David All's blog

Barack's Impersonal Text: Disappointing

2008-08-23T21:14:49-04:00

"Brilliant. Effective. Revolutionary."

Those are the three words I thought I'd write in response to Barack Obama's text message announcing his Vice Presidential pick. Instead, the only word that comes to mind is "Disappointing."

Let me explain...

Having upgraded recently from a BlackBerry to a white 3G iPhone I went ahead and signed up on my new line for the updates. More text messages? No worries, I had already opted for the unlimited text plan so that I could better follow about a dozen or so folks on Twitter without having to track mileage.

I ripped off the text like a pro -- tapping "VP" to 62262 and clicking send. Within seconds I received a response back from 62262 letting me know that the sign-up was a success.

Noting in my little black book of best practices that even the confirmation note had a call to action ("Please forward"), I cracked a smile in recognition of the genius of Obama online guru Joe Rospars and his team.

I thought, could the be the text that's heard around the world as it got forwarded from an initial few to many? What would the text say?

I was pumped and excited for the text. And I'm a Republican who will not vote for Barack Obama regardless of his running mate.

The promise of direct, exclusive information sent to my iPhone was a heckuva carrot to put out on a stick. Not just for me -- but for others too. In fact, last week when I was training 60 field representatives for the College Republicans (a client) I asked the room who else had signed up -- at least a quarter of the hands slowly grabbed the sky.

Days went by last week since I had signed up. I hadn't received a single text from Barack. Was this thing still working? Indeed, a Tweet would pop up reminding me that the foot was still on the pedal. I even thought it was genius that Barack's team had not sent a text to me. I had signed up for one text, at least initially -- don't break the promise or risk losing me.

So... I... Waited... For... Barack...

After a long week at work, I decided to forget about it for the night. I went out with friends, had sushi, saki, and laughs. I went to bed.

When I woke up this morning, I grabbed my iPhone to start reading through late night tweets, text messages, and emails. OMG. WTH is that? a text message from Barack at 3:04 AM? No way...

Confirmed. It was indeed from Obama's campaign -- but it wasn't from Barack -- the person. The text was from Barack Obama -- the Machine.

Using 148 of their 160-character limit the Machine wrote:

Barack has chosen Senator Joe Biden to be our VP nominee. Watch the first Obama-Biden rally live at 3 PM ET on www.BarackObama.com. Spread the word!

What were they thinking by not using Barack's voice? Didn't they realize that I'm used to getting very real, personal text messages from my friends? Didn't they know that even I thought that Barack really "got" this modern medium?

Patrick Ruffini blogged this morning that Barack's text wasn't even really worth the wait because it had leaked to the media beforehand. To quote Patrick, "What seemed like a brilliant exercise in media management devolved into a late night rearguard maneuver." Agreed.

So, if I were working for Barack, I would have suggested the following 160-character text (Leave no character behind!):

Senator Joe Biden is my VP pick. Visit www.BarackObama.com now to see a video message from us to you. You are an important part of the Team for Change. Plz fwd!

But... They didn't. Barack didn't text me anything. The Machine did.

I'm disappointed in Barack's team for missing this opportunity to communicate a direct, personal message from Barack and Joe to their people.

So points for using text messaging as a medium to communicate; however, they're just not doing a good job of using it effectively.

[Cross-posted from TechRepublican.]

Case-Study: Republicans Go Nuclear on Barack

2008-05-20T18:25:50-04:00

As an effective deployment of a modern media strategy, I want to share a recent example engineered by, among others, the Washington State Republican Party putting the hammer to Barack Obama after a *major* gaffe while campaigning in Oregon. I've been given exclusive insight on how this all went down.

Let's dig in...

On Monday at 2:23 PM, Ben Smith of the Politico.com broke the news of Barack who-needs-experience-when-we-can-have-hope Obama making a major gaffe on the campaign trail when he admitted having no knowledge of the Hanford Site, "a decommissioned nuclear production complex on the Columbia River in south-central Washington operated by the United States government."

Ben embedded the following YouTube video of Barack's gaffe which was uploaded anonymously by a brand new YouTube user, IRFSA8654. Natch.

