MyDD :: Google-Bombing The Election

Google-Bombing The Election

by Chris Bowers, Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 12:07:07 PM EST

For the PA-06 race, the DCCC has a new website out called Rubber Stamp Gerlach. Why is this important? Because the most common way that people use the Internet during election season is to find out information about candidates. From the Pew Internet and American life project: (large PDF, quoting page 5)

Asked of those who went online for election news during that campaign:
What do you do when going online for election news? In parentheses, the total number of online political news consumers in that year's campaign.

Research candidate positions on issues: (34 million)
Get or send email with jokes about the election: (32 million)
Research candidate voting records: (20 million)
Take online polls: (18 million)
Find out about the endorsements or ratings of candidates by organizations: (16 million)
Get information about when or where to vote: (14 million)
Join political discussions and chat groups: (6 million)
Contribute money to a candidate online: (4 million)

By far, the most frequent political action taken online is to find out more about candidates. In 2006, as in 2004, most of this searching for information will take place on Google. Whatever the top two or three sites are for a candidate's name on Google, that will serve as a major source of information on that candidate.

Now, some campaigns have bought Google Ads, and some have not. Either way, If the blogosphere were to work together to Googlebomb, say, thirty key Republican districts and direct people searching for a given Republican candidate to a good website, blog, article or advertisement that tells the truth about that candidate, we could make a huge impact on the flow of information on key congressional races to voters. For PA-06, it would not necessarily, be Rubber Stamp Gerlach, but it could be, for example, his page on GOP Auction House, which is already #7 in Google rankings on a search for his name.

I have struggled at times to figure out what useful action I can have in the final few weeks of the campaign besides reporting and keeping up spirits. This could be a pretty fun, cool and useful form of online action. What say you? Am I off my rocker again? Would this be a cool form of online action for the progressive blogosphere to take over the next few weeks?

Tags: Blogosphere, activism, 2006 elections, googlebomb (all tags)

Permalink :: 42 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

Yes anything we can do is worth the effort. After all Dems and Progressives can chew gum and google at the same time! We can do a lot more than rant this year especially!.

by eddieb on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 12:25:22 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

chris, i think this is an excellent idea. i'll do it on my own low-traffic blog. just don't be surprised to see the other side doing it as well!

and you might want to post a few suggestions, so we don't have to google every repub candidate (if you don't think that's crossing the line of course)

and long time reader, philly native... first time commenter... thanks for all you do!

-2manychefs

by 2manychefs on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 12:29:53 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

I have though on a few occasion that it would be interesting to start a group/site/blog with this as its primary activity.. Its seems we on the left have an advantage in this area we should exploit..

http://www.rubberstampgerlach.com

I have some SEO experience, and I am sure there are people in this community with knowlege that far exceeds mine..

by JBishop on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 12:32:56 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

I suppose every little bit helps. But really how many people who don't use the internet to get their news are suddenly turning on-line to find out about candidates?

My guess is that it's a bit of preaching to the choir, but it certainly won't hurt.

I find it amusing that the ConnecticutforLieberman.com site was actually taken by a satiric "pro-Lieberman" site.

; ^ ) So, it's not a bad idea, but a bit of an inside joke. I imagine that in 20 years time it would be deadly for a candidate to have the #1 site that appears be an opposition site, but in 2006? More of an irritant.

by Cugel on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 12:43:19 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

Chris,

Am I right that by Googlebombing you mean having lots of links to a site that tells the truth about Republican candidates?

I think its a great idea. I'd even suggest we have a tag and page similar to Adwatch, where MyDDers can post about sites that would be good Googlebomb targets. We might even have a post/thread with general tips for how to maximize the effectiveness of Googlebomb strategies and tactics, similar to the Adwatch instruction page. I'd prefer something like "truthlink" as a tag rather than "googlebomb," since the latter suggests gaming the system while the former highlights the truth-telling goal that motivates us.

The beauty is that the progressive netroots is big, active and growing (with a possible surge from now till the election), with lots of commenters (and diarists) who can add link reference beyond those in the main posts.

If posters and commenters were all aware of the value of including links (and of finding good "target" sites and posting about them), and if this strategy spread to other sites, including dkos, etc., we might have a new netroots+search-enabled system for "truth-telling" to the American people.

