Reading Log: What Would the Millennials Do?

Millennial Makeover

In the 2007 book "Millennial Makeover," Morley Winograd & Michael Hais hypothesized that the 2008 election would be unprecedented (in terms of online fundraising, youth participation, etc). Most publishers thought the authors were overestimating the role of young voters in 2008, but Winograd & Hais ultimately scored a publishing deal on the heels of Super Tuesday and their hypothesis - as we now know - was right.

Winograd & Hais explained the long-time political realignment model: politics is cyclical, not linear. At any given time, one political party dominates the political process - sets the tone and public policy agenda - and sees a "makeover" every 40 or so years. History has shown that in the periods of political stability, there is little variability in party identification or other voting coalitions. Winograd & Hais posit that two things need to be present to trigger political realignment:

1. The advent of a large and dynamic generation of young Americans (large enough to electorally overwhelm other existing generations).
2. A new communication technology paradigm (in the 1930's, this was the radio; in the 1960's, television; now in the 21st century, it's internet-based technology).

These two conditions are present in modern day politics and have helped define the Millennial Generation. Winograd & Hais explain that Millennials are civic-minded, group-oriented and problem solvers. In 2004, Howard Dean helped demonstrate the power of the internet, but in 2008 the Millennials put the internet (and social networking) at the center of the campaign.

Andrew Rasiej Video

Rasiej claims that the multi-dimensional social networking tools have developed a new kind of governance. Internet users are essentially competing with government and taking the lead in solving problems that need to be solved (e.g. online resource for reporting pot-holes, looking up times for public transportation). Like-minded individuals are finding solutions where government has lagged. These tools transcend geographical boundaries. Rasiej predicts that social networking tools encourage international diplomacy and have the potential to translate into civilian action, absent of political leaders.

Thom Yorke: Campaign Manager

John Ensign could have used the words from Radiohead’s “Creep” during his press conference yesterday announcing his resignation, “I’m a creep, I’m a weirdo, what the hell am I doing here?” Even so, Capitol Momentum Blog gives a more appropriate and thought-provoking use for Radiohead in political campaigns. In a recent post, Capitol Momentum outlined four ways that advocacy organizations could learn from Radiohead.

1. Reach supporters in the way that they want to be reached. Radiohead released their most recent album, The King of Limbs, by making it available for download (or just a one-time listen) on Slate.com, RollingStone.com, and YouTube. If someone bought it in-stores, they also received a newspaper about the band. Everything from Radiohead’s website, Facebook and Twitter account to their email and in-store promotions was up-to-date and fresh. Radiohead integrated (remember that word?) their offline and online promotions in a way that many advocacy organizations could model a campaign off of.

2. Don’t empower, enable! We learned about the importance of translating online support into offline action by making your audience your messenger. Radiohead encouraged their fans to film concerts and then used the footage, edited it and redistributed it. Radiohead fans were the ones that encouraged other fans to listen and participate.

3. Content is key. For Radiohead, disseminating quality content means making quality music. Not everyone loves Radiohead’s music just like not everyone will support your advocacy campaign. Providing supporters with updated and engaging content will keep people coming back for more if they can rely on your organization to provide them with reliable information in a timely and innovative manner.

4. Earn media. When Radiohead made their 2007 album, In Rainbows, available for download at any “you-name-it” price, 1.2 million people downloaded it in the first day. That summer, all proceeds from their one-time concert went to the Haiti earthquake relief effort. Capitol Momentum notes that their recent multi-media push is unlike any in history. Radiohead’s promotional efforts have garnered a significant amount of mainstream media coverage. The best thing about earned-media is that it’s free. For advocacy organizations, following steps 1-3 (integrate, enable, quality content) gets them to step 4 (earned-media).

Capitol Momentum’s full article can be seen here.

BackType It Up

For this week’s assignment, I played around with BackType – a monitoring site that provides companies, organizations and campaigns with a variety of analytics to better understand their social impact. Without an account (and hefty payment), the analysis is limited, but I was able to squeeze out a couple cool graphs with the freebee trial offer. Here is a comparison graph of Planned Parenthood and National Right to Life. I wanted to see if NRL was as active in the Twitterverse because of the latest budget battle. It doesn’t seem like NRL has done much…

Also: just for fun, I compared the influence index for fake Rahm and real Rahm – unsurprisingly, fake Rahm beat out real Rahm by a score of 59% to 47%.

MY Index Is Higher Than YOUR Index

The 6th Floor Blog commissioned Twitalyzer to find the most influential people on Twitter. According to Twitter co-founder Evan Williams, the simple practice of counting followers says very little about a person’s influence. Williams explains, “someone with millions of followers may no longer post messages frequently, while someone followed my mere tens of thousands may be a prolific poster whose messages are amplified by others.”

