Dem ChatterBox

Lessig is spot on!

2005-07-22T12:03:00.000-07:00

Keeping on the same thread of yesterday’s post, I’d like to again comment on Lawrence Lessig’s speech. And this time I’d like to focus on two of his statements: (1)“never have fewer people controlled more of our culture” and if you recall he quoted J.C. Watts and said (2)”If your explaining, your losing” because we live in a bumper sticker nation.

I completely agree with Lessig on both fronts!

It’s ridicules how pre-packaged and censored all our entertainment and art has become! Are there any true forms of expression? Somewhere amid all the American Idols and Apprentice winners of the world there is a smothered original thought we’re all being deprived off. I think Lessig’s point about how fast the world moves is especially relevant in politics. Direct mail, thirty second television ads and even interactive websites only get about ten seconds to engage the viewers. Fact is it’s hard to deny… if voters don’t get your message right away, they stop listening.

Are there any opportunities for candidates to make a second impression in the 21st Century? What about through different forms of communication (i.e.: t.v., radio, etc)?

Copyright: A Lifetime Pass?

2005-07-21T22:00:00.000-07:00

I’d like to comment on Lawrence Lessig’s keynote speech at the 2002 Open Source Convention. Besides it being a bit long – over thirty minutes – I really enjoyed his comments.

His four main points: “creativity and innovation always builds on the past; the past always tries to control the creativity that builds on it; free societies enable the future by limiting the past; and ours is less and less a free society” really sparked my interest.

I think a lot of the same principles Lessig talks about with regard to the evolution of the copyright laws, especially on the internet, have a huge impact on the political arena as well as the software developer profession.

Lessig raises a great issue: should copyright be forever? And does crippling innovation through regulation protect or harm the industries it’s trying to defend?

I’ve always been an advocate of any policy or process that increases ingenuity in the work place, in the academic field and in professional arenas. But then again I’ve never had anything worthy of a copyright…

McCloud's New-Age Middle Men

2005-07-20T10:37:00.000-07:00

I liked the comic’s rendition of the system of micro-payments as it relates to the artist’s world. He accurately depicts the old supply chain involving comics (or musicians, artists, etc.) and how it has been revolutionized by the internet. Besides the “middle men,” a more direct market openly linking the producers and consumers profits everyone. Should we be worried about the traditional middle men? It sounds like a familiar argument against Napster…

McCloud also makes a great point when he points out that advertisers have become the new middle men online. I’ve never thought of advertisers as the new-age censors of content. I guess it’s always true that the people signing the check have the final say.

What implications does this have for politically biased websites?

Not so fast with the online voting...

2005-07-19T15:39:00.000-07:00

I watched the demo for the instant run off voting and I think that it is a great start to improving the voting process, but may have one huge flaw.

The process assumes that the electorate has perfect and complete knowledge of all the candidates. In order to rank their preferences with any kind of accuracy all of the voters need to know a lot about each candidate. Realistically, voters choose one candidate (or one political party) and ignore the rest. Assuming the entire voting population - which would be necessary if the instant runoff voting system is ever to be adopted nationally - would take the time to learn enough information about each of the candidates in every race is unrealistic!

Is this a fatal flaw in the instant run off voting system or is there a way to redeem it with moderate changes?

Umm, Bush you passed the ethical line awhile ago!

2005-07-17T23:44:00.000-07:00

I wanted to comment really quickly on the article that was listed under recommended reading for this week. The article can be found at http://www.factcheck.org/article143.html and is titled, “Bush's Misleading Attack Video”. It is a great example of questionable ethical behavior with targeted campaigning. Bush not only out-and-out lied about Kerry’s donations; he actually made accusations about charges people could have argued he allowed in his own campaign while he was running for re-election. What’s the saying; “He without sin cast the first stone”… I think candidates at every level need to be very careful about blaming others for questionable practices when they themselves haven’t been the most honorable. Where is the ethical line in politics? Is it ever changing, or is there a true bare minimum? Across all boundaries (generational, regional or ethical ties) it seems people’s values represent the full spectrum.

Too much homework... sorry for the cop out guys!

2005-07-15T10:41:00.000-07:00

Thank you Captain Obvious (a.k.a.: Zittrain & Palfrey)

2005-07-14T06:43:00.000-07:00

The readings on the China study by Jonathan Zittrain and John Palfrey has to go in the “Thank you Captain Obvious” column. Who doesn’t know that China suppresses its citizen’s freedoms, creative outlets and almost all means of their interpersonal communication?

I think it’s so sad that in the 21st Century there are still people (and therefore governments) that believe they have the right, or even the power to regulate free thought. I think an interesting ethical follow-up study for the case study on China would be to look at what sites the general public in countries - like China – are flying under the radar of the regulating government. In other words, what are students and other subsets of the population currently permitted to access that they would probably not be able to in the future?

Another study might include a control group in those repressed countries in which web users are allowed to view the questionable sites and then track their opinions. Do they shift? Is the government regulation really impacting the population’s views?

XXX: Too Hot to Handle

2005-07-13T08:14:00.000-07:00

I understand where Professor Lessig is coming from but I’m not so sure I agree with his conclusion. Lessig refers to the trend we’re currently seeing from regulating legislation and advanced technology in attempting to “tame” the internet.

