techPresident - Patti Solis doyle - Comments

power of a network

conservstudent — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 20:54:04 -0500

The power of a network will far surpass that of a simple email list... always. The thing you don't get with an email list is investment. With a social network, people will invest themselves in it, nobody cares about an email list.

The candidates don't even need to build a social network, they can just use existing ones. Social networks are the future.

***
http://republican.konnects.com

network building isn't that hard

Dan Ancona — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 19:50:52 -0500

You just have to invest in the right toolset up front. Obama did exactly that; I can't understand the conventional wisdom saying that Ron Paul is the only people-powered candidate this cycle. Obama's just the first people-powered candidate to have a network that's getting big enough that it's starting to maybe (BIG maybe actually) translate into actual votes. It's going to be an interesting 3 1/2 weeks.

Yes and #2...

gibson_stevens — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 08:33:25 -0500

The network is part of the story, but the conversation is another. Lists of people aren't enough. Homegrown networks aren't enough either. Candidates must engage in the conversation to cut through and grab attention. Think about what interaction / communication / persuasion is outside the reach of the campaign? Certainly more than what is inside...

More of my musings...

Yes, and

Micah L. Sifry — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:57:25 -0500

Colin--

Yes, it's big network and big list. Oh, and by the way, a strong message and a strong messenger.

I just don't see much in the way of Clinton's organizing network, other than the pre-Internet networks she and Bill have, plus the unions. Neither of which reach young people.

Micah

How many people are on Obama's list?

Colin Delany — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:51:24 -0500

Micah--

Without know how big Barack's email list is, drawing a conclusion this strong is suspect -- you can't separate out your variables. At worst, I bet he doesn't have many fewer list members than Hillary does, and if he has 500,000 donors (essentially all of whom end up on his list), he's likely to have MORE people on his email list than she does. If you have hard numbers about email subscribers from his campaign, I'd like to see them.

Basically, I think you're drawing a misleading distinction -- the best thing is to have both a big list AND a big network. It isn't network vs. top-down, it's network AND top-down -- just as a campaign has both grassroots activists AND television commercials. Without encouragement from the top (the people who provided the networking tools in the first place), it's hard for a candidate-support network to form and thrive (if it were easy, we'd have lot of Ron Paul/Howard Dean candidates running around, and we don't). For example, a good question to ask is how many started those blogs and those fundraising campaigns because they received an email encouraging them to do so.

Colin Delany
e.politics
http://www.epolitics.com

All fair points, but

Micah L. Sifry — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:37:20 -0500

Luigi--

Yes, lists look easier to build than networks. But my point was to try to illustrate something about how the different approaches Clinton and Obama have taken to internet-based organizing are now playing out.

Micah

The graphic

Luigi Montanez — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:19:34 -0500

Oh also, I know Zephyr has a really good graphic similar to the one above, but this one shows that in a network, the center can be removed (the P), but communication is still possible among the C's.

To be fair to the Clinton campaign

Luigi Montanez — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:12:44 -0500

The Clinton campaign also has an Action Center, which has many of the same features as My.BarackObama.com.

I think it comes down to ROI. Building a network is much more resource intensive than building a list. Also, a list is a concrete asset with real value, that can be swapped or even (gasp!) sold. A network cannot.

Joining a network is a tougher "ask". Filling in your email address and zip code on a splash page is one thing. Filling in your name and providing a password to create an account is another. Joining a list is anonymous to everyone but the campaign, joining a network makes you findable to anyone else on the network.

Being a national Presidential campaign is a huge soapbox to have, something smaller campaigns and most advocacy orgs can't benefit from. I doubt most activists on My.BarackObama.com would join up to a similar network set up by a Senate campaign or a non-profit, even if they supported those causes just as much.