There's an excellent profile piece on RNC eCampaign Director Cyrus Krohn written by Jose Antonio Vargas. I've been watching for this piece to surface for quite a while -- ever since I introduced the two in a coffee shop off Capitol Hill last year.
The most interesting nugget in the story is the battle Cyrus appears to be fighting internally at the RNC to convince higher-ups to pull dollars away from the folks who like to run 30-second ads to go toward an effective online strategy. No doubt a difficult fight that is just getting started.
However, Cyrus uses the most effective argument to yield undeniable credibility to his argument -- data and results.
Krohn bristles at the criticism of McCain's eCampaign team. For instance, he says, "both parties are still too TV-obsessed."
"The use of TV in campaigns is kind of like our dependency on foreign oil. We know we have to get off it. We know we need to find alternative energy sources. But we keep on going back to the pump," Krohn continues. "Fact is, we need to develop a higher degree of comfort with allocating media dollars to the Web."
Last summer, he got the chance to test the effectiveness of the Internet as a stand-alone campaign tool. With the permission of the RNC's senior staff, Krohn zeroed in on the Louisiana gubernatorial race. Then-Rep. Bobby Jindal was an attractive candidate, Krohn says, and it was projected to be a tight race. For 3 1/2 months, using online micro-targeting and data-matching, he identified a set of voters and turned them out to the polls.
Statewide turnout for the Louisiana race was 46 percent. Of those voters who interacted with Krohn's online targeting -- he won't say how much of the total vote -- 76 percent voted, he claims. Krohn says he's not suggesting that the RNC is responsible for Jindal's win. What it does suggest, however, is that the model could have significant impact on voter turnout, he adds.
"Everyone is talking about Obama and his success with the youth vote. Well, there's a significant older demographic on the Web, and what I was able to do in Louisiana is identify and interact with an older voting bloc," Krohn says.
Results are the reason why the web is the killer medium for politics.
No doubt you can reach a load of voters at the end of the campaign with TV ads -- and that still needs to happen -- but perhaps you run a few less spots in order to have an effective online strategy. I don't think we'll see much of a shift in resources this cycle.
In the clip, POTUS talks about the housing market, saying "...Wall Street got drunk [points to camera crew noting, 'one reason I asked you to turn off your TV cameras']. It got drunk and now it has a hangover. The question in how long will it sober up..."
The clip isn't particularly newsworthy. It's not a "macaca" moment. But the clip is indicative of the changing times and how even at "high-dollar" fundraisers -- candidates and public officials need to realize that they may be among friends, but they could also be among people with a YouTube channel and a camera on their cell phone.
At the 2008 Personal Democracy Forum, I interviewed Democratic online guru, Phil Noble, founder of PoliticsOnline, who makes the case that a joint Barack Obama / DNC effort will pull in more than $1 billion online.
I had read Noble making the case for $1 billion earlier that month so I had to find out whether or not he really meant it. Sadly, he did.
One.
Billion.
Dollars.
Think about how big that number is folks.
That's enough money to play in a lot more states than the Machine we're typically used to.
This past weekend at the *first* RightOnline Summit in Austin, Texas, Slatecard co-founder Sendhil Panchadsaram and I held a discussion on effectively integrating the Internet into the activities of an organization.
As a case-study, we used the "Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less." campaign successfully launched by American Solutions showing how their movement is continuing to drive real, positive, tangible change. You can see and download our powerpoint presentation here.
As an addendum to the continuing success of that movement, I was just sent a YouTube link to John McCain's latest TV commercial, "Pump."
My favorite line: "Don't hope for more energy; vote for it."
One of the better speeches at the RightOnline Summit in Austin, Texas was given by Erick Erickson, the editor of the freshly designed and re-launched Redstate.com. (Looks good Erick.)
The thrust of Erick's speech (download as PDF) was simple: Stop being pundits and start being (online) activists. Let's dig in.
Erickson opened his remarks with the classic red meat which has helped brand Redstate as one of the top conservative outposts in the blogosphere:
There are people in this world who are morally and ideologically opposed to us. We call them the left. They are a group of people who want you to surrender your hard earned money so they can give it to someone else who did not earn it and probably would not need it, but for the their insistence on government dependence.
