Hey guys,
I know I haven’t been around for a while lately, but that’s in large part because I’ve been working on something big. Right now I’ve finished publishing the first part of a major project I’ve been working on here. The paper itself is divided into 5 parts – Intro, History, Current, Analysis, and Conclusion. You can also download the entire paper as a PDF (download here). Enjoy!
-Brad
Chapter One- Introduction and Overview
The greatest goal of democracy is to empower the citizenry to work with its government for the greatest overall good. Until recently, this goal had to be met through the necessary compromise of representative majority, where in many cases; a few would represent many, usually in a manner which was necessarily fitted towards a trustee role rather than a pure delegate format. At bare minimum, there were relatively few instances where the representatives could reliably communicate with their constituents; as with any proportional representation, input would only be as fast as the communication that was available during that time. But now, as with every other area of communication, the face of political communication is changing like never before.
The age of digital instant communication has changed much of our world already, and the time has come where it can begin to modify the processes and structures of democracy as well. We already have a society where 42 percent of voters now look to the Internet for information about candidates- traditional news sources dominate at 88 percent of voters looking at Internet for information, while the actual campaign websites for the candidates garnered only a paltry 30 percent (iCrossing). By creating and utilizing effective websites, policymakers can gain access into a great untapped reserve of previously unreachable constituencies in a way that is truly unprecedented. This separates itself from generalized public polling because this method allows politicians to get access to these voters in their native environment- engaging interest at the source. Since the first political websites for presidential candidacy were developed for the 1996 election between Clinton and Dole, there have been many marked improvements.
To understand the evolution of presidential online campaigning, it is important to ask- what are the elements of a successful Internet campaign? All of the websites can be described within the framework of a single model, which will serve to describe the function of all political campaign websites. These follow the model of Planning, Execution and Maintenance. Ultimately, the websites which best execute all three stages of the model will have the most success. Success of these websites can be defined in terms of measurable outputs such as funds raised, email lists acquired, meeting groups executed, volunteers enlisted and other nebulous self-reported data. And, as campaigns are necessarily as unique as the candidates they represent, there will be numerous differences between the campaign websites which will make the goal of creating fair comparisons and contrasts significantly harder. The specific application of this model will be different for each campaign and depend on the technology of the day. However, the model of Planning, Execution and Maintenance allows these websites to be compared fairly in terms of shared components. All of these features can be independently measured separate from the partisan nature of the actual campaigns, a significant feature in that this model as described should be able to identify universally effective techniques for online campaigning as well as partisan techniques which can create an edge for a particular side.
Planning
First, the planning and development stage creates the background from which the website is developed. A targeting strategy is developed which will identify the main user base and the core supporters, otherwise known as “the faithful”. The research identifying the user base and supporters is done by focus groups and surveys, which helps identify common factors which the target base finds appealing. The base and supporters will be different for each campaign, as there are marked differences between Republican and Democratic bases, as well as differences of character and personality between the different candidates. However the level of effort put into identifying these bases can be compared. Also identifying the campaign’s core needs with the website is important- this decides what priorities the campaign needs to focus on to maximize benefit of the website. The campaign’s needs may range from fundraising to voter education to addressing opponents- the specifics will change for every campaign, and the planning stage must address that. After this point, the campaign must develop a message and a theme which will both rally the core base and draw in newcomers. Utilizing the data from focus groups can help maximize the strengths of the ticket. Another crucial aspect is to identify trends in the overall development of the electorate and the internet, and capitalizing on those elements so that an overall strategy can be made to fit the interests of potential supporters.
Execution
The next step is the execution stage, which involves putting together the pieces to make a finished product which maximizes all the contributing elements. The candidate must create a user interface which maximizes the information gained from the research. The interface must utilize color schemes and layouts which test well with the focus groups, prioritizing the campaign needs for most effective website benefit, and maximizing ease of use. Here is where the planning becomes reality and certain tradeoffs are made. For example, in the Bush 2004 campaign, 18 percent of Bush emails asked for money, 78 percent of Bush emails asked the user to forward the email to a friend and 22 percent of Bush emails help contact/create group of online supporters. As Bush was already in office, Bush’s campaign did not need as much funding. However, in Kerry’s 2004 campaign, 75 percent of Kerry emails asked for money but only 5 percent of Kerry emails asked the user to forward it to a friend and none of Kerry’s emails helped contact/create group of online supporters (IPDI). Kerry had a greater need for funding for the campaign, so his online strategy reflected his funding priorities.
Once the priorities for the website are maximized, it is important to advertise the site using information gained from prior research- this involves identifying other sites commonly visited by core supporters, advertising with email updates to people with similar ideologies and ensuring that all relevant interest groups link to the website. Furthermore, an effective website will maximize visibility in search engines such as Google and Yahoo and creating targeted web ads which provoke interest in the campaign website and increase traffic. Obama was able to make considerable use of that, actually creating a team which stared 13 web strategists and grew to about 30, who searched for places to put advertisements for the barackobama.com website (Washington Post). Utilizing planning research and taking advantage of current web trends can be very beneficial to the advertizing process as well. For an effective extension of the candidate message, the message of the campaign should be clear throughout the website and the theme should be well developed and consistent.
