Alex White » US election 2008

Book Review: “Yes We Did” by Rahaf Harfoush

Alex — Sun, 16 May 2010 22:46:04 +0000

Yes We Did: An inside look at how social media built the Obama brand

Over Xmas, I purchased and read “Yes We Did: An inside look at how social media built the Obama brand“, by Rahaf Harfoush, a volunteer new media campaigner on the Obama 2008 election campaign.

This 185 page book promises to give an insiders account of how the Obama campaign used social media and social networking sites to turn Obama’s presidential campaign into the most successful in history. The blurb offers “strategic insights organizations can apply to their own brands” and how “email, blogs, social networks, Twitter, and SMS messaging” were used to elect “the world’s first ‘digital‘ President.

Before you get started, here are two important links:

Rahaf’s blog: The Foush; and
Techpresident: the essential website on all political tech news.

The good

Overall, Yes We Did is an excellent account of working inside the Obama campaign. Harfoush mixes the book up with part narrative, part reflection and part interview with other key players in Obama HQ. As you read, you can’t help but feel a bit of her excitement as she moves to Chicago to work on the campaign, or when she participates in phone link ups with David Plouffe and Obama himself. Similarly, you can see the evolution of the campaign: it is a living thing that learns and adapts to changing circumstances.

In particular, Harfoush’s lessons are worthwhile, and are carefully presented. Most of the major digital elements are in the book: the use of email, neighbour-to-neighbour contact, the creation of my.BarackObama.com, the role of videos and more. Each chapter has a summary of the lessons and tips, followed by more detail.

While many people may focus on the use of social networking, I think the most important chapters are those focusing on email, and the use of analytics. The ability for Obama’s campaign to “iterate” – to repeatedly make minor improvements and customisations to their communications (website and email) is in my view one of the most powerful elements of the campaign. Certainly as important as using Facebook or blogs.

The bad

This is not a warts and all look at the campaign. Harfoush is clearly an Obama devotee, and there is not a lot of details about when things went wrong. Often the most interesting and powerful looks at campaigns are how they deal with mistakes. For example, the Obama campaign mess-up with the MySpace fan-page creator is not really covered. Harfoush was a volunteer, so to some extent it could be that she was not ever involved in handling a crisis, or being a decision maker. However, few of the interviews cover negative aspects or mistakes.

Similarly, while solid, the advice given is fairly generic – most of it is available on countless other websites looking at using different online marketing or engagement techniques. Admittedly, a lot of what is out there is based on “what the Obama campaign did”… which leads my to the next downfall.

The Obama campaign had enormous budgets. While the online elements were nowhere near as well funded as television ads, the campaign was a multi-million campaign, with a large web team. This makes it difficult for smaller campaigns to follow through with most of the advice, simply because they do not have the manpower. The Obama campaign captured the imagination and passion of tens of thousands of people who volunteered and donated. Few campaigns will ever replicate a tenth of this mobilisation.

The verdict

“Yes We Did” is an excellent addition to your online campaigning bookshelf. If you’re involved with any kind of online campaigning, whether for a non-profit, union or political candidate, it is well worth reading. It is a solid foundation for building a checklist (or wish list) of online activities and engagement tools, and highlights some important lessons to do with engagement, fundraising and mobilising supporters.

You can buy a copy of “Yes We Did” from Amazon.com.

Joe Trippi on Online Campaigning

Alex — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:51:50 +0000

Joe Trippi is widely regarded as the “inventor of online campaigning”. As campaign manager for Howard Dean, and author of “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised“, he is visiting Australia and was at Melbourne University tonight.

His talk, about the importance of social networks and interactive campaignings, especially during US Presidential elections, focused on the notion that new-style campaigns empower voters. Light on detail, he provided interesting and illuminating anecdotes into the Howard Dean campaign, and an outsider’s perspective of the Obama campaign.

Trippi emphasised the two-way nature of new campaigning. During the failed Dean campaign for example, supporters were able to “become a part” of the campaign and “own” the candidate through activities, comments and networks driven through the Howard Dean website.

Republicans eat their own

Alex — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 07:01:38 +0000

Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin typifies the hard-right conservative group in the GOP that would rather eat their own than work towards defeating a common foe.

From CNN:

At a boisterous Sarah Palin rally in Polk City, Florida on Saturday afternoon, one name was surprisingly absent from the campaign decor John McCain’s.

Looking around the Fantasy of Flight aircraft hangar where the rally took place, one could see all the usual reminders that it was a pro-McCain event. There were two large “Country First” banners hung on the walls along with four enormous American flags meant to conjure the campaign’s underlying patriotic theme. Many of the men and women in the audience wore McCain hats and t-shirts.

But on closer inspection, the GOP nominee’s name was literally nowhere to be found on any of the official campaign signage distributed to supporters at the event.

The McCain team is not immune to this attitude (although his campaign has been taken over by the neo-conservatives of the Bush White House).

From ThinkProgress:

Last week, CNN reported that one McCain source called Palin “a diva” who “takes no advice from anyone.”

…

Asked to respond to reports that she is “going rogue,” Palin declared them “absolutely, 100 percent false,” adding, “John McCain and I, and our camps, are working together to get John McCain elected.” MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow noted Palin’s word choice: “Your camps, plural? A McCain camp and a Palin camp? That does not sound good.”

This destructive behaviour is reminiscent of the last dying days of the Howard Government, as Minister turned on Minister (for example, the leaks by Turnbull and the media commentary from Abbott).

Negative campaiging works

Alex — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:32:06 +0000

Negative campaigning works.

Negative ads are also generally are more ‘honest’ than positive ads – they generally reference their sources. They are more likely to energise supporters into taking action – even Obama’s campaigning to potential volunteers use the scare-tactics of Rove, Cheney, Bush and ‘more of the same’.

It especially works when you are behind in the polls against a popular candidate.

John McCain and his Republican allies are “readying a newly aggressive assault on Sen. Barack Obama’s character, believing that to win in November they must shift the conversation back to questions about the Democrat’s judgment, honesty and personal associations,” several top Republicans told the Washington Post.

They are only effective however, if they tap into something that the populace are already concerned about. Negative ads will miss the mark if they make outrageous, unrealistic or incredible claims.

McCain’s campaign is engaging in a massive negative campaigning spree. Unfortunately its attacks on Obama’s character are misplaced. On the whole, Americans are not scared of Obama. Most character issues were addressed during the primaries.

McCain’s negative campaigning has also overwhelmed his positive message, and has made his campaign look overly negative, with no clear narative or vision. This hyper-negativity can turn off voters, particularly the all-important independent voters that were McCain’s biggest supporters, sending them to Obama or depressing their vote altogether.

Turn-out-the-vote: the final hours

Alex — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 12:18:08 +0000

After all the half hour ads, direct mail and phone calls, US elections boil down to getting out the vote.

Obama has been able to spend enormous amounts of money on his “ground war” (as compared to the “air war” of television ads). Obama offices outnumber McCain offices in battleground states by as much as 2:1.

There are a number of tactics to get out the vote, but it basically boils down to door-knocking, and using the data gained over the course of the campaign to target voters effectively. After all, you don’t want to take opposition voters to the polling booth.

That’s right, despite all the sophisticated tools and techniques that US presidential campaigns use, it boils down to one-on-one conversations between a canvasser and potential voter. The databases and targeting are just aids to get campaigners in front of the doors most likely to vote for the candidate.

Campaign money simply allows candidates to employ more staff, train more volunteers and more effectively target potential voters.