Canned Ham

Thanks Emi and Phil

2005-07-25T08:27:00.000-07:00

Google Is Taking Over the World

2005-07-24T08:26:00.000-07:00

I just found this article on CNN about Google and its prominence within the web. Google is now a platform for email, blogging and tracking web traffic. In the development stages at Google are online payment services as well as plans to become an all encompassing digital library. Within a few years, Google could now who you are, what sites you visit, what you buy online and who you are emailing.

While it is nice to see Google moving in the direction of a one stop shopping site, it does raise some concerns about privacy and antitrust issues. With all of the internet security compromises of late, doesn't it seem really easy that someone could compromise a Google server and steal all of this information from one place? It would seem that Google is putting itself at risk by having all of this information in one place as hackers and law enforcement alike would do all that they can to use the information stored at Google for their own uses.

We have talked a great deal about privacy issues in class and for good reason. People need to feel that their information is safe online and not going to be comprised by people with bad intentions. In the political profession, we need to be keenly aware of keeping fundraising, volunteer and other information that we collect online as safe and secure as possible.

On Lessig

2005-07-23T07:22:00.000-07:00

I just finished listening to the speech by Lessig on culture today. While he raises a lot of interesting points, there was one point in particular where I could not agree with him more. Lessig makes the assertion that in today's society, control of culture has fallen into fewer hands than in year's past. I think that this is both sad and true.

Not to sound too much like a hippy, but I truly believe that corporate interests have completely taken control over American culture. Marketers tell us what to eat, what to buy, what movies to see, what to do with our free time and what to think. Control of culture has fallen into the hands of people who care less about culture and more about selling their goods and pushing their agendas. Like it or not, business and special interests have a great deal of control over the media. The few corporations that control the media don't care about what is good for society, only what is good for profit and loss statements.

Even in our field of political management, we craft messages to persuade people what to think and who to vote for. Sometimes I get the feeling our jobs are less about persuasion as much as they are about mind control. While that may sound cynical, it is true that we aim to control what and how people think. Are we just as bad as the companies that try to get us to watch their crappy movies and eat their gross food?

Day Off # 2

2005-07-22T16:08:00.000-07:00

Day Off

2005-07-21T16:27:00.000-07:00

Politics and IM Plus

2005-07-17T15:43:00.000-07:00

I came across this article in the Washington Post today about the new rollout of AOL Instant Messenger. Apparently, AOL is introducing a new version of AIM that will allow people to store all of their contacts for their friends in one place and allow them to text, call or send email to anyone of their online buddies. The new version will also allow for the use of web TV and radio functions.

I think that this is an exciting new advancement that can definitely be used for campaign use. Campaign volunteers will now have one platform from which to reach friends and supporters for GOTV efforts. While AIM can only be effective if the people you are trying to reach are actually online, the ability to use texting capabilities as well as store phone contacts can and should be used by campaigns to ensure that they are hitting supporters in all ways possible to motivate them to vote. While many campaigns use modified versions of these types of technology, the new AIM can be an excellent tool for those of us that are out in the field.

Big Brother and China

2005-07-16T16:00:00.000-07:00

I just finished reading the article by Zittrain and Palfrey on Internet Filtering in China and it makes me really grateful that I live here instead of there. It strikes me as incredibly bizarre that China has yet to succumb to the political pressures from the US and other democratic nations who would advocate for free speech rights for Chinese citizens. The measures that the Chinese government has put into place to repress their citizens online are downright draconian.

My office at GW has had to deal with a few incoming freshman from China directly related to this censorship issue. These students have not been allowed to apply for housing at the University based on the censorship that the Chinese have implemented over American educational websites. Heaven forbid what would happen if a Chinese student studying in America could apply for a double over a triple for their freshman year housing.

I was hopeful that when Hong Kong changed from British to Chinese power a few years ago that the trappings of Communism would fall when the Chinese government saw how effective capitalism and a democratic commerce system were first hand. I am still hopeful that the government will see the error in its ways and that the Chinese citizenry will rise up against this attack on informational and free speech rights.

Long Day At Work and a Bunch of Papers to Write......