Maintenance
The final step is the Maintenance stage- the time after a website and theme are developed when changes are made to the website to reflect the current campaigning environment. Maintenance occurs any time a significant change is made to the campaign website. Arguably the most beneficial advantage of a successful web presence is that it can quickly react to new developments in the campaign. A well maintained online website will make the most of this option. A good example was the Bush 2000 website, which evolved over time, with a total of five different versions and layouts with different features, ultimately featuring a “setting it straight” section, multimedia and issue links, specialized links by state, as well as daily trivia, volunteer, registration and Spanish links (4President Corp).
For most effective maintenance, the campaign must first identify where the web traffic is coming from and then maximize existing traffic by increasing presence and modify or remove advertising where it is ineffective and ensure the focus groups are still reacting most positively to the site as it is. The campaign should identify effective user responses- those which lead to meet-ups, fundraising, or other actions, and maximize their impact by rewarding them and focus on increasing attention to less effective responses. They should keep the website updated and ensure that there are consistent and compelling reasons for people to return to the site. Identified returning traffic data should be used effectively and loyalty to the site should be rewarded. Consistent updating will encourage repeat traffic and most directly reflect the current campaign priorities, which will increase page stay time. Through development of a successful email campaign, that effect can be achieved. Updating the site to reflect most recent events and responding immediately to news issues concerning the campaign lets the voter get the most direct access to the campaign and feel they can use the site as an effective resource. This can be effectively done through constant refreshing of key images on the main page and a consistently updated blog section.
Plan of the Paper
In the following chapters, this paper will describe the strategies employed in deploying a successful online campaign for national office. Chapter Two will focus on presidential nominee’s websites since the 1996 presidential race and put the 2008 election website into context as a continuation of the same model for website development. The paper will evaluate the websites and campaign strategies of Barack Obama and John McCain. First, this paper will look at the history of Internet strategies, starting with the early campaign Internet websites, and continuing to the 2006 Internet applications, studying the amount of research put into each website, the execution of the web pages and the maintenance. The paper will also look at influential blogs and effective techniques used in the past, and how the Internet has revolutionized the process of campaigning for votes. Understanding the background of Internet campaigning is fundamental to understanding the processes and background of successes and failures which have led to today’s Internet campaigning landscape. Chapter Three examines the 2008 election websites of the nominees and the techniques currently being used. Both of the two major party nominees of the 2008, Barack Obama and John McCain, have Internet websites and online campaigning strategies which utilize the historical lessons of prior campaigns and attempt to maximize their impact on the campaign. Chapter Four will analyze the 2008 election websites in context of previous presidential elections and the model they represent. This paper will analyze their successful and not-so successful strategies, ultimately determining which strategies draw more people, keep them longer and create more campaign momentum. Chapter Five concludes the paper and addresses the future of presidential campaign websites, outlining the most successful of these strategies.
Chapter Two-History of Internet Campaigning in the Presidency (1996-2004)
• Introduction
Campaigns have been using the internet as a resource for gathering support since the first presidential election website in 1996 (Interview with Cyrus Krohn, RNC eCampaign Director). Over time, these websites have clearly gained in prominence with the rise of the use of the internet, yet looking at these early campaign websites provides a valuable insight into the strategies used and techniques deployed by campaigns in gathering support for their candidates online. This gives a good understanding of how an advancement in technology led to an exponential rise in usage as well as campaign attention to the potential of the internet.