I think one of the most exciting aspects of the internet is that it can not be controlled from the top down. Instead, global governments should try to instill a voluntary approach like they are doing for porn sites. Creating the dot-xxx sites allow once questionable sites to offer safer online payment options. Purchasing the domain does not regulate any of the conduct and can still be accessed to anyone. I think the dot-xxx option is a great example of the internet opting to regulate itself and begins to address ethical issues online.
(You can Google “xxx domain” or “xxx domain ethical” and it will bring up a bunch of articles- enjoy!)

Umm, duhh! You're car doesn't clean the air!!!

2005-07-12T23:37:00.000-07:00

I’d like to comment on Fogg’s chapter entitled “The Ethics of Persuasive Technology,” which was in this week’s required readings.

The author raised an interesting point in his example about the Volvo Ozone Eater (page 214). He stated consumers that frequently played the game are “likely to [incorrectly] start viewing all Volvos as machines that can clean the air.”

Fogg claims that his example depicts an ethical concern uniquely related to persuasive technology, however I disagree. Technological innovations should not be blamed for deceptive advertising. Advertisers and producers in every industry try to appeal to consumer’s specific desires and have never overtly objected to utilizing trickery in the process. Again, the internet is a relatively new medium susceptible to the same negativity as any other T.V., radio or print message.

And besides, let’s not forget civil responsibility… Are these people this stupid? Last week in Roll Call (the Hill newsletter) there was a cartoon depiction of a job application for Bush’s next Supreme Court Justice. It was a joke (similar to the Volvo game) and no matter how many times I read it or show it to my friends, I’m not sitting and waiting for Bush to call me up for a follow-up interview.

Website Perks!!

2005-07-11T07:29:00.000-07:00

I really enjoyed Neilsen’s article on low-literacy internet users. I know how frustrated I get when I can’t find something online, but I can’t imagine what people that have to read every word on a website have to go through.

Neilsen made some great points but I think he left out an important option to help low-literacy internet users; offering stream-lined video for all important articles, perhaps including a section that has a volunteer or the campaign manager narrating the entire weekly e-newsletter. I think low-literacy users would really appreciate candidates going the extra mile to cater to their needs.

Blogs for whites only?!

2005-07-10T12:06:00.000-07:00

In reference to the article posted on xxblog.com called “The African American Blogging Thing” available at http://xxblog.com/index.php/archives/2004/08/31/the-african-american-blogging-thing/ :

I don’t understand the actual argument; it seems the author is truly surprised that working-class women and blacks are not online. I know it’s a bit stereotypical, but if you’re trying to examine those in the population that aren’t blogging I think it is as simple as looking at those subcategories of America that have the least amount of time to sit around and blog. The author blames the women and the civil rights movements for the inactivity, when in actuality it is those movements attempting to advance both subgroups that are the only ones helping.

Besides, I do not think it is as detrimental to the general cyber-sphere as the author implies. The internet is still in its infancy and there is plenty of room for growth.

Case Study: of the Virginia Conservative Action Pac’s (VCAP) Website

2005-07-09T14:05:00.000-07:00

Please check out the VCAP website and give me your feedback on my case study. Thank you in advance for your comments.

An Effective VCAP Practice:

VCAP’s website does a great job providing information important to its members on issues such as conservative plights, ways to get involved and applicable current events.

Conservative plights – There is a lot of information on the website which is complemented by the e-newsletter (providing more detail specific information) referring to the “anti-tax movement” by Virginia conservatives. Most of these sections included supportive information on opposing the “decision by Gov. Mark Warner and the 2004 General Assembly to raise taxes by an estimated $1.5 billion per biennial budget… protecting the seventeen Republicans who broke ranks with the GOP majority in the House of Delegates to resist the tax hike… [and] battling the tax first, ask questions later crowd.” In addition to lower taxes, VCAP also focused on promoting “limited government and sanctity of life.”

Ways to get involved – VCAP does an excellent job following up with volunteers. I registered on their website as a member and received a follow-up email the next business day. The email included: a thank you, a reminder of the activity I signed up to do, contact information (name, title, email and phone number) and additional upcoming events they still need volunteers for. VCAP does a great job stressing the volunteer’s importance in the organization and how every little bit helps tremendously. Similarly, VCAP also offers two different links to their volunteer page off of their home page.

Current events – There is excellent synergy between the website and the weekly newsletter, which is most apparent in their coverage and reporting of important current events pertaining to the conservative agenda. A majority of this section is devoted to promoting their endorsed candidates. However, it also provides important legislation, mentions of VCAP (and its members) in the news and upcoming meetings or open forums. VCAP is very effectively keeping their members informed through the daily updated website and weekly e-newsletters, which in turn mobilizes their supporters and increases overall membership.

An Ineffective VCAP Practice:

Unfortunately, VCAP’s persistent anti-amalgamative language divides not only Republican and Democrat voters, legislators and issues, but it also further divides the Republican Party into two sides, conservative and liberal. In such an already partisan and politically divided environment as the current atmosphere in Washington and throughout the country, this language and rhetoric further cuts away at VCAP’s potential base support. Examples of this are listed below:

“The vast majority of moderates got reelected, yet it is very clear the conservatives control the Republican Party. A lot of moderates are going to wonder if they really belong in the Republican Party.”

“WMAL broadcaster Michael Graham has embraced VCAP’s efforts against RINO’s (Republicans in name only) and has given precious radio time to our efforts.”

“To take out a tax-raising incumbent and to win an open primary, all while being opposed by the GOP establishment shows what principles and grassroots will do.”

Worst Methodology I've Seen in Awhile!!!

2005-07-07T23:41:00.000-07:00

Okay all you political scientists… are you completed outraged?!? Neilsen’s article about the “study” he conducted looking at how teens use and appreciate the internet was REDICULUS!!

