State of the Union Multimedia

January 29, 2011

The State of the Union address is always an exciting time for political junkies.  The proliferation of technology has continuously changed the address and created ample opportunities for the President’s supporters and opponents to express their opinions.  No longer do Members of Congress have to file into Statutory Hall in the hopes of garnering a 15 second sound byte on the national news, although many still do.  Politicians can now take command of their message and ensure it reaches their core audience.

Instead of delving into the policies presented in the speech, which many pundits already have, we are going to examine the ways in which Members of Congress leveraged the Web to ensure their voices were heard during the important occasion.

Following the Congressional Twitter stream on www.c-span.org, two Representatives stood out as the most active during the speech.  Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA) was the most outspoken critic of the President’s address.  It was revealed on national news the next day that the Congressman watched the address from his office instead of the House floor.  During the speech he presented many critiques such as “Obama’s policies kill free-enterprise.” Ultimately, the Congressman’s efforts were rewarded as national news programs, such as Hardball with Chris Matthews, publicized Broun’s activities, giving the Georgia Representative more publicity than virtually all of his colleagues.

Congressman Keith Ellison (DFL-MN) was the most prolific Democratic Twitter user during the speech.  The third term Congressman expressed elation and consternation at many of the President’s policy positions.  The Congressman now has nearly 10,000 Twitter followers, a very strong number for a Representative.  Organizing for America also tweeted live during the speech, repeating many of the President’s key phrases and policy positions.

After the speech concluded, many Members expressed their initial reactions via social media.  Some Congressman took it a step further, delivering their initial remarks with video.  While Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI) was delivering the official Republican response to the State of the Union, leading House GOP members including Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) responded to supporter questions received via Twitter on House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s YouTube page.  In addition, Congressman Cliff Stearns (R-FL) streamed his response live via UStream.

The White House joined in on the most wired State of the Union address in history.  WhiteHouse.gov streamed the address live and had policy advisors answer questions from Americans following the President’s speech.  In addition, the website had a seating chart identifying who was sitting with the First Lady.

Technology’s affect on the State of the Union is truly remarkable.  The President even joked, as he was walking toward the podium, that the address had already been leaked for hours and there was no purpose for him to read it.  Technology will play an even greater role in the years to come.  More people will watch the speech leveraging a mobile device and Members of Congress will become more creative in expressing their views.

Lastly, as a side note, will a staffer please buy Governor Mitch Daniels (R-IN) a DVR or Tivo.  This is 2011, the technology is available to watch two things at once.

 


Moving from Social Media 1.0 to 2.0

January 25, 2011

We have seemingly reached the point where social media is accepted in all crevices of Capitol Hill.  A vast majority of members from both parties have twitter and/or Facebook pages, and are updating them regularly with posts highlighting legislative achievements and local news appearances.  So now what?

While a majority of politicians have social media pages, they are still not leveraging their full capabilities.  It is not enough to tweet and post on Facebook, the true power in social media is its ability to inspire action.  Matt Lira, new media director for House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, said in a recent Politico article that social media’s “real potential lies in organizing government itself and how it functions.”[1]

There is no formal definition of social media 1.0 and 2.0, but here is my vision.  Social media 1.0 is what you currently see coming from most Member offices.  It involves basic posting on Facebook and Twitter and floor speech recordings on YouTube.  Its goal is to supplement traditional media coverage and draw attention to a Member’s legislative achievements.

Social media 2.0 is a planned and clearly orchestrated attempt to inspire action among its followers.  Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube posts are coordinated to present a central theme and encourage followers to express their feelings through replies or definitive action.  All social media postings are integrated to ensure a consistent message.  In addition, new forms of technology – such as mobile – are leveraged to enhance exposure.

A recent Roll Call article discussing radio’s influence on Congress included a quote from Rachel Maddow noting that “comparatively speaking, messaging on the left is much more ad hoc, much less disciplined and repetitive, and much less wide-reaching.”[2] The fact is Republican social media has been much more coordinated, with many more GOP members leveraging Web channels, as noted in our past article “Enthusiasm or Emphasis?“.  While social media is not the only reason for greater Republican messaging coordination, it is an important one.

Need a lesson on the power of social media 2.0?  Look to private business or entertainment.  Watch television commercials and see how the advertisements are encouraging you to log online or visit a Facebook page for more information.  Congressional communications in the digital age is about salesmanship as much as it is about substance.  And Members of Congress that harness a coordinated message supplemented by next generation social media tactics will be the ones to prevail.



The Power of Youtube

August 22, 2010

Basil Marceaux may not have won the Republican nomination for Governor of Tennessee but he certainly won the hearts and minds of internet users around the country. While established politicians weren’t taking notes of Marceaux’ campaign tactics, the precipitous ascent of his internet campaign videos should serve notice of the power of the Web and Youtube heading into 2010.

Outrageous sells on the internet. While most political ads may only receive thousands or only hundreds of views – with many Member’s floor speeches lucky to get out of the double-digits – an eye-catching, different video may garner millions of views. While campaigns may be hard pressed to tap the power of Susan Boyle’s rise to fame, or surpass Lady Gaga’s Youtube dominance, there are examples of politicians unleashing the potential of Youtube to change a campaign.

Many may remember Carly Fiorina’s “Demon Sheep” February attack advertisement against Tom Campbell, her opponent in the Republican primary for California’s Senate seat. This ad garnered more than 300,000 views and launched Fiorina into the national spotlight.

While Ned Lamont recently lost the Democratic nomination for Governor of Connecticut, this campaign ad, with more than 166,000 views, helped the businessman come out of anonymity to defeat Senator Lieberman in the 2006 Democratic Senate primary.

Lastly, while not a campaign ad, Obama’s speech on religion following the Reverend Jeremiah White attacks in 2008 garnered more than six million views. With a runtime of more than 37 minutes, it proves the public will watch any video they deem inspiring, funny or fresh.