• Presidential Race 1996
The first websites developed for political campaigning in 1996 were essentially a form of “brochure-ware”, basically websites which put up talking points about the candidates and referred the user to more concrete things in the physical world, much like a brochure or hand-card would in any other campaign. Aaron Myers, former Democratic Internet campaign manager for the Gore/Lieberman and Kerry/Edwards presidential campaigns, said that the internet was a non-factor in the 1996 election. The campaign websites were made almost as an afterthought, with no real prioritization given to them on advertisement, little serious coverage and most of the funds diverted to the “more realistic” TV advertisements. At the time, scalable resources were not available such as are they are today, and server space and web development technology and computer time was at a premium much higher than we see today. Because of the lack of developed technology, the first political websites were necessarily hampered in development and impact. (Krohn, 2008)
The first presidential campaign to use the Internet as a campaign tool was Bill Clinton’s campaign in July of 1996. It asked for contributions of video, audio or text, and called itself “America’s Home Page”. The Clinton campaign website was shortly joined by the Bob Dole campaign website in August of 1996, which presented improved interactivity by offering many more customizable options, including a customized greeting with the user’s name, updates on key issues important to the user and customized graphics chosen by the user. (NYT) Dole posted his nomination acceptance speech online- he was the first and only to do so that year (Pew Research)
• Presidential Race 2000
The 2000 presidential race was one of the first real opportunities for Internet technology to really have an impact on the election results. Ironically, when looking at the significant presidential campaign elections, one of the most important, yet often overlooked Internet campaigns was the McCain presidential primary website. Cyrus Krohn, eCampaign director for the RNC, said that this particular campaign was one of the most formative Internet campaigns, and says it had had more impact for online campaigning than even Howard Dean’s campaign. McCain’s 2000 Internet campaign was one of the most technologically advanced for its time, with the first web-ads and major online outreach programs of any presidential contender (Krohn) His website received 141,000 visits in October and more than 340,000 in December of 1999 (Business Week)
His Internet fundraising efforts were significant for setting some of the first records in Internet fundraising. His website also raised over a million dollars by December 28, with contributions averaging $3,150 a day over the summer increasing to almost $10,000 daily in December (BW). As a result of his fundraising techniques, he raised over $2.2 Million dollars in a single week during 2000 (Boatright, Robert G. “Fundraising- Past and Future.” Campaigns on the Cutting Edge. CQ Press). His website targeted veterans and college students with sections called “Patriots Interactive” and “Campus Connections”, the latter of which offered “winter break internships” to important primary states- this strategy would result in large crowds in New Hampshire with high numbers of both veteran and college-age supporters (BW). As a result of his campaigning, Forbes Magazine said that McCain was “regarded as the U.S. Senate’s savviest technologist” (Forbes)
Another notable 2000 primary contender was Bill Bradley, who had out-raised McCain in online donations by $1.3 million to McCain’s announced $1 million in funds raised. His website developed a Bradley Campus Network for students, a support group for women’s issues, made lists for Bradley supporters in different local areas, and even created a “Community Involvement Kit” for volunteers to use in promoting Bradley. He even had a section for local supporters to contact grassroots organizers in Iowa and New Hampshire, and even managed a fundraiser in California from the internet. (BW) Yet even with all of this attention to internet campaigning, the internet wasn’t entirely seen a means to its own end. According to Eric Hauser, former press secretary for the Bill Bradley campaign, the biggest effect of the Internet on the campaign was not its generation news coverage or alternative – “We can talk all we want about the new media, but the Internet is increasingly important because it can raise money, and money is important because it can be used to buy television time.”(CNN)
On the side of the presidential nominees, the Bush/Cheney website received 9 million hits and ultimately featured a “setting it straight” section, multimedia and issue links, specialized links by state, daily trivia, volunteer, registration and Spanish links. Bush was the first to seriously maintain his website, coming out with multiple versions of the website over time as the needs of the campaign evolved (4President) The fact that this page would evolve over time would be a precursor to the future understanding of how to achieve a web page with optimal functionality and usability- issues in which a lot of experience and attention to detail is necessary.
Opposing the Bush/Cheney site was the Gore/Lieberman website, which received 7 million hits. The website featured an “Interactive Town Hall”, where user-submitted questions would be chosen and replied to on the website, “Take Action” features for volunteering in local campaigns, custom web page creation tools with text and pictures that could be emailed, links to join email projects and to register to vote, and a customized web page for all 50 states as well as a Spanish version (4President II) He also had a media library, which included sound bites on major issues, videos of Gore’s campaign appearances, television ads, a biographical film, and Web-based infomercials- however the efficacy of these measures was tempered by the fact that very few internet users had the bandwidth or capacity to take advantage of these resources (BW)
The year 2000 featured the explosion of alternative websites- one count had it at 5,000 political sites, most of which close after the election ends. This was partly due to the growing use of Google and instant search capability. Also, online video was launched to great amazement but little functional use because few people had the capability to use it over the Internet (Bimber, B. and R. Davis. “Campaigning Online: The Internet in U.S. Elections.” New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.)
• Presidential Race 2004
Two thousand and four was the year when many fundamental aspects of Internet campaigning first made their appearances- ironically through the Democratic candidate of Howard Dean, a man “widely credited with being the first to see the potential power of the Internet to raise money and sign up volunteers.”(NYT) Cornfield points out 5 areas in which Dean’s campaign “revolutionized online campaigning”- News-based fundraising appeals, Internet-arranged local meetings/meet-ups, blogging, Internet referenda and group decision. Specifically relating to younger voters is the social networking aspects of blogging and interactive content, which were significant in Dean’s campaign. While certainly not new, political blogs were taken to the next level when Dean’s “Blog for America” posted 2,910 entries and received 314,121 comments, one of which started a project resulting in 115,632 handwritten letters sent to Iowa and New Hampshire voters (Pew)
Targeting methods originating in Dean’s campaign were later used in the Bush and Kerry campaigns, where three out of four Kerry campaign emails contained action boxes for money and 78 percent of Bush campaign emails contained boxes for referring friends to the campaign (IPDI) This is all very ironic because it was the Internet that some say brought his campaign to an end- after the now-infamous “Dean Scream”, which has become somewhat of a moniker for highly publicized political blunder spread over the Internet; his whole campaign was “brought down with blinding speed” (Boston Globe)
This is a political lesson which would have been very beneficial for potential Presidential primary contender Sen. George Allen to have learned in the 2008 election cycle- according to one source,
As badly as Dean was hurt by the constant… replay of his scream the night of the 2004 Iowa caucuses, it was nothing compared to what happened to… George Allen in his re-election campaign last year, when he was caught on video calling an Asian man “macaca,” … a racial slur… The video of Allen went “viral” almost immediately and penetrated the political consciousness so deeply that Allen couldn’t recover (BG).
