Using Social Media in a Slightly Different Way
Twitter, Facebook, and similar information sharing social media networks usually inform followers what someone is doing, what is new with them, or what is on their mind. However, former governor Rod Blagojevich are using social media to update followers on their corruption trial. This is a slightly different way to incorporate social media into one’s daily life. Talk about finding a new way to get the media on your side. Blagojevich’s corruption trial involving his activities while governor of Illinois began this week and Blagojevich tweeted that he was excited for the trial to begin. Blagojevich is charged with racketeering, bribery conspiracy, extortion, and wire fraud. Clearly, Blagojevich is using social media to his advantage. He has constantly affirmed that he did nothing wrong while he was in office and revealed his confidence again via Twitter saying, “The truth is on our side.”
Former Governor Rod Blagojevich
Often, media is restricted in high profile court proceedings. Here, Blagojevich is doing his part to share what is happening inside with everyone interested on the outside. This brings up a unique issue between those in the public eye and the public itself. I feel that frequently we here celebrities, politicians, and other high profile individuals complaining about a lack of privacy. They say they are never actually alone and that they don’t like what it has done to their daily lives. In this case, Blagojevich is inviting the public to be more involved in his life. Most politicians would prefer to keep events inside the court room strictly inside the court room, regardless of guilt or innocence. I find it intriguing that Blagojevich’s newest campaign is not for an election, but merely for support and he eliminates all barriers in his power to reach his audience. Facebook, Twitter, Foursquare, and YouTube provide the means to share any information with social media users. This is both good and bad information; biased and unbiased. There is also a greater element of freedom which is also a risk. Politicians know this. Celebrities know this. That being said, is there really room for a private life when you put yourself in the public eye? It will be interesting to see if Blagojevich can win a victory of support through his information sharing as the trial goes on. Despite any public favor gained through his latest campaign, those inside the court will be the ones to decide regardless of how many tweets Blagojevich makes protesting his innocence.
Google’s New Edge on Political Campaigns
Google is raising in the bar in political campaigns and social media. Today Google launched new tools for political campaign candidates to better engage the audience. YouTube’s You Choose 2010 Campaign Toolkit and the Google Campaign Toolkit rolled out today to allow candidates convey their messages to more consumers in a more effective way. They are revolutionizing online campaign efforts and jumping on the social media in politics trend.
You Choose 2010
YouTube’s You Choose 2010 Campaign Toolkit utilizes YouTube’s ability to create different channels for video posts. It includes the YouTube politician channel that is a home base for the candidate. There is a Moderator on YouTube that provides a debating platform for voters to interact with others. There is also a YouTube Insight channel allowing the candidate to see how their videos are doing in popularity as well as reach. YouTube is also providing addition features for those wishing to pay for their campaign toolkit. 
Such features include special promotional powers based on search terms. Consumers can search specific key words and when doing so, you ad will display on the page. If a consumer clicks your ad, you are charged but the advantage is through knowing that the consumer is exposed to relevant information making them more likely to view your ad. The paid toolkit also features call-to-action overlays to drive donations as well as a television ad online option that allows your commercials to air on YouTube and its partners.
Google’s Campaign Toolkit complements YouTube’s toolkit but also adds in the all-encompassing features of Google. Candidates will be able to use Google’s extensive application portfolio to effectively manage their campaigns. Features include:
- Google Adwords to customize the campaign based on consumer searches
- Google Apps to integrate communication into a shareable format for those running the campaign
- Google Maps and Google Earth to help consumers find you
- Google News to stay up-to-date on current events
- Google Analytics to monitor campaign performance
- Insights for Search to learn who is searching and what the are searching for
- Google Web Elements to add your favorite Google products to the campaign website
- Google Moderator to provide a voter debate forum
- Google Alerts to monitor what is going on and to email important news alerts
Political campaigns have already been gaining speed on social media but now that campaign managers can easily integrate all of their social media and online efforts into one system, social media is sure to drastically increase its involvement in the political realm.
Facebook and Politics, A Blossoming Relationship (Part 1)
Yesterday, Mashable reported that Facebook launched its US Politics Page at the Personal Democracy Forum in New York City. This page is geared to reveal how much Facebook has been integrated into political campaigns and politics in general. This page is a great resource to maintain up-to-date knowledge on the issues facing politics today. It also serves as a place where visitors can have their voice heard and also connect with others sharing similar beliefs. By integrating politics so conveniently into Facebook, an interface already so wildly popular, I believe debates of hot topics will intensify but also that people will begin to show more active involvement in politics. The US Politics Page posted the “Rock the Vote” logo as a favorite image reminding page visitors to vote in elections exemplifies this point. Barack Obama is often seen as being a pioneer at using Facebook as part of a political campaign, a smart move since he obviously cannot be everywhere simultaneously nor can he reach all voters face-to-face. This mentality can be utilized by all politicians and Facebook is the solution to reaching out to your audience from your home base. As election season starts to come around, Facebook and politics will become even more intermingled.
courtesy of mashable
From Jack and Diane to Senate Seat?
