February 2007 Archive

Across the wires:

Vilsack to end Democratic presidential bid - USAToday
Democrat Vilsack to drop out of 2008 race: sources - Reuters
Vilsack Drops Out - NYTimes

While I understand the reason (unable to raise the $20M initial anty), I am saddened the situation that forces him to making this decision. As the pioneer in starting his campaign first this season, Governor Vilsack did a wonderful job making a splash for reaching out and building excellent connections with supporters through his online campaign (especially impressed with his efforts on sites like blip.tv). I wish him well in his other pursuits - and congratulations on a good effort.

On the campaign site evals - TomVilsack08.com was one of the better sites out there in the Democratic field and deserves a discussion on its merits. In the coming days, if the site is not shut down, I will do a brief run down of the strengths and weaknesses of the engagement practices his team executed.

Tags: Tom Vilsack, Campaign 2008, Democratic Primary

Interested in a conversation about Social Media in this coming season? Join us today at the New York Social Media Club where we will be discussing the use of social media in political campaigns and how they have and will (potentially) impact this cycle’s elections.

Joining us will be:

• Noel Hidalgo - part of BarCamp and the “unconference” scene
• Joshua Levy - associate editor of Personal Democracy and TechPresident
• Adam Mordicai - founder of Advomatic, proving Drupal-based solutions and former Dean campaign member

Please join our host, Howard Greenstein and Nate Westheimer of VentBox for a very interesting evening.

Feeling the pressure of other states complaining about shifting the primary season, the national GOP warned the state parties not to move their primary dates - which included Florida. (See “GOP Warned Not To Move Up Primary“) Granted, no one is asking me, but I think it is fair for Florida to move up the primary, if only to get it into the conversation before the election is decided.

After working a couple of campaigns in Florida (and growing up there), Florida is a microcasm of the United States - with every major population having a geographic region within the state. Why wouldn’t it be appropriate for the state to have an influential primary? And, since the candidates are often making junkets to South Florida and other affluent parts of the state, it makes perfect sense to make it a place for primary election efforts. I wish Senator Ring’s efforts success.

Tags: Florida Primary, early primary, Jeremy Ring

Funny thing happened on the way to publishing this sites eval - a newsletter showed up in my Inbox announcing the launch of the new JohnMcCain.com website. With flowery words like:

Today’s release is the base platform for the thousands of Team McCain online activists to become involved in John McCain 2008. On the site, individuals are empowered as key participants in Senator McCain’s campaign to recruit other volunteers, raise money, and participate in a virtual town hall with Senator McCain. The site will continue to grow and evolve as Senator McCain makes a final decision about running for President.

“In 2000, John McCain harnessed the power of the internet in a way that was new and unique to campaigns,” said Christian Ferry, National eCampaign Director. “This site continues to build on that experience, recognizing the importance of new media in today’s political discourse and the power of technology to inform, involve, and connect individuals to a candidate and a campaign.”

“This site is a departure from the traditional campaign website in both design and navigation,” continued Ferry. “It is designed to engage users with a different visual experience on every page, giving them unique insight into the rich personal story of John McCain and his years of experience that differentiates him as ready to lead.”

With the press release as a starting point, lets check out McCain’s eCampaigning IQ:

JohnMcCain.com - (design by unknown, backend by unknown)
Comparing the current site to what existed last night, we have the same design principles - black, white and grays with McCain providing the color in the video clips that exist on the site. Funnily enough, the site is attempting some of the principles of the Democrats, with some additions such as Flash rollovers (move your mouse to the lower sections of the site), but there are some differences.

• First Impression - Strong, Naval, Dark - with McCain standing out as the light.
  From my first impression, I am not overly impressed - it is a challenge to figure out what to do. With McCain’s face on the right, I am drawn away from the two things that they want - to Join Team McCain and to Donate. I am intrigued to play the video, and hear Senator McCain speaking on Iraq. I still see Naval officer and the potential leader, with a level of gravitas. His brand is “McCain” - very heavy and dark. Almost foreboding. The logo is in the tradition of the Armed Forces - strong, sharp and clean. Throughout the site, the brand is consistant, but the layout and structure runs into problems.
  IQ pts: +4
• Call To Action

  In any site, the first thing to do is orient yourself. The large head of McCain is there to see his videos which seem to loom. As in the Hillary site, dark colors blend together and the white spaces stand out - in this case, you only see the video. The problem is that the other actions desired by the campaign are not readily apparent - aside from the 10AM CST Town Hall meeting.