Blogs4McCain.com quickly picked up on the video.

With a hat-tip to Blogs4McCain, Michelle Malkin picked up on the story and added valuable context to the argument by noting that John McCain had been asked the same question and knew all about it. Typical experience wielded by The Mac.

Someone must have tipped off the Associated Press because they were next to pile on Barack.

Today, Fox News' Major Garrett carried the package, added some context, and had this to say:

=PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT=

Republicans immediately pounced on this as a sign of Barack Obama's inexperience as a national candidate. Saying -- how could you not know anything about the Hanford nuclear waste site? It's the best known, most contaminated one in the United States. It's one the Department of Energy is spending almost $2 billion a year to clean up. Those clean-up dates are going to be missed. There's a huge negotiation in the state of Washington about how to extend those deadlines. It's a big issue there. How could you not know anything about it?

So while the Obama campaign says it is genuine and disarming, Republicans fire back -- it's inexperience. And that's going to be one of the core divides in this general election campaign. Barack Obama's genuineness, his likability, his willingness to talk straight with voters vs. Republicans saying he may be able to do all those things but if he's not experienced enough, how reliable a President is he actually going to be?

Small issues, small incident in this town hall in Pendleton, Oregon, but it's going to be something that will be playing out in the campaign throughout.

Today, MoveRed.org, the "youth coalition (ages 16-28) of the King County Republican Party," released this stinging video pulling it all together:

In my opinion, the case-study above shows how you can take a national candidate making a mistake on a local issue and turn that into a national news story. And the best part is that this is just the beginning of this story getting out.

The Washington State Republican Party has just blasted an email to its list asking them to "forward the message" and help make a donation to keep it coming.

Indeed, Porridge, to all of those who had a hand in this one. You're making us proud.

[Pardon the partisanship, this was cross-posted from TechRepublican.]

The Presidential Debates Must Embrace the Internet

2008-05-13T20:34:20-04:00

Based on a few recent experiences regarding the YouTube community, and specifically how the tool could help increase citizen participation in our upcoming general election debates, this post seeks to encourage the Commission on Presidential Debates -- the Old Guards if you will -- to truly embrace the Internet in at least one of its three scheduled debates.

Let's dig in...

This past Friday the Republican National Committee launched CanWeAsk.com - a platform which provides the RNC a powerful partisan tool to help it better engage Barack Obama early, often and dynamically. Of note, all lasers are trained solely on Barack, not Hillary. Natch.

The CanWeAsk.com platform provides both a place for the distribution of the RNC's opposition research against Barack (videos with scary audio over grainy black and white photos) but it also serves as a valuable utility for citizens to participate and ask Barack some very real questions. Snaps to the RNC for deploying the site before the Dems thought of it.

As you might expect, I joined the effort by asking Barack a question about health care. Disclosure, so you know, I've been working and focusing on the issue a lot with a few clients concerned about our health care system being run by the same folks responsible for the U.S. Post Office - bureaucrats.

My question to Barack which I hope he answers:

For those on their blackberry or working sans audio at work, here's the description/text of the video:

As a Republican and an employer who provides health care benefits to my employees, I have a question for Barack Obama.

You've proposed a health care plan run by the government. Won't the addition of a new government-run health care program resembling Medicare be a dis-incentive for employers to continue to offer health care coverage to their employees? Won't less competition only increase the cost of care, leaving the government trying to figure out how to cover the bill?

The coolest thing about this experience was that my video was featured on the FRONT-PAGE of YouTube.com this past weekend (or at least that's what two individual people have told me after stumbling upon my video). The video now has over 26k views and 335 comments.

Perspective: This video did not star a dancing cat or the Star Wars kid; it was a question to Barack Obama about a niche issue that could affect small businessmen throughout the nation. And the question wasn't being asked by Brit Hume or Charlie Gibson; it was being asked by a regular citizen.

In my mind, the popularity of the video underscores the notion that citizens are interested in being a real part of the democratic process beyond just casting their vote in November. It is my belief that only a true embrace of the Internet will increase citizen participation.

