Archives for 2010 Trends

Driven to Drink

Just about every time Spot-on ventures out to a conference or confab about 21^st century American politics, we hear someone say online ads don’t “really” change voter sentiment.

Since online doesn’t “move the numbers” it’s often seen as an “extra” for a well-funded campaign. Or worse: a waste of time and money.

That’s when Team Spot-on starts thinking about the location of the nearest bar and its hours of operation.

You long-time readers will know there’s growing evidence that online does affect voter sentiment. And since – with reason – no campaign is willing to entirely forsake television advertising for online, polling data can’t accurately measure online ad performance separate from television.

But this is beside the point. One medium does not replace the other.

So let us take this opportunity to point you skeptics out there to some info collected this last cycle: Polling data from Global Strategies Group showing a lift in numbers for TV and online. Our own numbers showing a dramatic increase in site traffic during an online-only campaign in Los Angeles. And there’s this round up from ClickZ on the search for a GRP for online.

There’s also increasing frustration with the kinds of creative being developed for banners – one we share. This article in on the tech news site Mashable is a good overview. If you want the strictly political take, the NYTimes’ Matt Bai took a few shots at the “Internet” president and wondered why Obama hasn’t done a better job of engaging online.

For those of you more interested in numbers than art, let us suggest you check out the useful Google Analytics. This FREE online measurement tool can tell you what’s bringing visitors to a website, what they do once they arrive and how long they stay. And in this off year, you’ve got lots of time to play around with it!

Analytics users have chimed in with their own take on what works and how some of Google metrics can be customized. One of the better how-to’s on this topic, well worth a read comes from blogger and entrepreneur Om Malik. Google has a helpful blog on the subject as well.

Posted by Chris Nolan at 8:48 AM | Permalink

Whitman’s Strategy

She didn’t win but Meg Whitman’s online strategy was a sound one for candidates at all levels to follow as Kate Kaye explains in her ClickZ post today. The campaign spent a lot – roughly $3 million – but that was still only small percentage of the $100 million-plus Whitman spent on all ad efforts.

Here’s Kaye’s story.

The Whitman campaign followed most of the golden rules: Start early. Target and optimize your efforts. Don’t just looking at political ‘pages’ for ads but at an overall online media strategy that combines smart use of targeting with media buying at the local level. We’d also point out the lack of emphasis on search-based advertising.

The only point we here at Spot-on would add: You don’t need $3 million to do this. The strategy Whitman used can be scaled down to the local level very nicely. Feel free to ask us how.

Posted by Chris Nolan at 9:38 AM | Permalink

All About Us

Spot-on’s been in the news lately so for you those of you stuck on conference calls of the non-crisis variety (as if….), here’s a run-down of what we’ve been doing and saying.

- Chiming in on the discussion over gross rating points and how that metric can – or should – get translated to the web in this ClickZ article.

- Chatting with eVoter Institute (and sometimes Spotlight blogger Karen Jagoda) about that same metric – gross rating points – and the importance of local news sites. That radio interview has two parts; part one on news sites and their importance and part two on GOTV efforts and online ad placement.

- Seeing Cerrell Associate’s use of Spot-on’s virtual slate card in June profiled in the most recent issue of Campaigns & Elections magazine. Here’s a pdf of the story, as well.

Posted by Chris Nolan at 2:09 PM | Permalink

Crazy Works?!?

What lessons can we learn from the convergence of the entertainment, news, political, and online worlds?

In the just released E-Voter Institute’s report Social Networks Supercharge Politics: Turning Action into Votes in 2010, there is evidence that 61% of those who consider themselves at least somewhat politically active are social network members. The curious twist is that those who are not members of a social network are 28% more likely than social net members to identify as very politically active.

Is this pointing to an opportunity for social networks to find more ways to get those with occasional interests in politics more involved? Or do the truly passionate only respond to town hall meetings, rallies and marches finding the online world inadequate to express themselves?

Amongst this group of politically active it appears that one third are as likely to forward links as they are to attend an event. Clearly these are two different kinds of activities but which is easier for a campaign to conduct and promote and what is the return on investment in the efforts?

