Traffic on The Bivings Report has been going crazy the last two days due a link to our blog within the extremely viral Inside CRM piece “The Twitter Hall of Shame: 50 Tweets That Will Echo in History.” The Inside CRM post could serve as a guidebook on how to create a viral article:

1. It is a list post.  People love list posts.
2. The article contains links to 50 other articles and blog posts on the web.  Most of the bloggers they link to will read the post, and then probably pass it around and/or add a link to the Inside CRM article (as I am doing now).  Inside CRM also smartly sent us a quick email to let us know about the article, in case we missed it or didn’t notice all the traffic they were sending our way.
3. The article is about Twitter.  First of all, people are just generally obsessed with Twitter.  Second of all, people obsessed with Twitter love to share stories about Twitter on Twitter.  I would guess Inside CRM is getting a lot of traffic from people passing this story around through Twitter.
4. The article is pretty damn entertaining.

Anyway, check it out.

Update: Regarding #3, my colleague Chuck, who works on our ImpactWatch team, points out that there have been 122 mentions of the phrase “Twitter Hall of Shame” on Twitter in the last 22 hours, according to Summize.  Lots of other people probably linked to the piece without using the exact article title.  So it looks like the piece is definitely making the rounds.

A few weeks ago the McCain campaign launched a “Spread the Word” feature on their campaign website that encourages volunteers to comment on prominent left and right leaning blogs as a way of getting the McCain message out. The feature was written up in Wired and has attracted a mixed reaction. Some think it is nothing more than astroturfing while others think it is a clever outreach strategy.

My take is that the idea is a good one but that the execution could have been better.

The piece includes very brief instructions, a long list of blogs to participate in (94 are listed) and a few talking points to copy. Intentionally or not, the tool seems to aspire to create an army of Ron Paul-style shills, who inject promotional materials about their candidate of choice into every discussion no matter the topic, alienating the very communities they are trying to reach. Bull, meet china shop.

I think the tool would have been better received and more effective had the campaign provided volunteers with better instructions as to how to participate in these blogging communities. Off the top of my head, here are some of the tips I might have included:

1. Read the blogs and familiarize yourself with their communities before posting comments.
2. Read the actual post you are commenting on before posting anything. Read other people’s comments as well before posting.
3. Make sure your comments are on topic.
4. Participate in the community beyond simply posting pro-McCain materials.
5. Be civil and respectful of others members of the community.
6. Etc.

Basically, I’d try to give volunteers more information so that they conduct the outreach in a manner that is respectful of the blogs they are participating in.

Simon Owens of Bloggasm, a blog that focuses on online media and journalism, recently conducted a very intriguing ‘mini-study' centered about the idea of personal blogging done by reporters, journalists, and other professionals.

He was inspired by the recent firings of two prominent writers, both of whom were fired due to participation in personal blogging.  Chez Pazienza, a former producer for CNN, was fired from his job in February because he wrote for Huffington Post and other high-profile blogs.  CNN has a policy against any outside writing without prior approval.

In April, Michael Tunison was fired from the Washington Post after he revealed that he wrote for the sports blog Kissing Suzy Kolber. His bosses told him that he had brought "discredit to the paper" through his blogging.

In order to find out how other newspaper editors and higher-ups felt about this issue, Owens contacted 250 of them, basically asking if they would be against personal blogging on non-beat issues by their writers.  Of those that responded, 44% "either required disclosure of the blog, issued caveats over what subjects couldn't be covered, or had outright bans on having personal blogs at all."

(more…)

We’re proud to announce that The Bivings Group will be one of the sponsors of this year’s Personal Democracy Forum, an important conference that covers how technology is changing politics. This year’s Personal Democracy Forum will take place in New York City June 23rd and 24th.

The preliminary program looks fantastic, with a great mix of big names (Craig Newark, Michael Arrington, Elizabeth Edwards), journalists (Jose Antonio Vargas, Anna Marie Cox, Clay Shirky) and political professionals from the left (Joe Trippi, Joe Rospars, Peter Daou) and the right (Michael Turk, Austin Walne, Patrick Ruffini, David All, Mindy Finn) sides of the aisle. I had a great time at the conference last year and learned a lot in the sessions and in the hallways.

You can register to attend this year’s conference here.

If you end up attending, please be sure to stop by our demo table to meet the Bivings team, check out our media monitoring platform, ImpactWatch, and to pick up some free goodies. We hope to see you there.

Let's face it; China needs to bolster its reputation before the Summer Olympics begin.  Otherwise, the several countries that are already considering boycotting may, in fact, do so.  In my opinion, it would be a shame if a past representation of political and economical unity were to be halted.  After all, if this one year is a bust, future Olympic games may follow in failure.

PRWeek recently ran an article in their online resource that the Chinese government was interviewing potential US and UK-based PR firms in the hopes to gain some positive pre-game press, prior to the events.  However, no PR firm has admitted to being in the bid war for this lucrative account.

(more…)

Before I write the rest of this slightly snarky blog post, let me preface it by saying that I am 100% pro-environment.  After all, the environment is where I keep the majority of my stuff, such as my house, car, and cat.  I would like to keep the environment as is, and I applaud ‘green' programs that aim to protect/restore/embiggen the earth.  However, I also believe that the majority of these programs are doing so simply for PR.  Call me a cynic, but it's true.  "Going Green" makes your company seem more family friendly and nicer in an otherwise cold, dark world of business.  In an attempt to rid myself of this pessimistic view, I scoured the Internet for five examples of companies or organizations that truly seemed to harbor an honest spirit of environmentalism.  In no particular order, here is a list of them:

(more…)

I’m originally from Texas and keep in touch with a lot of people that still call the state home. In the days leading up to the Texas Presidential primary, it seemed like everyone I knew reported receiving phone calls from Obama and Clinton supporters scrounging up votes for their candidate of choice. We’re talking three to four calls each. Everyone reported that the volume of calls was much higher than previous campaigns.

There are a lot of reasons for the increase in voter contacts I would think. The race was extremely competitive and Texas usually isn’t a primary player. Both campaigns are well funded. Overall interest is extremely high this year. But I think one key reason for the increase in contacts is the use of online call tools by both the Obama and Clinton campaigns. These tools allow the campaigns to crowd source voter contacts.

Essentially, both the Obama and Clinton websites allow registered users to make calls for the campaign to a state whose primary is approaching.   The first step in the process of making calls is to select the state you want to call.  After you select a state, you are assigned a voter (or list of voters) to call and given a script that includes some talking points and questions to ask such as “which candidate do you support?” and “what issues are most important to you?”.  After you finish talking to the voter, you report back to the campaign how the call went by filling out a simple form. This information is then stored in the campaign’s overall voter database (otherwise known as Customer Relationship Management database). The campaigns then use the information they collect via these tools to tailor get out the vote efforts, hone messages, customize donation appeals, etc.  These tools also provide the campaign with information about where they stand in each state.

These tools have been around since 2004, when both the Bush and Kerry campaigns had call systems built into their websites. The Fred Thompson (disclosure) and Mitt Romney campaigns had similar tools on their sites this cycle. However, I figured I’d take a closer look at the Obama and Clinton tools since they are still up and being used (look out Pennsylvania). Overall, I think both tools are excellent, although I found the Hillary tool a little easier to use.

Following are screen grabs of the call tools on both sites with my random notes. The phone numbers of the voters I was assigned have been blocked out to protect the innocent.

(more…)

"Ideas worth spreading" is the motto of a growing annual convention that is held in Monterey, California.  The Technology Entertainment Design (TED) conference covers a wide range of topics, from science to the arts, and nearly everything in between.  My fraternity brother, Chris, recently made me aware of this conference, which has been conducted since 1984.

There is an annual membership fee of $6000, however, this fee not only covers attendance to the events, but also attendance for other special gatherings and DVDs of the presentations.  Since not everyone can afford to be this enlightened, the official website was created in response, providing the highlights and best speeches from the conference.

(more…)

I was speaking with someone last night about how the 2008 presidential campaigns are using new media (blogging, web video, social networking, etc.), and the question about how to determine the success of these campaign came up.

One of the first things that came to my mind was media exposure.  I thought back to an article that awarding winning media critic Rory O'Connor wrote about a panel discuss he attended during Advertising Week back in 2006 in which Mark McKinnon, who has advised President Bush about media, and Democratic media strategist David Alexrod participated. (more…)

Last May I wrote a post about how offices on Capitol Hill deal with the barage of emails they constantly receive. Regulatory bodies and similar organizations also must handle similar flows of e-mails. Despite this, it is very important for our country's democratic nature that individuals' voices are heard. Further, some regulatory bodies are legally required to process public feedback during a comment and review period before a change is made. So what can a Congressional office (or a similar organization) do when it receives tens of thousands of e-mails from constituents the day before a key vote? (more…)

A little over a year ago I wrote a post that guessed which emerging technologies would have an impact on the 2008 election cycle. I figured I’d take a quick look back and grade my predictions, as well as list a few new technologies that have emerged since I last covered this ground.

