The Role of Campaign Websites

Spending some time on Obama and McCain's websites yesterday got me thinking more about the role of the campaign website: just like any brand website (and a candidate is a brand), they have to decide if the website's primary goal is to educate and win over undecided people, or if it is to engage and solidify support/money/loyalty/volunteer hours from the true believers.

Obviously a good website would do both, and if they're measuring satisfaction with their website, they could predict the likelihood of website visitors to donate, volunteer, even vote the same way an e-retailer can use customer satisfaction to predict likelihood to purchase or recommend. Taking it a step further, they could identify which specific website elements would have the most impact on the future behaviors they're trying to elicit: maybe tweaks to navigation would result in more online donations. Maybe better site performance would make it easier for people to use the website to volunteer.

In terms of whether a campaign site should be reeling in undecideds or increasing loyalty of supporters, it seems like Obama is trying to do both. In the wake of securing the Democratic nomination, BarackObama.com is clearly aimed at winning over former Clinton supporters; the home page has a huge "Thank you, Senator Clinton" banner with a button you can click to send Hillary a note thanking her for her candidacy.

McCain's website, on the other hand, with NCAA picks and golf gear, seems aimed more at educating and informing people who are already solid McCain supporters, while sending signals that McCain is a likable, regular guy.

Interestingly, last week Hitwise says that BarackObama.com had 86% of the market share compared to 14% for johnmccain.com. This week it's 79.7 vs. 20.3--still a huge gap. That's not entirely surprising since Democrats tend to be younger and Republicans tend to be older (and younger and older demographics correlate strongly with internet usage). But it is a surprisingly large disparity for candidates that some polls having running neck-in-neck. If I were on McCain's campaign staff, I would not be thrilled with that stat.

Howard Dean's campaign in 2004 was the first to really harness the power of the internet and email for a political campaign, and although his bid was ultimately unsuccessful, it changed the game forever more. It will be interesting to see how these sites evolve and change over the next 5-6 months before the election.

Putting your political opinions aside, tell me what you think of the candidates' websites.

Comments

[Jason Conrad]

Interesting post. I think we all keep waiting to see if the web has the kind of turning point impact that television had on the Nixon/Kennedy debates in 1960. Nixon refused make-up, the stubble showed up on those old black and white TV sets and he just looked haggard...his mom even called him afterwards to see if he was sick.

I don't think the internet will have the kind of turning point effect that the first TV debate had on the compaigns. Instead, it will have a more continuous effect on the ability of the candidates to generate and motivate grass roots movements and raise funds. Clearly, Barack Obama has outclassed everyone when it comes to his ability to do those things on his site. He's raised shocking amounts of money from record numbers of contributors online.

I should also mention that he has a very good e-mail marketing campaign running as part of their overall online intiatives.

Obama also has the advantage of some fantastic viral videos, including the "Yes we can" music video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjXyqcx-mYY

It will be interesting to see what role demographics play in this election. The older generations that aren't as web savvy are likely not to be impacted by the online presence of either candidate, where everyone who watched those debates in 1960 were swayed by what they saw on TV.

[Sarah]

Interesting point, Jason. I think the demographics factor will be an issue in this election--McCain's supporters are less likely to look for info online based on demographics, whereas Obama HAS to bring his A-game online. But by 2012, 2016, it seems like everyone will have to have a sharp internet strategy to be taken seriously. I'm not sure if that's true in 2008, but I guess time will tell.

(And I would argue it was during the Dean campaign that the internet changed the game the way that TV did it in 1960. Dean was the first one to harness the power of grassroots organizing online, and campaigns have never looked back).