Change is Good…
Obama and Politics 2.0: Documenting History in Real Time
In July of 2008, Nancy Scola wrote a really insightful post documenting a critical aspect of the Obama Social Media Campaign – Video. Enjoy!
I’m taking a crack at liveblogging an event tonight [ed. -- now last night] at NYU featuring Arun Chaudhary, director of video field production for the Obama campaign, in conversation with Ellen McGirt, senior writer at Fast Company and author of magazine’s April 2008 cover story “The Brand Called Obama.” Arun left his job as an adjunct film professor at NYU to produce video that pulls from public events, behind the scenes, and one-on-ones — unique creative content that populates BarackObama.com and a YouTube channel. Let’s get started.
Asked about the new media team, Arun describes at least 50 people crammed into one corner of an office building floor with with “pictures of JFK and graph paper tacked up on the wall.” Arun says the new media team spends a fair amount of money, but they’re buying fishing poles rather than fish; the broadcast quality footage they capture, for example, can be used for advertising in addition to online video. Asked about past campaigns he tried working with, Arun says they saw media as “too precious” to take creative risks with.
Arun explains his hire by the campaign by saying ‘you can learn the politics. You can learn how to navigate these worlds. But you can’t really learn the trades very quickly.’ The campaign has been attracting successful people that way, he says, naming Facebook’s Chris Hughes, who came on to handle social-networking. Arun then screens a well-crafted mock movie trailer calling people to a rally in New York’s Washington Square Park that features Obama in slightly goofy situations. Ellen: “We’ve never seen anything like this before”:
Ellen asks if the technology was in place three years ago to make video like this. “The technology was there three years ago, but I don’t think the right audience was,” says Arun. Back then, he jokes, there were just six hundred of the same people commenting on political blogs and that’s it; online participation today spans a wider segment of the population.* Ellen ask how he managed to get approval for the trailer video from the campaign and the candidate. Arun laughs a bit nervously, “I don’t know if the candidate saw it,” but says that it made its way, he believes, to the level of campaign manager.
The next video was crafted to call people to the pre-Jefferson-Jackson dinner in Iowa, as, Arun says, showing organizational strength was the key to getting attention and momentum in that state. Ellen asks if there was a concern that Obama and guest attendee John Legend were the only African-Americans seen in the clip. Arun pointed to the Internet Archive’s Prelinger Archives as the source of the overly white footage. (At the actual event, the video team had five cameras and five videographers in place capturing footage.):
Next video. An Iowa call-to-caucus piece, says Arun, is a campaign classic. It both asks Iowans to caucus for their particular candidate and educates voters on how to actually go through the confusing caucusing process. Both the Obama campaign and the Edwards campaign went the route of a dated instructional-style video, he says. (Arun praises the Hillary Clinton campaign’s call-to-caucus video which featured Bill Clinton eating a cheeseburger and saying something along the lines of “exercising is hard, but caucusing is easy.”):
It was the campaign’s “traditional media” team, says Arun, that whipped together a quick response to the Clinton campaign’s 3 a.m. phone call ad. But the new media team tracked down the young girl in the stock footage, Casey Knowles, an Obama precinct captain in Washington State. In the one-minute video, Casey deconstructs the techniques in the Clinton ad — the blue tint to the footage, the “scratchy voice” — and slams the “politics of fear.” An ad like that, says Arun, would never make on air, but works well online:
The candidate was in Terre Haute, Arun says, when the news broke that Obama had earlier made remarks in California concerning “bitter” Americans. Obama inserted a response to the incident in his Indiana speech. The new media team, says Arun, edited, packaged, and released the candidate’s own words within 19 minutes of the speech’s delivery. A lesson learned, says Arun, is that people are actually interested in the “sound blast,” and will watch long clips in their entirety:
He also cites Obama’s speech at their Chicago headquarters.The 14 minute clip shows the candidate addressing his staff, both in person and through a conference call (which creates a few minutes of less-than-thrilling footage when the call goes dead and Obama has to stall while it’s reconnected). It wasn’t deliberately shot low-fi for an extra dose of authenticity, Arun says, as some people suggested. There was no intention to create some sort of “Tanner 88″ moment. It was just, he says, that there was an intern manning the camera:
Asked by Emily about what an Obama administration might bring, Arun says that the role of video in an administration would be even more powerful than in a campaign. He mentions the broadcasting of health care meetings — creating a broader base of people who are able to keep an eye on the proceedings. The idea, Arun says, is not ‘telling people who tell people to tell people,’ but to use video to tell people directly. The role of video in governing, he says, is to achieve the goal of “cutting out the middleman.”
