Came across this fascinating bit of wisdom today:
In order to run an Internet campaign that doesn’t simply use the Internet as the new form of mass mailing, to use it as a form of broadcasting, which is the very old traditional sort of campaigning style, you have to embrace not just the technology but actually be willing to let go of your message, which runs against every political instinct these days. [emphasis mine]
So says — or said — David Weinberger, the Howard Dean campaign’s Internet guru, in December. Back then, his candidate was on a roll and seemed unstoppable.
Then came January.
I’m prepared to stake a claim to having had a worse January than Dean has, but not by much. Dean’s plunge, defeat and now-infamous caucus-night speech in Iowa deflated his campaign almost instantly and, barring a miracle in the next week or two, permanently.
(A quick digression and disclaimer: I was rooting for him throughout the summer, fall and winter. Plus I caught the interview with Dr. Dean and his wife, Dr. Steinberg, on Diane Sawyer, and I liked them both a lot.)
The conventional wisdom among Dean’s supporters is that he was done in by the media, especially the networks that played his arm-flailing performance over and over and over. (Former campaign manager Joe Trippi expresses that view here.) And it’s hard to deny that clip got way more play than it deserved. McLuhan scholars would point out that public speaking is a hot medium, and portraying it at its most intense in a cool medium like television is a guaranteed way of making a speaker look like a lunatic.
But other politicians have survived this kind of skewering, and far worse. Just what was it that made Dean so vulnerable in that crucial post-Iowa period?
Well, maybe it was message — or the lack of one. Since his defeat, Dean has lurched from message to message and tone to tone. In the run-up to New Hampshire, he was presidential and dignified, saving his barbs for Bush. Then, when that didn’t work, his message shifted to a harsh attack on front-runner John Kerry. Then a tactical message: he’d win Wisconsin or withdraw. Then a reversal.
There’s a rule in politics that, if you don’t define yourself, your opponents will do it for you. A strong message is key to defining yourself, and without one, Dean has become defined — unfairly — as a shrill, mercurial loose cannon.
The irony is that before Iowa, he had a very clear, very disciplined message that he stuck to: he is the candidate from the democratic wing of the Democratic Party. That message of insurgency was reinforced by the Internet campaign and its diffuse network of grassroots activists. The very way they campaigned delivered the message (and you can insert your own McLuhanism here).
That’s not to say there isn’t a valuable kernel of truth in Weinberger’s comment. Many are the campaign managers who cringe at the thought of a grassroots web site that doesn’t quite phrase the key messages correctly. Some campaigns take their message boxes as (ahem) lock boxes, turning candidates with spark and wit into dull-sounding automatons. Giving activists the leeway to do something much more meaningful than stuffing envelopes and stapling lawn signs is crucial.
But message matters. Getting the message through the filters of reporters and editors matters. Defining yourself matters. Losing sight of that, and being dazzled by the potential of the technology rather than its capability, leads to defeat.
