A Suggestion for the Obama Campaign

by: Matt Stoller

Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:26


Adam Green of Moveon hit back at Obama on the Huffington Post with his blog post 'Obama Got Outfoxed' and Markos hit back with his blog post 'Obama and Fox News'.  

All of us have endorsed Obama, and have criticized him over this, but the reality is that there was no communications with anyone about the decision-making or process that led to him being on Fox News.  There is also no messaging around Wright or any other bubbling stories.  There is basically no blogger communications going on as far as I can tell, the kind so critical to a good blog strategy like Tim Tagaris ran with the Lamont campaign.  The Clinton campaign does a much better job, down to little details such as inviting bloggers on press calls.  Even the McCain operation, with a much less significant blogosphere on the right, is having McCain out on blogger conference calls.  I find it odd that John McCain is doing a better job than either Democrat in handling his allies, but that's the case.

Anyway, it's clear that Obama's campaign has not fixed its relationship with the blogs and the liberal internet space.  That is most likely because their new media director, Joe Rospars, is a remarkably skilled logistics operator with limited bandwidth for communications.  The Obama campaign could sure use a Peter Daou type.

As the general election approaches, it would helpful it this logistical problem was fixed.

Matt Stoller :: A Suggestion for the Obama Campaign

Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
A Suggestion for the Obama Campaign | 62 comments
Yes and no (0.00 / 0)
I agree with some of what you've said, but in no way does the Clinton team have a better relationship with bloggers than does Obama.

And, you didn't mention this, but Markos does not agree that Obama "threw DKos under the bus".

Obama campaign is supposed to discuss strategy with bloggers? (0.00 / 0)
I think I must be missing the point of this post, because it sounds to me like you think the Obama campaign should be discussing strategy with the liberal blogosphere.

This sounds like such a silly idea that I assume I am missing the greater point.  

no (4.00 / 1)
They are supposed to be working with allies, giving out talking points, etc.
[ Parent ]
OK, more reasonable but I'm still having trouble seeing how this works (4.00 / 1)
Perhaps it's because I'm not a veteran blogger, but I don't really grasp the mechanics of working with allies and giving out talking points to like-minded bloggers.

Do campaigns typically have someone responsible for coordinating with bloggers, via conference call or otherwise?

And let's say they do: if a campaign operative suggests particular talking points, is it realistic to expect bloggers to rely on them and produce anything close to a coherent message?

Also, wouldn't this kind of coordination leave a campaign open to all sorts of charges, like being responsible for messages that are not really within their control?

I'm not trying to be facetious here.  It's just that, without more inside knowledge, the whole enterprise sounds impractical to me.

[ Parent ]
you could say the same for opinion writers in newspapers. (0.00 / 0)
and it's not a sure thing, not by any stretch of the imagination.

It's the campaign's position, how it's reported is up to who is writing, the talking points are to "help" that.

Only true hacks ever use the talking points exactly.
Much like music reviewers who just copy the bio for their music review and add in a few sentences.

The new media is still new, but it also doesn't mean reinventing the wheel for everything.

[ Parent ]
I don't believe (0.00 / 0)
that they're not distributing talking points, etc. So I miss your point.
[ Parent ]
Yeah, i generally get a couple of emails from the Obama camp a week (0.00 / 0)
I generally have a good idea what their talking points are just for having subscribed to their mailing list. Not to mention I can figure it out by reading quotes on CNN. I think whats different is that some of the independent channels, like this blog, decided to go to war with Obama over Fox. So its more like some left blogs are not echoing the Obama talking points, not that Obama is not getting the message out or has some poisoned relationship with blogs.  

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
If you're reading quotes on cnn... (4.00 / 1)
It's already too late to be an effective part of a coordinated messaging apparatus. Read up on Daou's triangle theory, or just read Tim's blog posts. They're both comfortable communicators, both with allies and the public, and they have a vision for how independent forces can work harmoniously to affect the conversation in all of our favor.

It's all about coordination, and meaningful coordination means outreach, not follow-the-leader. There's been a chilly relationship between Obama's online team and most previously established progressive bloggers for a while, precisely because there's very little sharing of information (which breeds an environment of confusion or worse distrust).

Essentially I think it looks like a power-struggle. The obama team saw an opportunity to build their own sphere of online support which they can largely control. They've done it, but in the process they've chosen not to coordinate with erstwhile allies in the same space, probably because this would have resulted in less control on their part over online supporters.