Their rhetoric is “hope and change.” You know, hope and change are always buzzwords in the revolution against freedom. The only change theyʼll offer is more government. The only choice theyʼll offer you is whether or not to abort your kids. The policies of the last eight years will be replaced by the failed policies of the last 100 years.
And like a modern general addressing his modern army in what Erick terms the "Freedom Revolution," he was precise and direct in how the activists in the room could make an immediate diference:
So you have a choice: get involved or not.
Go to RedState or one of the other sites out there. Start reading. Develop a feel for the community. Then start writing. Give us your thoughts on your local sheriff. Whatʼs he doing. Give us your thoughts on your state representative. Become the person others rely on for information.
Find what interests you. Start blogging about it. Cover the issue. Learn to do an open records act request or learn to read campaign disclosures or learn to do both. Know who you are up against. Be the person who raises the red flags. At least join the conversation. You cannot sit on the sidelines and expect victory.
You donʼt have to be the commander. You donʼt have to do it full time. Just be willing to lend a hand. Just be willing to stay informed. Just be willing to help others stay informed.
Simple, sound, easy, and helpful advice.
In a conclusion to his speech which caused an eruption of enthusiasm and clapping from the grand ballroom, Erick said: "Weʼve beaten [the left] before. We can do it again. And this time, we can do it online, where they think they are strongest."
The troops are ready to go and the generals are willing to lead. We will beat the left online. It is just a matter of time.
The Republican National Committee has launched its latest micro-site: GOPPlatform2008.com.
From the introduction!!!!!:
Welcome to the most grassroots-driven platform development effort in the history of American politics!
The Republican Party is seeking your input as we develop the policies and principles upon which we should stand for the next four years. On this website, you can share your thoughts, participate in polls, and communicate directly with the policymakers who will be shaping the party's agenda. All comments and feedback will be reviewed and taken into full consideration as we prepare for our convention in Minneapolis-St. Paul.
We hope that this process will guarantee the greatest amount of public input into any platform in American history!
"Input" from the American people can be interpreted anyway you like. Will any of this "input" make it to the actual platform? To be determined.
In the same spirit as the 92-page platform from 2004, and just in case anyone actually listens and cares, I'll add my two cents:
* A choice between nationwide high-speed Internet access and dial-up.
UPDATE 9:43 AM: Just a quick FYI - I submitted my text entry under Jobs & Economy >> Technology Policy and it hasn't yet surfaced so there's clearly a moderation policy.
UPDATE Saturday, 9:34 AM:Eric Pfeiffer has more on this over at the Ground Game including some more feedback from me. Also, shortly after I wrote this post, a top RNC official emailed me to explain that the moderation policy was only to prevent liberal bloggers from taking over the site. He explained my comment was posted within seconds.
I would list all of his profiles for you to "Connect" with him on, but there are, refreshingly, far too many. Instead, go to his homepage and scroll down to the Connect section.
The Majority on the Committee on House Administration is later today proposing new rules which would severely restrict constituent access to their Member of Congress and limit the ability of those Members to adopt new technologies. In an **Internet Freedom Alert** Memorandum (pasted in-full below) by Republican Leader John Boehner, he says of the Rule:
The Committee on House Administration is considering a new rule that could bring this trend to a screeching halt. The Committee is considering the adoption of new rules that would require outside websites such as YouTube to comply with House regulations before Members of Congress could post videos on them. Under the proposal, the House Administration Committee would develop a list of “approved” websites, and Members of Congress could post content only such websites. The rule has been proposed by the Democratic chairman of the Commission on Mailing Standards, Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA), and is being considered for adoption by the Committee on House Administration, chaired by Rep. Robert Brady (D-PA). A copy of Rep. Capuano's letter is available at http://gopleader.gov/UploadedFiles/Capuano_letter.PDF.
This Rule is extremely troubling on several fronts. First and foremost, limiting constituent access to an "approved list of third-party websites" threatens the openness and access provided only through the Internet to constituents, limiting constituents to use a handful of "currently hot"/approved sites and force Members of Congress to ignore emerging websites that could quickly become the next outlet for conversation with their constituents.
