
It is now common knowledge that Barack Obama's win last November had a great deal to do with his ability to use the Internet and Web 2.0 social networking sites. Pres. Obama was everywhere on the Internet from Facebook to YouTube to Black Planet and Asian Ave.
Pres. Obama was able to create a simple yet powerful fund raising machine while at the same time creating a brand in a whole new way.

Marketing today including the campaigning of a candidate to the American people is all about branding. Our names are brands and Pres. Obama understood this from the get go. Without necessarily having more money on the coffers he was able to generate the buzz and connect with supporters all across the country with the Internet.
The Republicans were unable to hone in the Internet's Web 2.0 applications in quite the same way and it can be argued that was one of the major reasons for their demise... of course the state of the economy and the war being blamed on Bush and the Republicans had something to do with that. One Republican who was able to use Web 2.0 and continues to do so, is Sen. John McCain's daughter, Megan McCain who maintains her own blog at McCain Blogette
Megan McCain says that the Republicans did not understand the Internet in quite the same way. They knew it was a fund raising tool, but did not realize its full potential as a way to campaign. They knew they needed to have an Internet presence, but not to what point. President Obama's youth, as the "first post-boomer candidate" for the U.S. presidency played an important part, as suggested in a New York Times article.
Those who followed Barack Obama on Twitter and were his fan on Facebook or watched his YouTube videos feel personally invested in the political process probably as much as those who canvassed and knocked on doors around the country. Many young Americans will expect that this interactive, two-way street will continue into his presidency and not end now during his first months as president.
It's fair to assume that most Internet, Web 2.0 friends of Barack Obama did not join these social networks because of him, but were already on them and decided to join him. What many of these people may not know is that following him, be it good or bad, creates an online identity for them. They may be independents, but are instantly branded as Democrats, they might agree with some of his ideas, but now seem like they agree with all of them--but most importantly, online advertisers track this information.
Through cookies and such, advertisers use this information to place ads on Facebook or other websites these people frequent. If their political ideologies are best kept private they suddenly are not and any photos they post up about the campaign or otherwise are no longer their property. These things may not be a major issue to most people, but are facts that people should know nonetheless.
Here's an interesting video we talked about in our class.
Do You Have a Facebook? ... talks about online privacy facts.
Social networking is a powerful tool to create a political brand, win a campaign, and interact with the electorate, but the online friends may not always benefit. With that said, candidates also need to make sure they are not overexposing themselves and becoming irrelevant in a short period of time.
Finally, here's a quick video on a NYU student who organized about 150 students for Obama through Facebook.

1 comment:
Interesting article. Relevantly, as many influential voices have repeatedly said, Obama--born 1961--is part of Generation Jones, born 1954-1965, between the Boomers and Generation X. Google Generation Jones, and you'll see it’s gotten a ton of media attention, and many top commentators from many top publications and networks (Washington Post, Time magazine, NBC, Newsweek, ABC, etc.) specifically use this term to describe Obama.
It is important to distinguish between the post-WWII demographic boom in births vs. the cultural generations born during that era. Generations are a function of the common formative experiences of its members, not the fertility rates of its parents. Many experts now believe it breaks down this way:
DEMOGRAPHIC boom in babies: 1946-1964
Baby Boom GENERATION: 1942-1953
Generation Jones: 1954-1965
Here is a recent op-ed about GenJones as the new generation of leadership in USA TODAY:
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20090127/column27_st.art.htm
Post a Comment