OK, so it's cool that Barack Obama got elected. And it's true he accomplished great things along the way, from reintroducing good design into campaign materials to revolutionizing micropayment donations. But before we talk about how he's still influencing the way we use the Internet, let's talk brands for a moment.
It has been discussed a million times in these pages, but 20 years ago, getting noticed as a brand was easy: You sat between the content people wanted. Today, however, when nearly everything is moving to on-demand, attention is no longer guaranteed. All of a sudden you're easy to ignore and, in turn, brands are being forced to act more like people. Instead of walking into the cocktail party and screaming their names, they have to be funny, charming -- interesting, even! They need to earn your attention.
Obama's campaign seemed to recognize this early on. Even though they likely knew I was in his voting block, they still courted me, making me feel special, providing fun tools and interesting communication. Obama, in other words, understands something most brands don't: There's an exchange required to get things done in an interactive world.
What has most impressed me about Obama thus far didn't come from his campaign, but from his change.gov site. During this post-election transition period, the administration, among other things, has been posting on this Web site proposals from various lobbyist groups looking for money or influence. This is opening our eyes to some aspects of the political process and is helping Obama raise money even after we elected him -- helping him to independently fund some of the interim costs normally paid for by special interest groups.
The transparency of posting those proposals is necessary to maintain our faith in that independence. The information on change.gov is showing us who might have been footing the bill, thus creating a "hidden" obligation for us to pay for it ourselves.
In some ways, Obama's strategy is akin to HBO's, a premium cable channel that answers to itself and subscribers. (As opposed to a non-cable network, ABC say, that is reliant on its advertisers.) By taking this route, he's reducing his outside influence. In the HBO versus ABC example, now his "advertisers" don't get to comment on his scripts anymore. Good deal for us: Just as HBO gets better scripts, we get a better president.
Continue to next page →
