A recent New York Times article on the DailyKos convention in Las Vegas mentions in passing a trend that I think is going to be huge in the 2006 and 2008 campaign cycles: user generated campaign videos. The article tells the story of Ava Lowery, a 15 year old from rural Alabama whose video condemnation of the Bush administration was shown at the Daily Kos convention and has been viewed 40,000 times so far on YouTube.

Free video hosting and discovery sites like Google Video and Youtube simply didn’t exist yet in 2004. If you wanted to post a video online back then, you were probably going to have to pay. Plus, even if you did post a video chances are no one would find it since there weren’t centralized video directories people could search (YouTube and Google Video once again). Combine these factors with the plummeting price of digital video cameras and growing adoption of broadband, and you’ve got a boom in online video.

As people begin to focus on the 2006 election, I’d look for tons more videos like the one produced by Lowery. And I’ll bet one or two of them will be seen enough that they might actually have an impact on a race or two.

Damien pointed me to Google’s advocacy page on the net neutrality issue. The page is very “Google”. They quickly state their position and link to external sites where users can take action. Not a lot of fuss and pretty much no wasted movement or effort.

More interesting is the excellent Save the Internet website that Google directs people to. The site has a couple of unique features worth taking a look at, regardless of your position on the issue.

Save the Internet has a seperate listserv that bloggers can sign up for to receive information on how they can help mobilize their readers. I think this is very clever - they are openly asking bloggers to opt in to their blogger relations program instead of conducting these activities behind the scene.

Save the Internet also has a MySpace page they are presumably using to win support among the young. The campaign has over 13,000 MySpace friends as of this writing. As an aside, the Save the Internet campaign is a single 106 year old Capricorn that doesn’t want kids.

In response to my post on politicians that podcast, a member of Congressman Jack Kingston (R-GA) staff left a comment pointing me to a blog entry on their site about new media tactics used by Republican House members. It sort of got me thinking: which politicians are most embracing Web 2.0? So, conducting no new research and working entirely from memory, here are the winners:

On the Republican side of the aisle, I think the winner is pretty clearly Rep. Kingston. The Kingston blog got a lot of attention for live blogging during the gunfire scare on the Hill a few weeks back. And here’s their own description about what they are up to:

“For our part, we have a true, interactive blog, and we also guest blog at RedState.com and PeachPundit. We also have a hidden video page for insiders, a podcast called the JackCast, and a flickr account for you to see and share multiple pics.”

I chose Rep. Kingston mostly because his blog reads like it’s written by real, living, breathing human beings and actually encourages discussion on issues.

On the Democrat side, I’d have to go with Utah Senate candidate Pete Ashdown. Not only does Ashdown blog and podcast himself, he actually took the time to personally comment on our blog here. Ashdown also has a wiki that he uses to collect feedback on issues and campaign tactics from supporters.

Lastly, Ashdown has posted a MySpace profile that he presumably uses to help him connect with young voters. Ashdown has clearly embraced the social spirit of Web 2.0.

Let me know if you think I’m neglecting somebody.

I was putting together a presentation today and as part of it I did a little research into politicians that podcast. What I found was semi-interesting (at least to me).

Here’s a quick list of the politicians that made the iTunes list of its 100 most popular politically-oriented podcasts:

(3) Senator Barack Obama (D-IL)
(14) General Wes Clark (D-??)
(30) Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI)
(33) Newt Gingrich (R-GA)
(51) Mark Warner (D-VA)
(59) Senator John Edwards (D-NC)
(62) Congressman Harold Ford Jr (D-TN)
(82) Congressman John Dingall (D-MI)
(86) Dick DeVos (R-MI)
(87) Senator Jon Cornyn (R-TX)
(94) Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
(97) Senator Bill Frist (R-TN)

Of these twelve politicians, seven (Clark, Feingold, Gingrich, Warner, Edwards, Clinton, Frist) have been mentioned as potential 2008 Presidential candidates. In addition, two (Ford, DeVos) are running for statewide office in their home states for the first time in 2006. Presumably the other three (Obama, Dingall, Cornyn) are either just really into podcasting or gearing up for future battles.

The most recent estimates I’ve seen show that only 1% of online households regularly listen to podcasts. And a study we performed recently found that 5% of 2006 Senate candidates are maintaining podcasts on their campaign websites.

