Between Barack and a Hard Place

When I heard about the difficulties facing the Obama Campaign and their MySpace page it reminded me of an article I read last cycle about Phil Angelides and HIS MySpace page.

“Phil Angelides, California’s Democratic candidate for governor, had nothing to do with creating a MySpace page under his name. His teenage daughter was the first to point out his presence on the popular online hangout.

But rather than kill a volunteer’s unauthorized efforts, the campaign has embraced the youth-heavy site, using Angelides’ personal profile page to post position papers and other announcements. It also scans the comments section to gauge what’s on youths’ minds, turning it into an informal focus group.

“We’ve come to embrace it as our own,” campaign spokesman Brian Brokaw said. “It can help you reach an audience that otherwise might be more difficult to reach. Not as many young voters watch the evening news.”USA Today

Similarly, Phil’s fellow California candidate and now Secretary of State of California Debra Bowen’s MySpace Page sports a curious bit of info

DISCLAIMER: This site was created by a volunteer independent of the official Debra Bowen for Secretary of State campaign. The information on this page may not reflect the exact positions or opinions of Senator Bowen, her campaign committee, her campaign staff, or her Senate staff.

And closer to home for me the newly elected Congressional Candidate and grassroots extraordinaire Nancy Boyda has a similar disclaimer on her MySpace

“this website is not affiliated with nancyforcongress.com or the Boyda campaign”

Interestingly, Boyda’s MySpace page features updated articles in the blog about goings on in Kansas and Washington - even a Congrats to the University of Kansas Basketball Team and their success in the NCAA Tournament. It also features campaign commercials via YouTube from the 2004 and 2006 campaigns as well as a banner available for supporters to post on their own profile pages declaring they are a “MySpace Voter for Boyda.” I mention this because it seems to have surpassed the actual campaign site which seems to be under construction.

With all of this - it prompted me to ask - how many sites are actually run by their campaigns!? Edwards clearly runs his, as does Hillary just don’t mistake it for HillaryClinton2008 or even her husband’s reelection fan site.

I sent messages around to some of the fan run Myspace Pages this morning but Catie - who started Boyda’s page in May of 2006 - was the only one to respond. She said she wasn’t the designer of the site a friend did it for her but she constantly tries to update it.

“I go to school too so sometimes I can’t be as attentive” she said. “But when its basketball season for KU or football season for KState I tried to keep it up.”

Don’t come between Kansans and their sports.

Catie says she did have some trouble with the campaign last year when she mistakenly posted a bulletin about advanced balloting

“I tried to figure out when the last day to fill out an advanced ballot or the last day to register to vote was and there was a lot of conflicting information on the Secretary of State website. I posted a date that was for the Clerks which was not necessarily for voters. The Kansas Party contacted me right away and told me that the information was wrong and gave me the correct information and posted a correction. Then they posted that on their MySpace site and their State Party website.”

But Catie said it was a few days later before she heard from the Boyda campaign.

“Someone sent me a message from her Myspace page and told me they were going to sue me if I didn’t turn the site over to them. I was only 19, I had no idea what I got myself into.”

Catie said she never knew if it was someone who was actually working for the campaign or someone from the opposing campaign trying to scare her. It worked. Catie was terrified. She researched other sites run by volunteers and asked them what they do and how they work with the campaign. Most, she said, were volunteers that were embraced by the staffers but none of them had been threatened with legal actions.

“My dad finally told me it was probably a good idea to take the site down.

Her story is similar to Joe Anthony in that she did in-depth research to find answers to questions asked by her MySpace friends and steer people toward the campaign for volunteer opportunities. But in the last month of the 2006 election Catie and her two friends who worked with her on the site, researched policy questions, attended rallies to get quotes from the candidate’s mouth, stopped updating and stopped collecting friends across Kansas. She replied to the person and informed her that she was pulling the site and that the threat was baseless because there were so many sites run by “fans” or “volunteers” but she understood the overall concern. If it was an opposing campaign they scared Catie enough to stop posting - but it didn’t matter in the long run - Nancy still won.

The evolution of termed “new media” was something Catie’s Communications class talked about after the election and she felt brave enough to try again - assuming the campaign would contact her if it became a problem.

“Does anyone really believe that Thomas Jefferson’s family is running his MySpace? I don’t think so. But if it brings people to his speeches and his work I think its a good thing.”