History’s lessons, it appears, even in the case of very recent history, if not learned, can come back with a vengeance. Ironically, even though this video, which made it onto YouTube was never really used by any of Allen’s opponents, the fact that it had received so much attention meant that he was effectually dead in the water before he could ever run for office. The internet revolution meant that stories were a lot harder to control, and the “viral” effect of gaffes and misstatements would now forever haunt candidates for office.
For the presidential primary nominees, the Bush/Cheney website had 16 million hits, 1.2 million volunteers, 6 million e-mail activists, and fundraised $14 Million. The focus of the Bush/Cheney website was on grass-roots campaigning, mobilization, get out the vote efforts- fused “canvassing, marketing, and proselytizing” with current research and analysis, installed a rewards program for motivating volunteers, ensured resources were available for all volunteers, and kept records of everything for increased maintenance functions. The campaign created “virtual precincts,” where volunteers created their own email lists and asked their friends to vote. The Bush/Cheney campaign also targeted districts and specific groups with specific emails- 18 percent of Bush emails ask for money, 78 percent of Bush emails ask to forward to a friend. 22 percent of Bush emails help contact/create group of online supporters (IPDI).
On the Kerry/Edwards website, there were 20 million hits and $82 Million fundraised. The Kerry/Edwards website focused on fundraising, a move made “out of necessity.” 75 percent of Kerry emails asked for money, but only 5 percent of Kerry emails asked the user to forward it to a friend. None of Kerry’s emails helped contact/create group of online supporters. Here we can see that there was a clear tradeoff in execution of the planned needs of the campaign- the Kerry campaign clearly had a disadvantage against George Bush, the four year incumbent, and had to raise awareness and funding for commercials and other vital resources. The campaign effectively used the online presence to out-raise the Bush campaign by a margin of almost 6 to 1 in Internet contributions (IPDI). And yet while the Kerry campaign was clearly well funded, they ultimately lost the election, proving a flaw in strategy.
Conclusion
Throughout the short history of Internet campaigning, there have been definite trends that have emerged- planning, execution and maintenance have clearly had an impact on the efficacy of even the earliest campaign websites. In Clinton vs. Dole, the very first political sites competed only on a visual level, and there was not much room for growth or expansion. In the Gore vs. Bush race, the Internet was just beginning to become a powerful resource, and the early primary campaigning of John McCain set major precedents for future races. Bush’s website would eventually become the model for maintenance, with many growing evolutions over time, while Gore’s website executed more interactive and engaging elements. 2004 saw a major evolutionary jump for the internet, and the political world responded- Howard Dean capitalized on this growth significantly. In Bush vs. Kerrey, there was a definite correlation between the planned needs of the campaign and the executed purposes of the website- the difference in emphasis was designed to suit the different needs of the campaigns. Yet as the campaigns showed significant progress over time, much more was beginning to be made of the concepts of online community, laying the groundwork for what was to come:
The more citizens use the internet, the more they might expect from campaigners and political journalists: rapid responses to information searches; a multiplicity of perspectives available on controversies; short and visually arresting promotional messages; drill-down capacities into referenced databases; more transparency from, and access to, institutions and players. Meanwhile, on the supply side of the political equation, candidates, groups, and parties now have models for how to use the internet to raise money, mobilize voters, and create public buzz. The new benchmarks established in 2004 could well be matched and surpassed in 2008 (Pew).
The early presidential websites from 1996 to 2004 created a background from which the 2008 campaign websites would draw. Particularly in the 2000 and 2004 elections, there was a great deal of potential realized for the impact of online fundraising, and more funds had been put towards having a well-developed internet strategy. There had been a clear progression of advancement with technology, and 2008 would be no exception. However there would also be marked changes in the way the electorate had used that technology as it had developed.
Chapter Three-Internet Campaigning in the 2008 Election
§ Introduction
The 2008 election will be remembered as the most Internet-intensive elections in history. The level of technology deployed for Internet campaigning has been entirely unprecedented, and the effects of this campaign will be felt far into future campaigning. This is in coordination with the increase of use of the internet as a medium of information- Forty-two percent of voters now look to the internet for information about candidates (iCrossing) Of that percentage, traditional news sources dominate at 88% of voters looking at internet for information, while the actual campaign websites for the candidates garnered only a paltry 30 percent (iCrossing). There has also been a steady increase in use of the internet as a resource for political knowledge- the numbers for those who have “regularly learned something from” internet sources has grown from 9% in 2000 to 13% in 2004 to 24% in 2008 (Pew) .The candidate’s use of the medium has also been extremely noteworthy.
