K Street Cafe

Join us on December 18, 2008 for an Internet Advocacy Roundtable that will explore how organizations can best address the challenges associated with the rapid growth of social media that has increased the fragmentation of the channels of public discourse. While the focus of the discussion will be on the relationships and influence of the English language blogosphere, the interrelationships between other forms of social media and blogs will also be explored.

Our speakers include:
*Marty Kearns, Green Media Toolshed, Netcentric Campaigns
*John Kelly, Morningside Analytics
*Ken Deutsch, Morningside Analytics

The event will take place on Thursday, December 18, 2008, 3:00pm—5:00pm at the Center for American Progress Action Fund (1333 H St. NW, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 2000).Please RSVP here as seats are limited.

You can also follow the event via a live stream here. Also, check out the archives of past Internet Advocacy Roundtables and announcement of upcoming events here.

A few weeks ago, I wrote a post about the change in online communication habits from email to Social Media, suggesting that communicating via social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter could some day replace more traditional email communication as the method of choice for activists.

Many of the follow up comments I received after the post went something along this line: Excellent – I agree, but how can I convince the ‘higher-ups’ in my organization that we need to use these new tools?

At the most recent Innovative Advocacy conference, two attendees asked one of the panelists similar questions:

How can I convince my Executive Director that we should include Facebook in our advocacy strategy when he or she thinks it’s simply a fad for their high school kids? And, how can I get approval for a policy blog when the general counsel’s office is nervous about not having control over what the public can write in the comments section? READ MORE »

Mobilizing online activists is the bread and butter of many advocacy organizations. But successful campaigns need to go beyond signing petitions and sending emails to policymakers. Yes, these remain important elements to any campaign, but it is equally important to use the internet as a persuasion vehicle. While campaigns are driving activists to take action, they should also be working to spread the message of the campaign across the web.

One way to achieve this is to incorporate a fundraising appeal specifically designed to raise money to run online ads for the campaign. Online ads are not only affordable, but they can also be very effective at persuasion and shaping the language of a policy debate.

We have been using this approach recently at the Center for American Progress Action Fund. Our two current campaigns, How Did This Happen?, a campaign to educate the public about how conservative policies and ideology are the root cause of the current financial crisis (HowDidThisHappen.org), and the Golden Pledge to protect Social Security from privatization (GoldenPledge.org) each supplement an action request with a fundraising appeal to help run online ads promoting the campaign’s message (see the ad images below).

While funds raised in this manner may be modest for some campaigns, it doesn’t take much to make a difference. For example, running the ads on blogs, rather than major media sites, can be very cost effective. For each $1,500 raised, an ad can be served nearly a million times. That is enough exposure to reach tens, if not hundreds of thousands, of new eyeballs; people who are not already on your email list.

And if you build a tell-a-friend feature into the campaign, so that anyone taking action or donating funds on your website is prompted to send the link around, you have the potential to reach even more people.

I didn’t know I was running for president until I saw this new video from AARP.  The truth is, AARP is launching a new election campaign that lets you put anyone’s name into their video as the candidate for president. Why? Because this election is all about YOU.

AARP’s new campaign is really about connecting with voters.  The very essence of this video campaign is to give the people a chance to insert themselves into the message, and then insert their friends.  Very personal touch, indeed.

While not the first to do something like this (Job Jab lets you put your face on an animated character), this light-hearted campaign really gets to the heart of electoral politics–YOU.

Want to send the ad to your friends with their name in it? Click here and have some fun.

Cross-posted on e.politics

Well, at least we’ve gotten ONE thing settled this political year: we now know what e.politics actually IS. At least according to (former) reader-via-email-signup K— S——, who sent this friendly message a couple of days ago (font size rendered accurately).

You left wing Marxist racist scum!
Dont send me any more of your crap.

Which brings up one of the classic issues involved in running an email list: how to deal with people who unsubscribe violently.

READ MORE »

Crossposted on Mediafuturenow.com.