The study has absolutely no validity and in no way should be generalized to the general public. The entire study involved thirty-eight users between the ages of 13 and 17; that is barely enough people to de considered a focus group, let alone to be considered an actual study with external validity.

There was one other part of the method section of the Neilsen article that bothered me… Neilsen reported that “most sessions were conducted in the U.S… [they] also ran a few tests in Australia to assess the international applicability of the findings. Within the U.S., [they] conducted studies in a rural Colorado, and in three California locations, ranging from affluent suburbs to disadvantaged urban areas”.

Okay, really! Asking a few people what they think in no way represents how an entire country feels about any issue. I’m really not impressed, Mr. Neilsen. There is nothing conclusive or informative about this study.

HAPPY FOURTH of JULY.....

2005-07-04T10:19:00.000-07:00

I found a great article complementing Dr. Johnson’s chapter on Congressional Websites (ch. 6, 125-150). It is available at http://www.personaldemocracy.com/node/403, written by Molly Chapman Norton, titled Why Congress Doesn't Blog...And a Few Members Who Do. Norton notes the digital divide on Capital Hill. She states, “many of the staffers interviewed for this article felt there was a future for blogging in Hill offices as members of Congress and their aides become more tech-savvy, but the difficulty in maintaining spin on a true blog was a hindrance”.

Reading this article upset me a bit. And because of my professional and academic background, I know the functionality of a “spin less” communication medium is absolutely frightening to any campaign or elected officials. But, from the perspective of a voting citizen its quite sad. I’d like to think that if candidates gave me an opportunity to see them minus all the hoopla and spin I’d actually be more likely to vote for them.

As a campaign manager, I’m not sure if I’d feel comfortable advising a candidate to put himself out there in an uncensored, unrestricted forum. IS there a future for post-able blogs on campaign sites? What would you advise your candidate?

Nielsen's at it again...

2005-07-02T05:32:00.000-07:00

Again stressing usability, Jakob Nielsen’s article (under recommended readings on the syllabus) made some great points that can increase traffic on government websites. Its funny, we spend so much class time devoted to content and online strategic persuasion, but if no one goes to our site and sees it, then who cares? You could have the best site in cyberspace, but if your mom is the only one leaving you messages, aren’t you just taking up space?

Nielsen did make one mistake though in his presumption about the U.S. government when he said “After all, private companies are typically compelled by the realities of profit making; they embrace usability to increase their customer-conversion rates and improve their marketing. Government entities, however, don't have such profit-oriented motivations”.

REALLY?!?!?!

Just like from the moment you walk into a hospital you are a customer first and a patient second. You will pay for every person that pops their head in your little cloth cubical, whose best interest is really put first? I apologize if I’m offending anyone, and it may be a bit too Machiavellian for the rest of my liberal views, but I believe the government most certainly functions like a business. Not the most efficient or profitable business, but a business nonetheless, complete with its own money-making machines, “customers” (citizens), and more special interests than you can shake a stick at.

I did like Nielsen’s observation about the leading intranets having some sort of “explicit processes in place to manage content contributors”. It’s so easy to put something like this in place, it’s amazing how many websites are still out of date and not kept up.

There is a very relevant article on the “Websites That Suck” page that we looked at earlier in the summer… it’s located online at: http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/amazon.html. Basically the article advises that web designers need to follow Amazon’s lead with any issue pertaining to usability.

Are you listening Beltway Bigwigs?

Candidates' Drunken Spectacles on TV?

2005-07-01T23:16:00.000-07:00

I became instantly intrigued when I began reading about the digital divide on Capitol Hill. I had no idea there was such a dramatic chasm between the haves and the have-nots. But really, what does a spiffy website say about a legislator? Or does it simply reaffirm their legitimacy with the web-literate electorate.

Would you vote for a candidate that didn't maintain an updated, efficient website? How much slack are us Generation Next-ers willing to give elected officials? Some of our parents still cannot seem to send an email without a 45 minute tutorial (with us on the other end of the phone), but where is the bar set for elected officials?

Would you support the re-election of a Congressman that can't even find their websites without help? Or does it even matter? Personally, I think we need to hold elected officials to the same high standard on the internet that we do with other voter contact mediums, such as television and newspapers (print). Could you imagine a candidate going on camera in sweats, intoxicated and spewing racial slurs? Okay, my example might be a tad extreme; but it's a valid point, elected professionals must present themselves professionally at all times and in all media outlets.

Watch out... they're watch YOU!

2005-06-29T12:28:00.000-07:00

I came across a great site that is still in it’s infancy it seems, because of the limited amount of information on the site, but what content they do have is very interesting. The site is called BlogAds.com and, like the name indicates, explores effective (and not so effective) blog advertising. I thought this site would be an interesting supplement to our class discussing on narrowcasting.

The site boasts that it is aimed at “decision makers” and is a strong advocate for target web messaging. It’s hard to argue against targeting efforts that have flourished online. Despite the possible privacy issues - that Cody, Ashley and I still don’t understand or agree with – internet campaigning, online advertising, and now blog ads allow people to be more efficient and highly effective with minimal overhead costs in their efforts to reach a specific audience. With results like these is unlikely their use will decrease over time.

There is a great ad for PoliTemps, which is the temp agency targeting political junkies like us, under the “misc. tab”… check it out – which is your favorite?

I'm About to Marry a Redneck - So Back Off!

