Politics gets Napstered

There is a useful piece in this morning's New York Times about how the internet is introducing "sweeping change into US politics":

"What the parties and the candidates are undergoing now is in many ways similar to what has happened in other sectors of the nation — including the music industry, newspapers and retailing — as they try to adjust to, and take advantage of, the Internet as its influence spreads across American society. To a considerable extent, they are responding to, and playing catch up with, bloggers who have demonstrated the power of their forums to harness the energy on both sides of the ideological divide."

Here are eight observations about the internet's impact on politics from the NYT article:

1. The internet is a powerful fundraising tool in the US - and a big part of the solution to the funding crisis facing Britain's political parties, too.  For more see this on The Guardian blog.
2. It's an important source of news - "The percentage of Americans who went online for election news jumped from 13 percent in the 2002 election cycle to 29 percent in 2004, according to a survey by the Pew Research Center after the last presidential election. A Pew survey released earlier this month found that 50 million Americans go to the Internet for news every day, up from 27 million people in March 2002, a reflection of the fact that the Internet is now available to 70 percent of Americans."  The BBC dominates internet news in Britain.  In America internet news-based sources are more diverse and democratic.
3. It encourages intimacy - "In 2004, John Edwards, a former Democratic senator from North Carolina and his party's vice presidential candidate, spent much of his time talking to voters in living rooms in New Hampshire and Iowa; now he is putting aside hours every week to videotape responses to videotaped questions, the entire exchange posted on his blog."  The image at the top of this page is of Democratic presidential hopeful Mark Warner's 'Forward Together' website.  As the site loads a minature Warner appears talking about his campaign.
4. It affords interactivity - most sites have blogs, fora and votes where average punters can have their say and shape policy and the campaigns.  The community, peer-to-peer dimension of sites is also vital: "[Campaigns] include Podcasts featuring a daily downloaded message from a candidate and so-called viral attack videos, designed to trigger peer-to-peer distribution by e-mail chains, without being associated with any candidate or campaign. Campaigns are now studying popular Internet social networks, like Friendster and Facebook, as ways to reaching groups of potential supporters with similar political views or cultural interests."
   
5. It hosts a lot of negative campaigning - "Both parties have set up Web sites to discredit opponents. In Tennessee, Republicans spotlighted what they described as the lavish spending habits of Representative Harold E. Ford Jr. with a site called   www.fancyford.com. That site drew 100,000 hits the first weekend, and extensive coverage in the mainstream Tennessee press, which is typically the real goal of creating sites like this... For their part, Democrats have set up decoy Web sites to post documents with damaging information about Republicans. They described this means of distribution as far more efficient than the more traditional slip of a document to a newspaper reporter.  A senior party official, who was granted anonymity in exchange for describing a clandestine effort, said the party created a now-defunct site called D.C. Inside Scoop to, among other things, distribute a document written by Senator Mel Martinez, Republican of Florida, discussing the political benefits of the Terri Schiavo case. A second such site, http://capitolbuzz.blogspot.com, spread more mischievous information: the purported sighting of Senator Rick Santorum, a Pennsylvania Republican, parking in a spot reserved for the handicapped."
6. It permits very targeted advertising - "One of the big challenges to the campaigns is not only adjusting to the changes of the past two years but also to anticipate now the kind of technological changes that might be on hand by the next presidential campaign. Among those most cited are the ability of campaigns to beam video campaign advertisements to cell phones." Mobile phones have much higher market penetration in the UK than the USA and may be relatively more significant here.
7. It is largely a young person's medium - "Analysts said that the Internet appeared to be a particularly potent way to appeal to new, young voters, a subject of particular interest to both parties in these politically turbulent times. In the 2004 campaign, 80 percent of people between the age of 18 and 34 who contributed to Mr. Kerry's campaign made their contribution online... For all the attention being paid to Internet technology, there remain definite limitations to its reach. Internet use declines markedly among Americans over 65, who tend to be the nation's most reliable voters. Until recently, it tended to be more heavily used by middle- and upper-income people."
   
8. It can empower the more extreme voices - "Bloggers, for all the benefits they might bring to both parties, have proved to be a complicating political influence for Democrats. They have tugged the party consistently to the left, particularly on issues like the war."
   

