Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Fiscal year starts without a budget
Next Post: Question of the Day
Posted in:
[Posted by Kevin Fanning]
* If you’ve been receiving tons of spam from Illinois Congressional campaigns don’t worry because you’re not alone:
The first few I ignored, recognizing that as a former party chair in the state I was bound to be on some lists. But by winter I’d grown mildly curious: where were these guys getting my address? I’d keep making it clear I didn’t live in Illinois, I’d keep asking to be removed, and sometimes they’d acknowledge receipt (not often) and remove me. Too often my e-mail went unanswered, and I’d get the next randomly-timed e-mail blast from them, repeating the cycle.
If this were one or two campaigns I’d let it slide. But it’s growing – I estimate at least half of the Congressional races in Illinois have added me to their list. Where are they getting my name from? My blog is linked to from Rich Miller’s influential CapitolFaxBlog.com site – and they are apparently spamming everyone on that list. (Three of the campaigns have admitted this is where they got my name from; no clue if the others are following suit, but it sure fits the pattern.)
It’s pretty ridiculous to spam everyone on someone’s blogroll. Not only is it uncreative and impersonal, it just becomes increasingly annoying. I have personally seen my fair share of it, and can attest to the frustration.
It becomes aggravating when a list server perpetually ignores your request to be removed from it.
* Rick also has some good advice for campaigns…
…If the stream of spam in my inbox is any indication, the state of online campaigning at the Congressional level in Illinois is stuck circa 1998.
Here’s some free advice, guys. Talk to your constituents. If you have some bloggers in your district (chances are you do), engage them. Meet them for coffee. Call them. Invite their feedback on what the candidate should be doing.
It’s a great point. Rich and I look at these blogs all of the time. They usually have very good coverage of local events, and add great insight into how many of the voters in that district feel.
For instance, I was looking at Team America’s 10th District Blog today, and saw this post regarding Congressman Mark Kirk and Dan Seal’s presence at a parade in Waukegan:
In yesterday’s parade in Waukegan, Mark Kirk had, by all accounts, somewhere between 200-250 supporters marching with him, many of whom were Latino, and who are turning out to be a huge base of support for Kirk. In fact, Kirk had so many marchers that, in the words of one Kirk observer, it “was actually kind of ridiculous.”
Dem challenger Dan Seals, on the other hand, apparently had about 15 folks marching with him. Seals had more people marching in Libertyville, so I have no idea why he’d have less in Waukegan, unless it simply shows that his base of support in what ought to be Dem territory is pathetically shallow.
* It would do these campaigns a world of good to heed some of the online advice.
posted by Kevin Fanning
Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 10:53 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Fiscal year starts without a budget
Next Post: Question of the Day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
i thought i read this yesterday!
Comment by bored now Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 11:06 am
Also noted by team america, mark kirk walked on water, healed the sick, gave sight to the blind, turned water to wine, and he loves kittens. Dan Seals, TA noted, might have been on his cell phone asking anton levay for how best to pray for osama bin laden at a black mass.
Comment by theoriginalbuckturgidson Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 11:22 am
LOL, no one ever said Team America was unbiased!
Comment by Kevin Fanning Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 11:25 am
why do you keep referencing the TA blog like its legit news source? Its ridiculously one sided and non-objective blog run by a Kirk supporter.
Comment by ChiTownGuy Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 12:00 pm
Read the last comment I made. No one ever said it was a news source. Relax. It’s a local political blog.
Comment by Kevin Fanning Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 12:11 pm
All news is effected by the opinions of the reporters. TA does not hide his bias. You can use it as a source of info without having to agree with it
See I said that without once referencig seals taking an envelope from convicted felon Dan Rostenkowski.
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 12:15 pm
Thanks for the plug, Kevin! I think the link to the Team America Blog was left off, though. And you’re right, we don’t hide our pro-Kirk bias, but we also report the facts.