Twitalyzer uses an Influence Index, which is determined by the number of times a person is mentioned by someone else + how often that person’s messages are retweeted. The results are pretty interesting. As you can see from the Twitalyzer’s results, there is a big difference between those that have a lot of followers versus those that are the most influential. Snoop Dog is slightly more influential than President Obama even though Obama has 4.5 million more followers.

You can see more results, like “who’s more influential” matchups (Sarah Palin or Newt Gingrich; LeBron James or Shaquille O’Neal) at The 6th Floor Blog here.

DIY D.C. Redistricting

Last week, the U.S. Census released the latest population numbers for D.C. According to D.C. law, each Ward needs to have a population that is within 5% of the average Ward population. Currently, Ward 2 is too big and Wards 7 and 8 are too small. Greater Greater Washington created a fun, interactive game (anyone can play!) to draw new Wards. Here is my attempt at redistricting D.C.

YOU can redraw D.C.'s Wards too. Greater Greater Washington's game is here.

Don't Empower, Enable!

Turning Your Audience Into Your Messenger
An important step in turning an online campaign into community development (action) is the need for campaigns to recognize their place in the three-dimensional world. Campaigns use the Internet (and its tools) to communicate to their audience, but the most critical part comes after that. They also need to use the tools to enable their audience to communicate with each other beyond the campaign. If an audience can find a reason to believe they have a personal stake in your issue, then they are more likely to become the messengers of YOUR message. As Dr. Rosenblatt said in the NCRC annual conference, “Online advocacy is not about telling people what to do and making them go do it, it’s about making them strategic partners in what you’re trying to do. And the social media, the social websites, the social networking, all these new tools that are available, they put those tools in the hands of the people you’re trying to become partners with to start doing your work for you – actually, our work, together – as they start to spread into their own personal networks.”

Building Social Capital
After Obama was inaugurated, his Obama for America Campaign turned into Organizing for America. The report, “Year One of Organizing for America: The Permanent Field Campaign in a Digital Age,” provides an internal evaluation of the unprecedented “governance organizing” model that was established once candidate Obama became President Obama. OFA underscores the need to build (and maintain) relationships and understand the value of social capital.

"For grassroots organizing online, effective campaigns tend to create social capital online, convert it to tangible action offline, and then run structured programs to maintain that capital. In a 2008 article about social capital and netroots activism, for example, political scientist Diana Cohen stresses that a key ingredient in the online “social capital framework” is “maintenance” – essentially an ongoing program to “maintain the capital so it does not deplete.” And while there is a broader debate among scholars and practitioners about whether email and Internet politics advances broader civic participation, an issue beyond the scope of this report, it is clear that in the case of the Obama campaign, new media organizing drove effective political action (fundraising, volunteering, voter registration, and event attendance)."

An Evolution of Integration: Rock The Vote
In “Mobilizing Generation 2.0: A Practical Guide to Using Web 2.0,” Ben Rigby begins his book with an overview of Rock The Vote. In its 20-year history, RTV has adapted to the ever-changing political landscape by incorporating new technologies as a means to engage youth voters. In its early years (1990-1996), RTV helped pass the Motor Voter bill through a campaign of PSAs and postcards to Congress. Between 1996-2002, RTV created the first online voter registration and ultimately registered more than 200,000 new voters during the 2002 midterm election cycle. In 2004, RTV began using Web 2.0 tools to spearheaded GOTV efforts. This set the stage for a record-breaking 2006 election: more than two million more 18-29 year olds voted than in the pervious midterm election. The life cycle of RTV exemplifies the power of integrating online campaigns with offline campaigns. Their online efforts translated into offline action.

Photo credit: icrossing.com

NYT: Will That Be Cash or Credit?

The advent of online media has forced content producers to consider the best way to integrate this “new” information channel into their business models. Content creators have grappled with the choice of charging content consumers with information that has otherwise (until now) been free. Consider the recent decision by New York Times to begin charging their readers to access online content. NYT’s subscribers have always paid for a hard copy of the newspaper to arrive at their doorstep; it would make sense, then, for NYT to charge online readers for the online version of the newspaper. Although NYT is not the first newspaper to charge for online access, other major newspapers will evaluate the success (or failure) of NYT’s paywall when considering their own online content as a possible source for secondary revenue.

A recent Washington Post article highlights newspaper analyst Ken Doctor’s concerns over newspapers transitioning to a paywall system. Doctor is concerned that the fees are too high and readers – especially the younger demographic who has grown up with relatively full and free access to the Internet – will not be willing to pay and newspapers will lose readership. A national Pew Internet survey of 755 adult Internet users helps shed some light on Doctor’s concern. Findings show that Internet users between ages 30-49 are more likely to pay for online content than their younger or older counterparts; however, among those that pay for news (18%), there is not an obvious age gap.

The full Pew Internet report can be found here.