Here are the grades I would give my predictions (original post is here for background):

(1) Ning (Niche Social Networks)

I’d give myself a C on this one. Many of the major Presidential candidates launched niche social networks on their campaign sites, hoping to encourage connections among volunteers. However, none of these niche networks really got that much traction except for Barack Obama’s. And no campaign used the specific service I recommended, Ning (which I think is still worth trying). Ron Paul supporters took the novel approach of trying to turn the entire Internet into a niche social network about Ron Paul, which is another thing entirely. I think there is still something to the idea of niche social networks around campaigns, but most of the action has been taking place on the more established networks (Facebook, MySpace, etc.).

(2) Mozes (Broadcast Text Messaging)

I’d go with a B for this one. The Obama campaign launched a quite aggressive text messaging effort where users are encouraged to text the message “Hope” to 62262 to subscribe to text alerts alerts. Other campaigns have experimented with similar programs. The Obama campaign program works pretty much the exact same way as I described in my post, but no one is using Mozes specifically. It is also really hard to measure the impact of these programs without getting access to subscriber figures.

(more…)

Want further proof of Barack Obama’s popularity online? According to the site Twitterholic, Obama has more followers than any other Twitter user (followers are people who sign up to receive a user’s Twitter updates through the service). Here is a chart showing the top 10 users:

Despite this popularity, Obama’s team doesn’t use the service that aggressively. They have only posted 78 updates. The second most popular user, Robert Scoble, has posted 7,499 updates.

You can visit Obama’s Twitter page here and Twitterholic here.

Update: Twitdir is another great resource for looking at data on top Twitter users.

In 2002 and 2006, we conducted studies that analyzed the features of the campaign websites of folks running for federal office. Our 2002 findings are available here and our 2006 study can be found here.

We are in the planning phases of a 2008 study and are trying to figure out what criteria to check for when reviewing the campaign websites. Below is a list of the criteria we looked at in 2006:

• En Español: Does the website provide a Spanish version?
• News: Does the website provide news and press releases?
• Bio: Does the website provide a biography of the candidate?
• Contacts: Does the website provide adequate contact information?
• Donations: Does the website provide the ability to make donations online?
• Fundraising Campaigns: Does the website provide the ability for voters to organize their own fundraising campaigns?
• Volunteer Forms: Does the website provide a volunteer sign-up form?
• Team Tools: Does the website provide the ability for volunteers to organize and track activity?
• House Parties: Does the website help volunteers set up house parties?
• Downloads: Does the website provide downloadable fliers, web stickers, or other campaign materials?
• Blogs: Does the website offer a blog?
• Podcasts: Does the website offer podcasts?
• Multimedia: Does the website offer audio or video files?
• RSS: Does the website offer an RSS feed?

I think in 2008 we’ll need to look at whether the campaign’s have presences on social networking sites and if they have social networking components on their own sites. We might also need to look at the use of widgets and wikis. We are still very much in the brainstorming phase.

What criteria do you think we should add?

While at the Politics Online Conference yesterday, I attended a rather interesting panel about using cell phones in political and advocacy campaigns.  Some of the panelists represented the One campaign — think Bono — and Rock the Vote.  Since both of these campaigns cater to a younger crowd, they need to use cell phones in connecting with their audiences.

During the panel the representative from Rock the Vote shared an interesting campaign that they just did using text messages.  His organization used their member database to print out voter registration forms and mail them to those people.  All the recipients needed to do was fill in their SSN, sign it, and send it in.  However, Rock the Vote knows that the typical person in their target crowd virtually ignores snail mail.  So they decided to send out a text message to everyone who they sent forms to alerting to them to the fact that the registration form is in their mailbox.  I found that interesting that they would send out something and use another channel as the call to action.  The panelist said that they didn’t have data back yet since they just did this campaign, but I would like to know how effective the text messages were.

Another interesting tidbit from that session was about a health care advocacy group in California that asked people to send it text messages about how they feel about health care as the California State Legislature was debating some new legislation.  This organization then rented out a jumbo-tron and placed it across the street from the legislative chambers.  Thus, when legislators walked outside, they saw text messages about health care from normal citizens on the large screen.

What are some interesting campaigns that you’ve seen involving cell phones?

I'm attending the Politics Online Conference today and tomorrow, and there was an interesting discussion during the opening session titled "Pervasive Politics" that Joe Mansour blogged about at TechRepublican.com. The session focused on how we as individuals will be bombarded with political information everywhere we go — not just online or through traditional media.  Think about political ads on your cell phone… (more…)