Me | My Work | Future Majority

[ Parent ]
except ... (4.00 / 1)
... I think this goes to the heart of the grassroots, bottom-up organizing philosophy they've pressed since early on.  To the extent that netroots outreach is important (and it is, and Tim Tagaris is an asset wherever he works), is it with the top-level netroots opinion leaders that it's most important, or with grassroots activists who are entirely on board with the campaign?

This isn't like a Lamont or Donna Edwards race where everyone's been on board with a candidate since day one -- the netroots leaders remained independent for a long time, and still (and properly) are independent enough to criticize Obama even after endorsing him.

So what is it they're not doing?

[ Parent ]
lots of stuff (4.00 / 1)
- Regular communications about the campaign
- Individual conversations with opinion leaders on how they can be helpful in promoting progressive values
- Providing a channel to listen to complaints and problems and address them

This is basic political work.  They don't have to do this, and they don't.  I'm just saying it would be better if they did, since it would help them and help us.

[ Parent ]
well ... (0.00 / 0)
I assume you know how to reach Joe and Sam when needed.  Re "individual conversations," I guess I'm surprised to hear you say you need that -- you certainly don't need talking points to know what to say, and as a supporter both of the campaign and of progressive politics, I'd rather have you outside the bus telling it where it needs to go than inside the bus too much.
[ Parent ]
whatever (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Perhaps you should consider the obvious (0.00 / 0)
that Obama doesn't consider you his allies. My bet would be that he doesn't consider you at all, and that when he does it's so he can best formulate the trajectory of your placement under the bus. When he went on Fox and mentioned DailyKos specifically, did you really think he meant only Kos?  You are too humble.
[ Parent ]
FOX & Obama (0.00 / 0)
We all have to accept the reality of the situation if as you say FOX is only watched by the right, well they represent almost 50% of the vote if they vote as a block (which they won't). No one here is going to vote against him for being on FOX, and I'm sure when he becomes President there will be far more criticism of what he intends to do that we have no knowledge of now. We do not control any of the candidates, just hope we pick the right one.
But they don't represent 50% of the voters (0.00 / 0)
Not even close. They represent the core 28% that will never abandon Bush.

The remaining primary voters might vote for Hillary if they didn't like him going on Fox.

[ Parent ]
Huh?????? (0.00 / 0)
Hillary's goping on O'Reilly, the serial Worst Person in the World, while Obama was interviewed by an actual reporter.  I suppose you could spin this as Obama gave cred to the faux Fox news operation, while she is going on an entertainment show to "take him on."  We'll see.  

But I can't believe anyone who knows Obama was on Fox would vote for Hillary over that.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

[ Parent ]
Hope for Change or Actual Change (0.00 / 0)
I don't think they would change there vote just bc he went on Fox but i hope the public is paying close attention to what he is doing and saying. He is being the politician that he tried to to have us believe he was not. I quite frankly would like nothing more than for him to drop out. This country is in complete shambles and it is getting worse. The administration has no accountability and corruption in government is so visible it is shameful. I am a black woman and would like to see a black president but more than that, I would like my country to be strong and economically sound. Obama talks about he wants to instill HOPE for Change. WE ARE BEYOND HOPE!!! We need change and we need it now . Hilary is the only candidate who has the heart, fortitude, and ADMINISTRATIVE EXPERIENCE to get us back on track. It took a Clinton to clean up a BUSH mess in early 90's and it will take a CLINTON to clean up after this Bush too!! Obama should run in 4-8 years!
[ Parent ]
oh man are they in for a surprise (0.00 / 0)
if they are going to vote for Hillary because Obama went on Fox network news (not fox news channel) their heads are going to explode when they find out Hillary did a fundraiser with Rupert Murdoch. This remains the most pointless non-issue of the campaign, just after flag pins.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
Who watches Fox? (0.00 / 0)
I think their viewership is broader than the core right wing of the party. Certainly, it was a lot broader on the day the interviewed aired.  Obama had the opportunity to reach all of those people and he took it.  I think he did very well.  
[ Parent ]
Fox broadcasting (0.00 / 0)
I just want to expand on this since none of us can seem to get over this squabble. The appearance was likely used by most affiliates in their evening news. So if one is to look at late Sunday night programming on Fox, you have people watching Family Guy and then American Dad, with promos throughout pumping "hear what Obama said this morning in a Fox News exclusive interview". Oh, but whatever, its only fundamental Christian right wing conservative fascists that watch Family Guy and American Dad.  

