"You don't really need to worry about your website"
I spent my day today at Campaigns and Elections Magazine's annual campaign training seminar. At the direct mail seminar this morning, one of the speakers (from the Republican firm of Political Solutions) was reviewing the various campaign media and their strengths and weaknesses. TV is OK if you have a lot of money and a general message you want everyone to hear, radio is good for a low-budget campaign, etc. The last one he mentioned was the campaign website, as an afterthought, and said, "As far as your website, not many voters will see your website and emails are only as good as the list you've got, so you really don't need to spend much time or money on your website."
Now, there's a serious debate to be had about whether the internet is a persuasion medium or just a mobilization medium, but I was shocked to hear a consultant from a prestigious consulting firm dismiss websites so cavalierly. Not just "websites have their weaknesses", but "you don't need to worry about your website or spend much money on it at all."
So, Emi, I see what you're up against in the real world :) With luck, perhaps it will be better by the time we're all out there running campaigns...
3 Comments:
Well that was a little frustrating to read. I hope it isn't true because we are spending a lot of time blogging. I think right now there are two camps when it comes to the Internet - the people who think it can reach people, and the people who don't.
I feel that this occurs with any new technology. I am sure when political TV ads were first used there were some who were skeptical at first. Now look where we are.
Hopefully it is just a matter of time before people get on board with the Internet. Otherwise this is one skill that won't be utilized in the future. I hope that is not the case.
I think that guy's comments about the ineffectiveness of websites and email lists are a great example of the generational divide between consultants.
It will be interesting to see if that guy hasn't adapted in 10 years or if he is out of a job.
That's pretty shocking! Did anyone contradict him? Did it affect your view of the conference (and the magazine) as a whole? I would think that at least his firm's lawyer would disagree.
Post a Comment
<< Home