Social Media in the recent Calgary election
————————————————————————–
Formatting note- please click on the top button that reads ‘politics’ to see a complete listing of blog entries. You will need to read this post from that link in order to post comments.
My friend who was involved on the Higgins campaign recently sent out a draft of a blog entry he is working on. His message- don’t get caught up in social media, its not what won this election for Nenshi, its not a magic campaign strategy. His thoughts are that Higgin’s team (himself included) lost the campaign with some key missteps, and that Nenshi won largely because he seemed honest and qualified to Calgarians.
My response:
Hi _____,
It is important to see Social Media for what it is- I’ll refer specifically to Twitter. You are right that it isn’t magic, but it is 3 main things.
1. It is a quick, efficient, way to be accessible to many people. This builds word of mouth support and can answer criticisms in real time (something Higgins needed to do, but was ineffective)
2. It is free marketing that is regulated not by how much you spend, but how much you use it and how good you are at it. Because of this it is marketing that people trust (because it is somewhat democratic and interactive- you can choose to get someone’s Tweets or not). And again- IT IS FREE MARKETING.
3. It is direct access to members of the press and other hyper-communicators in your area.
Higgins looked bad on Twitter because it suggested that she was out of touch (with Twitter) and was saying what other people told her to say or said for her. She didn’t write her own Tweets and her handlers (who were representing that they were her by using her account) didn’t understand the medium. Instead of engaging people like Twitter could have, and did for some, it made her look worse to key communicators and press people, reenforcing their belief that she lacked substance. Higgins has a sharp wit and strong personality, if she had run her own account people would have loved it.
That Twitter use hurt Higgins’ campaign shows why people like Twitter. If you aren’t informed and aren’t yourself you will look bad on it. Because it is so instant, and at times off the cuff, it can offer a glimpse into who someone actually is. The message that Twitter can put out for someone is: here I am, this is actually me writing this, I am honest, this is how I think, you can ask me things, I know what I’m talking about, anyone can test me and access me, you will see who I am through how I choose to respond or not respond. The message the Higgins team put out on Twitter was- Twitter is weird and kind of pathetic and, as such, all of you on it are also that way to us, we’re essentially a dishonest team here and we are going to misrepresent our candidate by writing from her account, Higgins herself isn’t running the show- she is being told what to do and what to say.
You are right to sense that its not a magic fix all on a campaign. Social media in itself is not and never will be the key to an election. It’s the combination of an honest, informed, accessible, team and most importantly CANDIDATE, PLUS social media that lets people know that that’s what you are all about: honesty, informed decision making and accessibility. That’s when social media works in a campaign.
It can level the field in a campaign by being marketing that costs nothing and is directly linked to who the candidate actually is. Some people are thrilled by this as a door-opening, democratizing, force.
You could say that Twitter is like a bar stool conversation, or sitting on a bus that is stuck somewhere, or attending a giant Quaker meeting. When you are sitting there in silence with a group of other people- some who you know and some who you don’t, you might venture to throw out statement. If I’m at the bar with three other people sitting there and it has been 2 minutes since anyone said anything, I might say “I don’t understand how these successful oil-men Flames owners can run a hockey team with so few prospects and a weak farm system. It’s almost like oil and gas guys are short sighted,”. It might just float out there or someone might respond to it. I probably wouldn’t say “Zak Pashak thinks that sports are an important part of Calgary”.
Social media wedged into a traditional control the message/media campaign as an afterthought or platitude is destructive. You absolutely should not use it if you don’t understand it or if you have contempt for it. Certainly, candidates who don’t have Twitter accounts can still win, but their campaigns shouldn’t half-way involve social media. Twitter users will more easily support someone who doesn’t use Twitter at all than someone who uses it poorly, or has other people use it poorly for them. Political advisors should not cast social media aside completely, they should all be learning as much as possible about it.
