Media Advocacy

Issue advocates and political operatives routinely compete for the attention of their target audiences in order to build support for their causes. Such support is often built through "media advocacy." According to David Simpson, media advocacy is "the process of disseminating policy-related information through the communications media, especially where the aim is to effect action, a change of policy, or to alter the public's view of an issues."

Harry Weisbren's Huffington Post guest-article nicely sums up the promise of media advocacy. He notes that traditional news media -- print, broadcast and radio news -- can be a tremendous asset in getting a message out through a (usually) credible source. The downside of these is that the advocacy organization's message will be edited based on the slant or view of the news outlet.

This is one reason why social media has become so prevalent in media advocacy -- organizations can deliver an unedited message, exactly the way they want to present it.

Regardless of the effective use of these media advocacy tools, it is critical for any advocate to convey a clear argument or message. In Matt Bai's book, "The Argument: Billionaires, Bloggers and the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics," we see how the struggle to articulate a clear argument has hampered the Democratic Party for years.

I recall John Kerry's 2004 loss well. I was a coordinated campaign field organizer in Oregon, eager for the promise of a new presidency, and I'd been so certain of a win. Certain that America couldn't reelect George W. Bush. I heard the announcement that Ohio had been called for Bush while on my way to the "victory" party, where half the crowd was in tears. I remember my boss saying, "I sure feel bad for George Soros right now!" Indeed. Despite the money that went into ACT, MoveOn, and Democratic Party efforts to defeat Bush, there was still a critical missing piece: an argument.

To sum up: there are a variety of important media advocacy tools that organizations and causes can pursue to get a message out -- and with the advent of social media, media advocacy is easier than ever. The first step, however, is to know what you're going to say.

Health Care's Digital Opportunity

The internet has fundamentally changed the way Americans receive and share information. As a health communication professional, I have always had a particular interest in the way this impacts health care. The Pew Internet & American Life Project sheds light on this in its various studies of the Internet and health care.

According to Pew, 79 percent of American adults are online, and 6 in 10 American adults go online wirelessly each day. Thus, online and mobile tools are a huge -- and relatively untapped -- resource for improving health and health care quality.

Pew's Associate Director of Internet Strategy, Susannah Fox, outlined the very tangible improvements that digital tools can make in health care in her September 2010 Pew presentation to the Mayo Clinic -- itself a leader in online health information sharing.

Pew found, for example, that mobile tools can drastically increase treatment adherence among teens with chronic illnesses. Mobile technology was used to monitor their health behaviors, and intervene via text message as appropriate. Medication adherence is a significant challenge among all chronically ill patients, and this is one illustration of how health care practitioners can harness new technologies to improve adherence in order to better manage these diseases.

Fox's presentation underscores a key principle of communications today: it is critically important to reach audiences where they are today. As Fox noted in her presentation, if you're not online, or you're not mobile, you're not reaching some of your audiences.

Beyond just implementing digital medical records (which is another critical tool to improve the quality and efficiency of American health care) there is a tremendous opportunity to implement online and mobile tools to remind patients to take their medications via text message, answer questions via mobile applications, or connect patients with similar conditions.

Unfortunately, most physicians are far from adopting such advanced online tools in clinical practice. In fact, physician use of the Internet to search for health information is only 86 percent, and 70 percent of physicians spend less than 3 minutes per day researching a patient scenario online, according to a study by Google.

Digital tools to improve health care represent a huge missed opportunity to date.

Clay Shirky on Collective Action

In his book, "Here Comes Everybody," Clay Shirky provides an overview of the impact of social media on society. Illuminated through examples -- some trivial and some profound -- Shirky shows readers that social media is transforming society because it changes the way in which we interact and communicate with one another and with groups.

Shirky writes:

"The centrality of group effort to human life means that anything that changes the way groups function will have profound ramifications for everything from commerce and government to media and religion."

Social media is one such innovation that has changed the way groups function. Fundamental to his argument, Shirky highlights the impact of social media tools on collective organizing. The costs of organizing groups to take collective action have essentially vanished.

Using a variety of tools from websites to blogs to social media networks, individuals can organize themselves into a group -- rather than being organized by a group. For example, by simply self-identifying as a supporter of a cause on a social network like facebook, individuals can opt-in, receive alerts, and show up for the rally (or whatever the action might be).

This shift is continuing to evolve -- and it is forcing politics to evolve along with it.

Social Search

Yesterday, Google announced the launch of its new Google Social Search functionalities. Social search has actually been around since 2009, according to Washington Post, but if you are like me you never noticed it before. The new features are hard to miss. Now, when searching for information on Google, the top results will be sites you've visited in the past (with the date of your last visit), and will include the relevant tweets, posts, etc. from those in your social network.

As a society, we have come to rely more and more on our friends' and acquaintances' suggestions in order to make our own decisions. It's only natural to use our friends' posts to help us filter information we find through search engines.

I predict (though not surprisingly) that this will have a very real impact on politics - especially political campaigns. As voters search for information about candidates, they will be influenced by the tweets, posts and preferences of the people within their social networks. They will be less exposed to opposing points of view, and will naturally gravitate toward the information that fits their existing point of view on candidates or issues.

As with past developments that allow us to connect with others online, social search will be yet another tool to help groups organize, and influence public discourse. Of course...until Google Social Search links with facebook, its influence on me personally will be pretty minimal.

A shift for online news sources?

Politico came into the office today, to present their latest product, PoliticoPro, which launched this week.

