Jeff Wartman

(This is a first in a series of introductory articles I will be writing about technology and politics.  These articles are intended to be introductory)

The Republican Party is falling behind in the utilization of technology.  Much of the force behind President Obama’s insurgent primary campaign and subsequent general election victory was a result of being on the forefront of new technology and new methods of reaching out to voters.  In order to be competitive in the future, we’re going to need to utilize technology in a way we have not been able to in the past.

First, let’s be clear on one point:  using technology in politics is not a “magic wand.”  It’s not even a way to do anything brand new.  Technology makes the things we always try to do, like reaching voters, getting our message out, and organizing, much easier.  It’s a more effective and efficient way to do the politiking we’ve been doing for years.

Understanding the evolution of the internet:  Web 2.0

The internet has moved from an expository medium, in which people were limited to finding and reading information such as in an old fashioned encyclopedia, to a collaborative medium.  No longer are resources static.  This movement has been dubbed “Web 2.0.”  Wikipedia, itself a Web 2.0 phenomenon, defines Web 2.0 as:

“…a perceived second generation of web development and design, that aims to facilitate communication, secure information sharing, interoperability, and collaboration on the World Wide Web. Web 2.0 concepts have led to the development and evolution of web-based communities, hosted services, and applications such as social-networking sites, video-sharing sites, wikis, blogs, and folksonomies.”  In a word, Web 2.0 and the future of internet politics can be summed up in two words:  “mass collaboration.”

It’s not just politics.  Businesses are getting in on the act, too.  According to a recent McKinsey Global Survey on the business use of Web 2.0…

“The rising popularity of user-driven online services, including MySpace, Wikipedia, and YouTube, has drawn attention to a group of technological developments known as Web 2.0. These technologies, which rely on user collaboration, include Web services, peer-to-peer networking, blogs, podcasts, and online social networks.
Respondents to a recent McKinsey survey show widespread but careful interest in this trend.  Expressing satisfaction with their Internet investments so far, they say that Web 2.0 technologies are strategic and that they plan to increase these investments. But companies aren’t necessarily relying on the best-known Web 2.0 trends, such as blogs; instead, they place the greatest importance on technologies that enable automation and networking.”

Web 2.0 is better politics.

As I stated earlier, the purpose of Web 2.0 is not to do anything new, Web 2.0 just makes more efficient and effective the things we’ve always tried to do. Matthew Fraser and Soumitra Dutta, in an article for Business Intelligence-Middle East, illustrate five important reasons why Web 2.0 is important:

It allows candidates to skip the media. Using tools like YouTube, Facebook or Twitter, you can take your message directly to millions, with no middleman.  One update, straight from you to them.  Many candidates worry about selective quoting and inaccurate stories in the media.  Using tools like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter give the candidate the control to craft his message.

It’s cheap and cost-effective. Running national ad campaigns can be expensive.  Barack Obama was able to use sites like YouTube to ensure his ads were viewed over 18 million times, with very little overhead.  Direct mail is expensive, yet sending quick updates through Twitter or a message to your Facebook group can distribute the same message to the same people without needing to pay for postage, printing, or supplies.  Purchasing advertising space on the internet is often cheaper and will reach more people than billboards or yard signs.

It makes grassroots fundraising highly effective. Both Barack Obama and Ron Paul were able to tap into demographics that generally abstained from donating to political campaigns by soliciting for small donations online.  A huge percentage of fundraising in now coming in $10-$50 increments online.

Candidates can effectively mobilize supporters. In the past, Get Out The Vote efforts took manpower and organizing.  However, with Web 2.0, you can reach out to thousands (locally) or millions (nationally) in only a few seconds.  Imagine having the power to update nearly all your supporters or followers instantly, as much as you need to.  Communication becomes nearly instant.

It facilitates civic engagement and creates social capital.  Democracy is better served when regular people have an avenue to express themselves and participate in the process.  The availability of technology aids in this regard.

