In a lengthy Washington Post article about the RNC's online guru, Cyrus Krohn, we get a nugget worth talking about.
[Crohn] says, "both parties are still too TV-obsessed."
"The use of TV in campaigns is kind of like our dependency on foreign oil. We know we have to get off it. We know we need to find alternative energy sources. But we keep on going back to the pump," Krohn continues. "Fact is, we need to develop a higher degree of comfort with allocating media dollars to the Web."
Last summer, he got the chance to test the effectiveness of the Internet as a stand-alone campaign tool. With the permission of the RNC's senior staff, Krohn zeroed in on the Louisiana gubernatorial race. Then-Rep. Bobby Jindal was an attractive candidate, Krohn says, and it was projected to be a tight race. For 3 1/2 months, using online micro-targeting and data-matching, he identified a set of voters and turned them out to the polls.
Statewide turnout for the Louisiana race was 46 percent. Of those voters who interacted with Krohn's online targeting -- he won't say how much of the total vote -- 76 percent voted, he claims. Krohn says he's not suggesting that the RNC is responsible for Jindal's win. What it does suggest, however, is that the model could have significant impact on voter turnout, he adds.
Crohn couldn't be more right. The days of lackluster campaigns who win simply because they raised more money for TV are over. I now tell my clients to reduce their TV budgets by 10% and spend it on online marketing, social networking and other web activities. And 10% might be too little.
And it's not just because the Internet is more prevalent. It's also because TV is less effective. Nearly 20% of US households now have DVR, and they tend to be the kind of households targeted by all politicians- affluent. So far less people are watching commercials.
It's time for candidates to end their addiction to TV. It may just kill them.
