Does Labour really need Obama’s digital guru?

2nd March, 2009 3:54 pm

By Mark HansonThomas Gensemer

PR outfit, Freud Communications have been busily spinning. They’re helping Blue State Digital, the company that provided the tools for the much fabled Obama online campaign and their MD, Thomas Gensemer, export some stardust and sell their services to UK-based corporates and charities.

I’ve met Thomas a few times and he’s always downplayed any talk of working with the British Labour Party but profile pieces in the Guardian and The Times reveal he’s secretly showing his ‘for hire’ light as the taxi rank of budding experts offering Labour advice grows by the day.

(PS Here’s Gawker’s view on the runners and riders in the queue of Obama digital gurus who will no doubt be getting their CVs out around the globe.)

So could Thomas do for Gordon what he did for Barack?

You may recall the ‘top secret’ session that took place at Labour HQ, where a select audience where invited to conspire with Thomas and his co-founder Joe Rospars on this very issue.

Sunny Hundal neatly summed up certain reservations about mistakenly believing buying a shiny set of tools will be the answer.

To be fair, though, that isn’t what Thomas is saying. If we check out his comments in the Guardian and The Times….

”Organisations can build very quickly, if they do the messaging right.”
“If you don’t have the audience, you don’t need the tools.”

The whole point is that if you can’t talk to a group of potential volunteers or voters on their level and in real-speak then there’s no point having the new website.

Gensemer recounts a hilarious anecdote of a campaign where supporters were invited to send feedback to the campaign. He wondered where the feedback was going. And then he got the answer. Upon locating the inbox where there were 78,000 unread emails!!!

This reminds me of a leading politician who expressed amazement to me that his constituents chase him if he doesn’t respond to emails within a week! And we’ve all volunteered for campaigns or signed up for a Facebook group and had no human being acknowledge or contact us.

Obama’s campaign has registered big-time on the consciousness of Labour’s big fish and they’re all saying “I want one of those.”

So, just pay dollars for Blue State and ‘Yes We Can’? No. We can’t.

Firstly our structures are different. There is no real permanent campaign structure to the Democrat Party in the US in the way that there is in the Labour Party here. You could argue that one of the biggest achievements of Obama’s campaign was to build a Western Parliamentary Democracy type Party.

Prior to Obama, volunteers coalesced around a campaign and then disappeared when they are over, only to have to be re-built again 4 years later. I think an interesting point here is that the very fact that the first iteration of Blue State’s software was called “party-builder” (that they built for the DNC) only goes to underline this.

Of course its true to say that the CLP structure is not now the most ideal structure for the 21st century (our Party structures largely remain the same as the ones created 100 odd years ago when the Party was created) – but moving away from this is a massive step that cannot, and will not, happen over night.

Should Party members also actually be seen as small donors, in the sense that membership means that we actually have 180,000 small donors giving to the Party on a regular basis?

Which brings me to internet fundraising – again massive differences between here and there? The literature on this largely recognises differences between US and UK culture on this – the fact that Americans give to causes of all descriptions far more than we do here and that it’s always going to make more sense and be more appealing to give to a candidate rather than a monolithic Party.

There’s always that greater incentive to give given that the strength of political campaigns in the States have always been judged on the amount of money they raise – and that they have a massive advantage in that they can use TV advertising to drive people to their websites to donate.

As a donor in the US I know that there’s a high chance that my is going to help fund a TV ad that might then turn the outcome of the election. As a donor in the UK I think my £10 may go to possibly fund a direct mail or a leaflet which is actually, on its own, very unlikely to turn an outcome of an election.

BUT, but, but…Labour’s approach to new media is changing. Here’s the Top Secret presentation that key figures in the Party signed up to.

Here’s a Labour politician getting it right at grassroots using freely available tools.

And Ministers are grasping the need to open themselves to communities, organised around particular interests and go and talk to them where they congregate. This is Yvette Cooper doing just that this week, via Moneysupermarket, a popular forum of people discussing personal finance issues. Yvette agreed to field questions from forum users.