In addition to Fraser and Butta’s points, I would add two more, semi-related points:

Technology allows us expose to demographics we have missed. Ron Paul’s Presidential campaign, which used the internet as it’s primary outreach tool, was able to tap into demographics that traditionally have either voted third party or not voted at all.  The Barack Obama campaign had major success not only by winning over swing voters, but getting people to the polls who have never voted.  Our methods for prospecting for new voters are good.  We did a superior job of both grassroots organizing and GOTV efforts in Ohio in 2004.  But the tide is shifting, and we need to get involved with these new methods immediately.

Increases Speed to Market.  The internet, unlike direct mail and most other forms of political communication, is instantly delivered.  The benefits of this speed cannot be understated.

Specific Web 2.0 Resources

This is a short list of five important web 2.0 resources that all candidates, at all levels, need to be utilizing.  This list is not exhaustive or complete.  There are many good resources out there.  This is just a list of the most important few.

Facebook:  Now the premier social networking site on the internet, Facebook has become the single most important Web 2.0 hub online today.  Facebook facilitates interaction and networking between people looking for social, business and political connections.  With millions of registered users, Facebook is a great way to set up “fan pages” about yourself for people to join – the digital equivalent of a yard sign.  Setting up a fan page allows you to prospect for new supports and gives you an instant distribution list, from which one click can send a message to anyone who has joined your group.  The stereotype that only young people should be on Facebook has been completely destroyed; no age stigma exists on Facebook anymore.  Do not fall into the trap of thinking you are outside of the Facebook demographic or that most of your supports will fall outside the demographic.  Facebook has become age-universal.

Twitter:  A simple site that allows you to send short messages to keep people updated of what you are doing.  The tagline on the front page of Twitter reads: “Twitter is a service for friends, family, and co–workers to communicate and stay connected through the exchange of quick, frequent answers to one simple question: What are you doing?”  Twitter’s function is similar to one of Facebook’s core functions:  the dissemination of information instantly, however, Twitter achieves this better than Facebook, integrating two way communication, private messaging, and text messaging.  The messages sent through Twitter are short – a maximum of 140 characters, which often means they are short enough to actually be read.  Twitter forces us to cut out one of the cardinal sins of political communication – being long winded.  A vast majority of political contenders are now on Twitter — Paul Ryan, John McCain, John Boehner, Bobby Jindal, , Jeff Flake, Eric Cantor, Tim Pawlenty and countless others are now keeping others updated through Twitter.

YouTube:  YouTube has become the standard for video clips on the web.  Put simply, YouTube is a site to view and host short videos.  YouTube itself is now a force:  Barack Obama and Ron Paul used YouTube to have their videos viewed millions of times, at a microscopic rate compared to traditional television advertising.

Wikipedia:  While often overlooked as the Web 2.0 phenomenon, Wikipedia is based on the central concept of Web 2.0:  mass collaboration.  Wikipedia is a vast encyclopedia with a catch:  anyone can edit the entries on the site.  Despite being open to editing, Wikipedia has actually become a standard for accuracy on the internet.  With thousands of hardcore Wikipedia editors keeping the goal of making sure Wikipedia is accurate, the accuracy rate now rivals the Encyclopedia Britannica.  Because of it’s popularity, millions log on each day to look up information on issues and candidates, so make sure you have an entry on this site, and keep it monitored.

Social Bookmarking (Digg, StumbleUpon, del.icio.us, reddit):  Social bookmarking a method by which you share news and other web pages that you feel are important.  By using one of the social bookmarking resources, you bring news, commentary and other web pages to the attention of either your friends and colleagues, or to the general public.  For example, Digg is a system by which you can “digg” an article or story.  This “digg” is like a “thumbs up” to the story, and it becomes available on Digg’s web page for others to view and “digg” if they so choose.  The more “diggs” an article receives, the more exposure it gets.  Each social bookmarking site works a big differently, but serves a common purpose: 

If we are going to be competitive, at any level, we need to utilize these resources now.  Not later.  If you are a candidate, regardless of level, and are not using these resources, you are at a disadvantage.

As I stated at the beginning, this is just an introduction; an overly simplistic view in order to help others understand a complicated and new technology.  Further articles on utilizing technology in politics will follow shortly.