2005-06-28T23:18:00.000-07:00

Some of the comments in class today really upset me. Someone decided to blurt out “white trash” in reference to Republican voters (in the second video we watched together) in white pick-up trucks. It is stereotypes like this that pigeonhole people and put up barriers based on class, race or religion. Not everyone that lives in the country is a redneck; just like not every redneck is a Republican. I think it’s sad that people in our field – and especially our program – choose to be so ignorant. With such an approach it is very unlikely “you” or your candidate will ever effectively connect with an electorate… so good luck finding a job!

The purpose of my blog tonight, however, is to discuss the possibility of a national board of elections that would trump the current state and county-level programs. Funding and regulations must be established at the Federal level and enforced all the way down the totem-pole.

All too often state budgets have to make serious sacrifices in the budgets to sustain their necessary programs. Adding to those costs are voting personal and machines that are utilized only a few times a year. It is not realistic to expect a rural county in North Carolina to supply the latest technology and best trained personal for Election Day – but isn’t it essential, isn't that democracy? Every vote matters!

I’m a liberal, but even I’m not naïve enough to believe Democrats have a chance in NC at the Federal-level. However, that doesn’t mean the voters’ voices do not count! And truly, isn’t that what we are saying to them, “Good luck voting. If your lucky the line wont be too long, your registration information will be correct, you’ll completely understand the newest ballot version and mark all the right candidates, and so on and so forth; and then and only then your vote will be counted.”

Sounds to me like it’s the luck of the draw! Something has to change change...

Wise Up Kerry, You Lost Them Awhile Ago!

2005-06-26T21:51:00.000-07:00

I really enjoyed (and just happen to agree 100% with) the article by James Verini titled, “It's the Incompetence, Stupid” for Salon.com on December 16th, 2004. Besides MoveOn.org earning the “Most Likely to Piss Off a Supporter Award” because of their poor response time, untrained coordinators and notorious reputation for doing absolutely no prior research on the communities they were working in, the Kerry Campaign had it’s own troubles from the start.

As Verini suggested, too many people were voting against Bush and not specifically for Kerry. It was their hatred for Bush that got them to, or drove them away, from the polls on Election Day. On the other hand, it seemed Republicans really believed in Bush and his entourage which motivated them to vote and to turn out in droves to volunteer and mobilize other voters.

Keeping with our technological focus, what could Kerry have done? Democrats didn’t identify with the man running for President of the United States on their behalf! It’s kind of sad… What about more emails? How about a weekly test message “from” Kerry thanking supporters for all their hard work? Or just wishing everyone a great day?

Not So Fast Frank

2005-06-24T05:15:00.000-07:00

I read the article by Frank Watkins entitled, “Technology, the Internet and Progressive Politics,” and while I agree with everything he said about Democrats still ignoring the internet’s full potential, while Republicans seem to be incorporating it quite well. But, I think he is missing a huge component to politics, especially in fundraising. The face-to-face ask is still the preference for fundraising! I truly believe any campaign is not bringing in their maximum amount of money each day if the majority of the campaigning in conducted online.

I’m already assuming my opinion will not be all that warmly received – seeing as the positive assumption about the internet and campaigning is basically a prerequisite for this class, or we wouldn’t be taking the course.

I am a Liberal, but I’m not an Idealist. I know it is not logical for every candidate to meet and speak with every voter. But I think in all our eagerness to adopt new technology mechanisms for reaching voters, especially at the local and state level, we must remember that nothing can replace the candidate (or someone from the campaign) making a physical and personal connection with a voter.

Attention, Attention!! Calling all Democrats!!!

2005-06-23T23:35:00.000-07:00

Well fellow Democrats, I’m not sure about you but I’m sick and tired of getting our tails beat by our counterparts across the aisle every time people make their way to the polls!

I came across an article that pretty much exemplifies the whole reason Republicans have been so successful in the past few election cycles…

And please don’t misunderstand me; I’m not saying the program I’m writing about is THE reason. Instead, I believe it is programs LIKE this one that have contributed to the GOP’s continued success.

The article explains how disorganization in County level politics leads to “a lot of duplication and communication challenges”. However, a software program called IntelElect's Campaign Manager attempts to eliminate these issues. In 2002, some Republican legislators at the state-level were given access to a database to help them gain an edge for high competition regions. Most specifically, “IntelElect Campaign Manager provides an accurate account of the vote and issues of constituents in their county that in the past has been difficult to obtain.”

I think the program is a great idea. In my limited campaign experience, I’ve never come across IntelElect products (we were pretty low-budget). But just about every Democrat can learn something from the excellent organizational skills on the GOP side. For instance, this past election cycle, we were all “out hustled” in key districts. Democrats were not able to adjust their strategic plan and position volunteers quick enough.

Where do you think programs like this can fit into a campaign - at any level? Has anyone used them? Do they truly increase efficiency, or is it a waste of money?

The Ideal!!!

2005-06-22T11:02:00.000-07:00

Please, please, please everyone read the real quick case study in Emi and Phil’s book on page 210 – it is a campaign manager’s dream! The cases study is an example of an elected official’s website that she launched before she was up for re-election, and because it was created and maintained on her own dime she was able to use the newsletter email list for her re-election campaign efforts later on. According to the article the candidate’s campaign camp then had one in ten people in the district’s personal email address (that they gave in requesting information or newsletters) along with their expressed support, or more generally speaking, expressed interest in the candidate!

Could you image any other long-term strategy with comparable results? I can’t imagine the bliss that must be associated with knowing that you have a direct line to one in ten voters in your district! Anyone that has ever worked on a campaign can recognize what a blessing that truly was!

