As I noted in the Political Web, Barack Obama has successfully penetrated the web to increase support and funding for his campaign. Back in 2004 blogs were influential, however social networks like MySpace, Facebook and YouTube were not. Actually, Facebook and YouTube didn’t even exist back then. With over 150 million combined monthly visitors these three sites are becoming a powerful political tool and Obama is doing a better job utilizing them.
However, what I find most interesting is that even with the massive influence of the web on this election none of the candidates are spending a lot of money online. Since the campaign began in February 2007, $238 million has been spent on television ads but only $4 million online. Why the huge disparity?
With the internet everyone has a voice, and a video camera. If a candidate can inspire the people to do the advertising for him (it was him/her) then there is no reason to spend money online. As any internet startup knows, viral marketing is the most beneficial and desired form of advertising money can’t buy. Obama definitely has online viral marketing working to his advantage. If the average person was able to influence television and broadcast videos for free I would imagine presidential candidates would only be spending money on political buttons.
With difficult questions, there are many truths.EdRuggeroEd Ruggero, The Common Defense
Any society that needs disclaimers has too many lawyers.ErikPepkeErik Pepke