And yet 2008’s changes reflect more than simply the exponential growth of technology- there are significant shifts in the way the Internet is used personally. In the words of one political operative who worked on previous elections:
“I think we’ll be analyzing this election for years as a seminal, transformative race,” said Mark McKinnon, a senior adviser to President Bush’s campaigns in 2000 and 2004. “The year campaigns leveraged the Internet in ways never imagined. The year we went to warp speed. The year the paradigm got turned upside down and truly became bottom up instead of top down.” (NYT)
The 2008 election landscape has been entirely different from the previous elections of 2000 and 2004, largely because of the stunning growth and popularity of social networking websites. Forty-two percent go to what this report calls “social media” sites, such as Facebook, YouTube and MySpace (iCrossing) These websites had not existed for the 2004 election, and so the capacity for instantly being able to push a message coherently and to use YouTube and Facebook as a tool had not been developed (Aaron Myers, Personal Interview) Because of this shift from traditional media to social networking, the Internet’s advantages have significantly shifted from the model of raising money to use for TV ads. This election would reflect the difference in adaptation and utilization of this new technology. When looking at the separate websites of Barack Obama and John McCain, several key differences show up in the area of graphic design, funds raised, general strategy and branding effects.
§ The Barack Obama Website
The Barack Obama website clearly demonstrated a significant degree of advanced planning and research. The my.barackobama.com site has been credited with being one of the most influential factors leading to Obama’s victory in his primary race against Hillary Clinton- the support it was able to raise for the caucus elections led to the early wins such as Iowa which ultimately putting Obama over the top (Krohn, 2008). The my.barackobama.com site effectively encouraged support for caucuses by motivating people to show up on Election Day and targeting areas where people would be more likely to respond.
Also significant in the Obama campaign was the unprecedented level of fundraising achieved through the website, far surpassing any prior fundraising efforts. Only counting the money he made online, Obama amassed more than $500 million from 3 million donors who made a total of 6.5 million donations (Washington Post). 6 million of those donations were $100 or less, for an average online donation was $80, with most donors giving more than once. According to aides of Triple O, the online organization managing Obama’s website development, out of the more than $600 million Obama raised, the majority was raised through the Internet. They also said that in September, Obama amassed more than 65 percent ($100 million of $150 million) from online donations. After Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s RNC speech, Obama raised $10 million within 24 hours (Washington Post).
Obama differentiated his website from other previous presidential websites through excellent graphical design which provided the website user with a very open and inviting environment from which to explore the website. The use of color, adaptation of the message and the overall design of the website led to an environment already adapted to the successful styles and graphic design of similar popular social networking websites. There were also key messages put throughout the site which stated things like “Because it’s About YOU” (Aaron Marks) This kind of message was highly effective at getting user buy-in, and entirely utilized the concept of the social network to the candidate’s advantage. Through the crowd-sourcing of the website and putting the emphasis on volunteerism and community, the Obama web team was able to mimic the look and feel of other major and popular social networks.
Another factor that made a significant impact was the “branding” of the Obama logo, the O. It became a very successful moniker and representation for the campaign, and the fact that it pervaded the web advertisements and many different products only made it that much more popular and successful. It managed to become a symbol for something somewhat larger than the campaign because it became a part of a social network where people came together, much in the same way as people came together through social networking. The symbolism was made much more real by the incorporation of the O logo in the word Hope, which was in many Obama logos. It would also become associated with the word “Change”, which was a key message for the Obama campaign. This was highly effective as many people, especially in the key supporter age group, had already had a mentality adapted for that kind of social networking. The idea of branding had grown through the use of various social trends, and the O movement became somewhat of a rallying cry. It also made for a scalable icon which would clearly represent the movement and the social networking, where people could identify themselves with other supporters in a clear wa
Ultimately, this kind of emphasis on social networking paid off in terms of hard numbers for social networks- there were 2 million profiles created for my.barackobama.com. Through that website, 200,000 events were planned outside the Internet, users wrote and posted 400,000 blog posts, and more than 35,000 volunteer groups were created, over 1,000 of which started on the day Obama’s candidacy announcement. The website also had a virtual phone-banking platform, from which 3 million calls were made in the final four days of the campaign alone. Over 70,000 members of the website raised $30 million through links and where their friends could come to their personal site to donate money to the Obama campaign (Washington Post).