The nest step would be to mobilize these voters and help them feel more engaged. For instance, a generic newsletter sent to those in the district asking for people to hold fundraisers or meet-ups would be extremely helpful!

How do you reach out, when they don’t want to be touched?!

2005-06-21T07:02:00.000-07:00

Jacob Nielsen’s article “Email Newsletters During Last Week of Presidential Campaign” was really interesting; but it makes me wonder how much of format, strategic decisions, and such were conscience choose or pure dumb luck, or lack thereof. Kerry’s emphasis on fundraising days before the election is ludicrous!

Why focus on gaining the means to contact voters and communicate your message if you wont have enough turn around time to even use the money. The only thing I can figure is either he was writing checks that were about to bounce and was therefore trying to cover past purchases, he was gearing up for a recount or he really was that clueless! (And that’s all coming from a hardcore Dem!!)

The only other thing I can think of to explain his misguided use of the email newsletters is that he knew the Democratic base wasn’t all that fired up to elect him anyway, so instead of urging them to support him and VOTE AGAINST BUSH (which is what he should have done) he filled up the blank page with prepackaged fundraising ramblings and focused his efforts elsewhere….

Would of, should of, could of…. We’re all great Monday morning quarterbacks!

Bow Down Peeps!

2005-06-20T07:02:00.000-07:00

Jacob Neilsen must truly be a god in the digital world… I read all three of his articles for tomorrow’s class on email and newsletters and found most everything he had to say very interesting. I don’t think it is too surprising to anyone in our class that the Presidential newsletters were scored considerably less on Neilsen’s scale than those of the Washington Post.

I think his findings are consistent with what we have been learning in class about how campaigns are structured from the top down – which includes just about every high level office candidate, from state-wide to President. The websites and resulting correspondence whether on blogs, emails or e-newsletters is not taken seriously. And such communication is certainly not looked at from a strategic standpoint. I expect we’ll find more of the same I suppose… that is until all of us get out there and are in authoritative positions on major campaigns!!

Anyone working on a campaign for this upcoming cycle?

Not so fast...

2005-06-19T10:12:00.000-07:00

I looked over the “Case Study: Zero to over $338,000 in 18 days using a volunteer website and blogs” and I’m not sure the results are as encouraging as we’re all taking them…

Rather, I think it is very likely that they were so successful because Daily Kos all ready had a heavy traffic website and extremely active blog up and running. It seams to me (it is also mentioned in Emi and Phil’s book in chapter 11) that in order for the blog and website to be an effective fundraising tool it has to be preceded with strong base supporters. Or have traditional campaign tactics such as direct mail, TV ads, or radio spots pave the way before hand… Will the internet ever stand alone as a campaign strategy? Or will it always be a complimentary feature? What about at the local level – do you think the internet’s role increases or decreases?

I think the community and public forum structure of the internet implies that it would be an ideal campaign tool, especially because it is comparatively very inexpensive. The only problem I foresee in any campaign is that there is just SO MUCH out there on the WWW… getting people to your website and keeping them there long enough to have some kind of effect or influence on them will always be tricky.

Poppin' Up...

2005-06-18T09:32:00.000-07:00

In chapter 11 of Emi and Phil’s book they mention banner ads as a means of paid advertisement for campaigns… There is a great article (it’s fairly short) that you should take a look at, the address is http://slate.msn.com/id/68180.

Emi and Phil advise against using banner ads because they are not very effective and often simply annoy your viewer, the article (available at above link) question the ethical basis for utilizing personal information - not from cookies, rather from permission-based websites – as means to target the political banner ads to stereotypical supporters…

What do you think? Personally, I think it’s fine and I’d much rather see ads that target my interests as opposed to things on “Support Bush” or Try Viagra”! I mean they are going to be there either way, wouldn’t you rather see something that is likely to spark your interest?

Would Have, Should Have....

2005-06-17T09:07:00.000-07:00

In Emi and Phil’s book, the chapter on "Secrets of Successful Online Fundraising," had some really good points I hadn’t thought about. For instance, in the section on the importance of celebrating your fundraising success (p. 165) they make a great point about using successful online fundraisings to create a buzz.

When I was a campaign manager this past election cycle, my candidate (he ran for NC Senate) wasn’t at the level that we could just do anything and get in the news – not even the local news would give us all that much press. I was consistently looking for something to write about in a press release that would have actually gotten some coverage… reporting the fundraising numbers and linking them to our overall campaign goals may have generated more of domino effect…

Drat! I wish I thought of that nine months ago!!

Fox "News"...

2005-06-16T23:42:00.000-07:00

Trevor Potter and Kirk L. Jowers’ chapter on election law and its connection to the Internet was very informative. I originally thought the internet was entirely unregulated, but Potter and Jowers bring up some interesting “advancements” online. It is probably important for me to first note that strictly speaking I am against 99.9% of censorship. I don’t think anyone has the right to tell you what you think is unworthy of being heard…

There is an appropriate saying that states – Think wrongly if you must, but in all cases think for yourself.

Why would the FEC have any grounds to constrain online campaign communication when there is evidence that a lot of money has been allotted for “overtly partisan political speech" on a webpage? If anything the internet is a perfect medium for letting candidates and political parties spend and do as much as they want to influence and educate people based on their personal views. It’s absurd to me that “news” stations like Fox can exist (which is biased entertainment in its purest form) but there are people in this world (the FEC) that want to monitor and regulate the internet… Well, it’s quite a job they’ve taken on… come on guys, pick your battles!

