Let’s get one thing straight: the Internet is not going to win this presidential election for anybody.
Let’s get one thing straight: the Internet is not going to win this
presidential election for anybody.
Comparisons to the role played by television in 1960 are based on a
complete misunderstanding of that election and the role of media in
politics. Michael Cornfield, research director of the Democracy Online
Project and associate research professor at George Washington
University, says simply: ’The Internet will be about as important as the
phonograph was to the 1960 election - not very. New media don’t decide
presidential elections, presidential elections showcase new media.’
John F. Kennedy won in 1960 because, unlike his rival, Richard Nixon, he
understood the power of TV. JFK wore showbiz makeup (rather than the
’Lazy Shave’ Nixon used to hide his stubble) and he made sure his suit
was a different color from the backdrop so he stood out instead of
blurring into the background (as Nixon did). And even though a candidate
like Steve Forbes has thrown anything from dollars 330,000 to dollars 1
million at his web site, no candidate has yet proved that he understands
the political power of the Net as Kennedy understood TV in 1960.
Not that any candidate can write off a medium that, by the time the
votes are cast, will be in half of the nation’s homes. (And that half
will be the half that is more likely to vote.) As Phil Noble, publisher
of Politics Online, says, ’Jesse Ventura’s campaign staff says that the
Net may have given them a 3-to-5% edge in the Minnesota governor race.
In a tight race, that is a useful margin.’
But Ventura’s very success means the element of surprise has now gone,
and none of the sites for candidates in the White House race demonstrate
a clear lead in their use of the Net. Most are solid, decently organized
sites with a family album, a biography of the candidate, variously
presented policies, some kind of archive and a continuous invitation to
use your credit card.
Survey says
PRWeek set out to judge the presidential candidate’s web sites. We
selected a panel of five judges - Internet and political consultants and
PRWeek’s Washington, DC political marketing journalist - to rate each
site according to seven criteria: ease of use, design, interactivity,
timeliness, content/features, effectiveness and message delivery. The
PRWeek site survey found Bill Bradley’s to be best, followed by Al Gore,
John McCain, Steve Forbes, George W. Bush and Pat Buchanan. (See box for
analysis. Full details on the judges and methodology appear at the end
of this article.)
One of the senior pros in Vice President Al Gore’s e-campaign, who asked
not to be identified, vehemently denied that his candidate’s site is
dull.
’That’s just guilt by association,’ he insists. ’Because people think
Gore is dull - which I know not to be true, having met the guy several
times - it’s easy to say the site is dull. There is lighter content on
there.’ Asked to specify that ’lighter content,’ he said, ’There’s the
kids’ stuff.’
Forbes, Gore and Bradley have all exploited the Net’s power to give the
user access to real in-depth information without perhaps realizing that
people are attracted to the Net because, as Cornfield says, ’You can
leave in a flash if you’re bored.’
But the sites are raising serious money. Noble says that by the time the
race ends, some dollars 20 million will have been raised online. The Net
can reach more voters per buck than, say, direct mail: banner ads, which
yield the same 1-to-1.5% response as direct mail, cost a dime compared
to 30 to 40 cents for snail mail. E-mail solicitations can cost dollars
1 but they have a 10-to-12% response rate.
It’s not just about money, it’s also about volunteers. Robert Arena, who
ran the Robert Dole site in 1996, says, ’We said that 15,000 out of our
45,000 volunteers came from the Net but that’s partly because the
candidate mentioned his site in the first TV debate, and you’ve got to
have that commitment from the candidate.’
Four years later, this commitment is there in terms of campaign
resources.
Cornfield says most of the candidates have now moved beyond simply
uploading their brochures, although a lot of the sites have pages that
look like scanned-in press releases. The sites are usually updated
regularly, although some can seem as if they are their candidates’
answer to CNN - they throw a bit of news up top and the rest is ancient
history. Lynn Reed, who designed the Bradley site, says technology must
be driven by the campaign’s aims.
’The site should be technically good enough to be professional and to
operate smoothly, but the other bells and whistles are only worthwhile
if they advance a strategic goal of the campaign.’ For example,
Bradley’s site does a good job of positioning the candidate as a real
person, not someone who has only been in politics.
Privacy is primary
But for many candidates, this campaign has taught them that Internet
politics are different from land-based politics. Cyberspace puts much
greater emphasis on issues like privacy. Some of the candidates have
learned this - and they are learning - the hard way, through news
stories about their own sites that did not reflect on them positively.
At the very least, they have done some things that they obviously didn’t
first think through.