Q&A
Question: There’s a discontinuity in your work with high video quality and no sound mixing. Why?
Arun: We shoot as high quality as we can because it might be used for broadcast, but get used to it — a lot of the networks are going so broke that they’re getting rid of their “sound guys.”Question: What role with user-generated content play in presidential campaigns?
Arun: Using voter-generated content while probably remain “an unrealized ideal.” Much of the content that gets sent to them is “a little strange.”
Question: Why is new media going to make young people come out and vote?
Arun: It isn’t. Barack Obama is what is going to make people come out and vote.
Question: If you embrace an interactive politics 2.0, how do you avoid politicizing governing?
Arun: I think we’re ready for 1.5. We’ll [ed. -- a clarification: "we" here is a reference to political campaigns in general, and to the tools that might come into common use -- not a reference to the Obama campaign in particular] have virtual townhalls, for sure.
* Updated to correct: The original line referenced political blogs; in making the joke, Arun was referencing hard-core blog commenters.
Social Media and Politics – From Obama to Iran and Onward…
Here is a great post by Rob Paterson on Social Media and Politics – From Obama to Iran and Onward…
What is democracy? Is it just a vote every 4 years? Is that all the citizen has?
Who ensures that even that limited moment of choice and opinion is secure and trustworthy. How are the votes counted? Who ensures that the people have even voted? You don’t have to be living in Iran to wonder about that!
How does a candidate get chosen? In the west it depends on a party and immense sums of money. In other places, the regime makes the call. It is all but impossible to become powerful without having made a deal with the in group whether this is in Iran and the Mullahs or anywhere.
What might democracy become in the age of Social Media?
Could President Obama have gathered the financial and voter support in his campaign without it? I think that it would have been unlikely. Are most politicians responding to what happened in that election?
I don’t think so. For I think that they miss the point.
The tools of social media are just that. Tools!
The point is that to engage the people you have to have a cause that strikes to their heart. Obama had that.
What the tools do is to make a real cause too powerful for the status quo to push under the rug.
In Iran, people are risking and losing their lives for change. In the before Social Media times such as at Tianemen Square, the regime can and did utterly squash dissent. I don’t think that this is possible today if the cause is well enough supported. Yes, the regime can set up a massacre that may stop the demonstrations. But the legitimacy of the regime will be ended. Their only chance then will be to become a North Korea or an Burma – a true pariah. The story will not end there.
The tools and the supporting global community are enabling the story to be told. The world is a witness.
There is also another aspect that I see. Our response to the traditional media is usually helplessness and then numbness. We see terrible events but we can do nothing but feel bad. Traditional media is so one way and so passive.
But people outside of Iran not only know what is going on but many are actively engaged in helping or in providing emotional support. This was even true for the Obama campaign. Millions of non Americans became personally engaged in the election in a way not possible by simply reading the paper or watching TV.
The Obama campaign – but regretfully not the Obama administration – and the Iranian push-back – will surely be seen in retrospect as a Tipping Point in the evolution of democracy. What will happen, I cannot know yet.
But the regimes everywhere will have to take note. There is a line of self interest and oppression that cannot be crossed. For if it is, the “Sleeper will awake”.
The voice of the people is no longer restricted to the ballot box. No longer subject to the control of the ballot box. No longer subject to the needs of party affiliation or millions of campaign dollars.
I don’t know how this will play out but it sure sounds more democratic to me.
Social Media And Politics in Canada (4/21/09)
Here is a great presentation at Miles S. Nadal Management Centre in the Ernst & Young Tower of the Toronto Dominion Centre on April 21, 2009 to marketing managers on the use of social media in politics.
