See What’s Out There

The MoveOn.org Obama in 30 Seconds video contest has a winner. To refresh your memory, MoveOn asked it’s 3 million+ members to make a 30-second campaign commercial for Obama. It had to be positive.

They received over 1,000 entries. Their members and the general public voted on the finalists, more than 5 million votes. And a panel of judges picked the overall winner.

Here’s the winner:

You can see other category winners here.

The Obama campaign has already responded to the gas tax issue with a new ad. What’s amazing is how short the cycle for new creative has become. Can your organization produce something new in two days?

Link [Obama Ad on YouTube]

MoveOn has to be running what could be called the most successful video contest ever — if the measurement is participation.

Their Obama in 30 Seconds contest invited people to make a 30-second spot, positive only, to help elect Barack Obama. They got over 1,000 entries, which is great. But they are, as of this writing, rapidly approaching 4 million votes to the contest. Now, there are many YouTube videos with millions or views, but in this contest each person has to vote for each video in three categories, so this is a higher level of engagement.

The whole thing is set-up beautifully. They are using Amazon S3 to host the video in their own player. They made the embed code available as well as a permalink. They require votes (out of 5 stars) in three categories, Positive Message, Originality, Overall Impact. They serve up the videos in a random order to make sure every video will get lots of votes.

Now, if success is electing Obama we don’t know how effective it is yet. But it shows the video contest is here to stay and making high quality media is easier than ever.

The quality of the videos varies greatly. Here’s a nice one I saw, but then because of the random serving I couldn’t find it again on the MoveOn site, but found it on YouTube:

[Link to video]

Barack Obama just gave a really thoughtful speech on race in America. You can read the transcript here or see the video below. What I hope it will do is start a conversation we often don’t have in this country about race and what it means to be American.

MoveOn is inviting the public to make a commercial on behalf of Barack Obama. They are inviting the public to make a spot and then the winner will get a national airing of their spot as well as $20,000 in video equipment. Nice. This is just the latest example on having your community create content for you. $20,000 is a low budget for a single professionally produced spot. It is nothing at all compared to the likely hundreds of entries they will get as well as the PR value of the whole thing.

Here are the details:

MoveOn.org has a message for all filmmakers, writers, directors, actors, editors, composers, graphic artists, and animators: Whether you’re a total amateur or a total pro, now is the time to use your creativity to help Barack Obama win. We’re launching an ad contest: “Obama in 30 Seconds.”

Powered by grassroots enthusiasm, Obama has won the most states and the most delegates. But the race isn’t over, and we’ve got to pull out all the stops to help him across the finish line.

We’re counting on you to make amazing ads in the next three weeks. Then, MoveOn members and the public will rate the ads, and a panel of top artists, netroots heroes, and filmmaking professionals will pick the winner from among top ads. We’ll air the winning ad nationally, and the winner will receive a gift certificate for $20,000 in video equipment.

As my readers know, I have been saying for a while now that the Obama campaign is a tremendous case study in the right ways to use the web, Web 2.0, and new media to energize and engage supporters.

There is an interview in Fortune online with Rishad Tobaccowala, who has the title of chief innovation officer of the media buying division of Publicis, which is a giant advertising company. While we in the not-for-profit world are looking at how the Obama campaign can be a model for what we are doing with issues and organizations, those in the advertising industry are also taking note.

What Mr. Tobaccowala does is see the Clinton campaign like the big established brand and the Obama campaign as the upstart. For him, it becomes a cautionary tale for big companies. For me, it is something the more established organizations should take note of. You can read the whole interview with Mr. Tobaccowala here and below I have excerpted the highlights.

Fortune: Who is using media more effectively in the Democratic primary - Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama?

Tobaccowala: Definitely, Obama. He is a digital candidate while she is the analog candidate. Don’t misunderstand me. They both primarily use traditional media. In fact, he’s outspent her in traditional media. But his Web site is amazing. It’s completely and continually updated. It feels alive and energetic.

His campaign also actively uses e-mail to keep you totally informed. Like if Obama is debating live, they say go watch him. They also created these challenges - when Clinton donated $5 million to her campaign, the Obama campaign sent out a note saying we have to match this quickly. In 24 hours, people donated $8 million to Obama.

