If It Were Easy, Everybody Would Do It
“If you look at the difference between a successful Internet campaign and an unsuccessful
one, success is neither a function of great technology, nor a larger staff, nor
a unique set of programming skills. Success lies in the campaign’s commitment to
communicate with its audience in an inspiring way and to articulate an agenda that
matters to the audience.”
This statement from The Political Consultant’s Online Fundraising Primer has a great point – stay focused on the message. I agree, but it's easier said than done.
I think the best way to do this is for the online campaign to collect and augment the activities of the offline campaign. In terms of an audience, the website is a place for the undecided voters to get more information and for the die-hards to reinforce what they already believe. It’s also headquarters for the volunteers.
However, we're dealing with a technical medium, where you need programmers and expensive servers and secure pages to allow for donations. I guess if it were easy, everybody would have a great site. Do you err on the side of inspiration or technical competence?
1 Comments:
First of all, I can't believe you have a link to Ann Coulter on your site, I should leave right now.
Anyway, I agree completely that an online campaign should be an augmentation of the offline. Every message being thrown out in speeches and TV appearances should be hammered home online.
As to whether or not you should err on the side of inspiration or competence, I would say competence. If the online campaign is an augmentation of the offline, you already have a lot of the message strategy worked out. While design is VERY important, so is an electronic donation system that is secure, and a volunteer form that insures volunteer information is recorded and available for follow-up contact. To me, if I were erring on the side of caution, I would err on the side of competence.
Post a Comment
<< Home