Twitter is not a broadcasting medium.  Much has been written about Twitter as the first “true” realization of the power of real-time social media.  Twitter is an advocacy medium.  Just ask Shaun Dakin.

Dakin is a former FedEx executive and, among other things, a big Twitter advocate.  He’s done something kind of amazing.  Dakin is CEO and founder of The National Political Do Not Contact Registry, a campaign to restrict “robo” calling and other less automated telephone calls for political and advocacy campaigns.

Perhaps not a particularly glamorous grassroots campaign, the Registry is exactly the kind of political “process” campaign that seeks to better participatory democracy in this country.  It’s the nuts and bolts of the workings of elections and advocacy campaigns, and it is worth both the attention of political professionals and (for our purposes) good study by the media and technology communities.  It is effective. READ MORE »

After the first House bailout vote went down in flames, I posted a K Street Cafe entry suggesting that it was ideology – not the flood of emails and phone calls to congressional offices – that determined the outcome. I noted that it was not fear of voter backlash that motivated legislators, as 77% of the “no” votes came from House members who had nothing to fear since they won their last election with more than 55% of the vote. In today’s Washington Post Outlook Section, writer Eve Fairbanks offers more data to support this theory by pointing out that none of the freshman House Republicans, who are closely aligned with the conservative Republican Study Committee, voted “yes” on the first bailout vote. She suggests it was conservative ideology that dominated their decision-making process.

So what turned it around the second time? Certainly the tax sweeteners and higher FDIC protection limits motivated some, but there was more evidence in the weekend papers that our K Street Café colleague, Colin Delany, said it perfectly with his blog entry last week: it’s all about relationships. Those people who built a relationship with a member of Congress and communicated their interest in the legislation influenced the outcome. This is a crucial lesson in grassroots advocacy: there is a significant difference in legislators’ minds between those people with an opinion and those with an interest. READ MORE »

K Street Café’s Colin Delany today used the enormous surge in communications to Congress related to the bailout bill as an opportunity to provide readers with a wonderful summary of best practices for organizations who are running advocacy campaigns.

I agree with almost everything Colin advises: advocacy campaigns should not rely on form email communications. Instead they should use a variety of tactics, they should encourage citizens to write in their voice, and they should use creativity to help reinforce their message.

But the events of the last two weeks have reinforced a few additional key best practices to run a successful advocacy campaign. READ MORE »

Crossposted on Mediafuturenow.com.

My colleague Brad Fitch writes in the K Street Café about the bailout plan, “What’s Driving Citizen Outrage?”.  Fitch takes a smart look at the factors underlying the passion, and recognizes a true “grassroots” advocacy campaign when he sees one.  In fact, the bailout may be one of those seminal – and rare – political events where the citizenry is truly engaged in an uncoordinated explosion, and Fitch cites the 2006 immigration debate, the 1998 Starr Report and the 1989 Congressional pay raise as the only seriously comparable recent examples.

Wired magazine makes an analogous point in its coverage of the case, in “Online Bailout Outrage Jumps to Streets, and Into Lawmakers’ Inboxes”.  It seems that the major advocacy groups organizing massive email, letter-writing and telephone campaigns are being eclipsed – at least this time around – by the virality of individual journalists and bloggers and websites launching often comical but all-too-effective pitched battles.  As just one example, Wired mentions BuyMyShitPile.com, a parody site organizing collections of junk for submission to the government to also be redeemed in the junk mortgage bailout.  (As of this writing, BuyMyShitePile claims stated value of its “junk” assets at $801,501,210,139.11.) READ MORE »

“The Hill” reports today that the bailout vote in the House this week was a “Crushing Failure for Lobbyists.” Hill offices are reporting a huge surge in constituent communications.    Even earlier this week, I posted a blog that showed an increase in constituent communications as a result of free media coverage of the story.  However, a quick analysis of the voting patterns for this week’s House votes suggests it was not grassroots pressure, lobbyists’ arm twisting, or even fear losing election that drove members.  It was good-old-fashioned “conscience.”  These folks just did what they thought was right.

READ MORE »