A little over a month ago, Republican Scott Brown pulled off one of the biggest political upsets in recent history, overcoming a 30+ point deficit to win the vacated seat of Ted Kennedy in a special election in a heavily Democratic state. One month prior to that, virtually no one had heard of him.
Much has been written about what happened in that month, and at some level it’s safe to say that Brown’s campaign embracing the digital space above and beyond the traditional political campaign played a major role in his success. But what is up for debate is whether or not his tactics should have other campaigns rushing to imitate. After all, there’s only so many hours in the day, and so many days in the week.
If every election had similar conditions to the one between Scott Brown & Martha Coakley, the answer would be pretty straightforward: candidates should be investing heavily in social media, leveraging rapid, cost-effective platforms for interacting with broad bases of support.
But the Scott Brown election was special, and while other elections might share some similarities, the following conditions combined into the perfect storm for Scott Brown’s digital revolution:
Overconfident opponent who ran a lackluster, mistake-ridden campaign
Perhaps the single most important component to Brown’s victory was the abject failure of a campaign run by Martha Coakley. Beyond the stunning lack of digital tactics, Coakley stumbled over and over after winning what was assumed to be the more competitive Democratic primary. With even a semi-competent opponent, the groundswell behind Brown would have been caught and caught early, extinguishing the flame before it was too much to control. This campaign is a classic example of the value in keeping tabs on your competition.
Impending healthcare debate raised regional race to national significance
Without healthcare reform, Brown wouldn’t have had the finances to compete. Most local elections don’t have the benefit of a looming national issue hinging on it. By figuring out that he was in a highly unique position, Brown watched the money pour in from concerned citizens across the country. Think that would happen if Brown would have been vote 39 or 45 instead of 41?
Special election had nation’s undivided political attention
In addition to having a controversial issue to tap into, Brown didn’t even have to compete for coverage at a national level, making it easier for advertising and PR to reach peak effectiveness. Think about if this had been a normal election cycle? If there were 60 other Senate seats up for grabs, how could Brown have ever defined himself as vote 41?
Increased apathy amongst Democrats (Obama letdown)
Further compounding Coakley’s shoddy campaign, internet-saavy Democrats who had made such a difference in Obama’s campaign have experienced a post-election let down. This points to perhaps the largest concern with heavily utilizing social media – when you really everyone around your underdog image, and then you win, you’re no longer the underdog.
Growing Tea Party Movement a motivated, pre-organized grassroots base
Of course, social networking becomes a heck of a lot easier when you have an existing network ready and waiting. Then it’s more of a communication channel than a recruiting tool, and your critical mass has instantly been developed. The Tea Party movement has been heavily leveraging free social media tools as cost effective, efficient means for self organizing. Scott Brown merely had to flip the switch.
So?
Good question. While I think social media can be a tremendously effective tool, and should absolutely be a part of any campaign (be it political or commercial), the level and depth to which social media is employed needs to be carefully thought out. If you’re an up and comer looking to slay Goliath, social media should probably figure much more heavily in your strategy – it’s a highly effective means of organizing and rallying supporters behind your cause, generating momentum without breaking your budget. You can quickly become the poster boy for change, the rallying cry against the status quo, and the hip and trendy insurgent.
But if you’re the category leader or the incumbent, you’re simply not going to see the same empassioned response. Your social media presence becomes much more of a defensive play against any potential Davids lurking around your ankles. Your use of social media becomes much more PR-focused, monitoring and correcting the record where needed, and gleaning as much consumer/voter insight as you can.
In other words, the decision is not whether or not to use social media, but how.
0 Responses to “The Digital Tea Party”