I'm intrigued by the product because it would provide more depth of news coverage for my primary issue area -- health policy (they also offer it for energy and tech -- and may expand in the future). They've hired talented reporters and promise the convenience of mobile viewing.

However...a subscription is $1,000 per person ($2500 for the first one within an organization).

I appreciate the fact that if they're going to invest in in-depth, niche coverage, they need a source of funding to pay for it. But it also worries me to see a shift in online news sources, where the best content is "behind the curtain" of an expensive subscription.

I have become so accustomed to finding the information I need online for free. But I wonder if we're on the verge of news's equivalent of the shift from Napster to iTunes.

How to Use Facebook Ads

I've known for a long time that facebook is capable of some serious micro-targeting. At times, I've found myself to be a "victim" of this brilliant tool. When I was single, I had to ignore the perpetual online dating ads, and now that I'm engaged I am constantly targeted to click for wedding planners, fad diets and dream dresses. I have also been on the other side, employing targeted facebook ads based on political leanings to further clients' advocacy goals. But, I've never actually administered an ad on my own. So this week's assignment was quite intriguing.

For class this week, we were assigned to find out more about facebook ads by experimenting with the tools ourselves. I have a strong interest in health policy, and I'm a native Oregonian. So, I created an ad targeting Oregon small business owners between 30-65, to educate them about the benefits of health reform. I borrowed content from the Organizing for America site (thanks, President Obama!) and created a facebook ad that would link directly to the pertinent information.

Here's how it turned out:



I knew facebook ads were inexpensive. For just $50/day, I could reach a few thousand of my target audience with ads designed just for them. The biggest surprise to me was how simple it is to do this! Facebook is so well-designed, all you have to do is play around with drop down menus and characteristics until you land on an appropriate profile for targets that falls within the budget. Easy. Even my mother could probably figure it out.

Who's behind that online ad? And who sees it?

Online campaigns in general can make it hard to tell who is behind a movement. A small, scrappy organization can do powerful things online, or a large corporation can fund a grassroots front group.

Micro-targeted ads take these questions to a whole new level.

As we learned in our reading, campaigns can successfully (and cheaply!) trick major news organizations like CNN (or whoever/whatever the target might be) into believing they have a major PR nightmare on their hands, when in fact a few ads were simply targeted to that precise group. Further, source amnesia allows players to make statements without really being accountable for any negative repercussions. All of this can be used for good -- or bad. It is amazing how much content is out there for which viewers really are not aware of the source, or do not realize they are being very specifically targeted. We no longer see the same ads as our neighbors, necessarily.

I predict that, after awhile, people will catch on. Advertising in all mediums will always carry significant influence, but once people gain a real awareness of the the fact they are being targeted, they might be a bit less susceptible to the influence of online ads.

The Basics

This week’s readings covered the fundamentals of an online campaign and serve as a good foundation for anyone getting into digital communication.

Dr. Rosenblatt’s overview of the “The Dimensions of a Digitally Networked Campaign” describes the three dimensions of online strategy:
• 1-Dimensional: tightly controlled messages and information, pushed out from an organization to audiences
• 2-Dimensional: two-way transactions between an organization and audiences
• 3-Dimensional: community based communication involving the organization, its audiences, and their audiences and communities, with little or no message control

Colin Delaney’s “Online Politics 101” teaches us how to translate the above strategic approaches into action through tactical execution. While Delaney strays a bit too often into inside jokes and anecdotes, he also presents a straightforward and comprehensive overview of the most important tenets and tools of online advocacy.

One important take-away from both of these readings is to make online outreach a positive, easy experience for your audience. For example, we are reminded to:
• Respect our audience’s communication preferences, whether email, facebook, twitter, text messages
• Make sure action is easy – “just one click away”
• Be easy to find
• Be navigable
• Present information logically and succinctly

Far too many organizations still forget the importance of these principles. A cluttered, hard-to-navigate website can send a message that an organization doesn’t care whether users find the information they need. Political campaign emails too frequently place the “act now” button at the bottom of a long diatribe that explains why we should care about their cause. The bottom line is, to be successful online, keep it short and sweet, and think about how to make action easy for your audience.

Kenneth Cole and the Risk of the "Human Voice" Online

Kenneth Cole's tweet heard around the world is a terrific, terrifying example of online tactics gone wrong. If you don't know about it already, just google "Kenneth Cole Tweet," or read this Washington Post commentary with a little more info on the Twitter fall out. The gist -- Kenneth Cole's twitter feed made a joke about the revolution in Egypt for the sake of sales...yuck.

When you think about it, this is an example of a company that was trying use online channels, hashtags, and the human voice (this time, really, really bad humor) to interact with consumers (and sell products). Generally, this is all good stuff that they could have learned from the Cluetrain Manifesto. And with their "human voice," Kenneth Cole made a very human mistake -- they told a joke that was not funny, not even a little bit. But when you are a big company, and the comment is made online, you can never get it back (thank you, screen shots).

In reality, the tweet was probably posted by a lowly junior staffer who was just trying to be creative, and get the company into a "trending topic." I feel truly sorry for this person -- they probably need a new job right about now.

These blunders happen in politics all the time. Rep. Bartlett's apologizy to BP instantly exploded on every online channel. ACORN was permanently damaged after being caught helping an undercover "prostitute" evade taxes on videos that were posted to YouTube. Rangel was rude to a well-known reporter. The point is -- in the age of the internet these mistakes are very easily publicized.

It's also sometimes a lot harder to be forgiven. In my opinion, you have to do more than say your mistake was "poorly timed" in your apology. Try again, Kenneth Cole.