On other social networking websites, Obama has over 5 million supporters, with profiles in over 15 different social networks, specifically popular sites such as Facebook, but also including some other more specifically targeted sites like BlackPlanet for African Americans and Eons for Baby Boomers (WP) This was crucial for the overall support Obama enjoyed, as the profiles and advertising done through these networks would create a snowball effect where more people who recognized the symbol would associate themselves with it and therein the community it represented. This effect was so great that it ultimately helped drive a movement for association outside the internet and into the world of merchandise. Obama-themed merchandise outsold McCain merchandise by a rate of 5 to 1, and many attributed that gap to the fact that people in the Facebook generation were so excited by the symbolism that they were somehow artificially driving up sales of real-world items like t-shirts and bumper stickers (MSNBC).
One part of the website design element which ultimately ended up driving a lot more traffic back to the website was the effective use of the splash page for barackobama.com requesting the user’s email address, at times not providing the user with a clear way to enter the website without providing an input (Aaron Myers) Ultimately, one of the elements of the internet which has not changed since the beginning of the internet’s usage is the popularity of e-mail. Obama’s website effectually managed this aspect, acquiring a list of over 13 million email addresses. Over 7,000 emails were sent to these addresses, many of them targeted per the individual’s specific donation levels for a total of over 1 billion emails being received by individuals from the list (WP).
§ The John McCain Website
By any account, John McCain’s website lacked the dynamics and functionality of Obama’s website. While John McCain had a serious history of successfully campaigning online, there was a significant difference between the election of 2000 and the election of 2008, something which may have only been realized too late in the game for the McCain team to take advantage of the difference. According to Aaron Marks, President of the Three Group LLC Internet campaign Development Company, McCain was stuck in the 2000-2004 mindset of the “Age of Information”, whereas Barack Obama adapted to the 2008 “Age of Participation” (Aaron Marks, personal interview). This explains why McCain would ultimately deploy his My McCain Space significantly later than Obama’s my.barackobama.com (Krohn).
The graphic design of McCain’s website made it somewhat harder to navigate. While it did utilize the popular “moving image” slides on the website which have been used somewhat successfully in corporate homepages, it almost became a distraction at times and detracted from the overall experience. One possible reasoning for this is that there was a significant difference between the key audiences for the McCain website and the Obama website, however the fact that there was not a significant effort put into allowing a similar kind of design become available for those with more capacity ultimately hindered McCain from seeing the same kind of support among that age range as Obama enjoyed.
However, regardless of whether there should have been a secondary site, the site that was there seemed to lack a strong central design like Obama’s had. The overall navigation was considerably harder to grasp, regardless of whether one was coming from the target audience or not. There was also some issue with the color scheme, where the overall theme of the site was not unified around a single color scheme, but there were many different clashing bright colors used throughout the website, which seemed to follow no specific pattern.
There was also a significant difference in the level of branding- only one image really comes through as a “brand” for the McCain campaign- the star with the two lines coming out on either side. While it makes for a professional-looking logo, it does not particularly convey any particular message, nor could the campaign slogan, “Country First” be made into any truly effective rallying cry which would resonate with the “Community Cooperation” movement that the social networks and Barack Obama’s website represented. The logo was also somewhat secondary and less interchangeable with the actual name of John McCain, whereas the O logo was considerably more interchangeable with Obama. The somewhat more ambiguous nature of the branding of McCain’s logo may have contributed to the difference in visible supporters online.
Official data for McCain’s final internet social networking support have not been forthcoming, and as such, it is harder to create a well-developed comparison between the two candidates. For McCain’s own website, the social networking aspect never gained the same prominence, nor have there been significant reports from the website itself documenting the numbers coming out of the campaign providing official estimates. However it is quite safe to assume that he would be significantly behind Obama in every category.
McCain’s campaign was benefitted by a tight-knit group of blogs accessed through the McCain Victory 2008 “blogroll”, which is a list of blogs supporting John McCain for president (Columbia Journalism Review) These worked as an “echo chamber” for talking points about Obama, creating a top-down system of disseminating information about the campaigns, but lacked lateral collaboration with the McCain social networking site. This lack of coordination would ultimately mean that there would be less message coordination between the two, and ultimately some online sources ended up running messages contrary to the campaign’s message. This ultimately led to an overall sense of dissatisfaction with the campaign, as confusion between the two led people to believe that the online rumors were being spread by the McCain campaign directly. The level of confusion was epitomized when Brad Marston, co-founder of the McCain Victory 2008 blogroll, was mistakenly identified by Megan McCain on her own blog as the “McCain e-campaign coordinator” (CJR). The fact that this kind of message development could get so out of hand means that there had to be a considerable lack of message coordination.
§ Conclusion
Online campaigning saw a significant rise over the 2008 election cycle. Partly due to the increase in web use and also due to the significant use and impact of social networking in internet campaigns, there was significant new interest and corresponding significant impact of the internet campaigns. Early internet grassroots campaigning helped Obama considerably in his ground game against Hillary Clinton, and would ultimately benefit him in his general election campaigning against John McCain. John McCain’s late start, combined with lack of message cohesion, ultimately created perceptions that haunted the campaign late into the general election campaign. This was combined with the differences in branding and message use, which, in Obama’s case, were particularly well adapted for social networking and community cooperation. Ultimately, the paradigm shift between the “information age” and the “participation age” created a new playing field for internet campaigning, one where Obama clearly had an early advantage and maintained it throughout his campaign.