Comments

[Jonathan Sheppard]

Extremely interesting piece. Tim - what more do you think can be done in the counrty with regards online campaigning? How far are we behind what's happening in the States?

[Jenny Stoker]

Some very interesting ideas indeed. This item should be passed on to the people close to David Cameron - those running his private office, Francis Maude etc because the party could get something along these lines up and running before the next election if they get their act together now.

I would make one further comment - these ideas should not only be thought of in terms of attracting just the 18-25 year olds - there are more and more people right across the age spectrum now using the net for all sorts of things, especially in the 30-55 year olds which is an age range we need to target. Also don't neglect the grey voters because there is a very high usage amongst them as well and their power is growing as we are now entering the era where the baby boomers are becoming pensioners and they are a generation that keeps up with modern technology and refuses to grow old.

[Editor]

Jonathan: At some point I intend to write a mini manifesto on the internet and politics... watch this space!

Jenny: I agree with you on older voters. Many older people use the web - particularly certain kinds of website. Crucially they are also what Americans call "influentials" or "connectors". They get inspired/ enraged by what they read and they pass on the news to others.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

It's an interesting development. However, I would ask those advocating more online advertising, blogs, virals, webcasts, podcasts to remember one thing. The only reason we can use the internet like this is because it is unregulated. You just wait. There will be those who don't think political parties can be made to play fair. The same luddites who want state funding will also propose some ridiculous regulator for the net as regards electioneering. If political parties are exploiting the net for all its possibilities then they should avoid hypocrisy by keeping the net free and unregulated.

Don't knock bloggers, they're not professionals (not most anyway)and they do it for fun, but they keep plugging away. Nobody has a monopoly on publishing comment anymore, and sometimes they get it right. The better bloggers will just have to try harder. Similarly, as we've seen from the criticisms of David Milliband's poor effort, being an "official" source is no guarantee of relevance of honesty.

If you're worried about people pulling off dirty tricks then you have one of two options. Either do it better than the other side or bust them, let the elecorate know, and make yourself look good. Or both, if you're clever. Don't write yourselves too many rules, you might regret it.

[Editor]

Henry: I think you are right about the danger of too many rules suffocating the internet. The internet should largely be a self-regulating mechanism. Blogs that lie or mislead will be exposed by other bloggers and will suffer accordingly (unless, of course, their lies/ spoofs etc are deliberately misleading and are designed to entertain).

The great lie the internet exposes is, of course, the lie of impartiality that broadcasters like the BBC rely upon to maintain their monopoly on the licence fee. By providing a democracy of diverse voices the internet adds greatly to the national conversation.

[Chad]

It is not just bloggers who are making political inroads online. It is interesting to see how sensitive the parties and leaders have become to the internet satire.

Satire is an excellent way to expose political folly, and in the USA it showed its impact during the 2000 presidential election when the editor of the excellent whitehouse.org had a site gwbush.com aimed at making its point through political satire.

The Bush team demanded its closure in the run up to the 2000 election with Bush's immortal quote:
"There ought to be limits to freedom,"

With the USA a long way ahead of the UK, I wonder if a similar situation will occur over here.

Most of the political satire sites I cover on satiresearch.com are US focussed but many new UK sites are appearing and it will be interesting to see if UK online political satire will be effectively utilised in the next election, whether with satire or humorous animations etc. Humour can be a very powerful online political tool.

[Editor]

Satire and humour are vital tools, Chad.

The biggest day for the White House website - by a long way - wasn't 9/11 or the State of the Union or Iraq's elections... but the launch of BarneyCam.

Animals and humour - a winning combo.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

Editor; Completely agree with your last comment. The BBC is crazy. It thinks that it can see ten years ahead into the future. The chances are that TV's, as standalone devices, will have disappeared by then. Most TV will be via broadband ect. The more work people can do now to diversify the content and means of delivery of media then the sooner we can be free of the strangle hold of the BBC.

[Patsy Sergeant]

Yes, Satire and humour do work - Rory Bremner doing Tony Blair, nobody does Blair like Bremner.

And I love 2DTV.