Political Technology

A good NY Times story that summarizes the latest information on cellphone only households in the US and how that will effect political polling perhaps as soon as next year:

A key quote:

"According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Health Interview Survey, adults with cellphones and no land lines are more likely to be young — half of exclusively wireless users are younger than 30 — male, Hispanic, living in poverty, renting a residence and living in metropolitan regions.

The Pew Research Center conducted four studies last year on the differences between cellphone and land line respondents. The studies said the differences were not significant enough to influence surveys properly weighted to census data. With the increase in cellphone-only households, that may not be the case next year. Researchers, including the New York Times/CBS News poll will test that by incorporating cellphones in samples.

The estimates in the Health Interview Study suggest that cellphone-only households are steadily increasing.

“If the percentage of adults living in cell-only households continues to grow at the rate it has been growing for the past four years, I have projected that it will exceed 25 percent by the end of 2008,” Stephen J. Blumberg, a senior scientist at the National Center for Health Statistics, wrote in an e-mail message."

Another media related study was released today... this time on the next generation of Americans (and voters) on their use of mobile phones and their consumption of mobile media. 

This is a Nielsen study on the "tweens" or 8 to 12 year olds. There should be a rule that once a technology reaches these numbers with 8 to 12 year olds, it's crossed a certain critical mass and can be officially deemed a "mass medium."

So for this wave, the report estimates that TODAY that:

* 35% of tweens own a mobile phone.
* 20% of tweens have used text messaging.
* 21% of tweens have used ring & answer tones.

 And it adds that "while text-messaging and ringtones remain the most pervasive non-voice functions on the phone, other content such as downloaded wallpapers, music, games and Internet access also rank highly among tweens."

Imagine how deep-rooted mobile media use will be for this generation when they begin voting in 6 years. 

Signs of the times. AdAge highlights a new survey on future advertising spending in the next several years.

A key forecast:

"We expect [online ad spend]  to overtake radio advertising in 2008; to attain a double-digit share of global advertising in 2009; and to overtake magazine advertising in 2010, with 11.5% of total ad spend."

It also lists that globally internet ad spending would grow to $44.6 billion from approximately $36 billion -  which would increase it's share of the market from  8.1 to 9.4 percent.

The Times has another, and fascinating, look at the fast growing world of non-broadcast TV, and how the use of video is being re-imagined right in front of us.  Called, Lots of Little Screens, TV is changing shape, it begins:

INEXPENSIVE broadband access has done far more for online video than enable the success of services like YouTube and iTunes. By unchaining video watchers from their TV sets, it has opened the floodgates to a generation of TV producers for whom the Internet is their native medium.

And as they shift their focus away from TV to grab us on one of the many other screens in our lives — our computers, cellphones and iPods — the command-and-control economic model of traditional television is being quickly superseded by the market chaos of a freewheeling and open digital network.

According to Move Networks, a company based in Utah that provides online video technologies, more than 100,000 new viewers jump online every 24 hours to watch its clients’ long-form or episodic video. During the first two weeks of November alone, more than twice the number of Americans were watching TV online than in the entire month of August...

Many of you may have digested the basics of what happened at the YouTube/CNN debate of the Republicans presidential candidates last night in St. Pete, Florida. If not, check out the New York Times.

But I was there and had a different lens applied to it. I was one of the few people attending from the progressive side, as a guest of Google and YouTube, and I was watching it to see how the new format worked or did not work.

The gist of what I think was reflected in a San Francisco Chronicle story that I was quoted in and that I helped the reporter with. The short answer is that I think the hybrid version of new media (user-generated video) questions selected by old media journalists (CNN) did not work as well as in the first such debate with the Democrats in the summer. It seemed like the CNN filters were heavy-handed, looking to spark fights (like with immigration) rather than reflect the range of issues of concern to Americans (and the 5000 people who submitted questions.) How could there be no interest in health care, climate change, and new energy issues?

Another striking thing was how all the video submissions, with one or two exceptions, came from Millennials, those under age 30. And almost everyone in the audience was much older. In fact, before the show began, CNN host Anderson Cooper asked for questions on the format from the audience. One young guy from the balcony asked why so few tickets had been given to young people. Cooper shot back – the Republican Party gave out the tickets, not us. It’s another sign that the Republicans are having a hard time connecting with this massive generation of young people, as well as coming to terms with the new demands of the new online media.

I was also struck by how many times Hillary Clinton came up in the debate, and yet not once did Obama’s name come up. (I think Edwards and Kucinich each came up once). It seems the Republicans are on auto-pilot in accepting the old conventional wisdom that Hillary is going to be the nominee. They have completely missed the new dynamics of a race that is far from won.