  And the one object that should be enticing me as an activist, doesn’t. And, for the campaign’s need - donate gets lost in the home page. But, when one goes into the website, Senator McCain shows up on the left-hand side, smiling and asking for a donation. But, as a first call to action, not exceeding inspiring. IQ pts: -1

• Signup

  
  As in almost all sites, the signup is easy - especially with the signup bar in the upper right-hand corner and they sacrifice getting the zipcode to get you to the next step. Here is where they fall down: the next page is straight out of an HTML designers training manual - long, straight and off the page.
  And, in this page, you must give your address if you want to be part of the campaign - to get a McCain website or to modify the look and feel of the website. I can not get away with minimal information, which will more than likely turn off some people that need to be coaxed into building a relationship. Then, once you do the first step (of how many?), you see the next page which has your personal information greyed out(!) and now you must enter more information to get an account which seems even more intimidating. And, then, the reason for my giving him my information, I can not make my site. Do I feel like I accomplished something? Or did they get something from me?
  IQ pts: +3

• Donate

  Here is where the task should be easy - simple page to enter my data and get a sense of confidence. This page is completely different from the others - with the standard HTML stack that goes down the page (or if you click on this link, you get the one-page contribution form). The only reason I feel confident about “safe” contributing is that the URL has the HTTPS statement, but I assume most other people do not know this. Additionally, there seems to be a lot of information requested due to the layout, even though they ask for only three more pieces of information. With the addition of the monthly contribution section and the “referred” object, they will discover a slight conversion difficulty - if only for the challenge given to users with so much choice and request for information. The error handling is also basic/simple - a list of all of the problems without reference (e.g. telling me that I did not Verify at the top of the page, which is a choice at the bottom of the form).When I am done, I am brought to a Thank You page - with the four options to be active. But no help, no receipt, no email to me (I skipped entering the email), and no tracking codes for how I got here. IQ pts: +3

  Interesting facet I think I discovered - McCain is testing the different contribution formats to see which results in a better conversion rate. Nice work on the experimentation side.

• Activism

  
  This Action Center seems to have the same features of the Hillary services, but includes state-specific services (volunteer for the state offices, create your own site). One thing that impressed me even though no blog exists, McCain offers users to either submit a video to the campaign with questions, submit a question via text or engage other blogs. Now this is a tactic I suggested awhile ago for another candidate who was staff-shy and blog-nervous, but it is a good stop-gap until the blog team is ready. In addition, the site promises personal blogs as well as the campaign blog. You can also invite others to join in via email, but all of the tools seem very limited. More like the bare minimum than a good compliment. IQ pts: 0

Read the rest of this entry »

Since everyone needs a place to start, and Hillary’s site seems to be considered one of the better sites, let’s begin the evaluation with her.

I originally planned on doing two or three sites per post, but as you will read, not an easy thing to do.

HillaryClinton.com - (design by Mayfield Strategy Group, backend by solutionset)
At first blush, Hillary’s site kind of looks like a simple re-templating of her Senate site – maintaining the some of the lighter blues of her past campaign site – and adding the requisite navy blues and red necessary for a “presidential” site. Upon the launch, one of the major colors that you saw was the color pink - look at the videos during the initial announcement launch - and watch as the candidate changes the color of her outfits from a purely pink then adding the blues of the jacket, to the total blue suit outfit - all while still being in front of the homestead looking room. Funny thing - when I first saw the launch, especially with the new catch phrase, “Let the Conversation Begin”, I knew Peter Daou had to navigate the Communications Team to coordinate that one. But to get back to the questions at hand:

Design/Technology Smarts

Now, to be fair, the head of Mayfield Strategies, Josh Ross, is one of my favorite designers. When we first “met”, after he had responded to an email I had sent out to a Stanford alumni mailing list, I immediately liked what I saw. Little did I know at the time that Josh was one of the premiere designers out there. Josh, with his long-time business partner, Alex Kaplinsky, did amazing things for the Kerry Campaign. And, after the campaign, their work has spread to a number of major campaigns in the 2006 including Senator Maria Cantwell of Washington, Senator Bill Nelson of Florida, Governor John Corzine of New Jersey to name a few. Their work is often clean and to the point, and they use the learning from their corporate clients to improve the sites and features found within the campaign sites. So, I am somewhat biased because it is in my own personal design style, but I am going to measure on certain usability principles and the original metrics we discussed in my earlier post.