Catie says she never heard from the campaign about the problem or the threats. She jokes it was a right wing conspiracy and says that if Nancy had lost she would have felt guilty she pulled the site so close to the election. But she said she never wanted to make trouble. To this day she has never been contacted by the campaign or the House staff and said she assumed they never knew the site existed. But recently she says she got up the guts to start recruiting friends again. Not quite as strong as Bowen and Phil - Boyda’s site has over 750 friends mostly from Kansas and Catie says they are mostly from the district.

“I get a lot of friend requests from organizations and people all over. I set a rule that we were only going to friend bands from Kansas. You know, support local music.”

Catie and Anthony aren’t unusual. Today’s campaigns are barely able to keep up with new technologies. And larger more traditional campaign staffers aren’t equip to handle the online needs or the desires of grassroots volunteers. And where does MySpace and Facebook fit in to a campaign? Should your Communications Director know how to design a MySpace page or should your Field Manager be on it? But the chances are that by the time campaigns are asking themselves these questions they are discovering what Phil Angelides did - its already been done for them.

With smaller districts its easier to communicate with voters but parallel campaigns sprung up all over California for Debra Bowen as well. Ralph Miller from Latinos for Democracy was one of the groups who raised money to run ads in Spanish over Spanish Radio endorsing the Bowen campaign in her Primary challenge against a Latino Senator. Another parallel campaign raised money to print yard signs because the campaign didn’t have any plans to do signs. Add to that the MySpace campaign and the Facebook campaign - as well as a website “Grassroots for Bowen” a still active site that links to Yahoo Groups and YouTube videos.

Campaigns in rural areas or places that aren’t targets for the national party have a hard enough time getting traction, attention, support, not to mention volunteers . This new movement of netroots enables volunteers to use their talents to advocate in behalf of their candidates. Some campaigns bring the volunteers into the fold and others flex their political muscle against well intentioned college students who want to do more than stand on street corners with signs or help with mailings.

I won’t claim to have any knowledge or understanding for the best way campaigns can coordinate with the netroots community - but I think the best campaigns are the ones who understand the skills of their volunteers and use them most effectively. Dean it was house parties and emails, Webb it was YouTube and Blogs, and every year there will be something new and different.

Joe Anthony from Obama’s MYspace page is soured about the whole ordeal:

“This was largely symbolic. The same campaign that inspired me to work so hard to build this community, the same campaign whose underlying message stresses “the power of the individual to have an impact on politics”, was constantly downplaying my role in this, bullying me, and a couple of other things that were just rotten and dishonest.” TechPresident

But Catie is still optimistic:

“It is essential for Nancy to represent this district. We have seen her so much more than we ever saw Ryun. The people need her leadership and her passion to help them. I’ve never been more honored to work on someone’s behalf.”

Joe Anthony is a paralegal in Los Angeles and Catie (who never gave her last name) is now 20 and a Junior at Pittsburg State University in Pittsburg, Kansas. Ralph Miller is a blogger and activist but also serves as the Executive Director for Latinos for Democracy.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Great piece

This is some excellent journalism. Thanks alice!

This is a critical story to follow: how and if campaigns are able to incorporate decentralized participation by their supporters. Motivated people like Catie or Adam — who create original content, take time to engage in substantive discussions, etc — are invaluable, but they (we) react very poorly to attempts at being controlled. We’re not pawns.

My guess is that smaller campaigns may be more friendly to this, as the stakes and scrutiny are lower, and many of them may simply not be aware of the activism being done on their behalf. Big national campaigns with a lot to lose are likely to remain paranoid and control-freaky for the forseeable future.

Exactly!

Thanks for the compliments.

I completely agree it is something to really watch - as we increase the number of ways to contact a person we increase the need for staff time to do the contacting - if there are no staffers who either can do it or coordinate it - it makes sense that volunteers would just take it on. If its volunteer run and the campaign doesn’t have control I can see the discomfort. But you don’t need to micromanage EVERYTHING…

I would wager to bet that most campaigns have no idea what is being done on their behalf. What I didn’t include in here is that Catie wants to start up every site for the Boyda campaign - Friendser, Flickr, Delicious, Facebook, etc… because she could coordinate the same message on each site. If the campaign itself did this - it’d be ideal - but clearly they aren’t interested or don’t have the staff time available.

She felt really conflicted about where that line is when it comes to creating fan based content - and I’d pose the same question to you - where is that line?? I sure didn’t have an answer for her.