Second, how exactly does the CHA plan to enforce this Rule? Do they control the Internet? For example, Republican John Culberson and Democratic Congressman Tim Ryan have been leading with their use of Twitter. And where would the Committee on House Administration come down on Rep. Tim Ryan's interview with Internet evangelist Robert Scoble on Qik? Would they force Qik to yank the video? How ridiculous.
Beyond those two points, this Rule shows a clear misunderstanding of the access which the Internet provides to constituents and Members of Congress to have a very real, open, level and honest relationship at a minimal/if any cost to the American taxpayer.
As you may recall, last year I helped co-author a non-partisan report known as "The Open House Project." The report was authored by a number of citizens who wear all stripes: Democrats, Republicans, Independents, etc. urging Congress to better use the Internet to provide more access, availability, openness, and honesty to the annals of Capitol Hill.
Of note, Robert Bluey of the Heritage Foundation and I served as the two Republican coordinators of the project. Past TechRepublican coverage here and here.
At the press conference announcing the report, Republican Leader John Boehner made it a point to attend the press conference to announce his endorsement of the project:
Both Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer sent letters endorsing the project.
As a former House staffer extremely familiar with the Rules governing a Members web-use (we broke them all and won a major award for it) I co-authored the chapter in The Open House Project urging Congress to modernize or eliminate the Rules limiting a Members use of the Internets. Here's an op-ed we co-wrote on the issue last year.
One of the more interesting findings in our analysis was that not a single complaint had ever been filed against a Member of Congress for their web-use (only exception was when a Member email outside of their Congressional district).
The bottom-line is that the Committee on House Administration should re-think it's entire position on the Internet--especially now that they are trying to reach government's long arm into the lives of a citizens use of the Internet to better connect with their Member of Congress.
UPDATE 3:13 PM: John Wonderlich who headed up The Open House Project has weighed in with a strong post urging the House to get with the picture:
If Members can use whatever brand of inkpen, or any brand of paper, or buy whatever shoes they want, they should be given radically expanded freedom to use the Internet, and make the same empowering discoveries that their constituents are. Even if that same pen was once used to scribble a ransom note.
The Committee on House Administration still has a line to draw, and plays an important function through the Franking Commission in preventing abuse of taxpayer funded resources. The restrictions, however, should reflect a balance between the liability they’re meant to avoid, and the potential benefits Congress could realize. The conflict of interest (or undignifiedness), is minimal, at best, and the potential benefits are nothing short of revolutionary.
Citizens are overcoming their fears about engaging online, and Congress should follow suit.
Congressional staff working on reforming Franking restrictions should be praised for their efforts, and Republican Leader Boehner should be praised for his bold stance on such reforms.
Also, Soren Dayton at The Next Right has a post which argues that this play by the Democrats could be a partisan move to keep the Republicans from communicating effectively:
Who gets technology? Either, as Capuano noted to the Post, ""To me, the Web is a necessary evil like cellphones," or House Democrats are trying to make it harder for the opposition to get their message out.
====================
FULL MEMO RELEASED BY REPUBLICAN LEADER JOHN BOEHNER
====================
**** Internet Freedom Alert ****
From: House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH)
TO: Online Community & Activists
RE: An Attack on Internet Free Speech
DATE: 08 July 08
I’m writing to alert you to an attack on free speech that is making its way through Congress. This attack, which should concern activists of all political affiliations across the ideological spectrum, comes in the form of a new congressional rule that would prohibit Americans from viewing content published by Members of Congress on websites that are not “approved” by the Committee on House Administration, the panel that creates rules governing the internal operations of the U.S. House.
Millions of Americans today utilize free, unregulated and uncensored websites like YouTube on a daily basis to not only obtain information from their elected leaders about what’s going on in their government, but to also give feedback and easily share that information with others. The advent of new media technology has empowered American citizens with real-time information about the policy debates and actions being undertaken by Congress. This has increasingly forced Congress to become more transparent and made it easier for American citizens to hold their elected leaders accountable.