2005-07-15T18:30:00.000-07:00

Another Reason Why I Like Watching Karl Rove Squirm

2005-07-14T17:53:00.000-07:00

I just finished reading the fact check on the Bush ad accusing John Kerry of accepting a large amount of special interest donations. It is true that Kerry did accept a great deal from special interests groups. What is ironic, however, is that Bush received substantially more than the Kerry campaign did from lobbyists, corporate types and other special interests groups. And to think that the Bush campaign would call Kerry “unprincipled” when he himself is attacking one of his main funding sources. Boy do I love irony.

While the net has become a great source for information sharing and putting out targeted messages, what scares me is that there is so much clutter on the net that people don’t know what is what. In the case of the Bush ad, people may actually believe that Bush gets most of his donations from small donors rather than from hitting up his friends on K Street. What is more concerning is that idea that the media has become so complacent in that they wouldn’t report of something like this that is blatantly false.

While there is a lot of clutter on the internet, there are also a lot of watchdogs like the Annenberg Report that keep those in the limelight honest. Anything otherwise would be “unprincipled”.

WWTD? (What Would Teenagers Do?)

2005-07-10T08:28:00.000-07:00

Nielsen asserts what many of us already know: everything on the net should be dumbed down so that even kids can understand. In his article on usability and teen internet use, Nielsen says that websites must be simple and exciting so that they can carry the collective attention of teens who generally lack an attention span. Phil and Emi have also said that sites need to be easy to navigate, have strong content and simple.

Marketers should take this to heart and create sites that are easy to use so that even teen consumers can understand what they are doing. While many consumer sites have tremendous ease of use, it always surprises me how some organizations still don’t get it and can’t seem to get out of their own way. Who knew that kids maybe our best test market when we are putting websites and messages together.

Nielsen Is At It Again....

2005-07-09T16:52:00.000-07:00

I just finished reading Nielsen’s article on the study he conducted with low-literacy users. One of the more interesting parts of the study had to do with testing content with both high and low literacy users. Nielsen found that low literacy users had higher responses to content that was more simple than high literacy users had to this same content.

To political professionals, this poses an interesting dilemma particularly when developing a message. Nielsen’s study essentially says that separate of ideological leanings, different types of style and content have different appeal to different users based on literacy. Does this mean that we should be stripping down our messages on the net to appeal to everyone or should we craft messages to users with higher literacy? Are these users more likely to be affected by the message based on their higher literacy?

I am inclined to think that messages should be targeted to higher literacy users. As someone who has an interest in sociology, I know that people with higher literacy rates are more likely to have an education, have a higher level of income and generally have higher rates of political participation. While it sounds somewhat callous, messages should be targeted to those who are going to be moved by them rather than having a broad based message that may get lost of users with higher literacy. This is something that most campaigns already practice, but this study is another interesting reminder.

Technology in the Third World

2005-07-08T17:33:00.000-07:00

I just finished reading the Economist article on the emergence of new technology in the third world. The United Nations has made a large commitment to bring people in Third World countries into the “wired age” by making investments in computer, internet and mobile phone technology.

While I think this is a great idea, I agree with the article in that introducing technology to these areas does not address the root problem that these areas have in terms of the disparities with the developed world. The reason that these countries have no technology in place is because they need to invest the money that they have into food and necessities rather than technology which they see as a luxury item. It is a very interesting juxtaposition to think of technology as a luxury item in our society, as many would cease to function without the use of a cell phone, the internet and god forbid if we did not have Blackberries.

At work recently, our internet went down for about an hour and there was literally paralysis throughout our department. They might as well have closed our office because nothing was getting down without the internet. I often wonder what work places must have been like 20 years ago when people couldn’t waste their work days on AIM, Friendster and buying David Letterman memorabilia on E-bay. I am sure we were a lot more productive back then.

I only use this work example to underscore that our society compared to the Third World is extremely different. The rapid development of our economy has made technology a vital part of our culture and we have convinced ourselves that all of these new things are necessary in order for us to survive. When one is living in sub-Saharan Africa and making $100 annual income, getting a cell phone is not at the top of the priority list in terms of things that one should be doing with their life. While I applaud the UN’s push to bring these areas up to speed technology-wise, I think they would be better served to get to the root of the problem and help these people develop their economies.

