Jeremiah Owyang

Overall I think it shows Obama’s campaign has a more active web presence.

But what happens if you adjust the tweet volume stats to include results for “barack, hillary, mc cain”? Wonder if standardized use of “obama” affects the gap..

Very cool, Jeremiah. There will be a direct correlation between Obama supporters being younger, more adept at using social media tools, and those leading to some new and interesting dynamics of real importance. I think Obama supporters using social media will be a de facto research organization for the campaign. They’ll be catching McCain, and the right wing groups, at their strategies almost instantly and then broadcasting to the world using all of the social media tools.

For example, the right wing sound machine planned on using a Michele Obama speech against her today where she said “why’d he” several times, referring to Bush. In an effort to show her as a racist in the video clip they hoped we would here her saying “whitey.” Before Rush Limbaugh, literally it was Rush, could use the material today, it was all over the networks warning us that it was coming. Talk about rapid response! By effectively using social media tools, Rush was scooped on his own propaganda effort. This election is generational, much like the use of the tools. Don’t you think?

Well, I think it’s more fair to compare Obama and Clinton as they were basically in the same news cycle(s) and there was attention focused on their campaigns, whereas McCain has been bbqing for the last few months. That said, there is probably also a demographic issue at play between the Democratic and Republican parties.

nevermind .. just tried it .. minimal difference on the tweet volume

You also need to take into account the ‘technographic profile’ (to quote Groundswell); much of the Republican base isn’t big on online engagement at this point (generational issues as much as failure to capitalize on the tools, IMHO), and a lot of their media folks are in more traditional media (radio, cable TV).

@Mike Chapman – I’m not so sure it’s command and control as where their conversations are happening, not necessarily online

Jeremiah – I’m curious, what application/tool did you use to scrape screenshots of those sites?

these graphs and charts and coloring books are meaningless unless all those hip/happening morons actually get their asses out of mom’s basement and vote for someone

This is in response to this post #15(these graphs and charts and coloring books are meaningless unless all those hip/happening morons actually get their asses out of mom’s basement and vote for someone)

_Nicely said_

I do want to add this is a great post for both the insight and the demonstration of the tools used. Pretty cool what is out there today for free.

As has been mentioned (Will in #10), this may just be the reflection of the age components and tech savviness of each candidates followers (in fact, I think that is precisely the measurement), but that does not negate the measurement itself.

Tech may just be the tools of the Obama echo chamber, just as AM Talk Radio is the echo chamber of the reactionary conservatives, some of whom will be ardent McCain supporters (although many of them fervently referred to him as the devil incarnate less than a year ago). As Mike Chapman (#4) points out, these tools are some of the essential tools for reaching the Obama audience, but the tools mostly engage that audience and likely ignored by talk radio and the reactionaries.

The question is which echo chamber is most effective. I’ll place my bet on old tech because the audience there doesn’t need new tools and habits, and they don’t listen to anything outside their belief system; their personal faith (meaning not religious faith) is absolute and infallible. As sdf (#15) said, the test will be whether the hip-and-happening crowd gets out and votes.

Doing this same measurement following each convention and a couple of times before election day would be very interesting in tracking any shift in tech use by the different groups as their strategies shift.

Thought provoking post, as usual. Thanks Jeremiah.

@sdf – ouch, I feel a return to ’00 w/your comment. Haven’t you heard that “hip/happening” people are participating? Record primary attendance?

On a separate note, I do think the online trend charts aren’t yet indicative of anything as they’d show Ron Paul at a much higher level than any other Republican (perhaps higher than Hillary Clinton).

There is a clear trend of an increased social media usage by Obama followers. But, maybe a good piece of supporters is just used to these tools. Clearly, social media has the advantage of connecting with people (and to info), bringing up news to the surface (transparency) a.s.o. But analyzing those tools alone would not take us very far.
We have to rethink the idea of relationships through such media as well as the ‘established’ media. Barack Obama published 3+ books – biographies and personal thoughts. I think people could build a relationship to Obama based on his ideas published. The relationship is very personal and if one believes in Obama as a person, he believes in the ‘Change’ notion, too.

Nine out of 10 Republicans supports Sen. John McCain, whereas only about 8 in 10 Demorats supports Sen. B. Hussein Obama, with 25% of Sen. Hillary R. Clinton’s former supporters saying they will vote for McCain this November.

With Republicans firmly in their candidates corner, there’s going to be less chatter than there would be amongst Demorats, who only recently concluded a protracted, bitter primary season.

That’s why the Obama disciples are so much more active.

I imagine the same could be said for any social media site. I suspect Facebook, Myspace and others would also have the same spikes, Twitter is simply easier to monitor because everything said on Twitter is in the public view.
This would be why Google are putting so much emphasis on their real-time search development.
One does wonder, though, how much of the chatter is genuine and how much is manufactured – switched on PR professionals know the value of this kind of promotion and Obama certainly had good PR people.