They use the Web to support their grassroots community approach by getting people to make supportive phone calls, arrange for rides and places to stay in states where primaries are being held and more.

Why else is it better to be the digital candidate in ‘08?

Well, think about it for a minute. Unlike Obama, she’s used traditional media almost entirely, like her town meeting on the Hallmark Channel. She got maybe 250,000 viewers. But the Black Eyed Peas made this great music video about Obama. It gets almost a million views a day online. The Obama campaign quickly realized how powerful it was and ran it on their home page.

So part of their ability is to figure out from the blogosphere or via crowdsourcing, whatever you want to call it, what works and begin using it. A lot of the Obama campaign messages are not their own but they point to and highlight stuff created by others. It’s created by the crowds.

In fact with over a million donors contributing, they position the entire campaign as one owned by the people. That’s what makes it so authentic. While both teams spin stuff, Clinton’s team tends to be rather unsubtle in their use of spin and attack and this really does not work as well these days.

…

Think of it this way. Traditional media is based on command and control. But the digital world is all about grassroots. Traditional media is about authority. Digital is about authenticity. You can see it in the language they use. Obama uses the language of “we and you,” which is inclusive and nods to the wisdom of the crowds. She uses “I and me.” His stuff is about “yes, you can.” Which is about the buyer. She talks about “experience from day one.” That’s about the seller. That doesn’t resonate anymore.

One key thing you recognize from everything from MySpace to the blogosphere is that people want to have a voice. We keep talking in my business about how the buyer is in control. Her campaign believes the seller is in control. That’s why it’s better to be digital. That doesn’t mean you knock out analog. Obama still relies very heavily on traditional media, too.

…
In the digital world you want to get signals from all over. But in what appears to be in her campaign a command and control word, Hillary just has loyalists. It’s like an echo chamber of nonsense. On the blogosphere everyone is laughing at her staff. They had a tin ear about what’s going on in the real world.

Meanwhile, Obama has used the Web to learn things and continually refine his message. His campaign knows exactly what works and what doesn’t, what pictures are right, what messages, and when to send it all out. He’s continually adapting. The only thing he never fiddles with is “Change you can believe in.” That’s been his slogan from day one.

…
Getting back to Hillary, do you ever run into any advertising clients with troubles?

Sure. I actually use the campaign as a case study. I work with a lot of market leaders. I tell them think about Clinton as a market leader with a brand name and to think about Obama as an upstart without a brand name. I spell out all the things we’ve just talked about - command and control vs. grassroots and authenticity and the two candidates’ different approaches to the media. Then I say which one of those do you think is your company. The first guy I did with say, “You’re right. We’re Hillary!”

You think the Yes We Can video was inspiring. Look at what the McCain people came up with.

In January, Barack Obama raised as much money, $28 million, as Howard Dean raised in his entire campaign last time around. And they have done it using $25 and $50 donors. Think about it. On the one side you have the traditional way to raise money — rich people asking other rich people to give. “Bundling” is when the partner asks all the associates to ante up the maximum to attend a local fundraiser.

An individual may give $2,300 per federal election. So if I give $2,300 to Clinton I am “maxed out” and the only way for me to do more is get $2,300 from my buddies. Lets say I am that law partner and by making a lot of calls I can get 50 people to max out for my candidate. That’s $117,300, including my own contribution. I become a Hillraiser.

The Obama campaign is raising money differently. They have raised lots of money from those small donors. For the Obama campaign to get to $117,300 from $25 donors mean they have 4692 people donating instead of only 51. Wow.

We care about this because we care about using the internet for fundraising and advocacy. What Obama is doing is a major milestone in the development of the web. The internet, only the internet, makes possible this kind of retail fundraising. There would simply be no other way to get people, excited in their own homes, across the country, inspired by speeches and videos, organized enough to get these donations flowing. People wouldn’t write the checks or fill out the forms, but they can click and give, just like they click to buy a book or a Pez dispenser or, in 2008, pay their parking tickets.