But potential 2008 Presidential candidates seem to be diving in head first. Why? I’d guess that the 2008 hopefuls are podcasting in an effort to speak to the most active members of their Party: the bloggers who are obsessed enough to listen to this stuff. This is sign number 1,129 that the fight for the hearts and minds of political bloggers in 2008 is already on.

So now that we’ve all agreed that The World is Flat and also that we’re a nation of people drowning in debt, Boston Consulting Group senior consultant Michael Silverstein has a new theory for us: Middle class consumers are on an eternal treasure hunt, looking for an emotional connection to our purchases, from mac and cheese to the kinds of pens we write with. So how does all of this effect the way marketers, advertisers and PR people communicate to consumers? Silverstein says this, “If your offering isn’t exciting enough to inspire trading up, but not enough of a bargain to satisfy the treasure hunters, you’ll have no emotional connection with your target audience.” (Keep in mind, this book focuses strictly on the consumer goods category.)

Having seen various “strategy” forms (these are forms that make a PR person answer, in short form, what their goal or vision is regarding messaging and product positioning. For instance, a public relations team member might write something like, “We want consumers to think of Sprinter’s Flavored Beverage as a way to live a healthier lifestyle.” Unfortunately, that’s generally the bulk of it sometimes. They build their powerpoint slides around that pithy wish list.), there is a noticeable lack of actual, thought out market research or connection to the consumer in these hollow, easily replicated messages. Somehow, many PR firms without research arms, think that market research isn’t necessary, outside of skimming through a few articles here and there. (more…)

Planning on watching the World Cup games the next few weeks? If you are, you better plan on taking some serious vacation time from your day job or moving to a different time zone. For those of you who think those options might be a bit extreme, then just charge up your cell phone.

What can my cell phone possibly have to do with World Cup soccer games?

Well, if you live in Europe or subscribe to MobiTV via your cell phone here in the US, you will be able to catch World Cup action from anywhere.

With few World Cup games being showed during prime time, it will be difficult for American “football” fans to watch the games. ESPN and ABC’s World Cup Coverage consists of mid-afternoon or early AM games, leaving working Americans out in the cold as far as World Cup coverage goes.

Cell phone companies are hoping to remedy this problem by broadcasting World Cup TV coverage on cell phones with TV capabilities. The BBC reported this week that the World Cup will be a kind of “test” for mobile phone TV, which is expected to truly take off by 2011. Wireless companies around the world are hoping to use the World Cup to spur interest in cell phone TV. A report by Informa Telecoms and Media predicted that a potential $300 million will be earned this summer by wireless companies who offer World Cup TV features to their subscribers. The same report stated that by 2011, there will be some 210 million mobile TV subscribers worldwide, led by Asia with 95 million subscribers. By the 2010 World Cup, one in thirteen cell phone users will own a mobile TV set and be prepared to watch the World Cup on their cell phones.

(more…)

Podcasting is about creating audio or video content for an audience that wants to listen or watch when they want, where they want, and how they want.

There are now several podcasting tools designed to make podcasting hassle-free and one of the more promising sites is Evoca.

Evoca makes podcasting easier than ever by allowing users to upload an audio file of a previously recorded content or more interestingly in my opinion, record a live phone interview from which a podcast can be created and hosted on the Evoca site.

The way this works is that users need to sign up for an account on Evoca.

By setting up the account, you will be provided with a phone number that you can dial into to begin recording your podcast.

This would work exactly like a conference call, with the added bonus of having your conversation recorded.

Once you are finished recording and hang up, the file will be automatically added to your Evoca account.

Evoca also provides you with the necessary HTML code to place a link to the podcast directly on your website.

You will also be provided with a URL to your own RSS feed, which will allow users to subscribe to future podcasts.

Transcriptions can also be provided and are charged based on the length of the recording in minutes. There are 2 types of transcriptions available:

• Executive summary ($0.80 per minute)
• Word-for-word transcription ($0.60 per minute)

Transcriptions can be purchased and added to the website after each podcast.

Cost for Evoca are minimal. There are two types of accounts.

• Free Account - Allows you up to 100 minutes of recording.
• Professional Account - 500 minutes of recording for $4.99 per month.

