Transparent Fundraising

Posted on January 22nd, 2008
By Todd Zeigler in Politics, Web 2.0

I think the most interesting move a campaign has made this cycle is Ron Paul’s decision to be completely transparent in his fundraising. For the last five or six months the central element of Ron Paul’s homepage has been a counter that tallies how much he has raised during the current quarter. A screen shot of the graphic is below.

ronpaul

In addition to this graphic, the Paul campaign has also published a feed of all its donation data that volunteers can access. This has lead others, such as Ron Paul Graphs, to do mash ups showing donation statistics. If I want to know how much Ron Paul is raising, I can go to any number of sites and get a real time number. This is in stark contrast to most of the other campaigns that, for the most part, keep fundraising information under wraps until they are forced to disclose the information publicly.

Others have followed Paul’s lead to some extent. The Huckabee campaign has a tally of quarterly fundraising on their site.

huckabee

Other campaigns have played with the idea of transparency in the context of specific fundraising efforts (meaning efforts to raise X dollars by X date). Howard Dean had his bat back in 2004 that showed progress towards goals. On the Fred Thompson campaign, we had our red truck, which was successful. The Barack Obama and John Edwards campaign have run similar fundraising pushes this cycle.

While I certainly wouldn’t advise every candidate to mimic what the Paul campaign is doing, I do think there is something to this transparent fundraising concept. Here are the benefits to the approach as I see them:

(1) Volunteers feel more a part of the campaign when they have access to fundraising numbers. They will take responsibility for moving the number and be more motivated to fundraise on a campaign’s behalf. Transparency also allows people to do cool stuff like money bombs. You end up creating a vibrant fundraising community of online donors/fundraisers that wouldn’t be possible without transparency.

(2) Your site will attract more visitors as supporters and the curious check back frequently to check the numbers. These people will end up sticking around to read other content and complete other activities. It makes supporters more likely to become volunteers.

(3) I think having a counter showing up-to-the minute donation information makes normal people more likely to give. There is something cool about getting the immediate feedback of watching a number increase after making a donation.

Obviously, there are down sides here. The media is watching too and will bury you if your numbers stink. What is innovative now may feel a bit gimmicky as more and more campaigns try the idea. It seems like the tactic of an insurgent candidate as opposed to a more established front runner.

But, all in all, I think there is something to the concept and I’d expect to see more of it in the coming days.

What do you think?

| Trackback URL |

Trackbacks/Pings

  1. The Bivings Group on NPR » The Bivings Report
  2. McCain, Go Real Time » The American Mind
  3. Does Good Design Matter? An Anecdote from the Thompson Campaign » The Bivings Report

Comments

  1. Micah Sifry

    Totally agree. This tactic adds strength to a campaign. (See our post on the subject here: http://www.techpresident.com/b.....juggernaut) But unfortunately the fundraising honchos inside the major campaigns are afraid to make these numbers so public; they think it will help their opponents more than it helps them.

  2. Todd Zeigler

    It is extremely disruptive to your traditional campaign structure, that is for sure. But I think the traditional campaign structure could use a little disruption.

  3. Sean Hackbarth

    I call the feedback loop the “video game effect.” Having real time stats turns the fundraising process into a game instead of the access-opener it has been in the past.

    It doesn’t take away the power of the bundlers because any campaign can use tracking numbers to see who’s giving what through whom. What a real time counter does is open fundraising up to more people. That builds a community, makes more people feel they’re a part of the campaign, and can raise a hell of a lot of money.

    Let’s note the campaigns that have implemented the counter: Paul, Huckabee, and Thompson. In all three cases it was about desperation. They had nothing to lose. If money was flowing in like with Obama and Clinton there wouldn’t have been a need to take that step.

about this blog

The Bivings Report (TBR) is a source of news, insight, research and analysis on the web-based communications industry. TBR content is posted, created and managed by internet strategists, media/communications analysts, web developers, designers and programmers, all of whom are employees of The Bivings Group.

Search Site

Archives

2008
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Jul          
2007
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2006
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2005
Jan Feb Apr May Jun Jul
Aug Sep Nov Dec    
2004
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Jul Aug Sep Nov Dec  
2003
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2002
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2001
          Dec

RSS feed RSS feed
RSS feed Facebook
RSS feed Follow on Twitter

Email Subscription


Delivered by FeedBurner

Collaborate

Send Tips Send Tips
Wiki Wiki

Authors

Tags

Most Popular Posts

Blogroll