Internet Plays Valuable Role In Increasing Democracy, Freedom

As perhaps one of the only people who attended both the Democratic and Republican YouTube debates on my own dime, it is clear to me that citizens need to continue to be a part of the debate structure.

While I was extremely pleased to see Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal and New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin join efforts to help promote and announce an informal "Presidential forum" with YouTube this fall, that doesn't go far enough.

As a citizen, I have the right to insist that my candidates for President interact with me and answer the questions I have about their positions on the issues I care about. Like most Americans, I rely on the participatory power of the Internet to communicate with public officials. That is why I believe that the Commission on Presidential Debates needs to fully embrace the Internet in one of its three-scheduled *official* debates.

It Might Happen: Commission Opens Door To Possibility

The Commission has already committed in its second debate to including the Internet, we just don't know the details:

The second departure from past CPD formats will be the introduction of internet access to the presidential town meeting debate. Questions solicited by Internet will be included with those from citizens on the stage with the candidates.

Unfortunately, a true embrace of the Internet by the Commission is suspect.

In fact, as Politics Magazine reported on Friday, the Commission's executive director struck quite a snarky tone toward a format resembling the YouTube debate by cracking a (funny?) zinger:

"It's a matter of figuring out which [interactive] elements are helpful to viewers and actually add something to the discussion and which elements are just distracting. We're not Entertainment Tonight."

I actually had to Google "Entertainment Tonight" to try and figure out what she meant. Even after reading it's Wikipedia entry I don't really "get" how a YouTube debate equates to the "most popular and longest-running entertainment news program."

For sure, the YouTube debates were massively popular with the American public. In fact, the Republican Presidential debate was the most-viewed primary debate ever. That's a whole heckuva lot of people interested in a Republican discussion and that's good news to me as a Republican. And it's also good news for democracy.

Look, I don't know Janet Brown or anyone on the Commission. I doubt any of them are on Facebook, LinkedIn or have ever submitted a YouTube video. That's cool with me. Different strokes for different folks.

However, the fate of what could be a ground-breaking experiment in democracy should not fall at the hands of these few. If the Commission is serious about using the Internet and finding a good format -- they should surround themselves with folks who "get" it. I'm happy to be one voice - and perhaps writing this note serves as my contribution to the effort; but I can also think of dozens of people from both the Right and Left who could offer valuable contributions to the discussion.

Last August I wrote a short op-ed for the New York Times entitled "The People's Court" for a series of bipartisan voices detailing how technology might be better deployed to add to the debate process.

Most of the other contributors took the topic seriously and offered solid feedback; but not NBC News' Tom Brokaw. Instead of thinking beyond the box and adding value to the discussion, Brokaw embraced an elitist tone and sarcastic attitude which is likely dominant in editorial rooms across the country.

The opening in his piece is telling of the elitism that "old guard" media types bring to the table:

"If this is truly the campaign of the new media, candidates should be required to answer questions only on their cellphone, BlackBerry or other personal digital assistant, so we can size up their personal text message codes, ring tones and thumb-typing skills.

"The questioners could be sweaty fat guys muscling people aside as they get off airplanes, shouting loudly into cellphones: 'Rudy, I just landed. Can we talk?' 'Hillary! Hey! Mike here! Can you hear me? Hello? Hello?"

The ironic thing is that Brokaw was attempting to be humorous and sarcastic; he failed at both and instead stuck his elitist finger in the eyes of participatory democracy. That being said, he actually does have a good point if you boil out the BS. Citizens should be able to participate in the democratic process where ever, whenever, and how ever they want. After all, this is America.

Brokaw may speak for a number of different "generations," and I respect his contributions to his industry, but he doesn't speak for me or my generation.

Personally I don't think folks sitting in editorial news rooms sipping iced latte’s represent my perspective very well; (I prefer iced coffee instead.) I doubt they represent "your" perspective either.

And to be sure, it was perhaps that same elitism and liberal bias in the editorial process which plagued CNN's editorial decisions in the GOP debate.

Conclusion

The Old Guards who cloak their elitism and misinformation with sarcastic humor have their foot pressed firmly on the neck of the Revolution and it's time we breathe freedom.