Bush’s campaign must have assumed it covered itself when it bought URLs
www.Bush.sucks.com and www.Bush.blows.com. But in May, Bush’s campaign
filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission against a parody
site called Gwbush.com; the action brought the campaign negative
publicity, especially after Bush said that ’there ought to be limits to
freedom.’
Bush dropped his bid to kill the parody site but soon stumbled into a
fight about privacy when he published a list of donors. Bush’s donor
information is now buried on the site, which has added a privacy policy.
The final indignity came when some hackers broke into the newly revamped
site to upload a hammer and sickle onto the home page. ’It was only up
there for three minutes before it was corrected,’ says a Bush e-campaign
chief.
Republican consultant Bill Greener says, ’You have to say that George W.
Bush’s campaign hasn’t done a lot you can quibble with. But I think,
unless you’re convinced a parody site is pure evil, you really shouldn’t
be giving it any of your time or thoughts.’
Gore made a great play of giving visitors the chance to inspect his
’open source code’ - like he was some sort of Linus Torvalds. It turned
out to be plain-old HTML. Many people viewed it as just a gimmick about
his openness. ’Calling HTML ’open source code’ is like calling gym shoes
a personal transportation system,’ wrote election site Evote.com.
Even Forbes, who announced his candidacy online, was found to have a
security hole in his site that let anyone send out e-mails to 5,000
volunteers on behalf of the campaign. Pat Buchanan’s site has had to
take down inappropriate copy, such as a story urging him to quit the
Republican Party (before he actually quit). Reed, who worked on the
Clinton-Gore e-campaign in 1996, says, ’The biggest mistake most
candidates make is putting up information that is not ready for public
consumption. Candidates should realize opponents are always looking at
their site.’
Bradley and Gore may have a slight lead in the cyber campaign, but the
contest has barely begun. Dave Model, director of the Hathaway Group,
says it’s unlikely any of the candidates will match Ventura’s
success.
’Part of that was his personality and populist positions were a clear
match for the Internet. I doubt other candidates will come across the
same way.’ (Buchanan Webmaster Linda Muller claims she’s been fired, and
a team of Web pros from the Hathaway Group are rumored to be moving in,
which may help his site.)
TV versus Web
The surest sign that the Net will finally have taken center stage is
when online consultants have more power than their equivalents in
TV.
’Right now, 60 to 70% of a campaign’s money goes on television,’ says
Arena, ’but the Net can be so much more cost effective.’ When Gore made
his TV pitch after the Senate vetoed the test ban treaty, he could have
done the same pitch on his web site for a tenth of the money and - being
the man who ’invented’ the Internet - he should have known that.
These are still early days in the cyber campaign and most of the sites
want simply to put their candidates’ biographies in the public domain,
mobilize volunteers and raise money. Arena says the percentage of
candidates’ web space devoted to their own life story proves that we
have entered the age of biography politics, where the issue isn’t
ideology but character.
But Noble is happy to go on record as predicting ’there will be one
story, I don’t know what, that will come out on the Net that will
influence the news agenda.’
The campaign e-managers are reluctant to be as bold. Greener says the
Net could make a difference on turnout ’at the margins.’ Equally, a
smart Net campaign can help underdogs like Bradley and McCain and
third-party candidates. ’If I was a third-party candidate, I’d take as
much money as I could and put it onto the Web,’ says Noble. But the Net
will be credited with electing Clinton’s successor only if it is a very
tight race. And, although the gross figures for number of hits for each
site sound impressive (see box), they should be put into context. The
only name with any presidential relevance to be featured on
SearchWords.com’s list of the 100 most-requested names is Abraham
Lincoln. He came in 99th on the list - below the Toronto Sun and just
above Brad Pitt.
Judges
Robert Arena: Web consultant who worked on 1996 GOP presidential nominee
Bob Dole’s campaign Web site; principal, Presage, Alexandria, VA
Bill Greener: Republican political consultant with Greener & Hook in
Washington, DC
Steve Lilienthal: Washington, DC, reporter for PRWeek
Phil Noble: Democratic political consultant, Phil Noble & Associates in
Charleston, SC
Paul Simpson: Internet editorial consultant and columnist for The Net
magazine
The methodology
The judges were asked to rank the sites according to seven criteria.
The ’nuts and bolts’ categories - ease of use, design, interactivity,
timeliness and content/features - account for half the marks, with each
category marked out of 10. Effectiveness and message delivery together
account for the rest of the score, with a top ranking of 25 for
each.
Web site review: presidential hopefuls in cyberspace
George W. Bush (Republican)
www.georgewbush.com
Money raised online: dollars 90,000
Web developer: Greg Sedberry, Syscom Services (Silver Spring, MD)
Ease of use: Since the site has tried nothing fancy, browsing is
easy.
