Political Video Tuesday: Yes, We Can

This is everywhere by now, but I'd feel like a bad supporter if I didn't link just one more time...



It's been a busy week around here, as my friends and I are trying to not so singlehandedly deliver the mid-Atlantic states to Barack Obama. We're in Delaware today (an experience which will get an entry all its own) and will spend the weekend working in the Potomac triangle of DC, Maryland, and Virginia. Plus, marvel as I resume my frightening trip into the world of online activism. BLAMMO!

For stories on all of that and more, keep on coming back.

Social Network Update III - Level of Discourse

As my adventure into Barack Obama's social network presence continues, I figure it's probably long past time to explore one of the key components of any network group: the discussion board. Home to well-reasoned discourse and terrible, terrible trolls alike, discussion communities are often representative of the state of the movement. How would the conversations on Facebook differ from those on Care2, and what would that mean for the groups? Sadly, there's only one way to find out: we have to hit the boards.

FACEBOOK

Since there are many different social communities dedicated to Obama and his candidacy, I'll be looking at messages from two separate communities. The first, "I endorse Barack Obama -- and I'm telling my friends!", is an activist group that advocates direct support of and involvement in the Obama campaign. That being the case, you would expect the messages found here have a distinctly energized tone, for both good and ill.

The group is extremely new, having been formed within the last week, but already the messages cropping up seem to bear our my expectations. For instance, the first message that appeared when I loaded up the message board was an invective-laced accusation regarding Obama's apparent status as a Muslim terrorist. Though this well-intentioned fear-monger was quickly shouted down, it seems like this kind of thing is going to be par for the course going forward.

The community that is forming around this group handles the trolls and weirdos as best as they can, and uses the board mainly as a bulletin space for calls to action, announcements of milestones, and heads-ups for Obama-related events. So far, actually debate/discussion seems to fall more under the auspices of the older, more well-established Obama group "Barack Obama (One Million Strong for Barack)".

When I arrived at this board, I was expecting the worst, simply because... well, that tends to be what politics brings out in people. I was surprised to find that the board, with a few exceptions, was fairly respectable when it came to the level of discourse. Part of this comes, I suspect, from eagle-eyed moderation; as I perused, I noticed topic deletions sprinkled throughout the threads. The supporters who are here also seem to take trolls with a grain of salt: numerous threads are devoted to venting about everyone's favorite type of internet rabble-rousers. In one, a particularly proactive community member (and apparent fan of It's A Wonderful Life) suggests donating to Obama every time a troll posts.

In terms of topics for discussion, the board is currently in the throws of Super Tuesday fever. This post, which I chose because of its proximity to my destination for tomorrow, captures the general feeling of many around the board. Elsewhere, there are numerous topics devoted to frustrations regarding Obama's opponents; in particular, Hillary Clinton seems to be drawing the most amount of fire, well ahead of any Republican candidate. The distaste ranges from outrage (a post regarding alleged Clinton puush-polling in California) to tactical (a breakdown of Mark Penn's latest talking points) to downright Drudge-ian (an apparently shocking video that "the Clintons don;t want you to see!!!").

As a site dedicated to Obama support, there is very little room for a middle ground approach when it comes to Obama's chief rival. However, the board does show some sense of awareness when it comes to life in the world of online politics. This post, which may be my favorite of the ones I've read so far, contains a conversation about the role of trolls and agitators in these kinds of communities. Far from being self-exonerating, many of the messages contain admissions of trolling by board members on Clinton sites, and seems to reflect the belief that "everyone's doing it". Though the group's view of such behavior seems to be negative overall, most of them still aren't willing to grant Clinton, or her supporters, a break.

More surprising is the group's preoccupation with Ron Paul. Instead of focusing on Any of the Republican frontrunners, most messages about the GOP are in regards to the TExas congressman's longshot bid for the White House. From complaints about his supporters, to ways in which to win them over, the Facebook crowd is either swept up in the Paul "revolution" with the rest of the internet, or aware of the power that Paul's bloc wields as a potential swing group in the upcoming election. Whatever the reason, though, you have to admit that, for someone with no with no shot at the nomination, this guy's everywhere.

