Digital Strengths Required Even in a "Wave" Year

Republicans are worrying, and Democrats rejoicing, over signs that 2018 may be a "wave election" year that sweeps Democrats to control of the House and maybe even Senate. Before Democratic hopefuls get cocky or Republicans throw in the towel, both should note a recent Campaigns & Elections article about lessons learned in Democrat Doug Jones' historic win in deep-red Alabama. C&E makes the point that, wave or no wave, a winning campaign has "got to leave it all on the field, regardless of what the forecast is ... To wit, Jones won by just over 20,000 votes—and few predicted he’d defeat Roy Moore." C&E cites six digital marketing lessons from Jones' victory. Start with realizing the importance of authenticity in both the message and how it is conveyed, especially in online ads and video where an authenticity will matter more than slick production. Note that digital success requires more than standard online ads; Jones' campaign invested heavily in social and engagement platforms, bought standalone video and audio inventory, used display and rich media, and maxed out what was possible on search. Third, C&R warns, a percentage-based budget that starts with heavy TV spending and divides small remaining percentages among other channels will risk missing that vaunted wave; C&E advises using an audience-first approach instead, maximizing reach and frequency for all marketing channels taken together and based on how various voting groups get their news and information. Fourth, campaigns need to focus on engagement as well as reach to get people to remember an ad in an extremely crowded media environment. That means investing in social media platforms and going beyond traditional display ads by using HTML5 and rich media to embed interactive content and voting resources in standard banners. Then get those engaging ads to more voters by using digital to expand voter reach, especially given the falling impact of traditional media channels (40% of voters watch no TV, C&E notes). But don't try to stretch a digital budget too thin at the outset striving for maximum audience; pick off priority audiences and build the program from there, C&E advises. See the whole article at https://www.campaignsandelections.com/campaign-insider/6-lessons-to-remember-during-a-wave-year

How Clinton Leads Trump in the Data Game

Targeted voter data and analytics are key to winning for political campaigns and causes today. So, who has the better data armory among the warring presidential hopefuls? Advertising Age magazine recently addressed the issue by comparing Democrat front-runner Hillary Clinton and Republican primary leader Donald Trump in terms of operations, spending and expert support. Political analysts give the Democrats an edge operationally, coming out of the two data-centric Obama campaigns with a sophisticated data-gathering operation that can target voters in swing states. In terms of dollars spent, the Federal Election Commission shows the Clinton campaign pays about $10,000 a month to a top data staffer, co-founder of data firm BlueLabs, and about the same amount combined per month for two additional staffers, plus Clinton has spent around $82,000 with NGP VAN, a Democratic voter data firm, since last October. In contrast, Trump waited until January to hire two "low-profile" former Republican National Committee data strategists, per Politico reporting. But he has brought data consultants on board, too, spending $240,000 with the political data firm L2 and about $18,000 with NationBuilder, a voter file management platform. The candidates will also joust with media buys based on data analytics, and Clinton has outspent Trump for data-enhanced media agency buys so far, shelling out $9.6 million to TV firm GMMB and $745,000 to digital agency Bully Pulpit in February. Of course, spending is not the only measure of strength in the data arena. Staff expertise and experience counts, and Clinton may have the advantage there, opined political analysts. While Clinton is sure to gather former Obama data veterans and agencies if she wins nomination, Trump may struggle to attract similar data expertise from the Republican side given the #NeverTrump movement. For more: http://adage.com/article/datadriven-marketing/clinton-trump-match-data-arena/302989/

Campaigns Must Go Beyond First-Party Voter Data

Political campaigns in 2016 are challenged as never before to go beyond first-party voter data in their digital outreach, points out a recent AdExchanger.com post. Peter Pasi, vice president of political sales at the digital ad agency Collective, notes that Borrell Associates has predicted candidates will be spending $1 billion on political digital ads ahead of the 2016 election, a huge jump from the $159 million spent in 2012. A lot of those dollars will be absorbed by programmatic advertising, which replaces human ad management with programmed ad buying and placement based on targeting data and real-time bidding. That requires digging a lot deeper into the data to avoid wasting impressions, and dollars, on generic voter campaigns, Pasi argues. Why won't basic voter data do the job? Because political advertising needs to focus on a finite audience of eligible voters actually likely to go to the polls and back the candidate or cause. Remember that only half of eligible voters actually show up to vote and many of those are not persuadable, Pasi points out. Plus, if 2016 proves anything, it is that polarizing candidates can overturn the usual assumptions about voter support. Luckily, campaigns can now use targeting data that goes beyond the static modeling by age/income/ethnicity/party affiliation of the past. They can optimize ad-targeting with real-time polling results, ID calls, field work, e-mail and direct mail responses, set-top TV data, and offline purchase and interest behavior. A lot can be gleaned about voters from what they read, view, share and buy. For example, targeting new mothers might help a candidate with a strong platform on child care or child tax credits, while identifying hunters can be crucial for campaigns focused on gun control and related issues, notes Pasi. And in today's volatile races, access to real-time data is key to adjusting and optimizing messaging and targeting. For more: http://adexchanger.com/politics/to-reach-likely-voters-political-advertisers-must-move-beyond-first-party-data/

TV Political Dollars: 75% Misses the Mark, Per Study

Targeted Victory, the GOP-focused digital media firm, teamed with online giant Google to produce the recently released "50 States of Waste" analysis, highlighting the huge amount of waste in TV broadcast spending by local political campaigns--at least campaigns by Congressional candidates. The analysis looked at the $320 million spent on Congressional races last year, on a district by district basis, and concluded that 75 cents of every broadcast dollar missed the intended voter audience and were wasted on out-of-district impressions. The analysis ranking of the top 10 most wasteful district campaigns is headed by Illinois Congressional District 10, where 93% of the $19 million spent included out-of-district viewers who couldn't vote for the candidate even if they loved the message. Next comes Arizona District 1, where 89% of the $16 million spent missed the voter target. Other states with districts in the top 10 of waste include Florida, Virginia, California, Colorado, Minnesota, Texas and Georgia. Of course, digital marketing champions Targeted Victory and Google have a motive to move campaign dollars from broadcast media to digital platforms and YouTube videos. And their analysis doesn't negate the potential value of TV ads in presidential bids and statewide races. Still, it's an interesting caution to local campaigners. And a reminder to all candidates and causes that audience targeting is now key to both broadcast and digital efforts. To take a look at your own Congressional district, go to http://fiftystatesofwaste.com/index.html?p=top10&d=1