Using the internet - beyond netroots.
by srolle, Mon Nov 22, 2004 at 07:17:55 PM EST
Compared to television viewers, website visitors are pretty uniform group. Not many environmentalist spend time perusing hunting forums, and very few grumpy old war hawks spend time perusing The Onion. We need targeted advertisments that direct visitors to websites that put the candidate in a positive light for their particular demographic.
Hunting/fishing/outdoorsmen websites would have ads directing visitors to a website like "Outdoorsmen for Kerry"... While an ad in The Onion would send the user to a positive description about Kerry's experience in the Vietnam War and then his political activism in the protest movement. The targeting websites would excoriate the opponents record on the issue being discussed.
It would not be written by the campaign and be a seperate entity. No quote could be attributed to the candidate, but the visitors would see a message designed to appeal to them. The Republicans have used this method repeatedly to make a point to an intended audience, and then shrug off attacks from the unintended audience.
I really think that part of the key to competing everywhere is being something to everyone. The vast majority of Americans base their votes on much less than a complete picture of both candidates. Furthermore they most likely agree with each candidate on some of the issues. Let's make people see the issues we agree with them on as much as possible. By targeting voters more, we can fill in only the parts of that voters electoral perspective that favors us. If a voter is has a vague idea of where the candidates stand on issue that they disagree with us on, but have a crystallized idea of how our candidate agrees with them on a different issue, we will get the vote.
Tags: (all tags)