The Obama campaign says they have more than 350,000 donors this year so far. 350,000 donors! Holy smoke that’s a lot of donors. And they are talking about this many in just over a month.

What the internet makes possible, the candidate makes happen. The internet didn’t raise the money. Obama’s inspiration activated people and the internet made it possible to turn that excitement into dollars. As I have written before, the Obama campaign has been amazing at using video to make that excitement portable across the web, capturing those moments that get people juiced.

There is a lot to learn from this campaign and at See3 and among other nonprofit communicators we will be studying it for a long time to come.

It feels to me like something is happening here. I guess we’ll see on Tuesday.

It was a creed written into the founding documents that declared the destiny of a nation.

Yes we can.

It was whispered by slaves and abolitionists as they blazed a trail toward freedom.

Yes we can.

It was sung by immigrants as they struck out from distant shores and pioneers who pushed westward against an unforgiving wilderness.

Yes we can.

It was the call of workers who organized; women who reached for the ballots; a President who chose the moon as our new frontier; and a King who took us to the mountaintop and pointed the way to the Promised Land.

Yes we can to justice and equality.

Yes we can to opportunity and prosperity.

Yes we can heal this nation.

Yes we can repair this world.

Yes we can.

We know the battle ahead will be long, but always remember that no matter what obstacles stand in our way, nothing can stand in the way of the power of millions of voices calling for change.

We have been told we cannot do this by a chorus of cynics…they will only grow louder and more dissonant ……….. We’ve been asked to pause for a reality check. We’ve been warned against offering the people of this nation false hope.

But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.

Now the hopes of the little girl who goes to a crumbling school in Dillon are the same as the dreams of the boy who learns on the streets of LA; we will remember that there is something happening in America; that we are not as divided as our politics suggests; that we are one people; we are one nation; and together, we will begin the next great chapter in the American story with three words that will ring from coast to coast; from sea to shining sea –

Yes. We. Can.

Celebrities featured include: Jesse Dylan, will.i.am, Common, Scarlett Johansson, Tatyana Ali, John Legend, Herbie Hancock, Kate Walsh, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Adam Rodriquez, Kelly Hu, Adam Rodriquez, Amber Valetta, Eric Balfour, Aisha Tyler, Nicole Scherzinger and Nick Cannon

Wow. A Black guy wins the Iowa caucus. That is so 21rst Century. Whether he goes on to win the nomination and becomes president or not, the fact that Barack Obama won in Iowa, a 95% white state, says something about the ability of Americans, especially younger Americans, to put race aside. It gives one hope.

With my marketing hat on I see something else. I see a campaign that will be studied for years to come. As a former political consultant, I know that it is much easier to get people who you know are going to vote to vote for your candidate than to get new people to vote. In the past 20 years most of the efforts to get new people to vote in large numbers has been short on real results. Whether the focus has been on the young or the low income, the results have rarely equaled the resources expended.

The Obama campaign was able to use the internet to mobilize people and then turn that online juice into offline action. “The Iowa Democratic Party says at least 227,000 people took part in their caucuses, a much higher turnout than the 125,000 who cast their votes four years ago.” according to CNN. That is an amazing number. That is something all nonprofits should be looking at closely.

The implication is that Obama had a lot to do with this increase in turn-out. Some random thoughts on how this happened.

* People were excited about the product.
Marketing is great, but if the core message and the messenger aren’t compelling you will only get so far. Obama’s message, which include his words, his color, his life experience and his age, combined to become something people could rally around.

* Video
The Obama camp used more web video in more quantity and with more impact than the other campaigns. Coincidence? I think not. The videos were able to bring people to the events who couldn’t be there in person. The videos were able to give voice to real supporters. The videos were able to animate Obama’s words in a way text could not.

* Data and organization
Turing the excitement of people into action starts with good data. The Obama people — like the other candidates — invested heavily in being able to track and follow-up with everyone who took actions on their site and to marry that data with data about Iowans in order to mobile people precinct by precinct and household by household.

Nonprofits should be excited about the possibilities of their investment in online tools and offline organizing. They can take their real stories, the compelling work they do and use social networking and video to turn it into online excitement and activities. They can marry it to offline action and, like the Obama camp, see real results.