=== Also noted by team america, mark kirk walked on water, healed the sick, gave sight to the blind, turned water to wine, and he loves kittens. Dan Seals, TA noted, might have been on his cell phone asking anton levay for how best to pray for osama bin laden at a black mass. ===
No, that’s Barack, buddy.
Comment by Team America Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 12:27 pm
Just to be clear, it’s Barack Obama whom the MSM consistently characterizes as walking on water, healing the sick, etc, etc. No idea what the ‘anton levay’ part of the comment was even supposed to mean.
Comment by Team America Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 12:31 pm
fixed the link
Comment by Kevin Fanning Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 12:32 pm
Danke!
Comment by Team America Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 12:34 pm
I’m a Republican who lives in Rep. Kirk’s district, but I think that he’s more liberal than many Democrats. He’s pro-spending increases, pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-gun control, pro-illegal alien, and anti-Iraq surge. I emailed him four times, within the past 15 months, and I asked why he’s a Republican. I didn’t receive a response. I emailed three of his aides, Lester Munson, Patrick Magnuson, and Eric Elk, and I asked them why Kirk is a Republican. I didn’t receive a response.
Comment by LakeCo.Conservative Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 12:34 pm
You bloggers miss the point. The ‘MSM’ has to report the facts, I read TA and can’t trust what you are saying because you are overtly biased. That fact calls all your ‘facts’ into question. About all I can count on in your post is that a parade actually took place somewhere in Waukegan, though I can’t even be sure you were there. You could just be rehasing what a kirk supporter told you happened there. At some point, the public has to get some facts — and not rehashed ones that a ‘blogger’ stole from real journalists who have a job that depends on the facts and could lose it for lying.
Comment by JR Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 12:50 pm
JR, so overt bias is bad; you prefer your news from sources where the bias is hidden and hard to identify?
There is a big diference between bias and falsehoods. bias effects the interpretation of a fact, not the exitsance of the fact itself. truthfulness effects the accuracy of facts. If you are saying TA is untrughful can you identify any facts which deonstrate this point?
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 1:34 pm
JR- excuse me, but I think YOU kinda miss the point. The MSM has their biases as well (or don’t you read the NYT?). At the end, the MSM are only accountable to their viewers/readers, and if they lose credibility for misreporting facts, they will not last in the business (recall Dan Rather and his reporting on the Bush national guard service “memo”). Same thing applies to Bloggers. Although there is no one to ‘fire’ us, no one will visit Team America or any other blog if we misreport facts–what we do is mainly report the facts that we find favorable to our candidates and add in a healthy dose of editorial about what we think the facts show. The ‘other side’ does the same thing. If you find that of value, then visit, and if not, don’t. As Kevin implies, quite often us bloggers have the story first. But please don’t accuse us of misrepresenting facts without evidence.
Kevin’s point, I think, is that campaigns ought to pay more attention, as the bloggers are often a lot closer to the events than some of the professional reporters, whose resources due to budget cuts and the like are becoming increasing stretched. And, as Rich pointed out in his syndicated column from last winter, good blogs can have the ability to influence MSM by exposing stories that otherwise might not come to light (the Terry Link petition scandal was the one Rich referenced, I believe). More and more often, it seems, the MSM are the ones “stealing” tips from Bloggers, not the other way around. But, who cares? If a story I think is important gets picked up by the MSM, then that’s great and I’ve achieved my goal. I can tell from my sitemeter that the Tribune and the Daily Herald check out TA’s blog on a regular basis, as I am sure they are glued to Cap Fax Blog. They are more than welcome to use anything I write about as a springboard.
Comment by Team America Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 1:44 pm
Teamamerica also seems to play fast and loose with the facts.
June 27, the blog says: “GOP incumbent Mark Beaubien has succeeded (for now) in knocking his challenger, Island Lake Trustee Rich Garling, off the fall ballot in the 52nd District race.”
If you care to download the supporting doc, you’ll see the blog is only citing a SBE Hearing Examiner’s recommendation.
