The internet 2.0 election

Last Modified: 20 May 2008
By: Felicity Spector

The internet is revolutionising the American election campaign. Felicity Spector finds out how sites like YouTube are spawning new ways of reaching voters and raising cash.

You've heard the hype about the "internet 2.0 election", but now see the evidence: an astonishing five and a half million people watched Barack Obama's speech on race in February - in its entirety.

That's all 37 minutes - uncut, unedited, and viewed on YouTube, which doesn't count the number of people who only tuned into part of it.

That's progress - not to mention an incredible level of commitment - and thanks to sites like YouTube, a whole new way of finding out about politics and sharing in the debate.

According to Washington political strategist Phil Noble, there was a hint of things to come in 2004, when a home-produced cartoon of Bush and Kerry set to music became the single most widely seen piece of material in the entire election campaign.

Instead of wooing a bunch of middle-aged, white millionaires, the possibilities of online fundraising seem to be boundless.

That's more than all the hugely expensive commercials produced by the presidential teams - and it was made by two brothers in their basement for about fifteen thousand bucks.

It all takes control of the "message" away from those centralised "war rooms" run by the parties and into, well, anyone's hands. It's Howard Dean's dream of the "distributed model" writ large.

The internet has also transformed another key relationship: that of politics and cash.

In the old days, running a campaign meant gathering top-level endorsements, both from newspapers and party grandees - and raising lots, and lots of cash.

Now, instead of wooing a bunch of middle-aged, white millionaires, the possibilities of online fundraising seem to be boundless.

To date, Barack Obama has raised a staggering $250mn this way - and pundits estimate he could more than double that for the general election campaign proper.

It's solved the problem of campaign finance and special interests at, well, a keystroke. As Noble puts it - there's no soul-selling involved, just "send me some money and I'll appreciate it".

Sure, there are still the big-buck donors, the $2,500-a-head dinners and the Hollywood moguls to vamp up the celebrity quotient, but Obama's donor base has replaced the elitist model with a populist one - and with it, a vast network of grassroots supporters available not just to give dollars, but to spread the word.

And here - another new internet phenomenon to throw into the mix: social networking sites like Facebook and Bebo.

According to Bebo's chief executive officer, Joanna Shields, it all heralds a sea change in the way politics works - not just breaking the stranglehold of the big donors and the TV networks but, she says, "democratising democracy - re-engaging millions of Americans".

It's meant the more far-sighted campaign teams (and yes, we're talking about the Obama lot again) moving away from centralised control of the message, and instead encouraging local creativity to take the initiative.

The kind of self expression which flourishes on sites like Bebo, she claims, is actually creating "a thinking nation of young people", which can only be good for the political debate.

Of course the bulk of the 2008 election is still being fought out the old-fashioned way - on television, in the papers, with old-style advertising campaigns.

This isn't quite the "first internet 2.0 election" - but from YouTube to Bebo, from the Obama Girl to Twitter - it's already enabling millions of people to engage, get involved, and more importantly, participate on their own terms, like never before.

Whether any of it translates into votes, the only measure politicians really care about, we have yet to discover.