The Committee on House Administration is considering a new rule that could bring this trend to a screeching halt. The Committee is considering the adoption of new rules that would require outside websites such as YouTube to comply with House regulations before Members of Congress could post videos on them. Under the proposal, the House Administration Committee would develop a list of “approved” websites, and Members of Congress could post content only such websites. The rule has been proposed by the Democratic chairman of the Commission on Mailing Standards, Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA), and is being considered for adoption by the Committee on House Administration, chaired by Rep. Robert Brady (D-PA). A copy of Rep. Capuano's letter is available at http://gopleader.gov/UploadedFiles/Capuano_letter.PDF.
If the proposed rule is adopted, the free flow of information over the Internet between Americans and their representatives will be significantly curtailed. Americans who currently use free websites like YouTube to obtain uncensored daily information about congressional policy debates will instead be forced to go to websites “approved” by the House Administration Committee in order to continue getting such information. This would amount to new government censorship of the Internet, by a panel of federal officials that is neither neutral nor independent.
House Republicans, led by Reps. Vern Ehlers (R-MI), Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), and Tom Price (R-GA), have expressed their opposition to this attack on Internet freedom and proposed an alternative solution that would allow Members of Congress to continue posting content at sites of their choosing. I will continue to keep you updated as this situation unfolds. For further information, please visit the House Republican Leader website or contact Nick Schaper, my Director of New Media Operations, at nick.schaper@mail.house.gov.
This past Tuesday in New York I participated in a press conference to help launch a bipartisan coalition, InternetforEveryone.org. The coalition is a groundbreaking initiative to make access to a fast, open and affordable Internet a basic right for all Americans.
The diverse group of Internet enthusiasts is unified under four basic principles:
1. Access: Every home and business in America must have access to a high-speed, world-class communications infrastructure.
2. Choice: Every consumer must enjoy real competition in lawful online content, as well as among high-speed Internet providers, to achieve lower prices and higher speeds.
3. Openness: Every Internet user should have the right to freedom of speech and commerce online in an open market without gatekeepers or discrimination.
4. Innovation: The Internet should continue to create good jobs, foster entrepreneurship, spread new ideas and serve as a leading engine of economic growth.
You can watch/embed/share the full press conference (33 minutes) via YouTube. A search on Google News for InternetforEveryone.org, will give you a number of press "clips" from sources on the event.
As one of the only Republicans in the coalition (Vint Cerf of Google is a registered Republican), I believe it's crucial for Republicans to embrace a national broadband strategy. Here's a short clip from the press event of me outlining my position:
As a Republican it is common sense why Republicans would support ensuring national access and availability to a high-speed Internet connection. The reason is that over 50 percent of Americans -- primarily dominated by rural/Appalachia America -- are forced to still use an inferior dial-up service to access the Internet. That's more than 10M households.
Rural Americans are our kind of voters and John McCain needs these voters to compete on Election day (and fighting for him in the trenches in the modern world).
In fact, as recently reported by the non-partisan Center for Rural Strategies, John McCain leads Barack Obama among rural voters by 50-41. Of note, this is the same margin found four years ago between George W. Bush and John Kerry and Bush went on to win the rural vote by 19 percentage points.
In other words, right now Republicans aren't fielding a full team on the field of the modern game. A huge segment of our voting bloc is forced to receive their news from mainstream media and talk radio outlets -- effectively keeping them out of the online fight.
If Republicans want to catch up with Democrats online it is essential that we ensure every American have an equal opportunity to access a high-speed Internet connection - even those that enjoy living in rural America.
I believe that to ensure national access we will need a public-private partnership to do so. If we wait for the ISPs to wire America, we're likely going to be waiting for a very long time because the cost-benefit of building up the infrastructure does not outweigh the financial interests of the ISPs. I get that which is why I believe the government will need to creatively encourage the market or free-up available spectrum white spaces to do so.
Whether or not we'll be able to wire rural America by 2008 is unclear. However, we can start the discussion now and hope that John McCain and other key Republicans take this issue up in the very near future. The sake of our party catching up online depends on it.
Recent comments
11 hours 40 min ago
11 hours 49 min ago
16 hours 41 min ago
19 hours 1 min ago
19 hours 21 min ago
19 hours 24 min ago
1 day 2 hours ago
1 day 14 hours ago
1 day 19 hours ago
1 day 21 hours ago