the moveon effect: the internet’s impact on political activism dave karpf, ph.d assistant...
TRANSCRIPT
The MoveOn Effect: The Internet’s Impact on
Political Activism
The MoveOn Effect: The Internet’s Impact on
Political Activism
Dave Karpf, Ph.DAssistant Professor, Rutgers University
[email protected]: @Davekarpf
Dave Karpf, Ph.DAssistant Professor, Rutgers University
[email protected]: @Davekarpf
The Internet and Political Action: A New Wave of
Skeptics
The Internet and Political Action: A New Wave of
Skeptics
A New Generation of Political Advocacy
Organizations
A New Generation of Political Advocacy
Organizations
Founded in 1998 Emerged in 2002-3 as a
vocal force in the anti-war movement
5 million members $90 million+ donated in
2008 election 933,800 volunteers in
‘08, 20 million+ volunteer-hours
200+ locally-based “MoveOn Councils
Founded in 1998 Emerged in 2002-3 as a
vocal force in the anti-war movement
5 million members $90 million+ donated in
2008 election 933,800 volunteers in
‘08, 20 million+ volunteer-hours
200+ locally-based “MoveOn Councils
•32 staffpeople•Zero Offices
Let’s take a closer look at MoveOn
Not Just “Clickstream” ActivismNot Just “Clickstream” Activism
MoveOn Isn’t an Isolated Example
MoveOn Isn’t an Isolated Example
•Founded in January ‘09
•400,000+ members
•$1,350,000 raised in ‘09
•Built their list around Norm Coleman/Al Franken and around the public option
•14 staff (only 3 in ‘09)
•Zero Office Space
•Combined expertise in technology, issue campaigns, and electoral campaigns
Membership regimes: This has all happened beforeMembership regimes: This has all happened before
Skocpol (2003) describes the displacement of cross-class membership federations by professionally-managed advocacy groups.
Skocpol (2003) describes the displacement of cross-class membership federations by professionally-managed advocacy groups.
Membership went from attending/participating to supporting/check-writing
This was a technologically-mediated transition. And we’re experiencing another one (Bimber 2003)
Era First Generation (1800s-1960s)
Second Generation (1970s-early 2000s)
Third Generation (2000-present)
Membership Type
Community-Based
Issue-Based Online-Based
Typical Activities
Attending Meetings, Holding Elective Office, Participating in Civic Activities
Mailing Checks, Writing Letters, Signing Petitions (Armchair Activism)
Attending local meetups, Voting online, submitting user-generated content
Funding Source
Membership Dues
Prospect Direct Mail, Patron Donors, Grants
Online Appeals, Patron Donors, Grants
Dominant Org-Type
Cross-Class Membership Federation
Single-Issue Professional Advocacy Org
Internet-mediated Issue Generalist
Three Ideal-TypesThree Ideal-Types
MoveOn
Hub-and-spokes
DFA
Neo-federated
DailyKos
Online Comm-of-
interest
Community
Diarists
Core Staff
Councils
E-mail members
Nat’l affiliates
3 Elements of MoveOn’s/PCCC’s Fundraising Success3 Elements of MoveOn’s/PCCC’s Fundraising Success
1. Zero-cost scaling. 100 e-mails cost the same as 10,000 e-mails.
2. “A/B Testing.” A form of passive democratic input
3. “Headline Chasing.” Targeted Appeals, Timely Issues.
1. Zero-cost scaling. 100 e-mails cost the same as 10,000 e-mails.
2. “A/B Testing.” A form of passive democratic input
3. “Headline Chasing.” Targeted Appeals, Timely Issues.
Meanwhile, Old Revenue Streams are CollapsingMeanwhile, Old Revenue Streams are Collapsing
Prospect Direct Mail is in industry-wide freefall.
Targeted fundraising appeals yield restricted money which cannot be used for organizational overhead expenses.
Prospect Direct Mail is in industry-wide freefall.
Targeted fundraising appeals yield restricted money which cannot be used for organizational overhead expenses.
National Wildlife Federation
AFL-CIO
Existing Advocacy Organizations have high overhead costs
New Groups and Old Groups Fundraise
Differently
New Groups and Old Groups Fundraise
Differently
Data from the Membership Communications Project
6 months of e-mails, 70 progressive orgs, 2,162 data points
And It Isn’t Just E-PetitionsAnd It Isn’t Just E-Petitions
This isn’t “clicktivism.” It sure ain’t “facebook activism.”
It isn’t even “organizing w/out orgs.”…nor is it “networked nonprofits.”
It’s disruption theory.
This isn’t “clicktivism.” It sure ain’t “facebook activism.”
It isn’t even “organizing w/out orgs.”…nor is it “networked nonprofits.”
It’s disruption theory.
•Changing definitions of membership
•Dramatic shifts in revenue streams
•New tactical repertoires
•Resultant shift in how collective action is structured in America.
•Displacement of old orgs by new.