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
Sounds good to me. (0.00 / 0)
A report came out in '06 stating something like the vast majority of people get all of the info they use to make decisions about elections from local TV news.  

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/2...

Maybe 36 seconds of info per day.

http://www.news.wisc.edu/13015

So if Obama got a good 12 seconds that's OK with me.

[ Parent ]
Not the point (0.00 / 0)
There may be some who think it is bad for a Democrat to go on a Republican network, but I'd disagree.  That isn't the point.

The problem Faux claims to be a normal, respectable news organization.  If Faux just claimed to be a conservative TV version of Air America there would be no problem.

The problem is Obama and Clinton are giving Faux credibility they don't deserve.

[ Parent ]
better job handing his allies? (0.00 / 0)
Every time I checked AM radio this last week, right-wing radio hosts were denouncing McCain for his condemnation of the North Carolina Obama ad.  I know there's room for hyperbole in blogging, but I don't think you're being very accurate here.

 

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

clarification (0.00 / 0)
That's not to say Obama is doing a good job on communicating with the blogosphere, because he isn't.  But all three candidates have issues with their base.



New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

[ Parent ]
obama on fox (0.00 / 0)
Obama's appearance, and behavior, on Fox was bizarre -- so confusing to me that I can't help but think that there's a good reason for it? Usually when I am this confused it's because I'm missing something.

What possible advantage could Obama have gained from his performance? Does he really think he's going to win a large fraction of Fox-types?

Not a large fraction (0.00 / 0)
But elections are won on small fractions

The liberal wiki
Send an email to terra@liberalwiki.com
[ Parent ]
You're confused (0.00 / 0)
because you've bought into the purposeful distortion that Obama was on Foxnews cable. He wasn't particulary going for that audience. He was going for the "news" shows on Fox broadcasting, which have a viewership not much different than the mainstream networks like ABC, etc. have. That audience is not "Fox-types", unless you consider those who stick around to watch the news after American Idol, The Simpsons, MadTV, or House "Fox-types".

As to his appearance/behavior, I don't know what you're referring to, and everything I've seen says most people and commentators think he performed quite well.

[ Parent ]
i'm not confused about what happened (0.00 / 0)
Obama's repeated capitulation to Republican talking points in the interview has been pretty well discussed here and elsewhere.

I'm just confused as to why he would.

[ Parent ]
Obama can win in spite of us. (4.00 / 2)
And 50% of us defend his stupid decision to go on FOX because we've become too invested in his victory to criticize.

He probably will win the white house anyway. And you know what? We'll probably end up cleaning up after his bad decisions anyway, and justifying nearly every stupid move where he bows into the right wing.

I wish there was a 50% rating here (0.00 / 0)
Because I'm not going to give this a troll.   But I disagree.   If we think negotiating with Iran is a good idea, but we can't talk to the FOX network (not even FOX News) audience, then we're not ready to eat our own dogfood.
[ Parent ]
Hillary on Fox (4.00 / 1)
Did I hear right, that Hillary will be on the O'Reilly Factor tomorrow night?

Not to be outdone.... nt. (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
This is a surprise (0.00 / 0)
why again? C'mon -- she sucked up to Rupert Murdoch and he did a fundraiser for her. She sucked up to Richard Scaife, very likely the most evil parasitic entity in America and got his endorsement. Why wouldn't she go on Fox?

But that damn Obama just can't seem to rise to the Clinton standard of ideological purity. What a joke. "Left" blogistan is itself sounding more like Foxnews every day.

[ Parent ]
he has a tin ear for the blogosphere. (0.00 / 0)
and he has ever since he wrote on dkos about net neutrality and got a massive frontpage smackdown by Markos.

It was the equivalent of getting of a nervous swimmer dipping a foot into the water of a pool and then immediately getting smacked in the face with a ball.

I knew it was an over reaction even then, after all he may have been the "patron saint" of the antecedent to the netroots endorsed candidates, but nobody is above being called on BS when they were wrong.

Unfortunately it was too forceful.

Believe me, even if the netroots, on the whole hadn't endorsed Obama we would still be ignored.

The Obama campaign made a concious decision to supplant us and create their own organizational infrastructure online. Which in a way has been helpful and is probably good, but it sure does smart when he'll talk to Faux News and not us.

