Republicans Tech Savvy or Just Paranoid

Fri. Feb. 20, 01:29pm EST

I have to say, I do think times are changing for the Republicans. But being from the technology side with a strong interest in politics and building our non-partisan platform here at politics4all.com, I have watched the parties involvement over the years online. Let's recognize that Obama's team has a proven record and everyone else still has a long way to go.

In the time that I have been following and researching the online behaviors of political parties, I have noticed some key points with the GOP that I think need to be focused on; one of these is openness. It seems like everywhere I go, I see closed and membership-only groups from a national to a local level. If you are going to appeal to the masses, you need to be transparent and open yourself up to all of the praise and the criticism that comes with it. Don't worry about the "trolls" that come a long; they might be putting a check and balance on the situation. You have to appeal to the masses and not just the registered party members. Recognize that it's also going to be an online and offline movement that's going to create a strong position.

Here is a good example of the lack of openness you will see with the GOP. I wanted to post a comment on the RedState.com site, which is the leading blog for right of center online activists. It was established in May of 2004 by Ben Domenech, Mike Krempasky, and Josh Trevino, and has played an important role in the right's fight online against the left. I went to comment on a blog post December 30th called Rebuild the Party: The Technology. It took me registering for an account and waiting 5 days for approval before I could start commenting and posting. By then the conversation was well over on the blog post and I ended up being the last comment to date. This makes it very hard for openness and collaboration to happen. As I return to the site today to see if there were other comments after mine, I realized that it was going to be hard to find because the site does not have a search feature. I even logged in to see if I was missing something.

I don't know if being tech savvy is the problem or worried about the openness that it brings. Whichever, it will be nice not to have these barriers anymore.

Comments

Joshua Boulée Fri. Feb. 20, 08:14pm EST#1

I can see them wanting to distinguish between members and outsiders in the comments, and don't think that is a bad idea. Not to allow outside comments at all is their prerogative, but not very forward-thinking, IMHO.

Jenci Spradlin Fri. Feb. 20, 09:03pm EST#2

You brought up some good points here Tom. I do see a fear of "trolls" and having closed channels of information distribution - I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing; however, the GOP is not in a position to restrict access to its message at this point since it is in the "underdog" position.

Meghan McCain made some points to the same effect in a piece that appeared on The Daily Beast entitled "Why Republican's Don't Get the Internet." Rob Kubasko, a Republican strategist interviewed in the piece made a great statement saying, "Technology does not drive success. Message (especially a well crafted one) drives success." Meghan adds, "We live in an era where most individuals my age get their political news from The Daily Show and SNL's Weekend Update. I know this aggravates the old school political operatives to no end, but it's true. The Obama administration understands that my generation spends most of its day on a laptop or a BlackBerry, and that using the web is easy way to communicate their ideas to their constituents. Making a website, Facebook group, or YouTube video entertaining and enticing is where grassroots campaigning begins." She ends by saying, "Until the Republican party joins the twenty-first century and learns how to use the Internet, its members will keep getting older and the youth of America will just keep logging on to the other side."

The problem is that the GOP isn't looking at how the vast majority of people desire to have that message delivered: not in some closed off partisan way, but in a manner that is broader and more compelling and open. It doesn't mean that we can get into heated debates about our own core values when we're there, but just like real life, we meet each other on the street as black and white; rich and poor; Democrat, Independent, and Republican alike - not segmented off and segregated into little groups. I think until we understand how to navigate among each other, how to meet each other on the street, to engage one another, to debate one another, to deal with one another even when we disagree, will we not win the war of ideas.

When we do this, we can learn our stories and not shove statistics and charts down the throats of our friends and neighbors. There is a place for that sort of thing, sure, but just think about how people like myself and Prince and Gillian and David and Joshua and others have bonded on this site and debated and argued (and yet still been civil.) THAT is real life. I think that will ring truer with the people (especially with young people) than expecting a broad swath of people to join a smaller activist group. There is a place and a need for those sorts of sites...but that isn't going to draw the masses.

Jenci Spradlin Fri. Feb. 20, 09:32pm EST#3

I will also add that there is a large group of young (and not-so-young) people who are very passionate about the GOP and interested in technology and communications who do "get it" and I don't want to discount their efforts in the least. It seems like those people aren't highlighted in articles about technology, or a small minority of those who have played a role in doing something are interviewed, leaving a huge number of people's voices left out. I am also involved in the GOP Technology Summit http://goptechsummit.ning.com/ that was put together after a great event that Chairman Michael Steel and Saul Anuzis put together last Friday.