When we look at trend data it appears that in 2010 forwarding email and links dropped from 38% in 2009 though equal to what was reported in 2008 (28%). What gets forwarded? We all know the crazier the message or web video, the more likely it will be passed on. It is becoming harder to break through the clutter and while people still like to share links with their friends and family, getting their attention is increasingly challenging.

The E-Voter survey also indicated that dedicated voters (the most likely to vote in all elections) are visiting candidate web sites (55%), searching for candidate information (46%), and forwarding links to web video (35%).

With 32% of the E-Voter survey respondents reporting that cable television is among their top sources for news and current events, the line between news, commentary and entertainment becomes blurred.

First we had the Glenn Beck gathering in August in DC, and now we have the Rally to Restore Sanity and the March to Keep Fear Alive being brought to us by Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert on October 30, the weekend before Election Day again in DC but also with remote gatherings.

In the echo chamber of the traditional media, announcements of these events were big news. Are these rallies and events in Washington a way for voters to express their concerns? A way to raise awareness about the need to vote? An opportunity to create colorful video that might go viral and promote the organizer? In this general election season what does it mean to be “teapartied”? A rally here, an interview there, dollars spread around from uncertain sources, and certainly a good dose of crazy to get attention and keep the tongues wagging.

What will get the most buzz online? Will those more likely to get politically involved online show up for a real world gathering being put on by an entertainer rather than a politician or will there be enough politicians on the program to confuse everyone? Who will watch the webcast? And just how crazy is it going to get?

It will be interesting to see how independent voters will be influenced by this. The E-Voter 2010 survey indicates that 61% of independents donated to a campaign because they wanted to help the candidate or cause reach a target fund raising goal. I predict that if the tea party candidates can make their campaign the kind of competition Independents understand, they will garner support. The question is does that action turn into votes?

We did have a chance to see crazy up close last Friday when Stephen Colbert appeared before the House Judiciary Committee’s sub committee on immigration. Delivering his testimony mostly in character confused the members of Congress, reporters, and cable news talking heads but it did accomplish the goal of at least calling more attention to the plight of immigrant farm workers. Or depending on your point of view, was an inappropriate place for the Colbert brand of truthiness.

The jury is still out on whether crazy will work on Election Day.

Read the E-Voter Report Social Networks Supercharge Politics: Turning Action Into Votes in 2010. Find the Executive Summary and link to the full report on the E-Voter Institute site. Register for the Webinar on September 29.

Editor’s Note: Karen Jagoda is president and co-founder of eVoter Institute and the host of the weekly podcast, Digital Politics every Thursday on wsRadio.

Posted by Karen Jagoda at 3:35 PM | Permalink

This Week’s Back To School Reads

This week’s selection, in honor of the official start of the “in earnest” campaign season, highlights the work of Spot-on pal Kate Kaye over at ClickZ. Kate’s got the franchise on covering online and politics so if you’re not checking out her work regularly, you’re missing out.
Here’s a write-up of the increasingly more important Chris Kelly campaign study.
You can get a pdf of the study right here.
Also, if you’re in New York next week, the Personal Democracy Forum’s holding an event to discuss the results. Details for that evening are over at PDF’s site.
Before you go – or even if you stay home, you might want to check out experienced tech journalist Lee Gomes has a few observations about entertainment marketing and paid advertising. Best used in concert, he says, which makes sense to us. And we’re pretty sure he hasn’t seen the Kelly study results.
Also, important, the below-the-fold stuff in this New York Times piece about the new Google search. The “psychic” aspect of New Google is great if you’re running for president. But down-ballot candidates may now have an even harder time catching audience attention online. And prices for popular search phrases are certainly headed up.

Posted by Chris Nolan at 10:44 AM | Permalink

Digital Politics: Talking Slate Cards

We can’t say enough about our virtual slate cards and eVoter Institute’s Karen Jagoda was kind enough to help us out earlier this week.

Spot-on founder Chris Nolan appeared on Karen’s Digital Politics podcast to talk about the slate card’s versatility and its use in down-ballot races. You can listen here and here.

If you’d care to skip the audio part of the program, a brief run-down on our how virtual slate card works – and works well – is here.

Posted by Chris Nolan at 9:41 AM | Permalink

Online Ad Targeting: Now A Consumer Issue

Here at Spot-on we’ve always been a little leery of online ad targeting.

In the online political space, targeting – using computer code to personalize advertising as a reader moves around the web – can backfire, especially when sensitive topics make in onto ballots or take center stage in campaigns. People might not mind putting a check in the mail but they sure do mind being “followed” on the web. Add to that the fact that Internet use is heaviest at the office, and, well, you can see why questions about privacy can’t be dismissed.

That’s why this week’s Wall Street Journal series on online privacy is so important. It details – with plain language and easy-to-understand graphics – how targeting works. And it talks with intelligence and political sense about how ad data is collected and how it’s used.

This won’t be the last of these stories; it’s just the 1st. Other outlets will pile on. Which means online ad targeting – pretty much the nerdy purview of the Federal Trade Commission and Congressional subcommittees – is now a consumer issue. You can count on more and more discussions – not to mention questions from clients – along with grandstanding and camera-hogging.

Why is this important for political media? It’s been very easy for some of these firms to market targeting as a well-used and familiar tool because it can look like the targeting used in direct mail. That’s probably going to change as companies amend their practices to conform to regulatory pressure. That’s the good news.

The bad news? Aggressive online targeting is a potential campaign issue – just like voting history or financial holdings. That’s the main reason Spot-on urges clients to use targeting carefully, especially for the hot-button issues that bring voters to the polls.

Editor’s Note: Chris Nolan is Spot-on’s founder. In another life she covered Congress and the regulation of the telecom business for Washington-based trade magazines.

Posted by Chris Nolan at 1:15 PM | Permalink

Really, Online Works

Following up on our post from a few weeks ago talking about how online ads and do drive traffic to campaign websites – even when the buy isn’t very large – we have this study from the folks at Global Strategies Group (in concert with Google and Centro, the Chicago-based media house).

Bottom-line: Online ads impress voters. GSG, which bought for Chris Kelly, a candidate for attorney general, in the Democratic primary surveyed voters who had seen online ads and those who just saw TV. Voters who saw both, had a more favorable impression of Kelly than those who didn’t.

You can check it out for yourself: GSG-Ad_Effectiveness_CaseStudy.pdf

Posted by Chris Nolan at 5:17 PM | Permalink

Call of the Wild

What to make of the Mama Grizzlies web video from Sarah Palin? This nearly 2 minute piece is posted on YouTube and clearly is trying to mobilize conservative women voters. Do women really feel as passionate about politics as they do about protecting their children from attacks? Is this a warning for men to watch out for the herd of pink elephants? This seems such a mixed message — it’s trying to be uplifting and at the same time it’s menacing. It’s too vague to be educational with strong visuals trying to say “I am like you”.

What do women across the spectrum expect they can do in the political arena? I think this is an exciting campaign season with women candidates having a chance to put their mark on political campaigning and craft messages that resonate with a broad audience. In a tight race, the women voters may make the difference but will the image of the tough Western (or frontier) woman speak to wormen and men around the country? In 2010 the challenge will be how to get out the vote and which messages will be the most persuasive in state and local races that Palin endorses.

The only thing that is clear is that political ads will no longer be just those traditional :15 or :30 second paid media spots. The Mama Grizzlies video got great earned media across the talk-show circuit and cable spectrum. In some cases it was being presented as inspiring and in others as extreme but people are talking, tweeting, and blogging about it as well. This video is another reminder of the power of longer form web stories – from tear-jerkers to ridiculous parodies – told by candidates and advocates as well as any of their constituents with a video camera.

It is also clear that the 2012 Presidential race has begun.

Editor’s Note: Karen Jagoda is president and co-founder of eVoter Institute and the host of the weekly podcast, Digital Politics every Thursday on wsRadio. This is her first post for Spot-on. where she’ll be a regular contributor.

Posted by Karen Jagoda at 7:53 PM | Permalink