CIA Invests In Firm That Datamines Social Networks
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from Wired:
“In-Q-Tel, the investment arm of the CIA and the wider intelligence community, is putting cash into Visible Technologies, a software firm that specializes in monitoring social media. It’s part of a larger movement within the spy services to get better at using ‘open source intelligence’ — information that’s publicly available… Visible Technologies crawls over half a million web 2.0 sites a day, scraping more than a million posts and conversations taking place on blogs, online forums, Flickr, YouTube, Twitter and Amazon. (It doesn’t touch closed social networks, like Facebook, at the moment.) Customers get customized, real-time feeds of what’s being said on these sites, based on a series of keywords. ‘That’s kind of the basic step — get in and monitor,’ says company senior vice president Blake Cahill. Then Visible ’scores’ each post, labeling it as positive or negative, mixed or neutral. It examines how influential a conversation or an author is. (’Trying to determine who really matters,’ as Cahill puts it.) Finally, Visible gives users a chance to tag posts, forward them to colleagues and allow them to response through a web interface.”
Apropos: Another anonymous reader points out an article making the point that users don’t even realize how much private information they’re sharing over these services.
Politics 2.0 – Real Democracy is close
Here is a great post by Rob Paterson on Politics 2.0
I had one of those coming out of the shower aha’s today. I think I see how Obama might be able to get the changes that we have all dreamed of – both for right and left.
So first I ask why is it impossible to get any real change – real change being defined as something that has to overcome the establishment in any field?
To have a real change – there has to be a President who will risk political capital and a majority vote in the house. By design right now this is impossible. Why?
Because until now the President has needed a lot of money to get elected and to have a chance of a second term. Because until now Congressmen and Senators need a lot of money to get and stay elected.
Because until now, the electorate were largely ill informed, passive and often even helpless. Their only involvement was to vote every few years and, even then, many chose not to do even that. Why should they? They knew that the decisions were being made by another process.
Washington has been bought by lobbyists. The lobbyists represent the establishment. The phone rings in a senator’s office. It is you the voter. A second phone rings, it is a major lobbyist. Which call gets priority?
No wonder we are all cynical.
How could health care or agriculture be reformed when all the money is behind the status quo and money is what is needed?
That is until now!
By building a vast grass roots organization by using 2.0 principles, Obama was able to raise more money than by using the traditional lobby pools. He not only got more money but he is less attached than any president in generations to the special interest himself.
Is this organization going to go away now? No – there are signs that Obama intends to grow this organization. Here is the link to his new site, Change Gov, just released yesterday. It is clear that he plans to go around the Hill.
He is preparing for the war of the future – A People’s War – where the President has a direct ongoing relationship with the people of America.
Roosevelt started this. His use of radio in the 1930’s was a masterstroke of using the then new media – to talk in a conversational way with the people. Now the President can listen to our conversation and converse with us.
I expect that we will start to see a new electorate – an engaged electorate – that will grow out of the grass roots campaign network.
I hear rumours of a new “Peace Corps” not to be deployed in foreign lands but at home. I see that community development and engagement will become paramount in the years to come.
So where does leave the old power brokers on the Hill? Isolated!
The smart Congressmen and Senators had better follow suit and fast – they will have to catch up with the people and the President. The real money that they do need will come from their engagement in the betterment of those that they represent.
The voters will awaken. They will start to be active. They will seek to take back their power so that what affects them most – so that decisions that affect them the most having access to good work, to energy, to food to a good environment and to better healthcare to a better education will be made by them and not a by a few who care only for themselves.
So politicians will have to awaken too. It will be more than their voting record that will be watched. It will be their larger actions to help their people. The greater transparency of our time will shine on them all. Those who serve the people will be rewarded and those that serve the elect will be punished.
Where does this leave the lobbyists? The best lobbyist will themselves have more than a check book. They will have to represent groups of active engaged voters or leave town.
A real change in health care demands that the insurance companies, the drug companies and the doctors have to be taken out of the position of political control.
A real change in energy policy means that the oil and coal companies have to be taken out of their control position.
A real change in how we spend money and on what in defense has to taken out of the hands of the main suppliers and the senior officers who serve them.
A rel change in how our financial system is governed means that control needs to be vested fram the leaders on Wall Street.
A real change in food systems means that BIG Ag has to lose control.
Without going around the Hill. Without directly engaging the People both in the policy and in the action – real change is systemically impossible.
This is Martin Luther all over again. The system cannot be reformed from within. A new direct model is the only way.
This is possible. For the first time, real democracy is possible.
Social Media Solutions prides itself on being a “hands on” social media agency. Our team has not only a strong educational background in business development, but also has a multitude of real-world experience in designing successful strategic initiatives for global corporations and small businesses alike. Our staff will partner with your company to ensure the development & implementation of the best social media strategy possible. 