My Thoughts on NorthernVirginiaGOP.com

2005-07-05T14:08:00.000-07:00

All things considered, there is not much that the Northern Virginia GOP website does well. The site is boring, hard to navigate and out of date. Additionally, there is a lack of synergy between the ground operations of the Virginia GOP and the web presence that this organizations has. Overall, the site lacks a professional feel and is not as effective as it could be.

To start, the layout of the site is confusing and it is very busy. The navigation does not work well and once you click on links, not all of them will link you back to the main site. The fonts and the text locations look sloppy and do not have a logical flow. The graphics are also dated look substandard. Stylistically, this is a very poor site.

The site also lacks effective ways to solicit volunteers and contributions. There is no place on the site to sign up to volunteer however; there is a link to receive the Northern GOP newsletter. As far as contributing goes, the link to contribute does not stand out and you have to scroll down the page to actually find it. The actual graphic encouraging visitors to donate does not stand out and is only distinguishable because it has flashing credit cards rather than an appeal to donate.

Content is probably the worst problem that this site has. The site has links to look at polls that do not exist. It is also has links to photo galleries that are 4 years old. Additionally, the site does not list what constitutes that Northern Virginia GOP and it only lists the Chairman of the organization rather than listing as many contacts as possible to show that they are a vibrant organization. There is no unifying themes or messages that the site is trying to convey to the visitor other than that this site is a disorganized hodge-podge of information that is hard to understand or connect to other information on the site. The organization has a great deal of cool information to get out. For instance, members of the organization have their own TV and radio shows. This site needs to be a cross platform for these other ventures so that all of these mediums are successful in getting the word out about the organization and its goals.

Overall, this site is disappointing and clearly not a priority for the organization. There is not an effective fundraising presence and it appears that the organization is just looking to have a website in name rather than something that will be effective for its cause. With some attention and some new information, this site could be an effective tool for strengthening the republican community in the Northern Virginia area.

Happy Early 4th of July

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

And They're Off.....

2005-07-02T13:22:00.000-07:00

Less than a day after the resignation of Sandra Day O'Connor from the Supreme Court and we are already seeing a flood of activity throughout the blogosphere about who should take her place. On the Democracy for America blog, Senator Pat Leahy encourages people to let the White House know that the Senate will not be used as a rubber stamp for judicial nomination and that the President must pick a just right for all Americans rather than those at the partisan fringes. Daily Kos has a variety of different posts weighing in on the Supreme Court vacancy. And Although I have yet to find it, I have heard that there is a conservative website and blog that is dedicated to stopping Alberto Gonzales from beginning nominated for the court due to his moderate stances on social issues.

It seems like everyone is weighing in on the court situation and that the blogosphere may have an impact as to who gets nominated to the Court. Online groups have been important in keeping pressure on both sides of the aisle when it comes to judicial nominations. With this high profile opening on the Court, it is more than apparent that both sides will continue to use online resources to persuade and mobilize the left and the right to get their desired outcome for a nominee. The next few months will certainly be interesting.

Blogging and Congress

2005-07-01T13:50:00.000-07:00

I just read Molly Chapman Norton's article on Congressional blogging and I think that some interesting points are raised. While Norton says that many on the Hill resist the use of blogs because they are hard to use for spin, I think that there are other reasons behind only a few people in power using blogs to get their messages out.

For one, I think that there is always a resistance to dive into the unknown in any field. Blogs are a fairly new technology and many in Congress are probably going to resist blog use until they become too important and essential to ignore.

Secondly, members of Congress may feel that blogs will put too much information in the public's view which would hold officials more accountable and susceptible to attack. Opponents of members of Congress could attack a member on their own blog. This lack of control may scare of many members who would otherwise like to have with their constituents the type of dialogue that blogs can provide.

What is clear is that blogs are the wave of the future and that many in Congress will move to using this medium. The attention that Conyers is getting on his blog is proof enough that Congress needs to make the move online and become more accessible to their constituents.

Taxpayers For Truth

2005-06-30T18:25:00.000-07:00

I just read Dimmy's post on how it seems like official Congressional websites are almost guaranteed to be better than Congressional campaign websites. I never thought about it before, but this is a fascinating phenomenon.

