Two views

Two views
: Two correspondents from Blogging the President went to the Politics Online Conference. Stirling Newberry says it was the place to be. Ellen Dana Nagler says it was a snoozer filled with laptopless peple who just wanted to use the Internet to raise bucks.

  • billg

    >>…it was a snoozer filled with laptopless peple who just wanted to use the Internet to raise bucks.
    And “Internet = money” will remain the mantra of politicos until someone can show them that more people read blogs than watch TV and read newspapers.

  • Why not use the Internet to raise bucks? People are using the Internet to help them raise dogs, cats, zebras, even ferrets. So why not bucks?
    Of course, to raise bucks you will need some doe.

  • What the hell are “laptopless people”? People who aren’t rich enough to buy a laptop? Hi there. The only laptop I own is no longer very much so due to its great age — a 486SX with 8 megs of RAM and a 10″ monochrome display, yeehaw! — and the fact that I can only power it up using the a/c cord due to its dead battery. I take donations. I so want to be one of the Kewl Folk™ with snazzy new laptops so I can blog wireless from Starbuck’s. It’s my goal in life.

  • (Having read the entry) Oh horror, taking notes by hand. They might as well have been using stone tablets and chisels! I hope Ms. Nagler didn’t get any uncoolness on her.

  • I was there, laptopless, and had a great time.
    Some clueless folks stumbling around — but on average, far more insight per capita than at the average publishing convention.
    Some folks I talked to definitely grasped that the Internet is not just an ATM but a tremendous lever. Numbers presented at the opening session indicated that 1/2 of “influentials” (the 10% of Americans who lead the other 90%) are politically active online. Wow. Hit them and you’ve hit the nail on the head.

  • I was at the conference and didn’t consider it a “snoozer.” Nor did I think that the politicos in attendence looked at the Internet solely as a way to raise money. What I saw was a concerted effort to understand and leverage the power of the Internet in a way that mobilizes constituents at a grassroots level. My company was a sponsor, and we organized a panel to discuss the basics of online advertising. The panel was underattended, in part because I think attendees wanted to do their best to understand the grassroots aspects of online political marketing before they moved into the advertising space. The blogging community and mobilization tools like Meetup are all the rage now, and I don’t think it’s solely because they offer an easy path to donations. Rather, I think it’s also due to the fact that campaigns want to provide new ways for Internet users to rally around candidates and issues that matter to them. There was quite a bit of discussion about how campaigns can get their messages out to the blogging community in a more efficient and effective fashion. I don’t think this is just because campaigns want to raise money. I think it’s because they want to get their ideas out there for everyone to chew on.

  • Tom,
    I was there too, and while I didn’t find it a snoozer, one guy talked for a long half hour on how web video was THE innovation of this election cycle. That’s the company Scott nailed for not getting it.

  • MattS:
    I posted about that on my blog a couple days ago. I wasn’t at that panel, but I heard about it from Scott. (We know one another from his i-traffic days.)
    Funny how anyone could claim that web video is an innovation in this day and age. It’s been around for years. I’m actually glad I wasn’t at that panel, because I probably would have fallen asleep.

  • Insertability of video is important, but it wasn’t what drove this cycle.
    Thanks for the link Jeff.