One thing that's lacking from the board (as far as I can tell, at least) is a strong presence of undecided voters. People don't seem to be coming here in order to figure out if Obama is their candidate of choice or not; the people who have chosen to be active in these groups all seem fairly set when it comes to who gets their vote. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it does remove the possibility of non-partisan information/persuasion sessions.

Another possible problem with the Facebook forums is the lack of lingering threads. Most discussions that I found on the site were created within 76 hours of my first searches. Going deeper, I found that, in most cases, all messages found on the first few pages were new rather than ongoing. There are a couple of problems with that. First of all, a lack of old, or even sticky, threads leads to redundant posting, as newcomers attempt to assert (for the 37th time) that Obama is not a Muslim/white supremacist/anti-Christ/etc. Second, the value of new content overshadows the need for the kind of foundational posting that takes a message board from a bulletin space to a community. In this climate, the possibility for the lengthy debates found on other boards is lost.

Overall, the message boards of the Facebook groups are far less painful than I was expecting. While the occasional troll slips past the keeper, the community generally fulfills its goal as a place where Obama supporters can come to have their beliefs reinforced. Undecided voters who wish to participate would do well to do what I just did: lurk.

CARE2

It goes without saying that Care2 is a very different animal than Facebook. As a community of progressive activists, you would expect their message boards to be quite different from those found on a general use social network site. For the most part, however, the same concerns and content found in the Facebook groups is present in the Care2 forums, albeit in a smaller setting. The people who participate in the Care2 groups are, generally, against Hillary Clinton, for Barack Obama, and ready to do something to help the process along. Thus, the instances of troll abuse are low to nonexistent. If anything, there may be even more outrage present on the Care2 boards than the Facebook one. In one post, the topic starter takes an endorsement of Obama in the direction of a screed against lobbying and special interests. In another, an earnest citizen calls for the campaigns to remove race and gender from their arsenal of potential attack points. On the whole, the Care2 boards seem to be more focused on political discussions, with campaign minutiae taking a back seat to political discussion. That said, the topics discussed do not deviate significantly from those found on the Facebook boards.

However, in spite of their similarities, the Care2 boards do offer several differences from their Facebook counterparts, to both their credit and detriment. For instance, Care2 allows users to embed images within their posts, which allows for interesting visual aids in addition to inspired argument. However, this advantage is nullified by Care2's difficult-to-navigate dating system, which uses the "x days ago/x months ago" display style for archived posts rather than the easier, more explicit dating method found on Facebook.

In the end, the Care2 boards may be more civil than the Facebook ones, but their small size and scope renders them less useful for daily visitors than their Facebook counterparts. Though Care2 wins the battle on many fronts in the worlds of online organizing, the campaign forum fight can be more successfully fought on the larger, more well-organized Facebook boards..

BOOK REVIEW: Mousepads, Shoe Leather, and Hope

To the majority of uninterested Americans, the name Howard Dean probably continues to conjure images of that red-faced night in January when the former Vermont governor’s dreams of victory in the 2004 presidential race evaporated in the wake of one ill-timed scream. However, ignoble ending aside, Howard Dean’s campaign for the presidency in 2004 was the backdrop for numerous lessons about the highs and lows of netroots campaigning. In their book “Mousepads, Shoe Leather, and Hope: Lessons from the Howard Dean Campaign for the Future of Internet Politics”, former Dean ringleaders Zephyr Teachout and Thomas Streeter lead a gaggle of their fellow Dean staffers in a semi-narrative, semi-analytical examination of why the Dean campaign mattered both then and now.

If you had to take just one idea away from the Dean experience, it might be the notion that the primary force that drives any authentic political movement is a sense of purposeful action. The authors spend a substantial amount of time reminding the readers that, for all of the “Internet candidate” labels that were bandied about in the press throughout Dean’s campaign, the message only really found footing because it was tied to fundamental citizen involvement. The Dean campaign didn’t simply use the Internet as a cash register or a bulletin board; they identified the desire for community-based action and set about using the tools at their disposal to create such a system in a digital environment.