It has a search engine, but our search came up saying that the index was
out of date. 7
Design: Since the October redesign, a clear menu of options is always
visible but the front page lacks punch. This looks like the site of a
candidate who feels he doesn’t have to try too hard. 6
Interactivity: No campaign kit to download. You can personalize the site
by registering, and you can e-mail the candidate but there’s nothing
that indicates whether or not he’ll answer. 4
Timeliness: On November 10, the latest news was two days old. On most
other visits, it was slightly better than this, but the overall feel
doesn’t smack of urgency. 6
Content/features: Has e-mail, audio, video, a strong Spanish section, a
’youth zone,’ shop where you can buy George W. Bush mineral water for
dollars 1.50 a bottle. 5
Effectiveness: The site hasn’t raised much money but this campaign’s
rich enough not to worry about that. In the last two weeks of October,
the site had 5.2 million hits - not the same thing as unique visitors
but still pretty good traffic. 11
Message delivery: His views on the issues are clear but the absence of
any Q&A-type format with real voters suggests that he’s not that
interested in other people’s views. 16
Funniest moment: ’Baseball players must be able to throw, catch and hit
the ball. Candidates must know about current events and important
issues, such as education.’ The Just for Kids section’s attempt to draw
analogies between politics and baseball strikes out.
Total: 55
Steve Forbes (Republican)
www.forbes2000.com
Money raised online: dollars 30,000
Web developer: Hensley Segal Rentschler (Cincinnati)
Ease of use: Ordinary mortals might find the profusion of buttons,
passports, control panels and the top 762 news stories about the
campaign just a bit confusing. There are 61 buttons on the home page
alone. 4
Design: While technically it’s the most sophisticated site,
aesthetically, it’s quite drab and uses unappealing colors. 6
Interactivity: Online polls, constant invitations like ’What do you have
to say?’ requests that you lead an e-precinct. The visitor can’t help
but feel flattered by all this. 8
Timeliness: Forbes sets a standard to which all other candidates should
aspire. Every campaign event is recorded here, though do we really need
to know that they had to send out for more fried chicken at a rally in
Waterloo, IA? 9
Content/features: You want features? Forbes got ’em: online polls,
webcasts, e-mail, video, audio, links, campaign kits, a site search,
postcards, desktop wallpaper - which makes it even odder that there’s no
Espanol.
9
Effectiveness: His campaign claims to have 5,000 e-precincts - some with
as many as 5000 members - so the Net is obviously working for him.
14
Message delivery: The site hones in on the issues like a laser beam -
possibly because Forbes has the kind of life story that doesn’t really
strike a chord with many Americans.9
Funniest moment: ’In 1990, Steve became President and CEO of Forbes Inc.
and Editor in Chief of Forbes.’ Although the site calls Steve a ’devoted
family man,’ there’s no mention here of the two people who played the
biggest part in his rise: Pa and Grandpa Forbes.
Total: 59
John McCain (Republican)
www.mccain2000.com
Money raised online: dollars 260,000
Web developer: Azfamily.com (Phoenix)
Ease of use: Despite the slightly nostalgic feel of the home page, this
is a very simple site to find your way around. 8
Design: With its reliance on the familiar red, white and blue, corny
photography and occasional flourish of Gothic typography, this has the
folksy charm, lack of pretension and down-to-earth good humor of a
small-town newspaper. 7
Interactivity: Apart from e-mail, a few polls and feedback on the
students section, there’s not much scope for interaction. 3
Timeliness: The press releases are updated regularly but the home page
doesn’t change enough. The campaign is cutting into Bush’s lead, but you
don’t sense this when you first find the site. 4
Content/features: E-mail, links to other Republican Party sites and to
his own campaign finance-reform site (www.itsyourcountry.com), audio,
video, a good site map, postcards, financial disclosure and shop. No
search engine and no Spanish content. 5
Effectiveness: McCain is the online community’s favorite Republican and
the campaign claims to have had more than 1 million hits over ’recent
weeks.’ After a recent campaign-finance debate in the Senate during
which the site was mentioned, over dollars 20,000 was donated through
the Web site.
17
Message delivery: The only perceptible difference between candidate and
web site is that the site hasn’t been accused of having a bad
temper.
The biography makes good use of his war record without being corny. This
is a rare thing: a site that makes you actually like the candidate.
16
Funniest moment: The button for George W. Bush staffers who have, says
McCain HQ, recorded 4,625 hits in two weeks, making them easily the
site’s most frequent visitors.