Give Me Your Money

2005-06-15T10:25:00.000-07:00

Continuing with fundraising readings from my last blog, some of the studies TPCOFP (The Political Consultants’ Online Fundraising Primer) discuss are really interesting. Most importantly, they found studies “showed that the people who are interested in politics and actively participate through the Internet have a considerably higher rate of contributing online—about 24 percent.”

I think it makes sense that those people that are already “plugged in” to current events and all would be encouraged to donate and more likely to donate online because of the added convenience. I do wonder though of those that contributed, how many were first time donors. What I mean is would they have donated elsewhere regardless of the internet, or is there perhaps some persuasive element to the websites they visited that urged them to donate?

There is a donate page for “Race 2004” in which they ask for money to help them buy new polling data. Unfortunately, the site hasn’t changed anything since the election. As we discussed in class, it doesn’t make sense that they haven’t updated the site to include their fundraising goals and timeline… lazy, lazy web designers!

A Fighting Chance....

2005-06-14T06:40:00.000-07:00

I had to break up the readings for The Political Consultants’ Online Guide to Fundraising Primer over a few nights because it is so long, but I’m starting to really enjoy it.

I think the authors made a great point about the internet creating a revolution in fundraising. All of the sudden, in the past two presidential elections, internet-based fundraising has proven its legitimacy. I can not even imagine a campaign website that lacking some kind of method for donating – noting that some of the lower offices may have a mailing address for donations and not an online version. The growing capabilities of online fundraising are really exciting because of its speed and low cost.

It is encouraging to see what immense impact small donors had at the presidential level. Traditional media outlets are so expensive I think it’s really encouraging to see other than the “usually suspects” get a chance!

Bloggers going Corporate

2005-06-13T06:23:00.000-07:00

I found a great use of blogs that extends past the political arena into the corporate world. I think the article about GM using blogs to build direct links to the public shows another great use of blogs and their potential. According to the article, GM choose to

“bypass the media and get out their message 'unfiltered’…When General Motors Corp. wanted to stop speculation this spring that it might eliminate its Pontiac and Buick brands, Vice Chairman Bob Lutz took his case directly to dealers and customers who were up in arms about the possibility. He wrote about it on the company's weblog.”

The article also noted an interesting fact that warned companies against misusing the blogs for generic advertising because the frequent bloggers would recognize the insincerity and the entire thing would back fire…

I agree that the blogs potentially allow a two-way conversation linking company executives and consumers that is unlike any other forum. Article is located at: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-blogs6jun06,1,4408183.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

2005-06-12T11:09:00.000-07:00

I enjoyed Sylvester Brown’s article, “Conyers Looks for News in the Wrong Place,” he pointed out a great point that American’s just aren’t all that interested in what goes on in Washington. It really is pathetic that we don’t have the attention span to follow world news or events and while it is reality, I think it saddens most people (especially GSPM’ers). Brown is accurate in stating the mainstream media is no longer interested in actual news because Americans would much rather see the next big sex tape (as long as China Doll is no where near it) instead of informative reporting on current global events. News is no longer news, it is entertainment and they are in it for the ratings…not a new concept, just an ever growing trend.

So do you think the internet is a catalyst for this trend? Or simply a new media forum for the shift to expand??

Promises promises!

2005-06-11T13:18:00.000-07:00

The article in the Economist on the Mobil Internet demonstrates how young the internet, and mobile technology in general, truly still is. And because it is in its infancy, any future predictions about its success are bound to be inflated… Besides according to people just a decade or so ago, we’re supposed to be in flying cars right now and living underwater - right?

I thought the trends mentioned in the “communication, not commerce” section were the most relevant and can even be linked to our field - political management, and essentially political communication. Predominantly because it is very important to remember that while more and more people are plugging into a dot.com lifestyle, where they are on the computer more often than not throughout their day, they are NOT spending all that time becoming better informed about current events, they are just “talking” to one another. An increase in internet use IS NOT directly proportionate to an increase in interest among the citizenry about your candidate or any particular issue (with the exception of Brittney Spears on 24/7 bump watch).

HAPPY BIRTHDAY ASHLEY!!!!

2005-06-10T17:56:00.000-07:00

It's my roommate's birthday, Ms. Ashley Monroe!!! Go check out her blog and wish her a good one!
Thanks!!

Calling All Doctors

2005-06-10T16:43:00.000-07:00

Megan Lindow’s article about Cell-Life and all it’s doing in Africa to save AIDS victim’s lives is amazing… I might be a true American and be completely oblivious about global events and such, but I had no idea that the experimental program even existed. Does anyone know how the program is funded? Are neighboring countries funding it, or are the cell phones being issued on a complimentary basis for the Cell-Life staff by the cell phone companies themselves? Lindow mentioned possible future funding opportunities, but didn’t spell out exactly how it is currently supported…

In such an extreme environment are the doctors and nurses never victims of roaming or no-signal dilemmas that I seem to fall victim to at least two or three times a day ( I can’t even go into the MPA building without losing all reception). I mean really, can you imagine if a nurse wasn’t able to get through to a doctor because she couldn’t get a signal! Who would be liable? What if the central system that stores all the data crashes?!

2005-06-09T23:01:00.000-07:00

I believe the CNN article “Anti-war protesters go digital: Demonstrators use technology to organize, publicize, evade” represents a victory for democracy.

People and subgroups that are not given adequate means of expression and a voice in their government should have the right and the means to demonstrate. I think it’s amazing that they were able to get so many people together, and so quickly!