I love it.

by mitchipd on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 12:46:38 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

Just be sure we keep on doing the other side of the idea - defend our candidates' good names by always linking to their correct websites when we post about them.

by Nina Katarina on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 12:52:09 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

Good point Nina.

by mitchipd on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 01:08:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

MD-SEN

Link Mike Steele (R) to this site:

http://www.therealsteele.com

by andy k on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 01:09:11 PM EST

Site Suggestions (none / 0)

Might I humbly propose Google bombing the following names to the following sites:

Deborah Pryce: BadPryce.org
Charles Taylor: TruthAboutTaylor.com
Heather Wilson: WashingtonWilsonWatch.com
Dave Reichert: RubberStampReichert.com
Rick O'Donnell: RadicalRick.org
Dick Pombo: DirtyDickPombo.com

Any more ideas?

by imaPROgressive on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 01:14:31 PM EST

Is it just me? (none / 0)

Does this tactic seem a little under handed? I don't know maybe I am old fashion, but I believe in winning the dabate on the issues.

by Classical Liberal on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 01:21:50 PM EST

Not underhanded at all (none / 0)

I don't think its underhanded at all, if the sites we point to tell the truth that Repubs try to hide. Its just like any campaign communication strategy. You can't win the debate if nobody's listening, so you need to employ strategies that reach people. It's a separate question whether you then tell the truth or lie and smear. If any anti-Repub sites are full of the latter, you don't need to include links to them in your posts or comments.

by mitchipd on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 01:38:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

Speaking of which, Patrick Murphy (D PA-08) just released a similar site to the Gerlach site called ElectionYearMike.com.

It includes some fun games showing how republican incumbent Mike Fitzpatrick took a pay raise while the minimum wage has remained stagnant, how Mike will say anything to get elected, and how he has consistently rejected or cut certain spending initiatives that would help the citizens of PA-08, while funding the pork for the districts of his Republican cronies.

It is good stuff so check it out.

by sem1480 on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 01:28:50 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

If you guys want help and have a budget we can make things happen for you.

We are a professional SEO company, and we'd be more than happy to help you guys out. We don't even want to make any money, just cover our costs.

www.vipsem.com

My name is Jeff, please ask for me if you call.

by jeff419 on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 01:37:12 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

how do you 'google-bomb" and what does it mean?

If it could help us win then we should do that..More and more people are using the internet for their infos on candidate and we liberal owns the blogosphere, therefore, we should use this to our advantage.

by Maria19Rodriguez on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 01:47:12 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

by Maria19Rodriguez on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 01:47:16 PM EST

You're kidding, right? (3.00 / 1)

"I have struggled at times to figure out what useful action I can have in the final few weeks of the campaign..."

Do they not have field campaigns where you come from or something?

by Dan Ancona on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 01:58:00 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

Chris, if you're wondering what to do, come on out to Nevada and help us elect Dina Titus as Governor and defeat her opponent DC Congressman Jim Gibbons .

by desmoulins on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 02:28:51 PM EST

correction (none / 0)

Her opponent is Jim Gibbons.

Right now, the "Vote Gibbons Out" blog is #3 on Google for Jim Gibbons, but with a few more links to Jim Gibbons it might move up.

Any ideas on the best way to affect the Google ranking of a site like Jim Gibbons?

by desmoulins on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 02:32:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: correction (none / 0)

Google rates sites not only on the number of times a keyword like "Gibbons" shows up, but also by the number of links to the site. So, if you could convince 10 or 20 bloggers to link to my site, which is Vote Gibbons Out, btw, that might make a difference. Or what if a bunch of state democratic party websites linked to pro-democratic blogs? Or progressive minded orgs like move-on, aclu, etc started a blogroll page linking to sites like mine?

by nevadascandalmonger on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 05:12:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: correction (none / 0)

I think its more complicated than just # of links; its the number of links that use the particular term, such as Jim Gibbons, to link to a particular site.

But I don't know if those links have to be on different sites or if they have to be clicked on to count.

Any help from the internets experts out there?

by desmoulins on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 10:32:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Great idea; some suggestions (none / 0)

Chris--

GoogleBombing specific names to sites that are highly derogatory may be fun and fulfilling, but how many random web surfers are going to click through to sites with obviously negative names like "BadPryce" and "DirtyDickPombo." Not that you shouldn't do this, but here are some additional suggestions for taking advantage of the likelihood that as the election approaches, lots of voters are going to use search engines to find out information about the candidates in their district.