Chapter Four-Identifying Effective Online Campaigning Strategies
§ Introduction
Online campaigning has only recently had the extensive impact we’ve seen in the 2008 election. But by looking at the 2008 election in conjunction with the previous presidential elections which used internet campaigning, one can see a clear method of determining effective strategy. Through looking at the Planning, Execution and Maintenance of the websites, specific strategies emerge. Planning ultimately involves understanding te needs of the campaign, and as 2008 proves, it also involves identifying current trends in the electorate as well. Execution involves not only the adaptability of the website in terms of its ability to put out an effective message, but it also involves the appropriate application of interface design and graphical development which engages users and gets them to interact with the website. Maintenance involves control of the overall message of the campaign, and ensures that there are no distractions from the overall efficacy of the message.
§ Analysis of the Impact of Planning
Planning determines message and theme. However, in the case of the 2008 election in the context of the Barack Obama and John McCain websites, there is a clear case to be made that it involves realizing the current trends in the internet and adapting to them as they develop. Part of a successful strategy must include identifying the needs of the campaign, and we have seen that clearly in the case of websites like John Kerrey’s and George Bush’s. However something that clearly changes the dynamic of the 2008 election versus every other election before that point was the impact of the shift in internet technology.
McCain had a late start on Obama’s kind of social networking incorporation for the website. This early disadvantage cost McCain untold volumes of support, as reflected by the fact that so many more young voters voted for Obama over McCain, by a margin of 68 percent to 30 percent (CNN). This difference must be attributed to the difference in the design of the website, as the former strategies of John McCain had yielded him considerably more positive responses in 2000, when students and college-age volunteers had made up a large part of his supporters (Business Week). The major loss can be attributed to the fact that Obama’s campaign was so much more successful at creating a brand for the campaign which was so successful and able to be incorporated into existing social networks and utilized for mobilizing other supporters.
§ Analysis of the Impact of Execution
Execution in the campaigns is largely dependent on the degree to which the website can function as a single place for accessing all necessary information about a candidate from the perspective of the campaign. Towards this end, methods maximizing traffic and increasing page stay time are imperative. Clearly, the best example of effective usage of the internet to maximize these goals has been the campaign work of Barack Obama’s web team. However, this team has built on the successes of other presidential candidate’s websites, which have demonstrated the importance of an effective web format.
Also proven to be crucial has been the impact of an effective web interface and graphic design. Far from 1996 with the “web brochures”, the 2000 election showed the importance of adapting your website to your potential users. With the Gore/Lieberman website, while some of the material was excellent and groundbreaking, the fact that many people couldn’t access it using the most commonly available technology meant that people could be potentially turned off to the entire website (BW).
In the case of the 2008 election, it became abundantly clear that branding and interface design had reached an entirely new level, and that the framework for drawing people in would be substantially changed. Utilizing a framework based on an understanding of social networking and successful graphic approaches, the Barack Obama team created a social networking site, my.barackobama.com which drew people in and made them a part of the movement.
The execution of the Barack Obama theme and message and brand was entirely unprecedented- the ad campaign that put the Obama logo and advertisement all over key social networking sites was entirely crucial to the fact that Obama’s theme was so universally recognized and utilized as a means for attaining support and gaining community. As the message was carried out and put into high-profile areas as well as specifically-targeted communities, supporters could immediately identify themselves with the overall movement and reach out to other people, ultimately yielding a strategy which spread to the communities around them. This would ultimately result in increased recognition as well as more impetuous for a real-world application of support.
§ Analysis of the Impact of Maintenance
One of the most significant findings of the 2008 research was the level of coordination between the campaigns and the social networks and blogs do have an impact on how message is ultimately disseminated. This was clearly demonstrated in the sheer lack of coordination between McCain’s social networking site, My McCain Space, and the McCain Victory 2008 blogroll (Columbia Journalism Review). Alternative sites must be a help rather than a hindrance to the campaign. Ensuring that proper message control is maintained can make sure that there are no distractions from the key messages of the campaign. Part of this relates back to the planning element, and ensuring that the message of the campaign can be appropriately related through alternative social networking sites can ensure that there are no such issues involved with communicating the needs of the campaign.
§ Implications of the Analysis
Future presidential campaigns will certainly benefit from a strong understanding of how the fallout of the 2008 election has changed the dynamics for all future campaigns. In the words of Cyrus Krohn, there will never be another election where there will not be a social networking aspect involved in the campaign somehow (Krohn, personal interview). The paradigm shift in this election was clearly captured by the web team employed by Barack Obama, while John McCain’s team was still building mainly off of the previous advancements in technology and capacity from the 2000 and 2004 elections.
