Post election engagement - Can the administration match the campaign?

2008 will surely be remembered as a landmark year for politics. When the word ‘change’ and the simple phrase ‘yes we can’ were repeated via every means possible by Barrack Obama and his supporters, to great effect. The potential of new technology to drive political campaigning, not just complement traditional avenues for mobilising the electorate, became clear. The campaign used viral networks, small, dispersed donations, and regular communications with supporters, via virtually every kind of technology – old and new – to spread the word.

The questions now being asked are how engagement and transparency using technology can work in government. One of the problems (!) with such a successful and inclusive campaign is how the enthusiasm for politics, particularly from sections of the electorate who have never voted before, can be harnessed. Trying to stop voters feeling ‘used’ now that the excitement of the election is over is a serious issue for the Obama team. This is highlighted by a report carried out by the PEW Internet Project which asked voters in the US what they thought would happen after the election. 46% of Obama voters expect to hear directly from the party leadership over the next year and 51% of supporters who were online expect some kind of ongoing communication. It is great for politics that people want to hear from politicians but can this momentum continue indefinitely?

It is of course much easier to be popular in opposition and Obama may have some difficulty in keeping all his supporters interested and onside if they become frustrated by the political process that inevitably means they will not always be able to get their way. The website of the President Elect www.change.gov has lots of ways to communicate and engage - you can ask Obama a question, you can send your stories or join discussions about policy debates. But where do your thoughts about policy go? Is someone collating all the ideas and creating some kind of report that will direct policy? It would seem a phenomenal task considering 27% of Americans who are online have visited the site and the last discussion had 4000 comments posted in a week.

It appears that so far this is exactly what they’re doing with Paul Shmitz (a member of the Innovation and Civil Society Team) giving feedback on one of the discussions via a YouTube video. It must require a massive amount of resources to monitor and evaluate responses to each debate but then if you can engage directly with the public on every issue perhaps you can save some money on political pollsters…..

So what can British politicians learn from this? Perhaps that online campaigning can be useful to get you elected but that it has longer term consequences for government - once you have engaged people you can’t just turn it off. To make online engagement legitimate and effective in terms of continued engagement and policy development, a clear strategy for using citizens’ input and an explanation of where their input will go is important. In the UK, citizens’ views are best facilitated by Parliament or government departments, where there is a close link to the outcome of policy as well as some distance from Downing Street. The slightest whiff of political spin and any good will created will drain away.

Beccy Allen, Researcher