This article reveals three huge benefits of new media outlets (be it the internet, text messaging, etc) that can be very helpful to those of us in the political or campaign arena: people were able to congregate on short notice, it was of little direct cost to the original organizers and a snowball effect was created which resulted in more participants than were initially known to be interested… just think of the possibilities all you campaign managers in training!!! :)

It's like our class... only it's real life!

2005-06-08T11:21:00.000-07:00

I thought this might be of interest, check it out if you have a minute… I was on Daily Kos (major Dem blog, does require that you register) and came across a post for an event Ohio Democrats are organizing for June 9th to protest Bush’s visit because of the whole “CoinGate” soap-opera. Okay, here’s where it gets interesting, and relevant, they are using blogs to mobilize their supporters. The initial protesters have already done some of the busy-work that all events require like making signs and beginning to spread the word, but the rest of the efforts are by “word of mouth” or via interactive technology… exciting hugh?

If you keep reading the posting there is also a good example of “investigative blogging”. The person that posted the site has collected evidence from police reports and other sources and compiled them.

Something smells fishy...

2005-06-07T09:11:00.000-07:00

There were two things in the methodology section of Bimber and Davis’ book (pg. 173-189) that seemed a little fishy to me… First, there was the coding of the candidate’s websites where the authors note that not all the graphics and pictures were visible (they downloaded the sites and did content analysis offline); but that they weren’t too troubled by it because they said they were more concerned with the text.

Umm, isn’t that a red flag?

I mean I would think that a majority of the people that skim the website are drawn right to the pictures/graphics, and even if they do read over the website the particular words will be forgotten and the images will stick with them. The second red flag that went up when I was reading this section was the part where the researchers explain that they conducted content analysis from open-ended questions which is heavily subjective – even more so because they drew a sample of 1,000 and were able to boil all those answers down to eight categories…. Did anyone else think this was a bit odd?

Flanders…I laughed out loud (I know, I know - I’m a nerd)

2005-06-06T08:08:00.000-07:00

Having worked as the only paid staffer on a campaign for a state senate candidate, I found Ireland/Nash’s chapter on recruiting volunteers (pgs. 181-195) extremely insightful… I wish I had read the same passages a year ago. Throughout the whole chapter I kept thinking, “well yeah, that makes sense… and that’s a great idea… and why didn’t I think of that?!”

For instance, the authors explain the importance of staying on message in regards to the campaign website’s rhetoric, and targeting likely voters. I think so often the campaign websites become a dumping ground resulting in a hodgepodge of unrelated and therefore unusable information (from the voter’s perspective).

Likewise, Jackob Neilsen brings up some interesting pitfalls of web design in his article Top Ten Mistakes in Web Design. Of them, I was most surprised by two. First, I guess just because I’ve used Google so much lately I’ve forgotten that not every search engine checks spelling on the inquiry (his number one on the top ten mistakes). Does anyone know if implementing the search inquiry spell check is just another option when creating a search box for a website or is it a whole separate addition (software wise)? And the second thing that surprised me on Neilsen’s top ten list, was his caution about having anything that looks like an advertisement on your campaign website (number six). I originally assumed that flashing graphics would draw attention, but he pointed out that it just annoys your viewers. I fully agree with his assessment of pop-up ads, there really isn’t anything worse than when you’re trying to navigate around a site online and you consistently get interrupted!

Vincent Flanders wrote a great article all about the worst of the worst. It’s like a car wreak you don’t want to look, but you have to – right? In Flanders’ article The Biggest Web Design Mistakes of 2004 he rips apart a bunch of unrelated (in that they don’t all belong to one genre) websites and ends up with a list of fourteen “commandments” that can easily be incorporated to any political online campaigning effort. I believe this article was very helpful and gave a clear to-do and not-to-do explanation for campaign web designers without resorting to all the technical jargon.

Help me out guys… it’ll only take a minute.

2005-06-05T11:45:00.000-07:00

I started reading Professors Ireland and Nash’s book Winning Campaigns Online and really enjoyed chapter six’s outline of the “must-haves” for a campaign website, and I wholeheartedly agree that the user friendly aspect is essential. Likewise, I believe Jakob Neilsen supported the same thesis well in his article Usability 101: Introduction to Usability.

I also agree with their position that stated: voters under 30-years-old are very likely to take their impressions of a candidate sometimes solely based on the campaign’s website.
For instance, I turned to candidate’s websites this past election cycle in an effort to understand their positions on issues that I care about.

Switching gears a bit… As a few of you know I am interning at NACFAM National Council for Advanced Manufacturing which is the National Council for Advanced Manufacturing. NACFAM is currently renovating their website and looking into changing the entire look and feel of the website.

We’ve done so much in this class looking at improving usability online. If you could take like five minutes to check it out and come back to my blog and give me any suggestions you may have for improving the site (especially anything that links with the principles from Ireland/Nash’s book, ch. 6), I’d really appreciate it. Thanks!

“The Blame Game”

2005-06-04T13:41:00.000-07:00

Jakob Neilsen contends that the internet will play a role in “undoing” the industrial revolution and revitalize a shift in industry. But one could also argue that we have already witnessed a dramatic shift in industry, in that, large manufacturing corporations have turned to supply chain suppliers and moved away from the traditional centralized manufacturing buildings that once housed all the research & development, production and assembly under one roof.