While use of technology has increased dramatically within the last few years, there are still some candidates that don’t think it is worth the investment to put up a solid internet campaign. I once worked for a candidate who had just about the worst campaign website but had an incredible official website since the state was on the hook for the technology bill. In his book on internet use within the legislative branch, Johnson points out that many on the Hill are using technology to push through legislation while not focusing as much on the internet for campaign use. While government use of the net is helped by the limitless coffers of the government, it does raise some interesting questions. When will we get to a point that it will be mandatory for all candidates to have a strong internet presence? Will the internet trump traditional forms of campaign communication? Are we there already?

Based on Howard Dean’s strong performance using the net, I think that many candidates have realized just how powerful the internet can be as a campaign medium. I still think, however, that many smaller campaigns don’t think that the internet can impact their campaign and they rely on more traditional forms of campaign communication. We are within striking distance of all campaigns taking the internet seriously, especially since it has been proven to be a strong means of raising money (aka paying for itself and then some).

I Love Monarch!

2005-06-26T18:10:00.000-07:00

When I was reading the Watkins article on Progressives using technology, I had a few reactions. For one, I agree with DelaBlogger’s post about Watkins obsession with Monarch. I am sure that he is very grateful for having such wonderful technology, but someone has to be on the take in order to love their software program that much.

It is also really interesting to see Watkins take on technology compared to what technology really exists today. He talks a great deal about the Clinton and Dole campaigns in 1996 and things have changed vastly since that time. Not only can sites be used for fundraising and informational purposes, sites are now used to bring supporters together and give them more direct ways to get involved in campaigns. Things have changed so much over the last 8 years and it will be exciting to see what technology will bring 8 years from now.

I also think that things have changed in terms of the reach of the progressive movement on the internet since this article was written. The Dean campaign and the popularity of progressive blogs are just two examples of the strength of the progressive movement and how it is now liberals who outpace conservatives in the use of the web.

Watkins certainly has shown us that things have changed. The GOP will certainly catch back up to liberals in their web-savvy, but it is their strict adherence to message discipline and top-down communication that doesn’t allow party leaders to use blogs or other web forums as a means to reach out to voters. While the lack of message control may have hurt Dean’s chances of making it to the White House, it was also the reason that so many people found his candidacy so appealing.

Is anyone else afraid of narrowcasting?

2005-06-25T07:12:00.000-07:00

I just finished reading the Purpura, et al article on narrowcasting and I have a few very different reactions. For one, I think this technology is pretty cool. I think that that it did wonders for targeting in the last cycle and that it will continue to do so as the technology evolves. Being able to know who your supporters are, what messages will persuade them as well as knowing what message will move undecided voters will certainly make targeting more efficient. This type of advancement in campaign technology is certainly exciting.

What does not excite me about narrowcasting is the fact that all of my information is so public. I hate marketers and I hate being bothered by people who want to tell me what to buy, who to vote for, what to believe and where I should be spending my vacations. I am not too sure that I want political campaigns to have this much information on my consumer patterns for use in trying to persuade me to vote for a given candidate.

Advancements like this are a double edged sword in that it helps some people while burdening others. Campaigns will need to use this technology appropriately so that it does not lend itself to advance in your face marketing tactics. Only time will tell is politicos will show restraint in narrowcasting.

Democrats for Incompetence

2005-06-24T14:42:00.000-07:00

I just finished reading the Verini article on Kerry's lackluster campaign organization. While everyone now knows that the Kerry campaign was in a state of disarray from start to finish, it was interesting to see Verini's point of view as a volunteer to the campaign. Verini says that Kerry's team was did not establish a real rationale for the Kerry candidacy and instead brought together a coalition of people who just hated George W. Bush.

While it is clear that the Kerry campaign lacked message discipline throughout its ranks, it also appears that Kerry could have used the internet better the act as a persuassion and mobilization tool rather than just using it as a fundraising tool. Bush was effective in reaching out the younger voters through the internet. The Bush team got the fact that this would be the medium to which many of their young supporters would respond. Kerry, on the other hand, lacked a coherent internet strategy and lacked any sort of synergy between his use of the internet and the campaigns ground operations.

Verini's experience only underscores the Democratic Party's need to pull their act together when it comes to online/offline synergy. Maybe Governor Dean will be successful in using the internet more effectively for Democratic candidates than the junior Senator from Massachusetts was a year ago. Only time (and more Democratic loses) will tell.

And You Think Marion Barry Had Problems....

