Smallbrain Solutions

Russell Buckley at Mobhappy.com has a very nice piece on mobile marketing here. Basically, he ponders why mobile hasn’t become more common as a marketing mechanism.

Personally, I am of the opinion that candidates need can get a pretty good jump on the competition by paying attention to mobile in the coming year. Why? Russell makes a pretty good justification here:

It’s hard to argue that mobile isn’t potentially important - two billion people carrying what are essentially Personal Media Players, capable of receiving calls and messages in real time, playing music, watching film, streaming Tv and radio and hosting games. Not only that, but we’re promised that these devices will soon be self-aware enough to know where they are in the world, and in relation to other users - and let interested parties know this information (with the user’s permission).

So it’s not the medium itself that represents the challenge for marketers. It’s bleeding obvious that it’s attractive. At least if you don’t work in a traditional [marketing] agency.

I will be developing a series of posts in the near future about how you (even as a low-budget local candidate) can use mobile in your campaign. For now, here are some good links to get you started:

> Network-centric Advocacy: Google SMS activism

Marty posted this back in 2004, and I must say that I find Google Local indispensable here in NYC. I have used it for driving directions on the fly, finding sushi in different neighborhoods, and other things.

> MobileActive

This was a conference, organized by Marty Kearns (see above) around mobile activism. Lots of good brain food here.

Take a look at these sites and I will be back with some ideas on how you can use Mobile in your campaign after the turkey has digested. In the meantime, you should add a “cell phone” field to your signup forms with maybe a “It is ok to contact me via text message” box.

See you soon.

Comments(0)

Ok, this has nothing to do with technology really, but 4 GOP reps actually sat down with Triumph the Insult Comic Dog to discuss global warning… I admire their courage.

Here is the link. Sorry about the Sierra Mist ads they make you watch…[via Chris Dykstra]

Comments(0)

A few days ago, Pinyo posted “The Seven Deadly Sins of Blogging”. It is a pretty good primer for folks getting ready to start a campaign blog. I would also point you to EchoDitto’s “Best Practices for Being a Successful Blogger”.

The thing that is most difficult for campaign blogs to get right is the “voice”. If you are just going to post press releases, call it a “news” page. Please.

Go read.

Comments(1)

SmartMobs points to a paper (abstract here, full PDF here) that examines the conventional wisdom that search engines make popular sites more visible - and therefore more popular - while shutting out the less popular ones. This of course creates a mirror of other non-egalitarian systems (the rich get richer, etc. etc.).

The authors of the paper, Santo Fortuna, et. al., suggest that the opposite is in fact true.

Neato. There is, naturally, some dispute about the experimental process they used - you can read the Economist article here - but this is definitely encouraging news.

What does this mean for you? Well, not a lot. Generally, the “googlearchy” as it is referred to, really more applies to general interest sites. If you are a candidate, it should not be difficult to get your site listed first on the search terms that are relevant to you (good luck if your site is about “social security”…). As long as you have a RELEVANT site with a niche content area (e.g. your campaign) you should be fine.

Definitely a good read though.

Comments(0)

Randall Stross writes today in the NYT about how Google’s model of text-only, relevant ads helped to push the online ad industry away from the “punch the monkey” and the ubiquitous pop-under ads of yesterday (I am not entirely sure that those days are gone…).

A fascinating look at the history of Google Ad Sense’s development really. The thing that got me thinking was this line:

It did take a little while before prospective sponsors were willing to try Google’s text ads, but soon enough, they attracted the intrepid. Mr. Brin and Mr. Page deliberately offered advertisers instant gratification: pull out your credit card, plunk down a $50 deposit, send in four lines - and in a blink it would be out there, having been automatically processed without a pre-publication review by a humanoid. (Google’s language police would follow up later, if need be.)

Ms. Mayer credits small companies for helping to draw the attention, and ad dollars, of Google’s big accounts. Because of the sheer number of commercial sites run by small operators - like the one that has bought a sponsored link tied to the unappreciated sport of extreme ironing - their customers add up to a very large number.
(emphasis added)

So, the thing that is important here is that there are extreme efficiencies with google ads that are not achievable with other bulk purchases and the cost-per-acquisition is stellar (if you are doing it right).

Basically, since you can name your price and pick your keywords, you can snag a lot of interested people into your program. If you are a candidate, chances are pretty good that your keywords are not being highly sought after, so you should be able to get CPC (cost per clicks) in the sub-$0.10 range. That means you will get a lot of qualified clicks for not a lot of money.

You will, of course, want to make sure your landing page is as effective as possible, since you are paying for the CLICKS not the signups.

(Disclosure: I do own 0.69 shares of Google stock - so go ahead and call me a shill for the industry.)

Comments(0)