BUT as we’re in government we have another challenge. The incumbency versus insurgency argument is well trodden but when it comes to practical implementation there are many more barriers. We are continually shooting ourselves in the foot by giving huge data capture opportunities to Government rather than the Party. I can understand totally why this happens – a Minister or Civil Servant has a good idea about a digital engagement opportunity and because they have the resources to make it happen internally they do it on a Government Platform without even thinking about whether it should actually be Party based.

We know from Obama’s campaign that all of their success was derived from the fact that they put capturing email at the centre of everything they did and then using these email addresses wisely to drive both fundraising and mobilisation. For example, their promise to let people who gave them mobile phone numbers know their VP choice first (and the fact that they carried out this promise by sending a text message at 2am because it was in danger of leaking to CNN first).

Compare this with the No10 petitions site – done on a Government platform when it could so easily have been done as Prime Minister and Leader of the Labour Party on a Party platform. 8 million email addresses are now sitting in Downing Street that can’t be touched by us (and indeed aren’t being used effectively by them) and, worse still, will be handed over to the Tories when they next get into power.

Of course Government has to engage using new media as well but the point that needs to be made is that Government doesn’t need to win the next General Election, the Labour Party does.

Comments are closed

Latest

  • Featured News Unions Anti-trade union legislation could face legal challenge for contravening human rights

    Anti-trade union legislation could face legal challenge for contravening human rights

    Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper is ready to raise the prospect of challenging the Tories’ proposed anti-trade union laws in the courts, claiming it might contravene human rights legislation. Cooper says she has received legal advice that points to potential breaches of Article 11 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which preserves the right of freedom of association, including trade unions. The leadership contender will accuse the Conservatives of trying to use their position to cripple the opposition with […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Labour have been “in denial” about threat from UKIP, says Dan Jarvis

    Labour have been “in denial” about threat from UKIP, says Dan Jarvis

    Dan Jarvis has slammed Labour for being “in denial” about the threat caused by UKIP, in a new report published this weekend. ‘Reconnecting Labour’, which was commissioned by Andy Burnham in July as part of his campaign to become leader, looks specifically at how Labour wins back votes lost to the anti-EU party. Jarvis raises concerns that the EU referendum a new high-profile platform that could cause further problems for Labour. He says that Labour were too relaxed about the […]

    Read more →
  • Comment The Labour leadership contest: too much politics and not enough personality

    The Labour leadership contest: too much politics and not enough personality

    Our recent prime ministers were not elected to lead their parties following general election defeats, and there are many problems with electing leaders whilst on the rebound. One of the biggest is that everyone is still in General Election Mode, presenting manifestos rather than their qualities as a leader. Policies and ideas are not wedded to any one person – any candidate could institute a policy suggested by any other candidate. Having good ideas qualifies one for the top table, […]

    Read more →
  • Comment What lessons does Lynton Crosby have for Labour?

    What lessons does Lynton Crosby have for Labour?

    After May’s general election, it appeared everyone in the party who tweeted or blogged was sure they knew why Labour had lost. By some weird coincidence, these opinions always seemed to mirror the prejudices of the author. You know the type of thing – our policies were too right wing, our policies were too left wing, our policies were too centrist, etc. Not very enlightening. So, to get a more balanced view, I turned to Lynton Crosby. I appreciate that’s […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Labour is in “mortal danger” – “we need to save it again”, says Peter Mandelson

    Labour is in “mortal danger” – “we need to save it again”, says Peter Mandelson

    Peter Mandelson has argued that Labour is in “mortal danger” . In an article in the Financial Times (£), the former cabinet minister and Labour campaigns director has warned against a Jeremy Corbyn victory. If the Islington North MP wins the leadership election, “that would be a very bad outcome for anyone who cares about fairness in our society or Britain’s place in the world”, Mandelson writes. Mandelson has called for a tightening of the rules over the leadership election […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends










Submit