Social Network

This is a post from my blog outside of C2C, also called Ant’s World:

Last week, we launched our new DA official website, as well as Contribute to Change, our social networking platform for DA volunteers. A number of people have blogged about it, and I’d say the verdict is, on balance, positive. However, some of the negative commentary has generated some debate.

I’ve been trying to keep up, and comment, but I thought I would put a few thoughts down here that might provide a bit more clarity on what the DA is trying to achieve with its Social Media (SM) strategy.

Our objective in SM is not to go out and convert millions of undecided voters or ANC supporters to vote DA. Perhaps, in our engagement online, we may swing someone who was undecided or leaning another way, but they’re not our primary focus, at least not initially.

The primary focus of our SM strategy is on existing DA supporters who are already favourable towards the DA. Contribute to Change is a platform for our supporters to get involved in the party and its election campaign, and contribute in whatever way they want to. It is a home for people who are already acting, or who want to act, as brand ambassadors for the DA. It makes it easier for them to be effective as brand ambassadors.

While we are relinquishing control of the message by inviting our supporters to become the messengers, we believe the risk is outweighed by the positive – namely, thousands of supporters authentically and convincingly marketing the DA to their peers.

So, no, our SM strategy is not about breaking into new markets. It is about activating our support base to shift undecided voters our way, and to turn out DA supporters on Election Day.

On a final note, just as the DA (or any political party, for that matter) needs to try and see things from the perspective of the ordinary voter, so too do those that are immersed in social media need to take a step back and consider the experience of the less-initiated. There are highly variable experiences and expectations.

So while the social media gurus expect a response to an @message on Twitter, many of us lesser mortals are pretty stoked to get regular updates of Helen’s campaign schedule, along with the occasional comment on an event or experience. Should Helen stay off  Twitter just because she has a pretty punishing campaign schedule, not to mention keeping things running smoothly in the City of Cape Town? I think far more of her followers would be disappointed with that, than with the reply feature not being used.

Barack Obama didn’t use Twitter for conversation, and neither did Seth Godin while I was following him (in fact, I recall the latter never even followed his followers back). The point is, Twitter is one channel, and it is being used to provide a particular service.

There are a number of other SM channels where the DA is engaging directly. So please feel free to engage us.