Total: 60
Pat Buchanan (Reform)
www.gopatgo2000.com
Money raised online: dollars 90,000
Web developer: Jason Brasswell
Ease of use: A pretty compact, text-based site that’s relatively easy to
navigate around, though the parts of it don’t always gel. Needs a
thorough reorganization. 6
Design: Patchy. The top of the home page tells you what he stands for
and what you can do if you agree. But the rest of the page is messy with
many of the links taking you outside to news sites or a prominent plug
for his book. (There are so many references to Buchanan’s books, you
half- expect a link to Amazon.com.) 3
Interactivity: You can join the volunteers, make a donation, buy a book
or e-mail the candidate (who will read your message). 3
Timeliness: Buchanan’s reactions to such topics as Gulf War syndrome are
posted daily, but the last official press release from the campaign was
uploaded six weeks ago. 6
Content/features: E-mail, good links to relevant news sites and special
interest sites like Antiwar.com, but no shop, no online campaign kit, no
Spanish section, no search engine, no audio or video, no kids site and
not much disclosure of donors. 2
Effectiveness: Fails to live up to the standard set by Buchanan’s
e-campaign in 1996. The scant biography seems mainly concerned to stress
his links to Richard Nixon, while his connection to the Reform Party is
glossed over. No sense of an active campaign. 8
Message delivery: The site clearly reflects Buchanan’s personality and
policies. But Americans don’t elect candidates they don’t like and from
this site, Buchanan comes across as a crotchety figure obsessed with
things people have said about him. 10
Funniest moment: Pat’s pledge on ’Cleaning corruption out of government’
running right next to a picture of the candidate with ... Richard
Nixon!
Total:38
Bill Bradley (Democrat)
www.billbradley.com
Money raised online: dollars 650,000
Web developer: Lynn Reed
Ease of use: Probably the easiest site to navigate, with a menu of
options always to your left. 9
Design: There’s a very fine line between polished and professional and
bland and dull, and sometimes this site just ends up on the wrong side
of that line. 6
Interactivity: You can download a good online campaign kit and e-mail
your story via the web site, but no online polls. 7
Timeliness: Consistent daily updating of campaign news and home page
rewards returning visitors. 8
Content/features: Pop-up windows, video, e-mail, shop, easy-to-find
information on donors, some Spanish content, good media center (although
if you do subscribe to his e-mail updates, be warned - you may be snowed
under). However, there’s no search engine, section for kids or
links.
8
Effectiveness: Bradley has scooped up the most online funds and has
attracted 650,000 unique visitors since last December with almost half
of those logging on in the last two months. 16
Message delivery: The site reflects Bradley’s personality but that’s
pretty easy to do with a biography that stretches to eight pages. His
views on the issues get a good airing, but he mainly stresses the fact
that he hasn’t always worked inside the Beltway. The worst that can be
said of the site (and by extension, Bradley) is that it takes itself
just a shade too seriously. 19
Funniest moment: ’Bill grabbed several pencils and hit the (Senate)
podium 56 times in 81 seconds, reminiscent of the blows (Rodney) King
experienced at the hands of the LAPD’ (after the verdict came down
acquitting the police of beating King).
Total: 67
Al Gore (Democrat)
www.algore2000.com
Money raised online: dollars 80,000
Web developer: Ben Green
Ease of use: Sometimes you can find yourself marooned wondering how you
get back to the home page. But for the most part, the page-top buttons
guide you through quickly. 6
Design: Technically adept without being flashy, this isn’t quite as
innovative as you might expect from the man who ’invented’ the
Internet.
7
Interactivity: Internet democracy in action with the electronic town
hall that, until the promised live Q&A sessions materialize, is a bit
like a monotonous version of a letters page. 9
Timeliness: The home page doesn’t change much and it’s not unusual for
the latest news from Gore to be a two-day old speech. 4
Content/features: Gore’s own words in every format except for
eight-track cartridge, downloadable photos and logos, a kids site, a
Spanish section, downloadable fundraising info and links to three
approved Gore merchandise sites. But no non-Gore links and no search
engine. 9
Effectiveness: A campaign official told PRWeek that the site has had 20
million hits and 1.2 million unique visitors and that 20% of those got
involved in some way, either donating money, volunteering or just
e-mailing the candidate. 20
Message delivery: This site is a perfect reflection of both the old
robotic Gore and the simpatico candidate who has recently reaffirmed his
membership in the human race. Gore’s focus on the issues is laudable,
but some of the content is so dull that it can induce a trancelike state
that can only be shaken by banging your head against the computer
screen. 10
Funniest moment: ’The very serious and troubling events in Pakistan
constituted a military coup, not an election.’ Just in case you were in
any doubt, Gore proves he’s not going to fail any foreign policy pop
quizzes.
Total: 65.