As of today, Garling is on the ballot. I believe the actual hearing is scheduled July 9.
Comment by Ela Observer Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 1:46 pm
Obviously, TA is Kevin Fanning’s poodle.
(If he’s reading, Rich will get that joke.)
–
Ghost, it’s pretty obvious which “reporters” are biased in favor of Mark Kirk — the ones that accept emails from Kirk supporters as “man on the street quotes” and also change headlines overnight, possibly after a talking to by the Kirk campaign.
…PS: Seals very publicly rejected that campaign contribution from Mrs. Rostenkowski (a woman is is not a convicted felon).
Funny, “news sources” like TeamAm don’t seem to ever publish facts like those while they busily report on such nonsense along the lines of ‘the Seals campaign “buying” votes by distributing free air conditioning devices’ (ie, little paper fans).
All in good fun.
Let’s remember why we have these debates, folks: Happy Independence Day everyone.
Comment by Rob_N Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 1:50 pm
That should read: “Mrs. Rostenkowski (a woman who is not a convicted felon).”
Comment by Rob_N Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 1:51 pm
Rob, TA is nobody’s poodle.
Comment by Team America Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 1:54 pm
So the only choice here is between overt bias and hidden bias? That seems a rather foolish assumption. My point is that most bloggers have no inherent reason to be accurate or trustworthy. They can go around printing whatever they want and then they criticize the MSM for a few slights or mistakes, but the MSM actually has real, concrete standards. And those in the MSM will actually lose their job if they outright lie, fudge the truth, make things up or present over bias. When I read a blog, I have no idea what the agenda is or whether I can trust it or not. And when I know a blog is bent a certain way, I don’t believe I can trust it at all.
Comment by JR Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 1:54 pm
===When I read a blog, I have no idea what the agenda is or whether I can trust it or not. ===
Right… as opposed to editorial boards with agendas and sponsors? Give me a break.
Comment by Kevin Fanning Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 2:00 pm
And, and Rob- we should point out that Dan Seals “very publicly rejected that campaign contribution” only AFTER we made the story an issue, as far as we can tell. Thus, proving Kevin’s point, once again.
As we also pointed out before, Seals can’t have it both ways– either there was nothing wrong with taking Mrs. Rosty’s money while teaching his night class at NU, or there wasn’t. If it was kosher, why give the money back? And if it wasn’t, why did he wait weeks until after we made an issue of it before he gave it back… in other words, he had to be called out in the blogosphere before he did the right thing. What a guy.
Comment by Team America Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 2:02 pm
TA,
Your ’spy’ in Prof. Seals’ class made the non-issue a “story” within moments of it happening.
Thus, everything that has happened since, from the Midwest floods to Seals not accepting the contribution, has happened “AFTER” you and your comrades whined about it.
Comment by Rob_N Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 2:10 pm
Let’s try to focus on the topic at hand. Flame war is over. The TA blog is what it is and Kevin’s inclusion of that post has, unfortunately, completely distracted the conversation here away from organized campaign spamming based, apparently, on my blog roll. Any campaign that does this needs to reassess its online strategy.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 2:28 pm
Rich - yes, any campaign still spamming should be embarrassed and reassess. It does raise an interesting question. What is the best way to build relationships with new email addresses? Especially with those that the candidate has never met.
Comment by ChiTownGuy Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 4:32 pm
Thanks Rich!
Yes, I think 1998 is about correct.
Since that time, we have gone through five campaigns. Those who hadn’t considered using the Internet for their communication, are now paying casual service to it. They are not even close to really understanding how they can use it, however.
A website could be thought of as print radio. If you are running for office, you should have a lot to tell voters. There should be a daily update at the minimum on any campaign website. Once voters browse through your site, you need to keep giving them fresh reasons to return. Living, breathing, candidates should have living, breathing websites.
Voters take a look at a website before they donate through it. They might visit a few times. You need to give them stuff to discover with each visit.
