Programus Interruptus

Apologies all around for both the unfortunate title of this post, and for the last two Pillars of online video campaigning being late.

Last week we covered Frequency, Interactivity and Exclusivity…and were staring Continuity right in the face. Then came the California Democratic Convention, which sent me into the bunker and kept me from jotting down the last two pillars.

I’m going to catch up on my sleep and we’ll take a look at the last two pieces of the puzzle, Continuity and Ubiquity by week’s end.

The Week Ahead

I’ve resolved to do more around here - or at least as much as I can, with a lot of work ahead of me on the upcoming California Democratic Party Convention.

Starting next week, I’ll be taking a look at a few principles I’d like to see as the baseline in online campaign videos. Monday through Friday, I’ll be examining these five pillars - paying attention to who is adhering to them (and who isn’t) - and how I would approach them were I the one making films for one of the campaigns.

So, check back next week for an introduction to what I’ll be talking about and a look at the first of the five pillars - frequency. Until then, take a look at this post from TechPresident on the five video ideas David All would like to see.

It’s Friday, and it’s my birthday, so I’m going to dig deep and give away five creative ideas I’d be working on if I were working for a Presidential campaign. Would they go viral? Well, you never know unless you try. And that, my friends, is the beauty of having a free distribution service.

And one more thing, you’ll note that all of these videos are POSITIVE. Video can be used to do something other than tear down the other guy. (TechPresident: Top five Presidential viral videos I’d like to see)

Joining the fray

The Washington Post has a story on Presidential online videos. Today’s angle, the folks who critique them. Prominently featured are Jeff Jarvis (of PrezVid and scholarly fame) and James Kotecki (the man who was answered by Kucinich!):

Kotecki has one recurring message to the candidates and their expensive media advisers: “The Web isn’t TV.” As in, Web viewers don’t expect to be spoken to, they expect to be spoken with. It’s a passive experience vs. an interactive one.

Other students of the genre have similar advice.

“Look at how the candidates are talking in their videos. With a few exceptions, they’re mostly looking sideways, not talking directly to the camera,” said Jeff Jarvis, who heads the interactive journalism program at the City University of New York’s Graduate School of Journalism and started PrezVid.com, a blog dedicated to watching the campaign through YouTube. “The important thing about this medium is it’s very human and intimate. A voter comes across and clicks on you. You should talk to that voter and look at him in the eye.” (Candidates Try Web Video, And the Reviews Are Mixed - washingtonpost.com)

From here on out - or at least until I land a gig that precludes blogging - I’ll be joining Kotecki and Jarvis in their efforts to chronicle the evolution of videos online. Coming from a slightly different point of view - as someone whose actually made these things! - consider this space for the next few months as my pro-bono advice for those who care what I have to say.

Gone ‘Til November

And now I’m back.

After many months out on the campaign trail, a few things I saw today - coupled with the election season being over - have called me back from dormancy here on Dropping the Gloves.

So, now that I don’t fear getting fired by one or more of my employers for blogging (considered “going on the record” by most…something only certain staffers are allowed to do), I’d like to share two things.

First, Patrick Roy will be inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame on Monday…at least that’s what I read. Bully for you, St. Patrick.

Second, the California Democratic Party may be on its way to an introspective moment following the results of the race for Governor. I may have been the only person to be on both campaigns - though some Westly folks did go over to the Democratic Party. I know the teams from both camps, and the candidates as well. Admittedly, I was much closer to Westly than to Angelides, whom I think subconsciously remembered me as a Westly staffer - and thus kept a watchful eye me.

In the whirlwind of it all, I don’t know where things went wrong. Emissaries of both camps are giving their opinions:

After spending $43.7 million running for the Democratic nomination, much of it on TV ads ripping into Phil Angelides, state Controller Steve Westly donated $2,500 to Angelides, his fellow Democrat … four days before Tuesday’s election. Angelides’ staffers said today they were astonished at the meager donation from multimillionaire Westly, especially after he inflicted so much damage on Angelides and then promised to unite the California Democratic party. (LA Times’ Political Muscle)

“When it was all said and done, in this year alone my primary opponent and Gov. Schwarzenegger’s team spent upwards of $120 million, most of it on media telling people a story about me…. Look, $120 million was just an avalanche of money.
—Phil Angelides (LA Times’ Political Muscle)

Angelides political consultant Bill Carrick, who joined the campaign after the primary, said his client never recovered from a brutal contest for the nomination against Controller Steve Westly that tarnished his image and depleted his campaign cash.

“Phil came banged up out of the primary and didn’t have any money,” Carrick said. In focus groups, he said, Democratic voters were “repeating Westly’s ads.” (Sacramento Bee)

Looks like somebody passed out talking points in the Angelides campaign. Blame Westly’s money.

The Westly team was given notes by our former ringleader:

Autopsies are never pleasant or pretty. But sometimes they’re necessary to find out just how someone met their demise — and post-mortems are equally appropriate for failed political candidates.

Take Phil Angelides. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger demolished the Democratic gubernatorial nominee in yesterday’s election, despite a national trend that put more Democrats in office. Even a cursory dissection of his campaign reveals Angelides violated some of the most basic do’s and don’ts of politics — mainly the don’ts. (San Francisco Chronicle)

The points Garry lists in the Chronicle piece (and in “Phil, the unlovable loser” in the Times) will be well known to the readers of the comments section at Bill Bradley’s New West Notes or in the California Majority Report.

• Don’t assume voters know a single thing about you
• Don’t think voters hate your opponent as much as you do
• Don’t fight the last war
• Don’t make a tax increase the centerpiece of your candidacy
• Don’t run your own campaign

One thing is for certain. The Democratic party needs to look at this race very seriously, with talk of Schwarzenegger running for Senate in 2010. I personally don’t see the Governor as someone who’d seek to be one of one hundred. But, with 2006 a day behind us it’s apparently time to prognosticate!

Now that the election is over, the talk of the town has quickly turned to the post-Arnold era 2010 gubernatorial election.

On the Republican side, newly minted Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner already is the early favorite by virtue of an unlimited bankroll to fund his campaign. But the GOP’s conservative wing will surely have their say about challenging him at some point. With who is not clear, particularly given the blowout of the weak Republican bench in statewide contests last night.

Here’s our early line on the 2010 Governor’s race: (California Majority Report)

All told, my 2006 record…not too good. From when I joined the Westly campaign in December through election day I had a finger in eleven pies.

• My main gigs; Westly (primary) and Proposition 87 (general) lost.
• Angelides lost.
• My good friend, Van Tamom lost his Assembly race.
• David Roth lost in his challenge to Mary Bono in the 45th Congressional district.
• The five Republican House incumbents I made web ads about for Majority Action held their seats (though barely)

My saving grace, John Chiang will follow Steve Westly as California’s next State Controller. One for eleven ain’t bad…is it?

Toodles!