A problem I do see in all of this still is that a lot of people on the street are not comfortable with the GOP brand ~ and even those that are want to have their own identity separate from that brand. So when you participate in a group like the one above, you have to create your profile on Ning (that is not transferable to other Ning groups) and you dont have much of a separate identity apart from that group. Whereas on Politics4all, you are free to join ANY group and STILL maintain your separate identity and blog and presence that isn't affiliated with that group....which allows you to participate, but keep an arms length distance from the group if for whatever reason that group were to take a turn in a direction that you weren't comfortable with.

Dawne Frances Shand Sat. Feb. 21, 01:23pm EST#4

Well observed!

PBCliberal Sun. Feb. 22, 08:16pm EST#5

There is a tech lag. If you hang around dKos for a while, you'll see the snide comments when a kossack gets wind of RedState trying to find competent technical help, or when the RS site has major problems. There's plenty of IT-savvy folks around dKos (though we too have our share of internet challenged).

Whenever there's an issue with an IT angle, or where good net research provides some background, there's a race at dKos to see who can get the goods on it posted first. I don't go to RS much, but I've seen some tech-stupidity on RS that would be called out at dKos at the speed of light.

Its also one reason that AM radio does far better with right wing talk than left wing talk. The lefties are listening to the podcasts and the Internet streams while the rights are playing with the cat's whiskers on their crystal sets.

Philip Bryan Mon. Feb. 23, 03:12pm EST#6

PBCliberal - i'd put the number of daily listeners of conservative talk radio up against any and all liberal podcasts or internet streams or webinars or whatever else you will throw out there...the fact of the matter is that it is not the medium that is delivering the message, it is the message itself - and that is why liberal radio does not make it. If what you say were true, then there would be zero talk of bringing the fairness doctrine back - you wouldn't need it right? you got your podcasts and internet streams - and i hate cats, much less their whiskers - so you might want to leave your labels back on the DKos message board, that way everyone will agree with you.

Joe Spears Mon. Feb. 23, 07:56pm EST#7

The interwebs are less than a friendly place for conservatives (though this sight has quite a few).

Message is the key, not the medium. I think the GOP focus on the medium of the message is losing site of the ball. For instance talk radio topics are discussed for hours, your typical internet head gets his message in a "twitters" which I do not think offers the the depth needed to do many of our top problems justice.

I remember the early days of the interwebs, advertisers and companies alike thought that advertising on the internet alone was going to work at selling goods. They soon learned that information on the internet is not a primary way to sell a product, but rather a an excellent secondary source to deliver information for those who are interested. Take TV ads these days, almost always have a url at the end of the ad, you use the "flash" off the 30 second sell to get them interested, use the internet to give them your full spiel.

Twitter in my minds eye is the 30 second sell, rather than becoming engrossed in what becomes semi-coherent jabber at times, I would use it to post clever articulate one-liners with a link to the more "meat".

What do I think about the internet and its liberalism? Dunno, but it is a hard place for a conservative too make headway, just look at how fast dKos is all over red state for a perceived failure, yet very forgiving of many of the self inflicted wounds of the blue states.

Joshua Boulée Mon. Feb. 23, 10:21pm EST#8

I think another reason talk radio is such a good fit with conservatives is that a lot of conservatives are people who work day jobs in settings where listening to an internet stream is not really an option. I, for example, work in a machine shop, and my radio headphones double as hearing protection. I rigged up a way to get satelite radio in the shop, and tried (I mean, really tried) to listen to the leftie channels, and they were so emotion based and reason-lacking I couldn't take it and went back to the stations where arguments are actually supported by facts, allowing me to clearly see when someone is spinning. When the conversation is based on fact and logic it is easy to follow when in a setting where you don't necessarily hear every single work... the left radio programs are so rooted in emotion and whims they twist and turn all over the place and are impossible to follow with only one ear while working.

Jenci Spradlin Tue. Feb. 24, 12:48pm EST#9

I hear what you are saying Joe about talk radio being a longer format vs. 140 character tweet; however, I think we continue to lose touch with reality if we "cling" to the notion that the 30-second-sound-bite-population is going to DESIRE to receive their information in that format. Whether it is prudent to learn about conservatism 140 characters at a time or not is pointless to argue ~ if the people at this point in time in 2009 are WANTING to get their information in that manner then it is the responsibility of the party and of the people who want to share that message to deliver it in that RELEVANT way.

The GOP is consistently labeled as being "out of touch" and we can debate whether that is accurate in terms of our definition of what is REAL and TRUE but in terms of conveying the message to the people (whether you LIKE it or not) I would say it is and continues to be SPOT ON. I just dont see that we are learning that lesson (despite massive failures at the polls). I think the younger generations see that, but we are being marginalized and told that it is not a relevant conversation and/or that we're getting away from "core principles." I don't know what that has to do with simply delivering the message in a way that resonates with the masses.