Crucial to planning is the branding element, and the creation of a symbol which can be used as a rallying cry for the whole campaign, as well as become a representation of the important things the campaign is fighting for. When used successfully, this can become a significant factor in developing support and cultivating a community of supporters who are not only proud to support their candidate but who also look towards networking with each other to make sure that the goals of the campaign are carried out.
§ Conclusion
Planning, Execution and Maintenance are the key areas in which a candidate can utilize an overall strategy which works for every future campaign. However, from 2008 and onwards, there must be a recognition of the impact of the social networking elements, where people increasingly identify themselves in groups and associations, and its importance in all future elections. To capture the full use of the internet, it is crucial to capitalize on the recent trends in internet technology and understand the potential impact of message development and branding in reaching out to various different groups of potential constituents and supporters.
A strong original symbol which effectively communicates the message of the campaign is critical in the planning stage, as future supporters will want a symbol to unite them and create a platform from which they can reach out to people around them and have them unify themselves. This creates a basis for supporters to ally together and work on recruitment and other activities. Then, a strong execution maximizing the symbolism and making it more applicable to social networking as well as creating places for supporters to meet and join each other creates a means for collaboration and mutual support makes for a high level of enthusiasm for the candidate and considerably higher participation rates. Then maintenance of the message is considerably enhanced by simultaneously being able to manage the original message through having `a scalable and applicable message already in place, and making sure that secondary networks have a strong understanding of the actual message of the campaign.
Chapter Five-Conclusion
The progression of internet technology has forever changed the face of politics. Technological advances have led to the point where some argue that there will never be another campaign which does not take the social networking aspect of online campaigning seriously. The consensus is that after 2008, things will never be the same:
Mr. Trippi, who worked for one of Mr. Obama’s rivals in the Democratic primary, former Senator John Edwards, said: “It has all come together for one guy, Barack Obama. But now that it’s happened, it’s a permanent change.” (NYT)
To be sure, the current advances online would not be possible without the background of previous campaigns. From the very beginning with the very first political sites from Clinton and Dole even without the capacity for growth or expansion, there were definite campaign elements being brought out. When the Internet was just beginning to become a powerful resource in 2000, the early primary campaigning of John McCain would set major precedents for future races. Bush’s website came to symbolize maintenance with its reformulations and regular updates, and Gore’s website demonstrated the use of interactive and engaging elements. In 2004 there was yet another major evolutionary jump for the internet, along with a corresponding political shift. Howard Dean’s campaign would start many precedents which would be used in many later internet campaigns. With the Bush and Kerrey websites, planned needs of the campaign would turn into the executed purposes of the website.
Ultimately the difference in emphasis on the websites would demonstrate the different needs of the campaigns. In Clinton vs. Dole, the very first political sites competed only on a visual level, and there was not much room for growth or expansion. In the Gore vs. Bush race, the Internet was just beginning to become a powerful resource, and the early primary campaigning of John McCain set major precedents for future races. Bush’s website would eventually become the model for maintenance, with many growing evolutions over time, while Gore’s website executed more interactive and engaging elements. 2004 saw a major evolutionary jump for the internet, and the political world responded- Howard Dean capitalized on this growth significantly. In Bush vs. Kerrey, there was a definite correlation between the planned needs of the campaign and the executed purposes of the website- the difference in emphasis was designed to suit the different needs of the campaigns.
These precedents, combined with the rise in internet use and social networking development over the 2008 election cycle, led to a significant impact in the McCain vs. Obama race, as well as significant impacts in the primary race. Early internet grassroots campaigning helped Obama considerably in his ground game against Hillary Clinton, and would ultimately benefit him in his general election campaigning against John McCain. John McCain’s late start, combined with lack of message cohesion, ultimately created perceptions that haunted the campaign late into the general election campaign. Ultimately, the groundswell of support Obama enjoyed came from a strongly developed planning strategy which incorporated thematic branding and strong message development, an execution strategy which made the symbolism of the rise of Barack Obama that much more powerful and a maintenance operation which maintained the original message and ensured that it was communicated effectively throughout the social networking applications it managed.
For there to be a similar strategy like this in the future, it would need to take full advantage of the lessons of this election and make the planning strategy start with recognition of the importance of social networking. But if 2008 has taught a single lesson, it is that more than any other area, the internet is one where considerable change can happen. If there are significant changes in the way the internet operates in the next 4 years until the next election, an appropriate planning strategy will clearly involve not just the social networks of 2008, but whatever new advancements come next.
Last 5 posts by Brad Tidwell
- Obama and International Perception - October 20th, 2009
- The Healthcare Debate, Simplified. - October 2nd, 2009
- Win $100 for Reporting Campus Leftist Abuse! - September 30th, 2009
- Serena, Kanye, Wilson and the GOP's Crisis of Coverage - September 22nd, 2009
- The Next Generation of Conservatism is Here- CampusReform.org - September 16th, 2009