2005-06-20T16:50:00.000-07:00

I have seen this article posted on some other blogs in the last couple of days. I have to tell you, I really love this story. Forget about the irony in the fact that West was outed after fighting tooth and nail for anti-gay legislation. Forget about the fact that West see’s nothing wrong with offering internships and jobs to young men he was meeting in the chat rooms as a means of making friends. Now West, who fought against giving protections to gays who lived in his city, feels that he should be protected from public scrutiny because his comments were taken out of content and not meant for public consumption.

You really have to wonder how West has the gall to say his privacy rights are being violated. One thing I have learned in this class and in the GSPM program is that you will always be held accountable for any written or verbal communication that comes from you or people that associate with you. In the primitive days of blogging, we learned that many candidates were afraid to be associated with any negative comments that anyone may post on their blogs. Politicians are still hesitant to partake in online activities as they, similar to West, may feel that their comments could be taken out of context. West should know better and do his constituents a favor by coming clean about the whole ordeal, take responsibility for his actions and move on with the City’s business rather than trying to cover his backside.

RSS versus Email

2005-06-19T18:17:00.000-07:00

I just finished reading the article about web feeds being a better means of campaign communication rather than email newsletters. I think that Gahran brings up a lot of good points specifically relating the campaigns not being about to get emails to subscribers due to Spam filters. As someone who has subscribed to email newsletters and not been able to get them due to Spam filters, I can definitely see how a feed would work better.

The one argument that I would make against the usefulness of feeds is that this technology isn't in wide enough use to be effective in getting the message out. While I anticipate that many more people will learn about and use feeds within the next few years, making sure this is effective will be completely dependent on the user having this technology set up. It will definitely take a few more election cycles before campaigns can completely stop using email newsletters in favor of using feeds.

Who Needs Politics When You Have Sociology...

2005-06-18T12:55:00.000-07:00

When I was an undergrad, I took a lot of sociology classes that talked about this new age of technology (modernity) and how it has brought a whole new host of problems into society. There are many sociological theorists who that that modernity has made our society efficient to a fault and that our lives have been made more complex by things that are meant to make life simpler. When I read this article, I immediately thought about this concept. Credit cards are just one way in which financial transactions easier and less cumbersome for people who want to buy things. With this enhancement to technology, however, have come a host of security and privacy issues, particularly with the internet making information more accessible to the public at large.

This concept of modernity can also be applied to political campaigns. With the professionalization of the political management industry as well as enhancements to campaigning technologies has come a host of new problems. Many campaigns are not able to afford sites, blogs and other new campaign tools. The ones that do use technology don’t always know how to use it properly, (see my blog about the Kerry campaign) which in the end may end up alienating some voters. While I think that technology has made life easier for political professionals, I think much of the technology is still too new to have many of the kinks worked out. Spoken like a true sociologists, I believe that technology has made life better and more complex all at the same time.

Usability and the Bush victory

2005-06-17T10:28:00.000-07:00

I just finished reading Nielsen's article on Bush and Kerry's email newsletters and I think he makes some really interesting points related to the campaigns internet strategies. While Kerry focused most of his efforts towards fundraising in the final week of the campaign, Bush used the internet as a GOTV tool and was able to bring his campaign to victory. While I had never really thought about it before, I can definitely see how Kerry could have capitalized more on web use rather than alienating his supporters with annoying fundraising appeals down the home stretch. This seems like poor planning on the Kerry campaign's part as it would seem like the campaign should have been focused on turning out support rather than trying to get more money so late in the campaign. This should be a lesson to future campaigns in that the net needs to be taken seriously as a turn out tool and that strategic thinking needs to go into how a campaign operation heads into the end of a campaign.

Online or Offline

2005-06-16T21:24:00.000-07:00

I just saw this article online about many newspaper readers preferring online papers to reading news sources off line. The article talks alot about how online news sources maybe hurting sources like newspapers which have seen circulation drop in the last few years. While I will always like reading a newspaper more, it is hard to deny the convenience of reading the paper online and reading about news as it happens.

Our class has focused a lot on new technologies and how politics will need to adapt around changes within the new media. Do you think that print news will become irrelevant in the next few years? Will political campaigns need to shift their attention to setting up online advertising? Is the print media dead?