I thought it would be interesting to look at two sites from the same campaign, the district of my hometown, which covers the northeast corner of Massachusetts. On the front page of both Websites, John Tierney, the Democratic incumbent, and Bill Hudak, the Republican challenger, featured: a campaign logo; an email sign up box; contribute, volunteer, and subscribe buttons; a link to their Facebook page; and a welcome message.
To me, Tierney's site (johntierney.com/home) is underwhelming, and its content limited. The layout is inefficient, not using the sides of the page, but only the middle. There is no multimedia on the page, and the 327-word welcome letter dominates it. For people who do not want to read the letter, this is a waste of space, and there is nothing else on the front page to engage them.
However, Tierney does feature a picture of himself (two, in fact) on the front page, which Hudak does not. I think including a picture helps candidates build familiarity and rapport with voters, and should be on every campaign front page.
To see just how far the Internet has come in seven years, I've included a February 2003 screengrab from Tierney's site (I'm sure that at the time, it loaded properly, but you get a concept of its archaic nature.)
Hudak's site (hudakforcongress.com) impresses me much more, using the front-page space very well. An 80-word "welcome" from Bill sits in a small box at the top with a "read more" link. A slider alternates
between four embedded YouTube videos. A scrolling calendar shows Bill's itinerary on the lower left. Links to his Twitter and YouTube accounts. A news feed links to recent mentions of Hudak in the media. The part of the page that caught my eye is the "voter shout box," which scrolls to show comments left by campaign supporters. It's a nifty device, and lets voters know that the Hudak is legitimate - he has supporters already.
The third candidate Website I looked at was Marco Rubio's (marcorubio.com). Rubio is running in the Rubublican primary for a Florida US Senate seat against Governor Charlie Crist. Rubio's site has a good color palette - white, light blue, and, to a lesser extent, red - which is easy on the eyes. His Twitter and Facebook links are easy to find on the right, and the top of the page is well-spaced, not cluttered and overwhelming, but not empty and fuctionless, either. However, the "latest news" section takes up far too much room, stretching all the way down the front page. Also, there is no picture of Rubio.
Overall, I think campaign Websites have become increasingly useful over the years, but at the moment, we don't agree on what their function is. Some people think they are mostly a way to learn about a candidate. Others think they are for fundraising. Still others think they are for organizing and networking supporters and volunteers. Really, they're for all of these things, though each candidates needs are different. Challengers need to share their backstory and platform with voters--and are desperate to raise money. Incumbents also need to raise money, and they need to tap into their base for volunteers.
In and of themselves, most people won't vote for someone because of their Website. And that's okay. With integrated marketing communication, there are many other ways for a candidate to get their message out. When voters are exposed to these multiple times, the message starts to sink in.
No comments:
Post a Comment