It seems like a no brainer to me on how Obama's

Internet Department head should have handled this - I would have imagined that they should look at it as if they were inviting the volunteer to be a consultant on retainer, with some stipulations for when the daily upkeep of the site got to the point where it would behoove both parties to either have the consultant join the campaign full time or for the month-to-month retainer contract to terminate with mutual agreement and along with final compensation and then the consultant would hand over the keys to the profile.

The first mistake was on Rospars for not doing his job as Executive of his Department, managing his human and technological resources. A loosey-goosey agreement on a job that requires by Anthony’s testimony often 5 and sometimes 10 hours a day is just stupid.

I thought that Rospars was a good hire at least in the sense that the director of the Internet Department should be someone who knows how to run a business - in that they know how to navigate contract workers, subcontractors, they know who is a snake oil salesman from their conversations with him and not from the grapevine, ie. they should know technology and politics - but mostly they must be managers. This episode was terribly managed.

What raised flags for me was that the handshake agreement went sour when Scott was brought on board. I wonder if the negotiations for compensating the volunteer for his work were imprudently initiated and then abruptly cut off following Scott’s arrival.

Anthony is burned and is biting his tongue on a lot of the story. Obama’s message control is tighter than a tick’s ass, as always - but it smells fishy and its another instance of the people-powered facade peeling back to reveal that, yup, there’s still that ivory tower up there filled with Daschle people and very important technologists who, you know, did such good work for the DNC.

Like, I know the Dean Campaign didn’t pay Rosen much, but they did pay the guy.

Here’s this Anthony guy, who is clearly a good networker and Obama’s management throws him under the bus. Bad bad bad.

isn't that what they did?

Internet Department head should have handled this - I would have imagined that they should look at it as if they were inviting the volunteer to be a consultant on retainer, with some stipulations for when the daily upkeep of the site got to the point where it would behoove both parties to either have the consultant join the campaign full time or for the month-to-month retainer contract to terminate with mutual agreement and along with final compensation and then the consultant would hand over the keys to the profile.

From [[http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/5/2/191954/1220#readmore|Rospars side of the story]], it sounds like they did just what you suggest, but Anthony didn’t want to relocate to Chicago. Fair enough. I fault the campaign for not coming back at Anthony with a counter-offer—part of the structural problem is that its too early for consensus on the dollar-value of Anthony’s work—but in Rospars place, what do you do with a campaign asset that’s not controlled by the campaign?

Dollar Value

I don’t know that it’s too early to put a dollar value on Anthony’s work. Lots of folks ran MySpace pages in 2006 for campaigns, and lots of folks do it for corporations. Everyone I know who’s done such a thing says that Anthony’s dollar amount is a low-ball for the size of what he built.

Agreed

I heard someone talking about it yesterday in terms of dollars per vote - 160,000 targets and gained people come out to $.34 a vote if Joe Anthony was paid what he asked. That’s a damn good deal. Tagging these people at the early days might also turn into volunteer opportunities = free labor - building a network with these 160k with their friends lists etc… Its a damn good deal for them to get out with this little a dough.

Peanuts

This is part of the larger argument about renumeration in the leftysphere that’s been going on for a little while (most notably on MyDD). My hunch is that professionals realize that $39-49k is peanuts, while volunteers and activists (who’re accustomed to going unpaid) feel like its a princely sum.

My point isn’t that

its too early to put a dollar value on Anthony’s work.

its that

its too early for consensus on the dollar-value of Anthony’s work

The issue isn’t $49k. Which 2008 campaign wouldn’t gladly pay 10x Anthony’s price for half as many MySpace friends?

The issue is that because of the way the story’s being framed (“we asked for a number and he gave us an outrageous figure” seems to be the campaign’s tone) and the general unfamiliarity with the value of Anthony’s work, his position seems shady to a non-trivial number of well-intentioned, reasonable people. Everyone agrees that Anthony’s work was valuable.

On the Money

For more on the money, check out this piece by Micah Sifry at Tech President. It quotes our own Fred Gooltz and the concensus seems to be that Joe Anthony was asking for less than 1/3 of what his list and his work were worth.

No they didn't

They didn’t draw up a contract before-hand. Either they thought that they could get away with it forever and then take it away if ever they needed to or 2) because they were stupid to not see that what Anthony was doing had enormous value.

That's too cynical for me

The two most plausible explanations are “incompetence” and “malice”. I’m inclined to give the campaign the benefit of the doubt.

(“Incompetence” wrt staffing, not tech-savvy; its pretty tough to argue that anyone (least of all the campaign) failed to recognize the value of a 160k-friended MySpace presence.)