I believe it is this trend, and not so much the “customization” trend on the internet, that is largely affecting not only consumers, but the environment, the economy and the overall psyche of how manufacturing should be conducted in America, and therefore world-wide. We no longer live in a world that we can pinpoint every environmentally damaging bi-product and its point of origin; it is therefore extremely difficult to hold anyone responsible or liable.

Who do you blame when there is a malfunction with your car and you crash? Do you look to the person that sold you the car, the one that assembled the car, or the person responsible for making the individual car parts? And the same goes for any pollution caused in the making of, during usage, and the eventual destruction of the car… who is liable?

“Hermits in Candyland”

2005-06-03T09:30:00.000-07:00

Oh my, I can’t remember the last time I have disagreed with an author on almost EVERY point and at almost every turn.

Sunstein presents a hypothetical world in which complete individuation dominates modern society. He then goes on to describe, with such horror, our newfound fantasy land. Much like Candyland the new utopia looks magical and enchanting in almost every way, but with its lollipop gardens and two free turns there are also pitfalls that can lead your demise, i.e. a society devoid of public controversial discourse.

Sunstein contends that with the current trend towards individuation everyone will end up living in some sort of environment akin to the bubble boy, never interacting with others dissimilar to ourselves. However, I disagree with Sunstein because the new “worlds” that we create by further subdividing ourselves on the internet causes us to form relationships with people and allows us to discuss, learn, and explore other interests.

For instance, a chat room designated for single mothers in their thirties will of course expand from gripping about too little time in the day to get everything done (i.e.: work, cooking, cleaning, attending recitals and soccer games, etc), to other areas of their lives like religion, politics or entertainment. We will forever be learning from each other; it is the medium by which, that is changing and not the action itself. Therefore Sunstein’s argument that reducing the number of, or importance of, public forums will cause a catastrophic downfall of the modern society is ridicules!

No matter how popular the internet becomes, people will still interact in the grocery store, picking up the dry cleaning, and at the car wash. Again, like I said in a prior posting, the world is far too small (and getting smaller) for anyone to become a hermit.

“Playboy is not for your Grandmother!”

2005-06-02T09:06:00.000-07:00

Would you stuff your May issue of Playboy into the hands of your ninety-year-old grandmother, or can you reasonably assume that naked ladies and articles about penis enlargement might be a tad too much for old granny?

Sunstein argues that the internet largely contributes to the shift seen world-wide to customize what we as consumers, and more so just as individuals, are exposed to. He sees fault with this growing tendency and desire to customize our own personal world, claiming that in order for democracy to thrive people MUST be exposed to “unanticipated encounters and share common experiences.” Quite simply put, Sunstein is WRONG.

The world we live in is much smaller and runs much faster than that of our parents, and much more so than that of our grandparents. And consequently, people are encouraged, and some would argue forced, to filter out information we deem unimportant or without credible substance (as is usually the case in politically slanted information). And while it can be argued that the internet aids this tendency, I believe it should be seen as a virtue of the web and not a vice, because I consider personal choice an expression of our right to have personal preferences.
I agree with Henry Jenkins’ point that the internet’s possibilities are limitless, in that it gives a voice and an outlet to those countercultures that are ignored by mainstream media. And besides, Sunstein went too far with his criticisms attacking TiVo!! (Alas, I admit that I am a Gilmore Girls and Regis & Kelly junkie- thanks to TiVo).

Sunstein is way off!

2005-06-01T07:40:00.000-07:00

We do not live in a linear, one-dimensional world. I am strongly against the death penalty and adamantly in favor of protecting the rights to a legal abortion. I’m also a former varsity athlete, a girlfriend, a sister, a daughter and a granddaughter; and they all impact my decisions and personal opinions far greater than someone I hear on the radio or an article in the paper.
Therefore I believe that any attempt by Sunstein to claim that the possible decline of public forums and their ever decreasing influence on the public is somehow a huge loss to the community-at-large is ludicrous!
After reading Sunstein’s article I truly believe this man lives in a far off galaxy. Never mind his theories of the impact and the role of the internet in the future; I think his description of the current state of public political discourse and overall democratic participation is not only without sufficient merit, it simply doesn’t exist.

Birds of a Feather...

2005-05-28T18:09:00.000-07:00

In Cass Sunstein’s article about the effect of the internet on society, he states incorrect assumptions in order to rationalize and convey his own message... ‘That the exponential growth of the internet shares a causational relationship with the demise of human interaction and original thought’ (or so at least that is my interpretation).

For instance, Sunstein contends that the internet is most effective in bringing primarily like-minded people together and has inherent, unseen filters that direct people to other internet users with similar views and opinions. This notion is not new or revolutionary outside the realm of the internet. “Birds of a feather flock together!” It’s human nature to want to surround yourself with people that are similar to you; whether based on political affiliation, religion, age, hobbies, etc. It is ignorant of Sunstein to conclude that the internet is to blame for the polarized tendencies of a nation so detached from the political arena that they are statistically more likely to vote for the next American Idol than vote in an off-year election!

Henry Jenkins was smart to point out the complimentary relationship of the internet and “old media” outlets. I agree, wholeheartedly, with his emphasis of the importance of looking at the bigger picture, in that the internet will not be the end of television, just as the invention of the television did not mark the end of the newspaper (as some had hypothesized at its infancy).

Greetings!!

2005-05-25T01:15:00.000-07:00

Hi everyone! Thanks for checking out my blog. I promise that there is much more to come, plus it will be updated daily. Please feel free to add your 2 cents whether you agree or disagree with my stance (actually I’d prefer someone that’s willing to challenge my positions). Thanks- Have a great day!!