Joe Spears Tue. Feb. 24, 03:21pm EST#10

I never said that we don’t use the new formats, nor do I say we abandon Talk Radio. What I am saying “Tweets” are not real good at conveying complex information (for my liking). I have nothing against the GOP using the tech, heck I use the interwebs all the time and gain a lot if useful information that way.

What I am talking about if substance, using tweets for the sake of using tweets goes noplace. I mean do we really care if a congressman tells he just got out of the movies and he liked “Gran Torino” (great movie by the way)? Or what he had for dinner? Sure it makes him more likeable and human. I would love to see messages like “I just got out of committee and something good is coming our way, go to my blog post detailing how this is going to affect you.” With a link to the blog post in there.

I mean no insult, but I am not arguing whether we are out of touch or not, we have vast issues in this arena not just the latest buzz word-word tech. Take (sorry to call the AL-GOP out like this) ALGOP.com is a cybersquater saying hate filled things about conservatives, while the state site is actually ALGOP.org. These are the little things, for a mere $10 dollars a year this man can stick to every conservative in Alabama. Why not take the site from him; he has clearly registered in bad faith in violation of ICANN rules. I would even wager to bet the GOP has yet to consider what to do about gTLDs that are coming, for the layman that is the internet will soon have vanity top level domains (the .com at the end of the URL), that is right for a hefty sum of money some can register .GOP or .RNC gTLD probably before Republicans even realize it.

I am not sure where you get the idea that I want us to stay in AM-Radio-Land, far from it.

Philip Bryan Tue. Feb. 24, 04:02pm EST#11

well Joe, thanks for noting that. While i like the advancements we are making with our own website and other aspects of our overall "tech plan," this is one thing that i have to admit being a novice on...that being the ICANN rules, so i appreciate you pointing that out. Our attorneys will hopefully get that done for me ASAP - and you will never insult me when offering useful info, that's the beauty of sites like this! - adios people, off to reclaim ALGOP.com...

david Tue. Feb. 24, 04:18pm EST#12

I think you will have a hard time with that Phillip, as the .com site is not really impersonating or trying to deceive folks that it is the gop site. In fact that is clearly stated and the site clearly gives a link to the algop.org site. I don't agree with purposely deceiving people, and unfortunately I think you'll have a difficult time with this one (remember whitehouse.com or whitehouse.org?) If ICANN is being better enforced, then I'm all for it.

Nevertheless, I commend you on the real algop.org site. It has come a long way (and yes, I do check it out frequently).

david Tue. Feb. 24, 04:20pm EST#13

btw, your link to Politics4all is wrong and leads to a dead page.

Philip Bryan Tue. Feb. 24, 04:52pm EST#14

thanks, i think the link on the homepage should be fine - i found in the links section where i needed to make an adjustment, just did that so all should be well with that link. What i love about this site is that i can make revisions in seconds

Joe Spears Tue. Feb. 24, 05:59pm EST#15

Deception and bad faith are a bit different, see the "People Eating Tasty Animals" case. He made no representation that he was PETA, and he lost the fight, I would argue that ALGOP falls under same rule.

david Tue. Feb. 24, 06:48pm EST#16

That case was based on Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act that only applies, I believe, to proper names or trademarks. So if ALGOP is trademarked, then it should be easy, if not it may be tougher. Any way, I wish Phillip good luck.

Joe Spears Tue. Feb. 24, 08:25pm EST#17

Well, I wish him luck too. But hopefully Philip you go about even handily at first, last thing you want to to be the evil GOPer on the interwebs, you above all people realize we are not cut any slack.

Joe Spears Wed. Feb. 25, 10:15pm EST#18

On a side note, I ran across this marketing boo writeup.

While it is not dealing with political matter it is dealing marketing and adoption of new tech, specifically software, which is all the Web really is.

* The Early Adopters don't need much convincing. Some of them will try your product just because it's new. They don't wait for anybody else's endorsement. They are leaders who prefer to be on the bleeding edge of technology.

* The Pragmatists will only buy your product when they see other Pragmatists doing it. If this sounds like a chicken-and-egg paradox, it is. We'll talk more about this problem below.

* The Conservatives will buy your product only after they see that the Pragmatists are happy with it.

* There is no way to predict the behavior of the Laggards. They may never buy your product. You can safely ignore them. If your product gets to the point where you are selling to the Laggards, you will no longer be in charge of marketing at your company. Your company has become quite successful. You are semi-retired. You have hired a marketing VP and assigned him ridiculous and unattainable goals just so you can watch him squirm.

Add comment

« Return to My Blog

Campaign Trail

Groups

Bill Tracker

Thomas Cook

Independent – Georgia