2008 will be the social media election

We've been saying for awhile that the era of counting eyeballs is over thanks to the power of social media to generate engagement as opposed to simple exposure, and we're now seeing the proof of that in the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary. Essentially the message was, money may buy eyeballs but authenticity buys votes.
In the interest of transparency, Facebook is a client, and I'm an Obama supporter, but having talked to numerous people and observed the crowds and attended the debate last night, I really believe that this will be the the social media election. We suspected, looking at the YouTube and Facebook numbers, that people, particularly young people, were more engaged than in any previous election. Granted, there's a big difference between 198,749 or 61% of Facebook supporters and 61% of the vote, but if the volunteer turnout is any indication, the difference is a lot smaller than you think.
The old NH tradition of people talking to their neighbors over coffee to convince them to support a candidate is now happening more and more on email, on Facebook and in the blogosphere. The best example is a response to Clinton's "Swift-boat" style negative ad characterizing Obama as soft on reproductive rights.
One of the local Planned Parenthood board members wrote an eloquent  response that began:

"Yesterday I received the attached mailing from Hillary Clinton.  I was appalled to see Senator Clinton resort to a "Swift Boat" attack on Barack Obama. As a  member of the reproductive rights community in NH, I am insulted by the misuse of information, and would have imagined that Senator Clinton would have had many positive things to say about her own record without resorting to this type of negative campaigning.  Obama cast these votes as part of a strategy employed by pro-choice leaders in Illinois.  That's why so many top pro-choice leaders were outraged by the attack and immediately defended Obama's record of leadership on this important issue. "

Ten years ago that response would have been heard by a small circle of friends, and would never have reached most of the voters before the primary. Today, I received 5 copies of it via email, and thousands  more people will see it in this blog and other blogs. I have  posted it to my Facebook page and will  Twitter about it momentarily. That's the impact that social media is having and with luck, truth will win in the end.
In another implication of impact of social media is the growing import of New Hampshire in the national political process, not just because we're the first to vote, but because now, the intimate meetings that we get to have with the candidates can be shared with friends across the country via YouTube. It used to be that if there was an event at my house, only the 100 people who came would hear the candidates remarks. Now I can upload the video and anyone anywhere can hear the responses and share in that intimate experience. In fact, far more people have watched videos of candidates in New Hampshire than live in the Granite State. Kind of defeats the "New Hampshire is too small to count"  argument, doesn't it?
What this means for the current crop of candidates is that the old tried and true strategies no longer work.  Putting out promotional pieces that are blatantly false will only damage the person who sent them. Claiming to be for "change" when two weeks ago you were running on the fact that what you did 20 years ago was great will not build trust or credibility. But most of all, I believe, is that  social media has the power to  bridge the divisive party politics of old and bring people or all walks of life and parties and ethnicities around common interests. The first step in this direction was the Facebook/ABC News debate last night. There were all the candidates, republican, democrat and Ron Paul, all on the stage, shaking hands, and for one brief wonderful moment, not a single barb, jab or jibe was thrown. It was truly an historic moment. Thank you to Facebook and ABC and WMUR for that one brief moment of peace in my lifetime.   

 

reprodu

Comments

[Adam Zand]

Love to get you involved in http://someelection08.ning.com

As always, you were a step ahead of me and GregPC.

Cheers, vote, Adam

[KD Paine]

kathleen, good question, that's why we'll be correlating the data as soon as the election is over to see if there is a connection. My guess is that people under 40 are coming out big time for Obama, and that's where all the chatter and support is. I'd say yes, it is having an impact.

[Kathleen]

Interesting perspective given what you are experiencing first hand in NH. My biggest question about social media "really" having an impact on the election is this: what percentage of those who will actually cast a ballot are monitoring and/or participating in social media outlets? The skeptic in me thinks not enough to make a real difference, at least on the scale of a general election...

[KD Paine]

ooh, I really like that idea. there should be a place on the ballot for "anybody but" or "I'll move to ___ if xx gets elected.

[Jason Falls]

Great post Katie. I just thought while reading it, though, that if this is going to truly be a social media election, we should be able to not only vote for our favorite candidate, but also vote ones we don't like down. (That'd make things interesting, don't you think?)