I was refreshed by the lack of irrational, starry-eyed optimism exhibited by the book’s contributors (not that I was expecting any, really). No one confuses the Internet with a strategy in and of itself; rather, they regard it as a powerful tool that, under the right set of circumstances, can circumvent traditional media roadblocks (name recognition, the “money primaries” of the early fundraising months), establish digital word of mouth buzz, and give voice and purpose to a large community of potential supporters. At every turn, however, the authors stress the importance of the circumstances rather than simply the tools themselves.

If Howard Dean’s message had been different, or come in 2007 instead of 2003, or if the United States hadn’t been gripped in the fog of post-9/11 hysteria that didn’t seem to dissipate until after the 2004 election, the campaign could’ve taken a very different turn in regards to both strategy and respectability. In the end, you get the sense that the relative successes of the Dean campaign were as much a product of the moment in history as it was of the new netroots revolution. Today, many of the Dean campaign’s risky innovations have become required, if overlooked, campaign tools. However, most candidates in the current field continue to exhibit an unhealthy lack of understanding when it comes to Internet campaigns. Ultimately, it seems that the Dean campaign’s legacy will be respected only when these tools receive the same consideration.

Political Video Tuesday: A Beer with Steve

Just thought I'd pass along a great new ad for a great candidate. As Liz from the Progressive Exchange listserv puts it:

[Steve Novick] is a progressive Democrat running for US Senate in Oregon with a very grassroots campaign. This generated 28,000 hits in 24 hours, all from blog posts and people sending it virally. Now it's at the top of YouTube's political page for the day.

I think this is a great model for grassroots campaigns, activists, etc. to get the news out there. Because of this video post and its views, many mainstream media outlets have taken notice and written articles about this. People are buzzing about it around the country. It's amazing how a little Internet coordination in Portland, Oregon can make ripples around the country. Ah...my geekish heart just skipped a beat.

Well said. Also, here's the ad itself:

Social Network Update II - Surveying The Scene

As I mentioned last week, I decided to take my support of Barack Obama online, joining the movements on Facebook and Care2 in hopes of finding out what all the fuss was about. In this, my first update as a user-activist, I thought I might offer some initial impressions on the culture and atmosphere of these two vastly different social networks.

Facebook

For the Facebook portion of my research, I decided to sign up for multiple Obama-related items to see how they did, or didn’t, interact with and influence one another. My list included the groups “Barack Obama (One Million Strong for Barack)” and “I endorse Barack Obama -- and I'm telling my friends!”, as well as applications like “Obama” (run by the campaign itself) and “Barack Obama Supporters” (built by an independent application developer). I also used Facebook’s relatively new “Fan” system to become a supporter of Barack Obama. After that, I let the lurking begin. Before I start participating in the conversation, I’d like to get a feel for exactly what the culture is like on both sites.

The first thing that you notice when you join Obama's groups and applications on Facebook is the sheer number of members that each one boasts. "One Million Strong" has over 400,000 members alone, while the more activist-oriented "Endorsement" group pulls over 40,000 of their own member. I'm sure these numbers overlap quite a bit, but they're still impressive.

Content-wise, each separate group appears to fulfill a separate function. "One Million Strong" is set up as a link clearinghouse; if you're looking for ways to donate, places to find news, or just a little more info about the candidate himself, this group is only too happy to send you on your merry way. This group also has the most active discussion forums of all the groups; there are currently over 15,000 Obama-related threads.

On the other end of the spectrum, the "Endorsement" group urges informed action instead of simply information by itself. From offering direct links to sponsored fundraising efforts, to providing template for creating your own door hangers and stickers, this group seems to be more grassroots-oriented than its other, bigger counterpart.

In terms of usefulness, the applications are a mixed bag. The "Obama" app is set up as an Obama news aggregator, updating continually with all of the Obama news that's fit to print. The others, however, seem fairly redundant. The "Supporters" group, built using the same template found on many second-rate TV show fan apps, is shoddy and unnecessary, and the Obama fan page rehashes much of the information found on all of the other sites. In the end, I think my focus will probably shift away from these last two pretty quickly, unless I'm given a compelling reason to pay attention.