-C.

roberts (4.00 / 1)
Obama didn't write about nn, he wrote about John Roberts.  And he didn't get smacked down.
[ Parent ]
only in our minds (4.00 / 1)
is (or was) Obama the "netroots" candidate in any true sense. While we are all looking for the "next" Dean, Clark, what have you, it's become clear that Obama's essential message is that "Democrats are just as bad as Bush." Compare and contrast "I represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic party."
[ Parent ]
You're right, Matt (0.00 / 0)
I also have come to recognize that the Fox appearance really was a dumb move, after reading more and giving it full consideration.

Clinton also does about 3 times as many press releases. And I've seen very few Obama ads on blogs. For all the support the blogosphere's given, I don't think there's much quid pro quo. (and no, I don't mean there's an expectation for him to pay for such support, but it does appear there's a lack of due consideration for his supporters, in messaging, networking or in any other way.

It's not like getting thrown under the bus but it certainly feels like the back seats are all the netroots get.

3 times as many press releases (0.00 / 0)
I love this line of criticism. They send too many emails, they don't send enough emails, they are not focused on winning over more center americans, they are appealing to the center too much, they should be on facebook, they are only on facebook, yada yada yada. The guy has been selling the fundamental progressive idea that our concerns and needs are universal no matter our location, ethnicity, whatever, and hes getting young people registered to vote than ever in US history, another giant progressive goal. And there is not being enough done for blogs and progressives? Im not trying to be his defender here but it just seems like the focus of criticism is a bit petty.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
Disgusting and depressing (4.00 / 1)
The hero worship mentality afflicting so many Obama supporters is appalling, and it's completely undermining the "better Democrats" mission of the progressive movement--during an election year, when there are critical opportunities for advancing that mission.

Here's a sad, but representative, comment from the dKos thread:

K O S LISTEN UP!!! (104+ / 0-)

KOS I'm not sure why you support Obama if you don't understand the primary reason most other people like him.  He talks to the other side. So don't piss and moan about it.  Obama is a trojan horse of logical thinking.  Let him slowly work his magic, even if its places we don't care for.

104(!) uprates for the idea that we're all supposed to shut up and wait for the magic man to solve everything.  This kind of childish explosion occurs every single time Obama is criticized on any lefty blog.  It's no wonder our candidates don't take us seriously; many of us can't be taken seriously.

Your timing is way off. (0.00 / 0)
I agree with you about pushing a more progressive agenda and keeping politicans' feet to the fire but your timing is way off. The right time for that is early in the primaries. I know some of you still can't accecpt it (I don't know if that includes you) but Obama is going to be our nominee. We must focus on the general election.

And no, we shouldn't just wait for the magic man to solve everything (which is waaaay condescending). Our job, at this point of the campaign, is to support him. Lefty blogs should be behind him by this time. This is a war. That's why Matt's point is a valid one. The campaign should reach out to the liberal blogosphere. Whe should act like echochambers and we should be rallying the troops.

[ Parent ]
Matt, (0.00 / 0)
Beware offering up the slightest negative comment on Obama, or you, too, will be thrown under the proverbial bus.  Never mind that you support him, you committed heresy by criticizing their god.  It began with Krugman, which should have been a sign that this Obama thing truly is a "cult of personality."  In the past 24 hours, Obama supporters here and at Daily Kos have attempted to marginalize you, Digby, and Markos for daring to point out that Obama might have made a mistake.  This is insanity.

If Obama supporters truly care about the progressive movement, they should be willing to listen to those of you who have been fighting for our values and principles for the past several years.  If they aren't willing to listen to your thoughts, opinions, ideas, and criticisms, then they are showing that their motivations are not bigger than one man.  

I have a name for the Messiah seekers (4.00 / 1)
The LEAVE BRITNEY OBAMA ALONE Brigade. And then I tell them to get the hell offa my lawn.

It's great to see the young be feisty about politics for a change, but they do need some vision correction and hearing aids so they can discern the difference between a friend and foe.

[ Parent ]
Give the messiah/head patting thing a rest. (4.00 / 1)
I'm from CT where we gave Obama a win, and I've yet to meet one of these deluded creatures you write of.    I've met plenty of boomers who feel that it is HRC's "time" and Obama needs to fall on his sword, be less uppity, whatever.  

I'm not sure who has better corrective lenses on when I compare your youths to my boomers.

Boomers have had a great track record of getting theirs and leaving the wreckage to the fiesty young.   I guess in this case their cheaters robbed them of the long view which had Obama coming at them too quickly to change tactics, and so they cry "Get off my lawn" since it isn't going their way.

Or am I just a crazy as you are?   Neither of our generalizations will hold water with a lot of scrutiny.