Like you, I am optimistic in my belief that the Internet could serve a valuable role in increasing citizen participation in the Presidential debates. Unfortunately, even for an optimist like me, the signs are not looking very good for those being engineered by the Old Guards.

This is the first step, but I can't do it alone. A bipartisan coalition of concerned citizens could help convince the Commission to embrace the Internet for a debate and I look forward to working with you to do just that. Stay tuned.

[Cross-posted from TechRepublican.]

YouTube-Google Announce Presidential Forum

2008-04-29T11:00:11-04:00

Today, one of the Republican Party's fastest rising stars, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, joined New Orleans Democratic Mayor Ray Nagin to announce that they are working with YouTube and Google to "bring American voices into a forum with Presidential nominees."

Along with the New Orleans Consortium, Jindal and Nagin plan to host the forum on September 18, 2008 at the Morial Convention Center in New Orleans.

Appropriately, here's the YouTube announcement:

Let's hope all of the candidates decide to participate.

Two things worth thinking on:

1. For the past two Presidential events, CNN was the official media sponsor with YouTube. So far, no media carrier has been listed. We shouldn't assume that this means that CNN is out of the running for the gig, but given how CNN handled the Republican debate last fall (see the Save the Debate Coalition statement), I'd be surprised to see them get it.

2. As Dan Manatt blogged last December, the Commission on Presidential Forums has already made it clear that to increase participation, the "Internet" will play a major role in the second commissioned debate - which is a "town hall style" debate:

The second departure from past CPD formats will be the introduction of internet access to the presidential town meeting debate. Questions solicited by Internet will be included with those from citizens on the stage with the candidates.

The second CPD debate is scheduled for Tuesday, October 7 at Belmont University, Nashville, TN. Will YouTube and Google be there? Time will tell.

One thing is clear, I'm heading to both New Orleans and Nashville.

Beyond Bittergate, Barack Yields Success to His Supporters

2008-04-27T23:31:58-04:00

Remember the now infamous speech Barack Obama gave behind closed doors at a fundraiser in San Francisco where the meme "Bittergate" developed?

How could we ever forget.

Beyond Bittergate, another nugget has emerged from that same speech that Chris Chiasson has unearthed through his close listening to the audio of Barack's speech which is worth noting in this space.

As transcribed by Chris (emphasis and line-breaks to aid readability mine):

Starting at 14 minutes and 50 seconds:

I want to make a point about fund raising because I think it is illustrative of what else is going on. We raised 55 million dollars last month. ... I'm sorry. We raised 55 million in February; we raised 40 million that last month. Now, these are gaudy numbers. But, what's interesting is not the amount raised. 90% of what we raised came over the Internet. 50% were for $50 or less. Our average donation is less than $100.

Now, essentially what we've done is we've created a parallel public financing system. That using the Internet and mobilizing people all across the country - over 1.3 million donors - we've created a system where ordinary people can actually finance, can fuel, a campaign at the highest levels.

It's the same way that we've competed organizationally. We didn't have all the fancy endorsements early on. We remember - you know, we had some courageous endorsements from Barbara Williams and some other folks - but most of the big names here in ... California went the other way. And yet, we were able to compete everywhere.

Why is that? Essentially, groups formed themselves using technology. We have an Open Source system. For people to just grab onto good ideas. They start organizing their neighbors, organizing their friends. And, next thing you knew, we'd built the best political organization in the country. And that's what we have. I mean, we have the best national political organization that anybody has seen in a generation.

This realization by Barack that his success is due (at least partly) to the connectivity of the Internet is important.

There is a Revolution taking hold of American politics. I only fear that this Revolution continues to thrive on the wrong side of the aisle.

We continue to have work to do. I hope you're with me.

[Pardon the partisanship, this item was cross-posted with a smile from TechRepublican.]

YouTube Expands YouChoose Platform

2008-03-13T09:35:23-04:00

YouTube is expanding its popular YouChoose platform to Senators, Congressman, and state candidates. To apply for a "Politician" account, you can download the application here (PDF).

