Candidates use power of text to bolster campaigns: But it’s too early in process to gauge effectiveness

Just as FDR targeted radio listeners with his fireside chats and John Kennedy’s dashing looks helped sway television viewers during the Richard Nixon debates, Barack Obama is using a cutting-edge media platform to approach voters.
The Illinois senator last summer launched a new text messaging initiative in an effort to expand its grassroots network and organize volunteers for events, encouraging supporters to send “GO” to the vanity code OBAMA (62262) to sign up for messages. The campaign quickly built on the service, which is powered by SinglePoint, a Seattle-area interactive mobile firm, and a Beltway startup called Distributive Networks: A mobile site was built, offering free ringtones (clips from Obama’s speeches) and wallpapers, and voters can send questions via text message to get policy statements and other information. The mobile site also includes information on how to donate or volunteer, and is promoted through a prominently placed icon on the campaign’s Web site.
More than a novelty
While the campaign’s initial push into mobile was a novelty, “as they used it they realized that it has a couple of great applications,” Distributive Networks CEO Kevin Bertram said during a panel at CTIA Wireless 2008 several weeks ago. “It’s a great way to take your other media types . and give them that additional call to action. Which, I think, is what makes mobile so great.”
Obama was by no means the first U.S. politician to dip his toes into mobile: fellow Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Edwards both beat Obama to the wireless punch in their presidential bids, and Republican Ron Paul used Twitter feeds to deliver campaign updates to followers. Improbably, former Sen. Rick Santorum was one of the first pols to go mobile, teaming with pundit Mary Matalin in 2006 to distribute thank-you notes to supporters via text.
Voting reminders effective
And while politicking through mobile is still very much in the experimental stages, it appears wireless can be an effective tool in turning out voters. A 2006 study from the University of Michigan and Princeton University found that text-message reminders to young voters boosted turnout by more than 4% at a fraction of the cost of more traditional get-out-the-vote methods such as phone calls or door-to-door canvassing.
Whether a reasonable uptick in voter turnout is indicative of how mobile might generate votes for a specific candidate is uncertain, of course. But the personal nature of the mobile phone – coupled with the ability to cull information from supporters – makes wireless an especially effective tool in touching voters, creating stickiness and spurring them into action, according to Diane Strahan, VP of mobile product marketing for NeuStar Inc., the clearinghouse and directory service company that oversees the common short code program in the United States.
“Just as Ronald Reagan learned the power of television, I think Obama and John Edwards have applied the power of mobile,” Strahan said. “If you look at Obama’s mobile campaign, he’s got fundraising elements, people can volunteer, they can get customized as well as canned answers. It’s a growing database. How much he’ll leverage that in the future to turn these participants into advocates has yet to be determined, but at least he’s doing some level of personalizing by region and issue.”
Indeed, Obama’s campaign seems to grasp the power – and limitations – of wireless better than some others. Not only is Obama one of the few to have a vanity code – Clinton and Edwards failed to link their short codes to their names or any other memorable item – the campaign provides incentives such as stickers to those who provide personal information. And many text messages add a viral component, asking supporters to forward the message or encourage friends to sign up for alerts.
Those efforts contrast starkly with John McCain’s campaign, which has yet to add a mobile component.
Tech overload
That kind of sophisticated mobile campaign has its share of snags, as JupiterResearch analyst Julie Ask has pointed out. The Obama campaign sends three to four times as many texts as the Clinton camp, Ask noted earlier this year, which may prove overwhelming for all but the most dedicated supporters. Technological glitches still exist in many of the mobile offerings, and few campaigns have managed to integrate mobile with computers, pointing users to the traditional Internet where appropriate – to enter detailed personal information, for instance, or donate to a candidate.
While they may do little to further the national discourse regarding sophisticated policy matters – “If you think it’s challenging trying to respond to a sound bite in a debate, try doing it in 160 characters,” SinglePoint VP Doug Busk quipped earlier this year – they can raise brand awareness and keep voters in the loop. And that’s as important in politics as it is in any other kind of marketing, Strahan noted.
“I think today brands are really seeing mobile as a potential viral component that is a must-have, because the users are actually defining the brands today,” Strahan maintained. “Politicians are trying to get a point across, a value proposition across. A brand in and of itself is a value proposition, it’s a promise, and all these political candidates are in themselves a brand. They’re making a promise to America about what they stand for and what they’re going to deliver. The exact same rules apply.”