Obama is getting new boosts from all kinds of quarters, including the powerful tech community who he wowed with his recent tech and innovation proposals laid out at Google. But that is another post of another time…

For now it is worth noting that almost every Republican candidate and most in the crowd expect Hillary will be the nominee and they clearly relish the thought.

Peter Leyden
Director of The New Politics Institute

This last Tuesday Verizon outlined a new more open strategy to supporting "any application, any device" that meets their minimum technology requirements on their network by 2008. This dramatic move also offers that "any application the customer chooses will be allowed on these devices. "

The Verizon Wireless President called this "a transformation point in the 20-year history of mass market wireless devices – one which we believe will set the table for the next level of innovation and growth.”

With this new strategy, Verizon seems to be seeing that the benefits from being more open with their platform outweigh those of trying to maintain a more rigid, more controlled "closed garden" model.  

Some analysts believe that this move will broaden the number of "officially supported" devices on the Verizon network from what it is today (around  50 handsets) to somewhere more than 500 once developers have really begun taking advantage of this new offer.  I'd suspect that this would include many new devices that are not primarily voice based based, but that are pure data devices.

These new more broad pool of officially supported devices would then have to compete on offering a better consumer experience, and new and innovative features. 

 And this speaks to an overall trend we've highlighted before on this blog about "smartphones" getting smarter... and continuing to grow into full fledged media devices. 

I will be in St. Petersburg, Florida, Wednesday night for the second YouTube/CNN debates – this time with the Republican presidential candidates fielding the questions sent via web video from the American public. I am very curious about how their slate will handle the questions posed to them.

As you recall, the Republicans initially balked at playing ball in this more wide-open media environment. But after the Dems did it this summer, and their more youthful  supporters harangued them to get with it, they decided to try it out. We’ll see how they will manage, and how the CNN journalists who ultimately screen the questions will treat them as well.

For those who are just tuning in, you can get an overview of the debate in the New York Times blog, complete with a few links, or plunge right into the fray of the more than 5000 entries at the YouTube website. I will be in the spin room after the debate and will report back to this blog by the next morning. Check it out.

Peter Leyden  
Director of The New Politics Institute

We end the New Politics Institute’s Fall New Tools Campaign by releasing a new memo by the Chief Privacy Officer of Facebook on one of the least understood but most intriguing of the new tools: social networking technologies.

The memo “Five Main Ways to Use Social Networking in Politics” lays out how the booming social networking websites like Facebook and MySpace can be used to do many of the old-fashioned fundamentals of politics: branding, voter registration, fundraising, volunteering and voter turnout.

Politics has always been about “social networking,” or getting people to organize their friends and family to support a cause or a candidate. These new social technology tools just supercharge an individual’s ability to extend his or her reach. And so progressive organizations need to understand how these new approaches can make good old politicking so much more efficient and productive.

Chris Kelly, Facebook’s Chief Privacy Officer and Head of Global Public Policy, wrote this terrific guide that can be used by those just getting started or those looking for more nuanced ways to use these powerful new tools. You can read the memo off the NPI website or download a PDF file for printing.

Kelly also gave a talk on the topic, along with three other top experts in the social networking field, at NPI’s final tools event in Washington DC on Wednesday. Next week, video of the entire event, and the individual talks, will be available off the NPI website.

Plus you can find similar memos and video of the other eight new tools that NPI has explored this fall. We encourage you to use this material, and spread links to it far and wide.

Thanks.

Peter Leyden

The Times this am has one of their periodic stories about how new media is changing old ways.  This one focuses on one of the subjects we've been talking about a great deal over NPI - how video has been liberated from the distribution monopoly of broadcast TV.  It begins:

WHY are fewer viewers watching the new fall television series? Perhaps because they are too busy watching video online.

As broadband service becomes more available at home, the growing prevalence of video programming on the Internet is catching the attention of consumers — not to mention marketers and media companies.

“Video has been liberated” from the TV set, Beth Comstock, president for integrated media at NBC Universal, said last week at a panel at the Ad:Tech conference in New York.

“If you’re in the video business,” she added, referring to companies like her employer, the NBC Universal division of General Electric, “it’s exciting to see where it’s going..."

REMINDER: Today we are rounding out our 2007 New Tools Campaign with a lunch event devoted to social networking. Details are below:

Social Networking Tools
Wednesday November 14, 2007
12:00 - 2:00 PM (Lunch will be served)
Phoenix Park Hotel
520 North Capitol Street
Washington, DC
RSVP: Dave O'Donnell - dodonnell@ndn.org - or 202-384-1212

We will be bringing together four experts who know the technology and the best new strategies, and can clearly explain what works. They are:

Chris Kelly, Chief Privacy Officer, Facebook; John Hlinko, President and CEO, Grassroots Enterprise; Cheryl Contee, Vice President, Fleishman Hillard, San Francisco; Ben Rattray, Founder and CEO, Change.org.