The Calgary Herald has two political scientists “blogging” for them in this election to give “analysis of what is really going on.” They are worth a read but are very conventional in their perspectives...perhaps because they are academics after all…and one has to take with a grain of salt that they really know what is going on. In this election things are so volatile and variable that nobody knows what is “really going on.”
An example of the conventional, dare I say passé, point of view is that of U of Lethbridge Political Scientist, Peter McCormick and his recent rendering. His Five Ways to Measure Campaign Excitement are quintessentially quotidian and so out of date. Not wrong per se but so yesterday, obvious and mostly misleading.
An example of the conventional, dare I say passé, point of view is that of U of Lethbridge Political Scientist, Peter McCormick and his recent rendering. His Five Ways to Measure Campaign Excitement are quintessentially quotidian and so out of date. Not wrong per se but so yesterday, obvious and mostly misleading.
I say misleading because “excitement” is not the test. Citizen engagement and voter turn out are the real tests of any election campaign's effectiveness. Excitement is a media construct not anything that is important to a voter or a requirement of an election. The world is run by those how show up and voters who show up run the world. Engagement
There is a whole new world of election information and citizen engagement that the Internet has wrought that Professor McCormick misses. I don’t know the gentleman but presume, as an academic, he is likely not an active partisan either. So he does not likely know the “excitement measures” and volunteer engagement that is internal to any election campaign either. But I could be wrong.
There is so much going on beyond the Professor’s tests of “coffee shop” chatter, the “sign wars,” paid advertising levels, opinion polls and voting day turn out. Not that they are not "measurements" but they are unreliable and increasingly irrelevant in the brave new (and morphing) world of elections.
Coffee shops are hardly representative samples of public opinion – especially in the go-go economy of Alberta…who has time to take extended coffee breaks to talk politics these days? Sign wars are becoming passé as well for three reasons, fewer people have party allegiances, fewer have time to volunteer and more are seeing them as pollution - visual and otherwise.
There is so much opportunity for earned media in an election that to resort to paid advertising to get your message out is the price you have to pay for being boring. Opinion polls and focus groups are a joke but MSM loves them for reasons of simplicity. “Opinion” polls are hardly representative of anything of substance anymore. This is because most people refuse to participate and those who do are as likely to lie to the pollsters as they are to tell the truth. I saw a great bumper sticker years ago. It said “Save Democracy – Lie to a Pollster.” Sound advice in some circles.
Voting day turn out is an accurate measurement of citizen engagement and I have no quibble with that but the Get Out The Vote (GOTV) efforts of the candidates has a huge impact on turnout totals. That leads me to other real “excitement” measures internal to campaigns. The participation rate of campaign volunteers, the number of mail drops that get done the number of doors knocked, the number of phone calls made by volunteers – not professional services and ultimately – the amount of money raised are the real reliable measures of excitement and engagement in an election.
Then you have the phenomenon of the internet and the impact of Influentials as truer tests of excitement/engagement. Actual Bloggers who are citizen journalists and columnists who have a wide active readership and the amount of posts they do, ther new and returning and traffic requency plus the comment activity are all reliable measurement of excitement for a very a active and growing group of citizens. You Tube and Facebook activity is another modern measurement of political excitement/engagement any conventional observer would miss. Website traffic, readership, content updates and the number of active links are the new “coffee shop” for busy people - and a better measure of actual excitement and engagement.
The number of interest group surveys promulgated and targeted issues related campaign efforts directed at political parties and individual candidates are a better measure of citizen interest and engagement. The complexity of the issues being discussed in a campaign (and there are lots of complex issues these days) that are not being dumbed down by leaders and candidates is a more sophisticated measure of campaign effectiveness in their out reach to voters.
Readers of this Blog often hear me say campaign matter…and they do. What also matters is the new means and models of election campaigning that we have now emerged to reach voters and to be reached by voters. This technology had made it possible to have a dialogue and a virtual conversation between candidate and citizen – one-on-one actually for those candidates who blog too. The filter and traditional political agenda setting of the MSM is no longer dominant and new influential voices, like real bloggers, are publishing a wider range of input and opinion.
Old style politics are still around as are old style election techniques and commentary, but they are no longer mainstream. They are definitely not a measure of what is really going on in politics and elections these days either.
There is a whole new world of election information and citizen engagement that the Internet has wrought that Professor McCormick misses. I don’t know the gentleman but presume, as an academic, he is likely not an active partisan either. So he does not likely know the “excitement measures” and volunteer engagement that is internal to any election campaign either. But I could be wrong.
There is so much going on beyond the Professor’s tests of “coffee shop” chatter, the “sign wars,” paid advertising levels, opinion polls and voting day turn out. Not that they are not "measurements" but they are unreliable and increasingly irrelevant in the brave new (and morphing) world of elections.
Coffee shops are hardly representative samples of public opinion – especially in the go-go economy of Alberta…who has time to take extended coffee breaks to talk politics these days? Sign wars are becoming passé as well for three reasons, fewer people have party allegiances, fewer have time to volunteer and more are seeing them as pollution - visual and otherwise.
There is so much opportunity for earned media in an election that to resort to paid advertising to get your message out is the price you have to pay for being boring. Opinion polls and focus groups are a joke but MSM loves them for reasons of simplicity. “Opinion” polls are hardly representative of anything of substance anymore. This is because most people refuse to participate and those who do are as likely to lie to the pollsters as they are to tell the truth. I saw a great bumper sticker years ago. It said “Save Democracy – Lie to a Pollster.” Sound advice in some circles.