Care2

It's safe to say that Care2 is an entirely different animal when it comes to social networking. While Facebook's activism and political opportunities are just a small part of the overall Facebook experience, Care2 operates under exactly the opposite ratios. If you're not politically (or rather, progressively) active on Care2, what's the point of joining?

Surprisingly, there are relatively few Obama groups to be found on Care2. When I did my initial search, the first result that came up was a group dedicated to advocating a Kucinich-Obama ticket in 2008. Clearly, this ain't your father's social network.

I finally settled on joining the two biggest Care2 Obama groups. In Obama's Care2 world, big is a relative term. The first, "Barack Obama for America in 2008", covers roughly the same territory as its Facebook counterparts, albeit in a smaller, stripped down setup, and has around 600 members. The other "Barack Obama for President", seems a bit more activist-oriented, and boasts a membership of around 100.

How interesting. On both sites, there are specific groups for information and activism. So far, I haven't seen the two go hand-in-hand. I wonder what that says about these communities?

BOOK REVIEW: The Tipping Point

To master the power of fads, trends, and movements, you simply have to think like a virus. That is, according to Malcolm Gladwell, at least. In his book The Tipping Point, Gladwell seeks to explain exactly what makes some ideas take off and causes others to languish in obscurity. While the book tends to be written with marketing in mind, the implications that it has for the world of online politics are still numerous.

One of Gladwell’s chief observations is that, regardless of the marketing technique or tipping points surrounding a given trend, content is still king, especially in the early going. People might catch on to a clothing trend once the audience of connectors, mavens, and salesmen are on board, but there has to be something that draws in those groups to begin with. Without the initial interest, whether it’s generated by quality or quirk, the idea has no chance of taking off. This is especially important in the political world, where the field of both online and offline messages gets more crowded every day.

Gladwell’s examples run the gamut, from expected (the resurgence of Hush Puppies in the 90s fashion world) to surprising (the sudden decline of New York’s staggering crime rates). However, they each have one thing in common: the all tipped because of subtle nuanced factors far outside most observers’ fields of vision. For Gladwell, the devil is in the details, and having the ability to recognize and monkey with these particulars is generally the difference between a successful campaign and a fair to middling one. For online organizers, this means that things like button placement on a website, or the delivery style of actors in a campaign ad might be all it takes to make or break an otherwise politically sound message. While scary to some, this concept also insures that those who’ve trained themselves to spot such problems are guaranteed a spot in the process.

Speaking as a keen-eyed, would-be political consultant, I find that heartening, at least.

Social Network Update I - Introduction.

As part of my current course in Internet politics, I've been given the task of evaluating the use of social network sites by campaigns through firsthand experience. Over the next few weeks, I plan to track my involvement in a political campaign using social networks as the main means of communication and organization. Below are my choices for social networks.

Facebook

My first love in online social networks, Facebook really has all that people in my age range can ask for in terms of establishing an online presence. Though the addition of innumerable (and often shoddy) user-made applications has cluttered Facebook's once-sleek appearance, this social network still hasn't lost the reputation that it gained in the heady days of .edu-only admission standards.

Care2

I just finished signing up for Care2, and my first impressions are fairly positive. The profile options are comprehensive and accessible at the same time. I particularly enjoyed the "see choices" option for categories like issues and interests. The tag clouds that pop up are solid ways to gauge the popularity of issues on Care2, and also serve to jog the memory when it comes to thinking of personal preferences. I know that I always go blank when presented with so many blank boxes; Care2 presents a nice cure for that particular syndrome.

Since I don't have a very large network of friends who are currently members of Care2, I'll be casting my net wide in terms of the groups I join. For the purpose of this project, however, I will be primarily focusing my efforts on observing the level of activity and discourse surrounding Barack Obama's campaign for the Democratic Presidential nomination. While I am confident that Obama's campaign will continue throughout the spring semester, I will also pay close attention to the Clinton campaign and, in the event of Obama's defeat, will shift my focus accordingly.

Now that introductions are out of the way, all that's left to do is join some groups, make some friends, and get active. Let's see what happens.