How about:

1. Adding factual information to sites like Wikipedia and Congresspedia (which actually has more meat on its pages on Members of Congress than Wikipedia).

2. Consistently linking to those pages whenever you mention a Member, which will drive up their search engine results.

3. Adding a tool like the Popup Politician, which is a line of Java script that you insert on your site's template, and then it creates a rollover link next to any Member's name that you mention in a post. The rollover produces a small popup box showing the Member's picture, plus links to their page in Congresspedia, their campaign finance profile in OpenSecrets.org and their recent voting record. The nice thing here is once you add the Java script, you don't have to do anything else. See the Sunlight Foundation's blogs for an example of the Popup Politician in action. (Full disclosure, Congresspedia and Popup Politician are both projects of Sunlight, for which I am a consultant.)

Micah

by Micah Sifry on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 02:57:16 PM EST

Re: Great idea; some suggestions (none / 0)

Important point about site names, Micah. And that Popup Politician tool sounds pretty neat.

My initial concern would be that it might be more effective to point people to more hard-hitting and focused (and, frankly, partisan) sites than ones that require a lot of digging through long voting and fundraising histories, unless these are really easy to evaluate. My quick look at Congresspedia and the other links is that they're great resources, but not quick attention-grabbers and opinion-influencers.

Maybe a compromise, if it's feasible, would be to add one more link to the Popup Java script, and for someone(s) at MyDD to be responsible for choosing the best "hard-hitting but fact-based partisan page" and adding that to the Java script code. This would be a "partisan customized" version of Popup Politican, suitable for a blog site like MyDD, which is more focused on achieving partisan/electoral goals more than simply providing fact-based political research tools. That raises a general question about how customizable Popup Politician is, and how much coding expertise is needed to do the customizing.

I also wonder how using Popup Politician would affect Google Page Ranks, versus adding specific links in posts and comments. PP seems like a really nice tool, but it may not be the best tool to achieve the Page Rank goals laid out in Chris' post, which I think are worth pursuing in a focused way.

by mitchipd on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 03:33:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great idea; some suggestions (none / 0)

The Popup tool can be tinkered with; and we definitely want to create a version that would make it easy for a non-techie to add some links to particular content (say, to posts on your own site referencing a particular Member)...However, Sunlight Foundation is a c3, so it can't go and add links to obviously partisan sites.

We'll be adding documentation that explains how to get under the hood...stay tuned.

by Micah Sifry on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 05:16:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great idea; some suggestions (none / 0)

Sounds good, Micah. Software tools that allow non-techies to get under the hood enough to use and customize them are very high-value projects as far as I'm concerned. The netroots is a huge and pretty highly-motivated "human resource." Every enhancement of "productivity" has the potential to generate big results--at least in theory.

We are building a new democracy-enhancing communication system, piece by piece, election cycle by election cycle. Big thanks to all the tool-builders spending time on this effort, and to all those who help make it happen with funding, etc. I bet the Founding Fathers (and Mothers) would be proud and happy to see this new "revolution" taking place at a time when the realization of their vision appears to be in jeopardy.

by mitchipd on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 05:47:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

We need tags for this (none / 0)

At the risk of repeating myself...

Chris, Matt, Jonathan:

Can we set up a Googlebomb/Truthlink "project" that uses a similar structure to the Adwatch project, where we'd have a generic tag (I'd suggest something like "truthlink") that could be combined with candidate- and race-specific tags that MyDD readers could use to find diary posts and threads that include info, discussion and suggestions related to "truthlinking" strategies and target sites (both pro-Dem and anti-Repub), both in general and for specific campaigns.

There's already some pretty useful and specific info in this thread, but it probably won't be accessible to anyone else once it fades into the archives without specific-enough tagging.

by mitchipd on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 03:06:23 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

Anyone know how important anchor words are in google bombing? I was thinking about writing a short script that links to about twenty or thirty sites that people could cut and paste into their signature line; that way everytime someone posts a comment (say on kos) the links would go up. I was hoping to make it so the visible words would read "Google Bomb This Election!", with each letter pointing to a different site.

Clearly, that won't be as good as anchor words, like the candidates name, linking to the site -- but who wantst to have a list of thirty candidates as their signature? A single sentance won't clutter things up, looks kind of cool, and might go viral. My question is -- without appropriate anchor words, will something like that be able to impact the page rankings?