There was an interesting piece in the New York Times on Sunday about eBay’s lobbying tactics, “How eBay Makes Regulations Disappear“. Here is the relevant quote that describes what eBay is up to online:

“EBay combines its politics-as-usual approach with more creative grass-roots tactics. It keeps its membership informed about regulatory issues as soon as they crop up, using mass e-mail messages and a year-old Web-based initiative called ‘eBay Main Street,’ which sends out ‘legislative alerts’ and provides letters that users can send to government officials. Bowing to the traditions of ward politicos adept at turning out the vote, eBay routinely summons its sellers and sends them on personal visits to statehouses around the country to meet with legislators.”

From my reading of the story, it is unclear to me whether eBay is mobilizing their full member database or just people who opt in to their eBay Main Street program. I would guess they are mostly sending emails to Main Street members. But if they get into a real fight and mobilize their full membership, look out. eBay has a massive grassroots database at its disposal that rivals the databases of the Republican and Democratic Parties. Here’s a breakdown:

First, I hadn’t really thought much about how massive eBay really is. According to the Times, at any one time there are 89 million items being sold on eBay and the site has 193 million registered users. 193 million registered users! To put that in perspective, 122 million people voted in the last U.S. Presidential election.

Second, when you register for eBay you are required to give them your full address and phone number, in addition to your email address. This information allows eBay to easily get sophisticated demographic data about each user: they know your state, your Congressional District, your county, and even your State Legislative District. In addition, eBay has access to your account history. They know how many items you’ve bought and sold, and how much money you’ve made or spent on EBay. eBay knows where you live and exactly how you use their service. And they have this information for ever single member.

So, if you combine points #1 and #2, you’ve got a massive and targeted database of users that can mobilized when regulation threatens eBay.

I don’t think the size and potential power of eBay’s database can be overstated. The eBay database rivals anything the Democrat or Republican Parties possess in terms of pure numbers (the press has estimated the size of the Dem and GOP databases at around 170 million Americans each). And having an email address for every member is huge.

Regulate eBay at your own peril.

We’ve briefly mentioned Second Life here at the Bivings Report, and, since then, I’ve kept an eye on news from this virtual social experiment. I do this through a low-volume RSS feed called New World Notes. Recently, Second Life users had the opportunity to attend an in-world political rally for Brian Ulaszewski (in-world name Brian Omegamu), a candidate for the second district city council of Long Beach, CA. (more…)

On June 1, 2006, The Bivings Group held its first ever Philanthropic Brain Trust, which took the form of a pro bono communications strategy brainstorm for a local nonprofit called DC Fights Back. Our company is deeply committed to volunteer work and we are always looking for new opportunities to give back to the surrounding community and offer our intellectual capital to a good cause. We are deeply grateful to the Spectrum Science Communications team (Amanda Sellers, Liza Morris and John Seng), the Zeno Group’s Heather Gartman and Phil Armstrong, the Smithsonian’s Colleen Perlman and Sharolyn Hyson from HIMSS for their participation and for bringing their ideas to table.

DC Fights Back is an organization that is committed to raising AIDS awareness in the Washington, DC area. Health educator Alex Lawson presented us with some shocking statistics that made us all wonder why most of us don’t hear about AIDS on a regular basis. Take a look at these numbers:

(more…)

I read an interesting article in Business 2.0 this month (June 2006) entitled “Flipping Web Fixer-Uppers” regarding a new trend in online entrepreneurship – purchasing underperforming sites, improving the content, infrastructure, and/or marketing to build traffic and revenue, and then selling them for a profit. This has been facilitated by sites such as SitePoint and eBay where whole sites and the businesses built around them are auctioned off.I took a look at SitePoint, and there are a lot of sites that I would never purchase, but there are a few I found that I would consider. As the article in Business 2.0 says, the key would be finding a site about something you are passionate. I do not think that a techie would be able to flip a site on modern art, nor would a musician be able to turn a profit on a site dedicated to advanced data structures.

I do think that this kind of entrepreneurship has merit, as I have personally visited many a site with potential but which has been neglected. There are many destinations on the Web that simply need the tender love of someone who really cares about the site’s topic in order to blossom. Virtual real estate certainly has tangible value, so it is natural that this kind of opportunity arose just as it did for neglected homes in hot housing markets across the country.

Some of the sites for sale are quite comical. My favorite is SaveToby.com, which I had run across before. It involves threatening to eat an innocent bunny, and the viral momentum it had a few months ago is worth a blog post in and of itself (stay tuned).

If you are interested, visit these sites to see some of the Web properties currently up for sale:

• SitePoint
• EBay

We got a short and sweet mention of our campaign study on CNN’s blog, the Situation Report.  Here’s the relevant snippet:

“An extraordinary study examines how well candidates for Senate are utilizing online technology in the 2006 campaigns.”