Features for a "Politician" account include:

• Official designation as a "Politician" channel.
• Enhanced design and branding capabilities, including a personalized banner advertisement to be
displayed across the top of the channel that links back to a home website.
• Extended video upload capability (extended length uploads, and up to 300 MB per video file).

To receive an account, you have to meet several pieces of criteria that you can find on the application.

I asked YouTube News & Politics editor Steve Grove about expanding the YouChoose platform and he said, "We're expanding our You Choose '08 platform beyond the presidential race to include Senate and House races - we want candidates down the ballot to reach out to voters in the same way that the candidates at the top of the ballot do. In today's political environment, you can't not have a YouTube channel."

How true. The political world has shifted.

[Cross-posted with a smile from TechRepublican]

RNC Convention Partners with UStream.TV

2008-01-29T11:57:13-05:00

The Republican National Convention has brokered a deal with UStream.TV to serve as its "Official Live Video Streaming Provider." Appropriately, the announcement was made live via streaming video at www.GOPConvention2008.com.

Readers of TechRepublican will recall our conversation with UStream founder Brad Hunstable two weeks ago where he teased that a "major announcement" was in the queue. This is that announcement. And, of note, Hunstable said that the "deal would not be replicated with the Democratic Party." Sweet.

Of the partnership, the GOP Convention President and CEO, Maria Cino, said in a prepared statement, “Partnering with Ustream.TV sends a clear message that the Republican Party wants the Internet generation and all people – from Party loyalists to casual observers – to be part of the 2008 Republican National Convention. Anyone with computer and Internet access will be guaranteed a front-row seat to history through www.GOPConvention2008.com, as we formally nominate the next President and Vice President of the United States.”

From the release on the partnership:

Ustream.TV allows anyone with a camera, computer, and Internet connection to broadcast live video to a global audience. Ustream.TV was founded by two U.S. military veterans and a technologist who strived to create a way for people of all ages around the globe to connect with each other through the power of live, online video broadcasts.

In addition to live gavel-to-gavel coverage of the convention, the Ustream.TV broadcasting platform will be used to proactively engage bloggers and traditional media outlets unable to travel to Minneapolis-Saint Paul for the event. As part of the pioneering effort, convention and other Republican officials will be scheduled to participate in live video web chats and other online interviews, using Ustream.TV’s platform, leading up to and during the Republican National Convention.

Fellow bloggers, if you're interested in obtaining media credentials, you'll find all of the information you need here.

[Cross-posted at TechRepublican.com]

Ron Paul's second "Money Bomb" ignites today [UPDATE]

2007-12-16T16:17:59-05:00

UPDATE Dec. 17; 9:56 AM: Ron Paul broke another record - hauling in $6M in 24 hours.

The Boston Globe is reporting that Ron Paul's loyal supporters have triggered their second "Money Bomb," and have already pulled in over $2M (as of 10:30 AM EST).

Hoping to detonate what they call a "money bomb," the supporters started fundraising at midnight Saturday and have already raised $2 million as of about 10:30 a.m. today, more than at this point on Nov. 5, according to figures they posted online. They hope to collect a total of $10 million by midnight Sunday.

Of note, Ron Paul's fourth quarter total has exceeded $15M (his goal was $12M).

As readers of this space will recall, I caught up with Paul at the YouTube/CNN Debate and asked him about the "Money Bomb" and Paul told us this day would be coming soon.

Paul predicted that this "money bomb" would be bigger and better then the first. It appears that it's on track to do just that.

[Cross-posted from TechRepublican.]

Fred Thompson versus Floating Text and Conga Drums

2007-12-07T10:36:58-05:00

One of the oddest moments of the YouTube CNN debate was when Fred Thompson had his opportunity to air this 30-second spot:

Odd because this was the first and only time a candidate - Republican or Democrat - had used their 30-second opportunity to take a swing at their opponents.

In an interview posted today by John Hawkins at Right Wing News, Fred Thompson's campaign manager, Bill Lacy, discusses their YouTube debate commercial strategy.

Now, tell us a little bit about the decision to go negative with Fred's ad in the debate. That was a bold choice. Why did you decide to do that instead of going with a positive Thompson ad?

First of all, people in the mainstream media would never buy this, but I find bloggers, in this respect, are more subtle sometimes...

Are you getting ready to say that it's not really a negative ad because...

That's exactly what I'm getting ready to say.

(Laughing) That's true.

I'm gonna say that if they said in the past and they said it on tape...it's not negative. We're just literally taking something they've said and they've done (and putting it out there). I just don't personally view that as being negative.

You're right. ...Technically, it's not negative...but, why you decide to go with an ad to push the other candidates down instead of pushing Fred up?

I think the idea was to start to get people to think about, in this case, ...the two governors, their past records, and what they've done, and to understand that one of Fred's big advantages is that he's a consistent conservative, that everybody in the race has been in different positions in the past.

...The other piece of it was that we wanted to try to get some people to go take a look at the two minute version of it on our website, which I think is a very strong piece that I think completes the trilogy by adding mayor Giuliani and a couple of his comments and then finishes with a strong, very positive 30 seconds on Fred. We thought that was more likely to catch people's attention and drive them to the website...

Well, you know it worked. I don't even remember what any of the other ads were at this point. Yours did stick out at least.

It did get some attention.

Looking back on the video, I would argue that it was one of the largest missed opportunities of the campaign. After all, 4.5 million viewers were tuned in and paying attention. This would have been a great time to get the momentum shifting back in Fred's direction.

Let me explain...

The reason this video missed its mark was not because it pulled down unsavory YouTube clips of Fred's opponents -- that is fair game, a smart use of the medium, and was pretty darn clever. It effectively put those opponents on defense with their own words which they had to try and explain. Bravo. Snaps. But the video did not put Fred on offense.

The reason it failed to make any real impact was because Fred had no starring role.

Instead of relying on their best (only?) asset - Fred Thompson - they relied on floating text and conga drums to drive their message that he is the only conservative in the race.

Those words likely poll well, but I was sitting in the audience and I could hardly read what the words said on the 25-foot screen in front of me. 4.5 million viewers tuned in - I doubt I was alone.

Look, if you need a sale, who on that stage is a better salesman than Fred Thompson?

Instead, I would have argued my case to Bill Lacy and the highly-paid media consultant that Fred needed to remind folks why they started liking him in the first place. It wasn't a flashy piece of direct mail or a phone call.

Quite simply, it was this video and a belief that Fred was a different kind of politician:

Yup, I would have asked Fred to sit in that chair again, turn around to the camera with a cigar in hand and say that he was looking up some of his opponents on YouTube to prepare for the debate, and then literally show him watching the unsavory clips on YouTube. After the clips, Fred could have simply cocked his head with a "huh?" expression, told viewers to look at YouTube themselves for his opponents names, and then asked people to go to his website to see why he's the only consistent conservative in the race.

That would have put the ball squarely in Fred's court and would have shined a brighter light on several YouTube clips that millions of Americans have never seen.

The Fred Thompson recipe for YouTube success calls for one-part charisma, one-part Hollywood, two-parts red meat conservative rhetoric, and a dash of comedy relief.

At one point, we believed. Remember?

YouTube Responds To CNN Blowback, Asks For Feedback

2007-12-01T14:25:10-05:00

YouTube News and Politics Editor, Steve Grove, wraps-up the Republican YouTube/CNN Debate with a YouTube video:

Of note, Steve says the following at the tail-end of the video which we can assume is a direct response to the blowback CNN is getting for its liberal bias:

Well there has been a lot of commentary there about which questions CNN chose for the debate and the format that we used, and as we move forward with developing debates and other opportunities like this for you to connect directly with those running for office your feedback is really important to us. So post a video response or a comment to this video and let us know what you think.

Make sure you weigh in. CNN has some serious explaining to do.

An Assortment of Responses from the YouTube CNN Debate

2007-11-30T17:57:03-05:00

After the YouTube-CNN Debate, I spent some time in the "Spin Room" talking with folks about their thoughts on the Republican debate. (I did the same thing at the Democratic YouTube debate earlier this year.)

Below, find short vlogs from Ron Paul, Duncan Hunter, Patrick Ruffini, Robert Bluey, Mary Katharine Ham, James Kotecki, Jose Antonio Vargas, Meghan McCain, Charlie Smith, and, wait for it... Chuck Norris.

Ready.
Set.
Go.

First out of the gate, I asked Ron Paul about the "Money Bomb" on November 5 where he raised $4.38M in 24 hours from his supporters. Further, it sounds like another "Money Bomb" is scheduled for December 16. Video:

Meghan McCain of McCainBloggette. I first blogged about the launch of Meghan's group blog back in October. Video:

Congressman Duncan Hunter commits to a YouTube election for the General Election if he's our respective nominee:

Mary Katharine Ham of Townhall.com. Video:

Patrick Ruffini reacts. Video:

Jose "Above-the-Fold" Antonio Vargas of the Washington Post reacts:

Robert Bluey weighs in and notes very few questions on health care. Video:

James Kotecki of the Politico.com weighs in. Video:

Charlie Smith, National Chairman of the College Republicans, weighs in:

Last, but certainly not least, Chuck Norris:

(Sorry about the camera angle. I was looking at Chuck and avoiding his jabs to my stomach -- seriously. If you don't believe me, watch Patrick Ruffini's video from a different angle which shows the kidney blows.)

I'm crossing my fingers that I'll have another round of videos for you after the YouTube debate for the General Election (sans CNN, of course).

(Crossed with a smile at TechRepublican)

Rudy Giuliani Launches "Team Rudy" Social Network

2007-11-29T18:51:28-05:00

Republican Presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani will announce later tonight the launch of their social networking platform, "Team Rudy," which you can access now at my.joinrudy2008.com.

An excerpt from the queued email:

Team Rudy is an online volunteer network for Rudy where you can create a profile and earn points by signing up your friends, donating online, writing letters to the editor and volunteering at your local Rudy headquarters.

With much appreciation, I got a sneak-peek at the platform earlier today from the campaign.

Here's a screen cap of my profile:

My thoughts...

* Easy to navigate and has a familiar feel that social network users are becoming increasingly comfortable with.

* The point system for volunteers to rack up for performing volunteer operations, though not "new" by any means, is excellent and will encourage Rudy's hardcore supporters to get even more active. Given Rudy's love of baseball, supporters will be ranked accordingly:
- Rookie Team: At Sign-Up
- Farm Team: 50 Impact Points
- Double-A Team: 150 Impact Points
- Triple-A Team: 500 Impact Points
- Major League: 1,000 Impact Points
- Starter: 2,500 Impact Points
- Veteran: 5,000 Impact Points
- Hall of Fame: 10,000 Impact Points

* The platform will give the official volunteer campaign effort the control (and user data) they need to be able to assign directives where and when they need it, ensuring that important grassroots activities are accounted for and completed.

Regarding Team Rudy, it's a Java application based on Spring and Hibernate running on JBoss. And it's neat.

(Cross-posted with a smile at TechRepublican)

Fred Thompson shares the spotlight...with you. [UPDATE]

2007-11-09T17:19:22-05:00

A note from Fred Thompson's modern media guru, Sean Hackbarth, alerts us to their latest UGC campaign, Be A Star.

From Sean's note explaining the program:

Fred is a bona fide star. But he's not the only star on this campaign. Each one of you is a star who believes a consistent conservative like Fred needs to be elected in 2008. In the age of YouTube anyone has the power to make a video, get people to watch it, and become a star.

We need some of your star power to spread the word about why Fred will make a great, conservative President. That's why we've launched Be a Star. Make a video telling America why you support Fred Thompson for President. Talk about how he wants to keep America strong, fight Islamist fascism, secure our borders, keep taxes low, and reform government. Tell America why Fred is a good man and a great, conservative leader. Tell everyone why they should donate to the Fred Thompson campaign.

Upload your videos. We will pick out our favorites and put them on Fred08.com. Then you can vote for your favorites.

It's easy to tear down other candidates. What we're looking for are positive videos showing why Fred should be the next President of the United States. Mention Fred's character shaped by his life experiences, his quest to end sanctuary cities, and how he has the guts to tackle the impending entitlements crisis.