Thanks.

by Joe Gabriel on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 03:43:39 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

can someone please explain to me what does google-bombing means?

by Maria19Rodriguez on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 03:48:45 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

Maria,

I'm not sure I've got it right, but here's what I think we're talking about here:

Google search results listings are based on something called Page Rank. At least to some extent, this is based on the number of incoming links to a web site and the number of incoming links to the sites that link to this site (e.g., having links from popular sites like dkos, HuffPo, NYT, WaPo, etc. would increase Page Rank a lot more than links from "joe's personal blog" that gets no traffic and has virtually no incoming links).

Since the progressive blogosphere is growing and includes some high-traffic sites with lots of incoming links, the idea, as I understand it, is for MyDD posters and commenters, and the progressive blogosphere as a whole, to include inks to web sites that present a pro-Dem and/or anti-Repub point of view.

The more this happens, the more likely it is that any citizen doing a Google search to find info on their local or state races will see a list of search results where pro-Dem and anti-Repub pages are listed prominently at or near the top of the page.

As Micah notes, these folks may ignore listings for sites like "DirtySonofABitchJoeSmith," since they'd figure these would not give them factual information or what they'd consider "reasonable" opinions.

So, the end goal seems to be to influence Google's Page Rank in ways that would get people looking for campaign-related info to visit sites that contain info we think can help them evaluate the candidates and end up voting Democratic.

My understanding is that Google doesn't like it (and could take action) if you try to unfairly "game" the system they've set up (this is done a lot in the "commercial" sector). But I think that, if our goal is to include links in our posts and comments to sites we consider good sources of campaign-related info, Google wouldn't have a reason to do anything to discourage us. This is, after all, the fundamental purpose of links--to send people to other sites that have relevant information. We'd just be doing it with an appreciation for its broader impacts in addition to its immediate value for guiding readers to good sites, which we do already. We won't be unfairly "gaming" the system, we'll just be keeping in mind how it works as we continue the practice of adding links to our posts.

Does this help?

by mitchipd on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 04:21:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

Do a google search for "miserable failure" for an example of a google bomb.

by Classical Liberal on Thu Sep 28, 2006 at 11:41:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

by Maria19Rodriguez on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 03:48:50 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

I think this is a fine idea. Bombs away everybody!

PS - shrieking harpy

by StiffMittens on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 05:27:01 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

so everytime i post a website linkage, it is google-bombing which improve the google ranking?

for example, if im too link santorumwatch.com, that'll be 1 point for the website?

by Maria19Rodriguez on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 05:30:28 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

I don't think anyone really knows exactly what formulas Google uses (they actually change it over time--its their "secret sauce," if you will). But I think you've got the basic idea.

What I'd suggest (others might disagree), is that you do it in a way that makes sense for people reading your posts, as opposed to just filling up a page with "santorumwatch.com". To the extent it can, Google tries to take "context" into account anyway, so putting links in places that make sense as you write posts and comments would probably work pretty well. One simple step might be to include a link to a "favored" site at the end of every post or comment in a thread that's focused on a related topic.

There are probably other MyDDers that know a lot more about this than I do, and hopefully we'll find more comments and suggestions from them, especially if we can set this up as a "project" like Adwatch.

by mitchipd on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 06:02:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

by Maria19Rodriguez on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 05:30:33 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

Look, here it is in a nutshell: You want the website santorumwatch.com to come up in Google any time someone searches for Rick Santorum (if you Google that phrase right now the "Santorum for Senate" site appears as #1). You start posting links all over the web, in which the a tag's href points to santorumwatch.com while the text surrounded by the A tags reads "Rick Santorum". The more places that the Google bots find that text phrase linking to that site, the higher it's ranking in Google's search results. Eventually, if enough of these links are posted, anyone searching for the phrase "Rick Santorum" on Google's search page will see the santorumwatch.com page as the #1 result instead of Santorum's actual web page. Try Googling for the phrase "miserable failure" right now. The #1 search result is GWB's bio page on the Whitehouse's website.

by StiffMittens on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 06:31:16 PM EST

Re: Google-Bombing The Election (none / 0)

Oh, BTW, please help me proliferate this Google bomb:

shrieking harpy

Just repost the link on as many different web pages as you can.

Thanks.

by StiffMittens on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 06:34:02 PM EST