Voting day turn out is an accurate measurement of citizen engagement and I have no quibble with that but the Get Out The Vote (GOTV) efforts of the candidates has a huge impact on turnout totals. That leads me to other real “excitement” measures internal to campaigns. The participation rate of campaign volunteers, the number of mail drops that get done the number of doors knocked, the number of phone calls made by volunteers – not professional services and ultimately – the amount of money raised are the real reliable measures of excitement and engagement in an election.
Then you have the phenomenon of the internet and the impact of Influentials as truer tests of excitement/engagement. Actual Bloggers who are citizen journalists and columnists who have a wide active readership and the amount of posts they do, ther new and returning and traffic requency plus the comment activity are all reliable measurement of excitement for a very a active and growing group of citizens. You Tube and Facebook activity is another modern measurement of political excitement/engagement any conventional observer would miss. Website traffic, readership, content updates and the number of active links are the new “coffee shop” for busy people - and a better measure of actual excitement and engagement.
The number of interest group surveys promulgated and targeted issues related campaign efforts directed at political parties and individual candidates are a better measure of citizen interest and engagement. The complexity of the issues being discussed in a campaign (and there are lots of complex issues these days) that are not being dumbed down by leaders and candidates is a more sophisticated measure of campaign effectiveness in their out reach to voters.
Readers of this Blog often hear me say campaign matter…and they do. What also matters is the new means and models of election campaigning that we have now emerged to reach voters and to be reached by voters. This technology had made it possible to have a dialogue and a virtual conversation between candidate and citizen – one-on-one actually for those candidates who blog too. The filter and traditional political agenda setting of the MSM is no longer dominant and new influential voices, like real bloggers, are publishing a wider range of input and opinion.
Old style politics are still around as are old style election techniques and commentary, but they are no longer mainstream. They are definitely not a measure of what is really going on in politics and elections these days either.
Sign wars are becoming passé
ReplyDeleteOh, man, I really, really hope you're right when you say that sign wars are going out of style. This is probably the most environmentally costly part of campaigns, and sign vandalism and mischief is a pointless headache to all parties. If all parties agreed to run a sign-free campaign (even just as a test) and stuck to it, I think you'd see a higher level of political discourse. Putting up increasing numbers of larger and larger signs is the equivalent of shouting the same message louder and louder.
Even just keeping signs off of public property would be an improvement because you'd have a more realistic indication of support if all signs had to on private residences and apartment windows.
I am a political junkie and find this to be the most boring campaign in the history of Canada. No new ideas and leader who simply restates talking points when asked a question. The PCs will win but will lose some seats at which time we will need another leadership race.
ReplyDeleteThere are not a lot of new ideas for sure and the platforms are all safe incremental "changes" at the margin.
ReplyDeleteCO2 Sequestration from the PCs and High Speed Rail from the Greens are about the boldest pronouncements I have seen.
I think all parties are afraid of making the big gaffe and are retreating into old style political framing of their opponents more than speaking to the merits and meaning of their campaign platforms.
Our best policy thinking seems to be coming from Manning and Lougheed instead of the political leaders we have in place now. I hope that will change in the new legislature.
Big undecided vote still there at 27% this late in the campaign and 25% say they are likely to change their vote means this is not over by a long shot.
"Our best policy thinking seems to be coming from Manning and Lougheed instead of the political leaders we have in place now. I hope that will change in the new legislature."
ReplyDeleteI'm not critiquing either man, but the fact that neither of these gentlemen are in power now, probably allows them to come up with innovative policy thinking... they do not have to link the various ideas into one clear overall policy document, election platform or - most importantly - a budget.
Agreed Anon - not being in power provides certain freedom of expression. We citizens need to change our attitudes towards sitting politicians and our leaders. We mave to let them have the same freedom to explore, adapt and YES change opinions with out it being seen as a weakness.
ReplyDeleteI had Professor McCormick for 4 courses throughout my studies at the University of Lethbridge, he is most definitely non-partisan, and strangely his focus was more on the Supreme Court of Canada and the relevance of court decisions and the Charter on politics and governance, rather than provincial scene. I had other professors on such topics as political parties, Alberta politics, and Canadian politics, and so seeing Prof. McCormick dissect the provincial election would be like reading about the NHL Trade deadline on this blog in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteNot sure how the Calgary Herald got him to be their "blogger" but from experience on the Lethbridge scene when the local media there wants comment on issues such as campaigns, candidates, etc they always go to the Poli Sci prof from the College, not the University.
Regarding excitement, it's a natural for many Canadians to want excitement in our campaigns when we look south and see such stirring speeches and campaigns when the Americans vote, and yet no one dares acknowledge it because we spend so much time as Canadians trying to distinguish ourselves from our neighbors that we hate it when we envy them.
Thx for the comment Jeff. The MSM gets caught in a same old - same old trap line of "usual suspects" they always go to.
ReplyDeleteThey are usually on deadline and need quotes so they go to the tried and true "reliable sources" all the time.
That is why I am loving the blogosphere and the comments I get on this Blog. They come from some "unusual" and often "unrealiable" sources but always "engaging and animated" sources.