You can view the study here.

An article on the BBC reported Friday that a college professor at Bradford University in the UK has replaced classroom lectures with podcasts.  Professor Bill Ashraf feels that the quality of his lectures is compromised by the large size of his classes, some of which contain as many as 250 students.  Using Dr. Ashraf’s method, first year biochemistry students can listen to lectures on their own time and send questions to the professor via text message.

Apparently, Professor Bill Ashraf is not alone is his use of podcasts to supplement or replace classroom lectures.  Locally, American University’s Washington College of Law has begun offering podcasts of guest lecturers in order to accomodate students’ busy schedules.

The University of Minnesota has also started offering various podcasts to students that give advice for stress relief during hectic times during the school year.  The University is also considering using podcasts for spreading information about orientation, life after graduation, and even computer tips.  At the University of California at Berkely, about 40 courses are reproduced in podcasts, providing students with a method of reviewing course material during finals periods or in the event that they miss a class meeting.

If that’s not creative enough for you, check out a new school opening next year in Melbourne, Australia. Coburn Senior High School plans to allow students to download podcasts of classes at on-campus internet cafes on a routine basis.  The school will have a technology focus, and will be built despite the 2003 failure of Moreland City College, established on similar principles to Coburn.

Elementary schools have even jumped on the podcasting bandwagon.  Jamestown Elementary School in Arlington, VA has been “pen-podcasting” with an elementary school in Scotland, where children as early as kindergarten have been introduced to iPods and other computer technogoies in the classroom.

(more…)

After finishing our 2006 study of political web campaigns, we became curious as to how American politicians’ campaign websites compared to those in other countries.  We looked at similar studies conducted in the UK, Germany, Australia, Finland, Hungary, and Sweden, and drew some conclusions:

Countries with parliamentary systems of government tend to have websites that are highly centralized.  In countries like the UK, Germany, and Hungary, very few individual candidates maintained websites.  Rather, parties would maintain websites containing all candidates’ information.  As an example, only 9 of 323 candidates in Hungary in the 2004 EP elections maintained websites, but all the parties had active sites.

Campaign websites worldwide are lacking in their interactive capabilities.  We found that, across the board, candidates are failing to take advantage of interactive strategies the Web provides users.  Despite the development of new technologies, websites have consistently remained “top-down” in nature, providing online versions of traditional campaign materials, and have been described as “old wine in new bottles”.  It seems that candidates may fear losing control of their political message and the content on their websites, and are thus reluctant to use resources developing tools such as bulletin boards, chatrooms, or comment functions on blogs and articles. 

(more…)

Among many, there seems to be a belief in the intrinsic value of online conversations. The world is flat. Ordinary people are being empowered. Governments and corporations are being held accountable.

It is all true to an extent. But I think the story that isn’t being told enough is how divisive and pointless much of the online conversation really is. A few examples I’ve come across the last few weeks:

(1) I’m a San Antonio native, huge Spurs fan and geek, so I went online and read some of the discussion about the heartbreaking Dallas - San Antonio NBA series. Not a productive use of my time. I’m fairly certain most of the posters were drunk. Flame wars. Personal attacks. Awful language. Two posters were so upset with each other that they were making arrangements to meet in person so they could fight. The Internet Tough Guy in action.

(2) Sadly, much of the political discussion taking place online isn’t much better. Republicans are racist! Democrats are socialists! Blah, blah, blah. Sure, occasionally substantive, important discussions break out. But just as often people are simply seeking out others who think just like they do. The result isn’t enlightenment, it is the hardening of beliefs and division.

(3) I recently read an article about the rise of a trend called Internet hunting in China. It’s quite disturbing. In essence, some Chinese Internet users are using the web to carry out personal vendettas. In one case, a husband used an Internet message board to post a diatribe accusing a Chinese student of having an affair with his wife. An online mob formed against the student, with some supporters of the husband organizing online to hunt down the student. An online mob!

The point has been made many times by people a lot smarter than I am: the conversations taking place online are a reflection of human nature. In many cases, the anononymity provided by the Internet brings out the worst in us.

I don’t really have a big point here. I just would caution that the online conversation isn’t as enlightened as many evangelists would have us believe. And in many cases the conversation is tearing us apart more than it is bringing us together.