• First Impression - She’s soft and strong, she could be our President
  As Tom mentions in his Flash post, the brand is strong - “Hillary” - no mention of “Clinton” there, but it’s already an automatic reflex to connect the two words. The logo is diminutive with the same “soft but strong” font-type (white letters with a hint of a blue outline). IQ pts: +4
• Call To Action

  Not sure who was the first to do this on campaigns, but Mayfield often recommends having a splash page that almost requires you to have to signup to get to the homepage. But as of my viewing today, it looks like that page is no longer available (clear your cookies and go which leads me to believe that Peter and/or Mayfield has determined the return on investment (visitors to signatures) has either been dropping off or dissuading people from going the next step (they decide to leave instead of doing the next step).

  The first things I see as the call-to-action is the leftmost visual - the main stage as we used to call it. It leads people to the main topic that the campaign is promoting, and the negative font placement (white on a darker color) draws your eye. Secondly, you are drawn to the lower right by the “Contribute” button. Thirdly, well - here is where it gets “wonky”, as my students put it. You could claim it is the “Making History” box, the “Top Videos” or the “Team Hillary Action Center”. This is where it dies out for me - since I am not enticed to be “active”, rather, I am enticed to use the website for two purposes - watch the videos and contribute. IQ pts: +3

• Signup

  Signup is easy - especially with the signup bar in the upper right-hand corner, and they grab the requisite two pieces of information (name, zipcode). The disappointing thing is the next step, which leads you to the “Team Hillary Page” with the light green “Thanks for signing up for email. Take the next step and join Team Hillary.”. This page is the disaster that every campaign goes through - how do you get more information about a person and their interests without inundating them with too many requests? Mayfield is a firm believer in the “above the fold” rule - all of the work must be above the fold of the screen, to maximize the performance. Consider that every major contact page (e.g. signup, Share Your Thoughts, videos, contribute) all exist primarily above the fold - and the action button is (usually) easy to see. For me, this is key - to maximize the performance. IQ pts: +4

• Donate

  Again, contributing is easy - all of the lessons learned from eCommerce and the Kerry Campaign are in force - the backend does not enjoy the same look-and-feel of the main site - but we sacrifice for the safety of the server. Same one-page, above the fold concept. Errors are handled appropriately (with small red font where the “errors” live), tracking of where the donations come from and even the contribution receipt has a “Report a Problem” link which can connect to the contributions@hillaryclinton.com email account. Minor issue is the font size, but the assumption more than likely is that people with bad eyesight are not going to use this interface as often. IQ pts: +4

• Activism

  
  With the Action Center provided by solutionset, Hillary has one of the nicest action centers - with the lovely hues, simple interface and above the screen fold principles. Each of the functions are clearly available on the right, and clicking through, the particular features are clear and simple. They falter when you look at the so-called Featured Actions are essentially performance trackers - “Did respond to this issue? If so, track that”. Note, that there is very little to do once you click through the Featured Actions aside from identify yourself (as I explained almost six months ago in another post). And, if you want to get involved in a party for Hillary, the party locator is excellent - as long as someone has published the party within her system. IQ pts: +3

  Recommendation: consider publishing the events via an iCal feed for google and/or other services like zvents or eventful for interested parties outside of the HillaryClinton.com domain

Read the rest of this entry »

In the last two weeks, with the many announcements by presidential hopefuls like Senators Clinton and Obama, former Senator John Edwards (not to mention Governor Richardson, Senator Biden, Senator Brownback, Senator McCain, Representative Kucinich,…), a couple of blogs have been engaging in discussions about the IT worthiness of the campaign sites (see [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]). Even the Bivings Report has begun evaluating the sites, with the first one being Hillary’s (definitely check out the Flash analysis of the site by clicking on the graphic).

In reading these articles (and some are from friends of mine), they seem to reply on the simple tick-box evaluation (e.g. do they have a blog, can you donate, and so on) of the site features and pay little attention to the major goal of each campaign: capturing the contact details of the supporters and/or get a donation as quickly as possible. My effort will focus on this issue with a simple tradeoff: do they meet the need of the user/visitor/supporter? Will they succeed in their goals? Are they making the grade?

Read the rest of this entry »