[ Parent ]
Those "creatures" (0.00 / 0)
surround me, to the point where I can't have political conversations with them anymore.  I realized it was hopeless when my friend refused to go see Valerie Plame because she was a Clinton supporter.
[ Parent ]
That is part of the wreckage (0.00 / 0)
I'm sorry you are surrounded.   Maybe we are having the same problems with different people!

And it is a shame that this person chose not to see Plame because she was a Clinton booster.  She served our country in such a way that it would be hard to turn down a sighting.  

But I've read her husband's pieces over at HuffPo, and they were really insulting.

Part of the problem here is that a lot of us supported Bill and Hill and Valerie, etc in terms of social and sometimes real capital, and then we see the quality of their opposition to Obama.    For Bill and HRC we wish they gave the Bushes and Scaifes and Murdochs half as much guff as they give Obama, and for Joe WIlson we're shocked that Obama gets as much guff as he gave Bush.

The opposite example is Elizabeth Edwards.   I was a JRE supporter before he dropped, and I found myself pulled to Obama.    I don't feel that her support of HRC is in any way distateful or bridge burning, she sees a positive difference in policy and goes for it.   And good for her.   If more of that was going on we might not be in this mess.

[ Parent ]
Web 2.0 (0.00 / 0)
I agree with you, Matt.  If Obama simply posted a diary at dKos every month or two the reaction would be tremendous.

But I remember back in January when I was learning about Obama's operations on Facebook, MySpace and YouTube.  At the time it seemed like blogosphere was being leap-frogged.  All this stuff was happening on the web for the Obama campaign and I didn't see any of it because I was sitting back in Web 1.0 land.  I still wonder if there might be some truth to that.

But even if that is true, I still agree with what you suggest.

talking point on Wright just hit CNN (0.00 / 0)
This is getting a bit far-fetched (0.00 / 0)
As an Obama supporter do we really want to see him pandering to us or going after new voting blocks in other places.  Moving it a step-further how effective can a national blog be when the campaign is literally micro-targetting congressional districts that have odd numbers of delegates.  At the end of the day I would go out on a limb to say that 95% of the people that read this blog will not be voting for McCain - and each of the candidates name id has been established so again the net yield is diminishing returns.  
Actually, No (4.00 / 1)
The Obama campaign has an active and responsive outreach to liberal bloggers.
oh really? (4.00 / 2)
Did they talk to you about Fox News?  Did they give you talking points on Reverend Wright?  Do you know how to be helpful in Indiana, or which journalists are causing problems or which ones are worthy of praise?  Are you aware of the negative frames the right is pushing that they need help with?

This is about a dialogue, which they are not having.  Their conversation with bloggers is a joke.

[ Parent ]
Ah (0.00 / 0)
So you want to run their campaign.
[ Parent ]
Asking for help does not equal letting your campaign be taken over (4.00 / 2)
If the you or Obama staff has some kind of fear that asking bloggers for help in Indiana or help pushing back against right-wing frames or the Wright story means they're going to take over the campaign, they have worse problems on working with allies than I thought.


Me on Facebook
Me on Twitter
[ Parent ]
sophomoric response. n/t (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Excellent suggestion (0.00 / 0)
And to my fellow Obama supporters: instead of arguing with a major blogger over whether Clinton does or doesn't do a better job at keeping allies in the blogosphere informed and prepared, wouldn't it be better to focus on what's working well and learn from it?
Maybe it's a good idea to maintain some separation.... (0.00 / 0)
....so that the left blogosphere can be completely autonomous.

A cosier relationship with the campaigns smacks too much of top-down politics as usual.

[ Parent ]
Oops. My first post: it didn't belong in this thread. (0.00 / 0)
Sorry!
[ Parent ]
The problem is (0.00 / 0)
the left blogosphere has been taken over by the Obama supporters to the point where many people like me (I am fairly neutral in the race) won't bother to comment much.  It's only in the past couple of days, when I've seen a sense of balance return to my favorite blogs, that I've ventured back in.
[ Parent ]
The real question is (4.00 / 2)
does he consider the netroots to be his allies?

Personally, I don't think so.  I think he threw both Wright and the netroots under the bus in the last couple days, and I think he considers both to be on the fringe.  This was a "Sister Souljah" moment for both Wright and for the netroots, for different but similar reasons.

Maybe it's a good idea to maintain some separation... (0.00 / 0)
....so that the left blogosphere can be completely autonomous.

A cosier relationship with the campaigns smacks too much of top-down politics as usual.

A Suggestion for the Obama Campaign | 62 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox