Friday
Apr112008
On Politicians, Social Media And Obama (with diagrams!)
Friday, April 11, 2008 at 18:24 | baratunde | tagged B.L. Ochman, Barack Obama, Chicago, Community, Election 2008, NYC, Social Media, Teresa Valdez Klein, Twitter, Web Community Forum in Technological
So my social media homeysita Teresa Valdez Klein blogged over at Web Community Forum the following
Good point, but I'd like to extend it.
I haven't read Li's book yet (though I have it thanks to you, Teresa), but I have been working on a response to BL Ochman who thinks Obama's not using the Internet well at all in terms of empowering people. I'm not lumping Teresa and BL into the same boat, but I'll respond to both with a part of my view on political campaigns and social media.
Let's start with Talking 2.0
In this part, politicians with their big heads and big mouths sit on the top, get on TwitterSpaceBookTube, collect a bunch of friends and broadcast their message in a very direct mail sort of way. It's just like direct mail, except the people build their lists on their own. It's advertising beyond 30-seconds and much better targeted.
Now, Fundraising 2.0
Again, politicians are at the top of the heap, this time tapping into millions of small donors. Obama is the king of this right now. At this phase, politicians enable donors to solicit from other donors with their own mini-campaigns and donation widgets. This is significant, as it threatens the big time financial interests who've long held the ear (and balls) of our elected officials.
Listening 2.0
I don't have a picture here, but just invert the talking image: lots of voices and ideas from the people slapping the politician upside the head. Teresa's LinkedIn post is taking a look at this. Everyone using the web for this purpose has a ways to go. The wiki model has proven most effective at integrating contributions from the multitudes into a coherent work. Will we ever have a wikitician? a wikiacracy?
I know Obama has a form on his site to collect ideas and feedback on his various posted policies. I have no idea what happens to that. Do they go to advisors, interns, /dev/null? Not sure.
What I do know is that the next layer is essential to reaching a point where campaigns and politicians can meaningfully integrate all that they are hearing from voters and supporters..
Community-Building 2.0
This is a very different picture. The politician isn't necessarily at the top. They are at the center, because it is around them that civic activity is happening, but people's attention isn't solely focused on listening to the politician, giving money to the politician or even talking to the politician. To extend Tereas's line, "as we online community geeks all know, there’s a big difference between making people feel heard and actually hearing them" and enabling them to hear each other.
People are talking to other people. The politician/campaign/organization is the hub of this activity but not necessarily the top. They provide tools, however, which allow people to identify and find each other. They provide materials. On Obama's site, this is the my.barackobama.com social network tool. I've seen volunteers from NYC take this tool and use it to organize dinner parties, trips to Virginia and Pennsylvania and more.
Folks looking to help out turn here to find activity in or near their zipcode.
The politician, in this case Obama, has inspired or enabled communities to form and to take action. Today that action is focused on getting this candidate elected, but what I'm really excited about is how this carries on into the actual governing.
There are promising signs from the Obama campaign that they will do more than any president in history or any candidate running to bring active citizens and community into our government. I've written on that here:
These Obama proposals offer unprecedented access to the workings of government for the common citizen. Searchable databases of federal department documents and activities and data, comment periods on non-emergency legislation, streaming video of important meetings. It's hard for citizens to act intelligently without information, and I'm impressed that Obama sees the value in opening the doors.
That's the exciting thing for me. Not so much knowing that a candidate actually reads my posts on twitter, but knowing that I can collaborate with my fellow citizens in keeping an eye on government and in building solutions to some of the pressing problems we face.
As always, Fired Up!
In their new book, Groundswell, Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff outline five major objectives in online community building: listening, talking, energizing, supporting, embracing
If I had to wager, I’d say that the candidates’ efforts on Linkedin fall neatly into the second category. It’s unlikely that the candidates are actually paying attention to the thousands of responses pouring in, but that’s a smaller part of the political equation. The important thing from where the campaigns stand is that these outreach strategies make people feel heard. But, as we online community geeks all know, there’s a big difference between making people feel heard and actually hearing them.
Good point, but I'd like to extend it.
I haven't read Li's book yet (though I have it thanks to you, Teresa), but I have been working on a response to BL Ochman who thinks Obama's not using the Internet well at all in terms of empowering people. I'm not lumping Teresa and BL into the same boat, but I'll respond to both with a part of my view on political campaigns and social media.
Let's start with Talking 2.0
In this part, politicians with their big heads and big mouths sit on the top, get on TwitterSpaceBookTube, collect a bunch of friends and broadcast their message in a very direct mail sort of way. It's just like direct mail, except the people build their lists on their own. It's advertising beyond 30-seconds and much better targeted.
Now, Fundraising 2.0
Again, politicians are at the top of the heap, this time tapping into millions of small donors. Obama is the king of this right now. At this phase, politicians enable donors to solicit from other donors with their own mini-campaigns and donation widgets. This is significant, as it threatens the big time financial interests who've long held the ear (and balls) of our elected officials.
Listening 2.0
I don't have a picture here, but just invert the talking image: lots of voices and ideas from the people slapping the politician upside the head. Teresa's LinkedIn post is taking a look at this. Everyone using the web for this purpose has a ways to go. The wiki model has proven most effective at integrating contributions from the multitudes into a coherent work. Will we ever have a wikitician? a wikiacracy?
I know Obama has a form on his site to collect ideas and feedback on his various posted policies. I have no idea what happens to that. Do they go to advisors, interns, /dev/null? Not sure.
What I do know is that the next layer is essential to reaching a point where campaigns and politicians can meaningfully integrate all that they are hearing from voters and supporters..
Community-Building 2.0
This is a very different picture. The politician isn't necessarily at the top. They are at the center, because it is around them that civic activity is happening, but people's attention isn't solely focused on listening to the politician, giving money to the politician or even talking to the politician. To extend Tereas's line, "as we online community geeks all know, there’s a big difference between making people feel heard and actually hearing them" and enabling them to hear each other.
People are talking to other people. The politician/campaign/organization is the hub of this activity but not necessarily the top. They provide tools, however, which allow people to identify and find each other. They provide materials. On Obama's site, this is the my.barackobama.com social network tool. I've seen volunteers from NYC take this tool and use it to organize dinner parties, trips to Virginia and Pennsylvania and more.
Folks looking to help out turn here to find activity in or near their zipcode.
The politician, in this case Obama, has inspired or enabled communities to form and to take action. Today that action is focused on getting this candidate elected, but what I'm really excited about is how this carries on into the actual governing.
There are promising signs from the Obama campaign that they will do more than any president in history or any candidate running to bring active citizens and community into our government. I've written on that here:
if Obama's campaign is successful, it will be because we are successful, and if that happens, I envision a country in which people are more engaged in their government and society and thus check the power of those who already have unfettered access. I know the power of this inspiration because it has touched me and made me committed to seeing it happen in my small sphere of influence.
If his revolutionary open government and technology plan and government ethics plan (for the love of god, read it!) comes to pass, we will have more visibility and input into the (corrupt) workings of our government than ever before, and it will be up to us to act on that new information. (BTW, compare that to this assessment of Hillary's tech/communications plan. It pales). With the searchable government spending database he spearheaded (use it!), we may find that the obscenity of our budgetary priorities is so readily available, we have no choice but to protest it.
Obama's platform is not just about his positions. It's about the tools and infrastructure he's offering directly to the citizens of this country. Forget for a moment who speaks in a most commanding fashion about the particulars of health care legislation. Forget about beautiful language or alleged experience. Look at what President Obama offers all of us: empowerment. Empowerment like we've never seen. Power we forgot we had. Power that a community organizer trained on the streets of Chicago would recognize in a heartbeat. We may not get an opportunity like this for several decades!
Look, I am under no illusions about the forces that wield the true power in this country, but what has been restored by Obama's campaign is my faith (and go ahead, say it, "hope") and knowledge that true power is still held by the people, and that we the people can use more of that power under President Obama than under any other. By far.
These Obama proposals offer unprecedented access to the workings of government for the common citizen. Searchable databases of federal department documents and activities and data, comment periods on non-emergency legislation, streaming video of important meetings. It's hard for citizens to act intelligently without information, and I'm impressed that Obama sees the value in opening the doors.
That's the exciting thing for me. Not so much knowing that a candidate actually reads my posts on twitter, but knowing that I can collaborate with my fellow citizens in keeping an eye on government and in building solutions to some of the pressing problems we face.
As always, Fired Up!
Reader Comments (15)
The diagrams got my attention. Your analysis got me subscribed.
Josh here (coauthor of the book you just bought).
I found your diagrams interesting. I use one that looks a lot like your "Talking 2.0" to speak with corporate clients. Your diagram misses the social aspects of talking -- that is, that once the messages are delivered to the "masses" they are supposed to talk to each other about those messages. So I include conversations among the people.
But you are exactly on target that while candidates talk to people, and people talk to each other, the people rarely get to talk to the candidates. If Starbucks can take ideas from its customers (see MyStarbucksIdea site) why can't Barack Obama?
That would be incredible. But remember, in-credible means not able to be believed.
thanks for coming through Josh! Your book is high on the list. Trying to finish Zittrain's "Future of the Internet."
I just skimmed the MyStarbucksIdea site, and I see a great potential for this in political/government conversation. Can't wait to see what you're written about it.
If a government can foster this sort of idea generation among its citizens (especially at the local level) and act on even a few of them, people would feel respected. It's the small things that give us a sense of belonging and worth. If I find that an idea I submitted or voted on is under review or actually gets acted upon, I'm just likely to care more about my community.
I hope the Obama campaign/presidency looks seriously at tools like this soon. Thanks again.
Josh Bernoff everybody!!
First of all, found your post thru your tweet and now will add your blog to my Google Reader. Love your stick visuals!
Call me cynical but I don't believe that the current candidates are really participating in social media themselves, i.e. like you and Teresa said, reading your posts on Twitter. Its a means to get elected...to "reach" the fish where the fish are.
The value of social media in the campaign is that people can talk to each other....twittering the Obama/Clinton debates live comes to mind. And Obama has indeed fostered this on mybarackobama.com.
But whether this is a very smart "use" of the new media ala JFK being credited with being the first to understand how to "use" TV will remain to be seen.
I will go read Obama's technology plan. I have not read it. Thanks for the kick and the link.
But I wonder if any of the candidates see on line "listening" as anything more than a campaign tool....the next generation focus groups. Like Josh, it seems incredible to me that any of the candidates will take ideas like Starbucks says they are going to; to better serve their customers.
However, the good news is that as people talk to each other as described in the Groundswell (It's an awesome book!), power will return to the people and government like marketers will have to listen and participate because the groundswell will be ubiquitous.
hey marianne, thanks for the contribution. Conversations among one another is definitely the more achievable measure of social media political success. It's already happening.
As for campaigns/governments harnessing the ideas of the governed, I have faith that that CAN happen. Whether it will is more up to us than the candidates and politicians.
For it to really work, people have to feel that their contributions are being taken seriously, even if they don't get used. The fact that Obama's offering a comment period on legislation is a heartening start, but I want to see us take it further and more local.
Perhaps people get points or rewards of some sort (as in games) to contribute and for ideas that generate the most agreement or conversation (because even conversation without agreement is valuable. citizens talking to each other).
I also wonder if part of the reason Gore's reinventing Gov initiative didn't go as far as it could was because it came before its time. He had a set group of people looking for opportunities to increase operational efficiency and save money. That doesn't scale with some small committee.
If you employed the citizenry in this task, you'd get a wider range of concepts.
thanks again for coming through. this excites the hell out of me. it's non-partisan and non-ideological as well, so left, right and center should feel open to participating if the system is established well.
[...] Baratunde [...]
[...] Baratunde [...]
[...] online social networks to give the appearance of listening to stakeholders. Baratunde Thurston wrote a great response — complete with diagrams — and brought up many important [...]
The truth is that the Democrats won because of Web 2.0. Largely because Obama had the assistance of FaceBook's Founder and Co-Founder. Without them, Obama would not have won the election and activated millions of volunteers and supporters.
Let's hope Obama is not one of the Illuminatis or their puppets. I worry that he will get the JFK treatment if he doesn't comply. It's a dangerous time for the people of America and the World.
This is hilarious. I think media can and have played a very important rule in this election. I have seen such a big campaign. even on the virtual world games I have seen billboards "vote for Obama". I guess this really can have the potential to turn the tables, but still doesn't have greater potential than the policy difference between these two parties, democrats and republican
So you know, I stole the photo of whiteboard diagram #3 for a <a href="http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/09/CommunityChicago"presentation I'm doing with the American Press Institute. (The picture of me is cheesy as hell. Cropped from one in the Huffington Post.)
Yoink.
Thanks, man.
i encourage plagiarism of my ideas! way to go dan
I think we can thank and blame technology for Obama's win. He has won the election but has not delivered the goods yet. I will still give him time to prove himself.
Patience is a virtue my friend. After all, its not easy and quick to make order out of chaos.
If a government can foster this sort of idea generation among its citizens (especially at the local level) and act on even a few of them, people would feel respected. It's the small things that give us a sense of belonging and worth. If I find that an idea I submitted or voted on is under review or actually gets acted upon, I'm just likely to care more about my community.