Campaign websites should be barrier free. They should be bilingual or trilingual depending on voters within that voting district. Photos and art used should reflect the demographics of your voter base. Too many campaign websites for white middle aged candidates, have photos of nothing but white people, as though no other kind of voter exists. It is ridiculous.
Candidates should have staffers that live online. Traditional press people are often useless because they do not understand how the Internet opens new doors. Traditional media people view their candidate’s website as a digital brochure and often reproduce a candidate’s mailers. This is frankly idiotic and simply obsolete. A good campaign considers their website a broadcasting tool for audio, video, print and interactivities such as donations, shopping and networking.
I have a boatload of ideas that I have developed over the past 15 years, since Al Gore and I started inventing HTTP. He was a lot more normal back then and funny, skinnier and more humble. That Oscar really went to his head, didn’t it?
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 4:50 pm
JR missed the point and Ghost almost made it.
Political blogs (Capitol Fax excepted) usually aren’t effective as “traditional” news sources. They’re PR TOOLS. Some sponsored and funded by the campaign (VERY risky indeed) and others sponsored by “independents”, which are great channels for PR distribution and testing, and for keeping one’s ear to the rumble.
Campaign websites generally ARE redundant with printed materials, but good sources for the obligatory position statements, unlimited pictures of the candidate, family and supporters; e-donations; volunteer sign-up; event announcements, etc. They’re most effective use is keeping the ground troops energized.
Political spamming is just as ineffective–if not more so–as robo-calls. Even the average voter nowadays perceives them as amateur. Efficacy of repetition is LONG gone; hence the reason people are irritated to the point where they’ll consider switching if another viable candidate is out there. Perception is that the staff is major small time and comparable to telemarketers who believe that x number of robo-calls and/or emails will result in x number of votes.
VM is also right that campaigns need staffers (and I’ll add consultants or more experienced staffers) who live on line. However, most campaigns that follow that strategy make the mistake of hiring the wrong talent for the right jobs.
Volunteers and newbies are fine for maintaining campaign sites. The methodology, processes, and technology are turnkey and simple. Bloggers, however, need to be highly-experienced PR talent who can not only sell and test their product, but can immediately tell when trouble is brewing and initiate appropriate damage control.
VM is also right in stating that there’s a way to leverage technology that many aren’t aware of yet. Perhaps I should submit a proposal to him to see whether we can team up to make some beaucoup bucks and do some good.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Jul 1, 08 @ 10:14 pm
Daily Herald called me for permission to quote me during the primary in the 14th. I get email from candidates asking me to post but never from anyone in my districts.
Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Jul 2, 08 @ 5:53 am
Rich,
As Bored Now noted in the first comment, Kevin posted a very similar entry earlier (though I can’t find it). The only thing that seemed new to me (again, I can’t locate the original) was the “For instance…” and the link and pullquote from TA at the end.
Thus the discussion over Mr. Fanning’s continued canoodling with Mr. ‘Merica. (TA did himself no favors by taking another useless, needless whack at Professor Seals as he seems wont to do.)
–
To the topic, I thought the Pera campaign had a very good online presence, as do the Kirk and Kotowski campaigns (bloggers notwithstanding, present company included).
Each of those campaigns, and there are several more, use their email list very effectively to link to 3rd party news and info on the candidates and also to highlight their accomplishments, upcoming events, etc. Their sites also do the same in a more general, broader reach sense.
Comment by Rob_N Wednesday, Jul 2, 08 @ 9:10 am
===Thus the discussion over Mr. Fanning’s continued canoodling with Mr. ‘Merica.===
I thought the flame war was over? The reason I attached the post from TA was because it exemplified the point about local bloggers being in touch with their districts. (Whether they are biased or not) Seriously, get over it.
Also, I pulled the post about 5 mins after I posted it on Monday because it wasnt ready. Hence why it went up yesterday.
Comment by Kevin Fanning Wednesday, Jul 2, 08 @ 9:19 am