Be creative. Use animation or props. Be extravagant or be simple. Sometimes a simple video full of sincerity can say as much as one filled with fancy special effects.

The only real restriction, besides telling us why you're for Fred, is your videos should be under 25 MB.

Sounds neat.

UPDATE 8:25 PM: Woops, I should have noted a similar UGC campaign launched by Rudy Giuliani last week, Why Rudy. Rudy's effort even has a nice Google maps mash-up indicating where the supporter lives.

From the site:

Tell us why you support Rudy! Send us pictures, video or text of why you think Rudy should be the next president and how you show your support from the mayor. We want to see where you’re displaying your Rudy signs, bumper stickers or gear.

In my book, the more UGC the better.

"Fred File" makes memeorandum Leaderboard

2007-10-25T16:35:55-04:00

As Patrick Ruffini blogged yesterday, the memeorandum Leaderboard is now up and running.

What is the memeorandum Leaderboard? Pulled straight from the source:

The memeorandum Leaderboard lists the sources most frequently posted to memeorandum.

This particular version corresponds to the 30-day period ending October 25, 2007.

Sources are ranked by Presence, the percentage of headline space a source occupies over the 30-day period. "Discussion" links are not taken in to consideration here — only full headlines are counted.

In other words, when they post a blog entry, other bloggers read, link, and discuss the content of that post.

Of interest, the only Presidential candidate to make the LB's top 100 is Fred Thompson's blog, the Fred File. In fact, the Fred File is the only "candidate blog" to make the list.

Most of the credit clearly falls to Fred Thompson, the candidate, whose late entry to the race sparked tremendous interest on the Right (and Left) which likely contributed to this ranking.

But the team behind the Fred File, including blog veterans Sean Hackbarth who is on the official side of the campaign, and both Jon Henke and William Beutler, of the firm New Media Strategies, also deserve a tip-of-the-hat.

Regarding the Fred File's placement on the LB, NMS' William Beutler said, "Of all the presidential campaigns, this one is doing the best job not just in using its campaign blog effectively, but also working with the larger conservative blogosphere, as an important element of the campaign."

It'll be interesting to see how current events and candidate gaffes or cheers help influence this latest metric over time.

Mitt Romney to record TechCrunch Podcast

2007-10-22T18:13:05-04:00

Michael Arrington of TechCrunch, perhaps the most influential tech blogger, plans to host a tech-focused podcast interview with Governor Mitt Romney (Slatecard Profile) later this week:

Technology is becoming more and more a part of mainstream life. But the journalists who have access to the 2008 presidential candidates usually aren’t prepared to talk tech, and so the candidates’ positions on digital issues are often left unexplored. We want to change that, and have been reaching out to the presidential candidates to talk one-on-one with us about the issues that are important to our readers.

Governor Mitt Romney, a Republican candidate for president, was the first to respond, and we will be recording a podcast discussion with him in the next week. What we talk about on that podcast is largely up to TechCrunch readers.

Snaps to Mitt for being first to take on the challenge and props to Arrington for playing a role in this important election.

So how can you get involved?

Arrington, in true Web 2.0 fashion, is asking his community what questions they want Mitt to answer:

We’re finalizing the high level questions we’ll be asking Governor Romney (and other candidates in the future). Please let us know in the comments what tech-related issues are important to you; what would you ask if you had the chance? Issues to think about:

* the role of technology in education - what role should government and technology companies have
* the growing digital divide in the U.S. and around the world
* immigration and visa issues
* the role of government in protecting personal privacy online
* Mobile spectrum allocations and ground rules
* How should the U.S. engage with China: technology, human rights and censorship issues
* the role of free markets; helping U.S. technology companies compete worldwide Net neutrality
* Intellectual property issues - copyright, patent and trademark policies

So what question do I hope Mitt answers? I'd prefer to find out where Mitt Romney is on Net Neutrality.

In case his staff needs some help with the issue, here's two conservative arguments both FOR and AGAINST the issue:

Conservative Argument FOR Net Neutrality

Conservative Argument AGAINST Net Neutrality

What question would you like to see Mitt answer? Make sure you let Arrington know with a comment on his post.

[Cross-posted with a smile from TechRepublican]