Who’s talking?  Many who spend time following the #pcldr hashtag seems to be a small grouping.  This is partial speculation, however, with as explosive as politics can be, this is really low engagement overall.  People just don’t seem to care about what’s being said, at least enough to spur on discussion and content generation online outside of the current observers.  The group actively participating in this Twitter discussion, predominately led by candidate supporters is even smaller.

Taking samples such as the one below over a week or more, the players on the list move up and down but generally stay the same. You’d think that the best time to see the most activity would be during or right after a live debate.  That is generally true, although policy announcements help, yet the amount of people being reached on Twitter, is in my opinion, very small considering the importance of this.  I do expect this to heat up as we get closer to the first ballot in mid-September.  Here’s a screen shot from tweetreach.

Now lets take a look at the Wildrose Alliance Party and their hashtag #wrp, who are not currently in an internal leadership race.

By comparison, the Downtown Arena District hashtag #yegarena discussion as of late has heated up but in the last 24 hours is on a bit of decline.

Go beyond this one small view, and take into consideration the amount of main stream media coverage this issue has generated in the last 6 days or so surrounding the Enoch and MLA PR issues have reached well over a million people.

The reasons for the low digital engagement regarding the PC leadership race in part would include accounts with small follower counts engaging.  A small cross-section of account variety engaging in the discussion.  That said, I’m not including the #ableg or #pcaa hashtags in this post, and that would normally need to be sifted through and considered for a more accurate reading of issue reach.  Also, the various campaign camps might want to consider the activity of their own teams in particular.

When building a better understanding of a digital footprint, one should consider several factors.  To measure more accurately, say as part of a formal project report, I would consider all primary elements that make up a digital footprint.  From the content created, the attention given to that content, the influence of those engaging, the sentiment of the comments, and the reach of that content across all relevant digital channels, such as Facebook, YouTube, Linkedin, political blogs and mainstream media websites, then compare that with conversions.  This is a lot of work.  Some may be fooled into thinking that a single piece of software might handle all of this, and they’d be wrong.

To interpret what’s happening within that PC tweetreach stat above we need to ask some key questions.  Sure hired guns can create white noise to look busy but is this translating into increased interest in their candidate?  I’m seeing more impact based on direct comments made by a particular candidate.  As it should be.  How about the volunteers?  A small group of 5-7 or so per candidate quick to defend their candidates is evident, but are they convincing voters to join the discussion, donate to their candidate, buy a membership and become advocates?  I’m seeing a bit more positive evidence of this lately based on some of my own real-time analysis, that said, I wouldn’t suggest evidence of a “landslide” victory for any one candidate.  Pretty safe to assume this is going to a second ballot.

Curious as to who is getting the most traffic to their website?  I consulted Alexa.com which provides a global ranking for all websites. The higher the number, the more websites with better traffic than your website.  You want a low number.

In order of Alexa ranking worst to best:

 
When asking why these rankings are the way they are, there are several reasons.  From a commitment or lack thereof to digital content generation, and existence of an actual digital strategy versus those who haven’t focused on it.  In the case of Rick Orman, a concerted use of traditional advertising driving awareness.  He is also an outlier and less of a known entity as compared to the other candidates, plus he throws all other candidates under the bus every chance he gets.  Having said that, the proof is in the conversions pudding.  Each campaign will know whether this traffic is translating into meaningful membership conversion.  I would hope they’re modifying web content based on their internal web analytics AND what they’re hearing at events.  However, the above evidence supports that this work is beyond some of these campaigns. In at least a couple of the campaigns, this is likely a lack of knowledge and understanding.  In others, I would add a lack of prioritizing resources to focus on this.
Just for fun I also looked up the various Party websites.

 
Clearly, this is only a fraction of the information that one should consider before making any serious judgements, recommendations or moves.  However, if one or more campaigns takes a critical look at what they’re doing, and can figure out the flash points that drive membership conversions for them in particular among voters, and then repeat it, some late gains can be made.  I will say though, there is little help for those without any strategy.  The numbers above separate those who are simply going through the motions from those making a concerted effort.

Also, one final little tid-bit, currently with respect to “sentiment,” Doug Griffiths and Alison Redford are reaping more positive comments related to their efforts in the last couple of debates, Doug Horner, Gary Mar and Rick Orman are not inspiring noticeable jumps in positive sentiment, the majority is “neutral,” and Ted Morton is leading with respect to negative sentiment.

One other key thing to monitor is the low “attack” factor.  Generally the Wildrose is leading the political attacks with one NDP supporter being vocal.  That said, the PC candidates are generally not being challenged as much as I would have expected.

For me, as far as personal voting goes, demonstrating an understanding of technology is important to me regardless of Party. Technology permeates our lives, whether you’re 9 or 90 years old.  This isn’t the only consideration to be sure, but it’s important, and it drives me nuts that in this day and age, we still have to explain to business and political leaders that there’s this little thing called the “Internet,” an environment that should definitely be respected and mastered.  For me, the above numbers suggest there’s a fair amount of work yet to do.

Many in business spend their days talking about social media.  Sure we talk about it too.  We also use it in a very targeted way to build business.  Many people spend all day being “social media rockstars,” building up their own account numbers.  We spend time tending to our relationships, when we can….but we’d never call ourselves “rockstars.”  Thankfully, a lot of the time we’re doing client work, and using the power of social media to drive new opportunities and revenue for them and us.

Using Linkedin, I reached out to some key people in the Alberta Oil and Gas sector.  The ensuing conversation via LinkedIn led to Skype calls and discussions of potential social media and live streaming projects for fusedlogicTV.  Which brings me to my quick trip to Calgary to meet with a few different firms at the Gas and Oil Expo and Conference on the Calgary Stampede grounds.

Steve Zurakowski from Dynamic Vision (shown above on the left) appeared on “A Brilliant Idea Every 60 Seconds” on fusedlogicTV a week ago.

Once again, social media has enabled me to reach out in ways I never could have in the past, it’s an absolutely critical business development tool for fusedlogic.  Building relationships in person is incredibly important, social media opens doors, and draws us closer in between face to face meetings across Alberta and beyond.  Today I met with people from Dubai, China, Calgary, Ft. McMurray and Halifax, all from a simple “inmail” within LinkedIn and within the next week or two we should be announcing a very exciting and major new global project.

After walking around the exhibition and meeting with a couple of clients, I ended up at the Xtreme Hot Oil and Pressure Service tent for a tasty beverage.  Frankly, they had the tunes cranked up after the Expo closed at 5pm.  I like these guy’s style and I was like a moth to a flame.

Due to the fact that this new business relationship isn’t quite signed off on yet, I won’t mention all the folks I met with today. However, in one case, we’ve agreed to announce a new powerful global relationship very soon.  Stay tuned and thank-you for your support…

At first, I have to admit that my reaction was “wait a minute…!”  Then I let it sink into my thick skull for a minute.  She was absolutely right.  Do you agree?  Let me go further and explain.  Obviously, I think social media is “potentially” valuable when communicating on behalf of any campaign.  Leilas’ point was that the “potential” wasn’t being realized by any one campaign, and I completely agree.

This was substantiated by my conversations I’ve had with a number of campaigns and candidates.  In one case, as I stated on Getting Social with Schwabe this morning, a campaign manager behind a candidate for Mayor (I won’t say where), stated they didn’t think social media would have any effect whatsoever on your vote.  Well, I suppose if that’s your campaign strategy, you’ll find a way to ensure social media is irrelevant.

“Social influence” is about using social media to influence human beings online.  As the municipal elections progress, I’ve been looking for evidence of social influence strategies.  Difficult considering that this field of candidates is for the most part, relatively new to social media, at least on a mass coordinated deployment basis.  As many know, it’s easy to set-up an account, much more difficult to inspire voters to inspire other voters on and offline.

There are those out in the world who would have you believe that you don’t need to understand Twitter, or any other social technology, “just experiment and play around” they say.  In an election, 30-days is a very short period of time to influence people to vote your way.  Not having any idea as to how to accomplish that, and then venturing out into the social web and asking people for help in normal circumstances might be fine, but during an election, this may lead to demonstrating unpreparedness, and allow competitors to exploit this weakness on how to engage in the middle of an election.  Maybe this is your strategy if you’re a blogger with little to lose.  This unsophisticated approach can put your personal brand, and/or campaign at risk.

Voters could infer that if you’re coming into this election, and you didn’t think social media would play a role, that this would say something about your leadership capabilities.

What kind of things are voters looking for from candidates?  Certainly voters are using social to gather information in general, as was evident in the answers provided to my question on LinkedIn.  So an integrated communications strategy is key.  At some point people are going to want to learn more than your calendar of events 140 characters at a time on Twitter.

Most candidates in the Greater Edmonton Region, this includes surrounding areas like Strathcona County seem to be simply communicating their locations, events attended, and little else.   However, whether this approach is as effective as it could be is up for debate.

For example, does the candidate have “health buddies?”  Or better yet, a cluster of health buddies.  In a recent MIT study that suggests that social networks influence behaviour, in this case related to health issues, researcher Damon Centola, an assistant professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management, assigned participants a “health buddy” to measure the effect on whether social networks could influence behaviour on health related issues…and the study suggests that “yes” influence and subsequent action did take place.  The study found that how people were connected had a direct impact on how information flowed, the reach and the rate at which it spread.  This wasn’t solely the number of connections or “buddies,” but also the dynamics of those relationships that influenced actions.

Connections count, but the same amount of quality connections and shared experiences count more.

STUDY: “The rate of adoption in the clustered networks proved to be four times as fast. People were more likely to participate regularly in the health forum if they had more health buddies who registered.”

So my question to candidates in this municipal election is, are you focusing on building “micro-tribes of influencers” who support your position as a result of continued shared experiences?  Or are you simply taking up digital air?  This is now a very short race, those who had an understanding of this going in will ultimately be further ahead on election day.  Those who listen to bloggers who suggest candidates should simply wing it without any real advice or plan do so at their peril.  Voters like “fans” appreciate a real experience with the person of interest over event planning updates.  Voters appreciate real engagement.

Here’s an interesting example of how a political candidate, in this case younger than most running in the Edmonton region managed to build a core of support online that then translated into evangelism, and she states that she won in large part because of it.  She does suggest that meeting people in person, door-knocking was also valuable which demonstrates that shaking hands works too.

Watch a CNN interview to learn how Elise Hall used social media to influence voters to help her win her election for the Oklahoma House of Representatives.

Is your favourite electoral candidate demonstrating a higher level of understanding related to engagement and influence?  List them here, show your support.  As voters we should look for evidence of “political action versus broadcasting content,” if you think your candidate is generating action via influence make a case for it here.  Maybe others will agree with you, and your candidate will end up generating more momentum with people telling two friends or (two thousand) and so on and so on…

With a smaller group and a few new faces to the group, we engaged in a discussion about the social media people are using, the tools they use to augment their social media experience and some of the issues surrounding social media. The discussion this time was led by Mastermaq.

Of course Twitter was the main topic of discussion, as it usually is. Everyone at the Social Web Meetup was on Twitter. Normally I’d be tweeting about the discussion, but because it was such an active discussion, I wanted to make sure I caught all of it. Do you prefer to actively tweet what you’re hearing or to listen, reflect and respond or tweet?

Peoplebrowsr was recommended as a good tool to be able to track multiple Twitter streams.

How do you use Facebook?

I thought one of the more interesting discussions was about Facebook and how people use it. Some people have a real issue with having an open profile, with worries of identity theft or at the very least doing some data mining. Having pictures of relatives, particularly children, was an issue with one of the meeting attendees. Do you keep your profile open and add everyone?

My profile is limited to friends and family, but I do have some business contacts on there. One of the meeting’s more active Facebook users said he had thousands of friends on there!

Some of the other social media tools we talked about: LinkedIn, ping.fm and friendfeed. Randy Troppmann from runningmap.com was there and talked a bit more about his site.

Free versus paid social media tools: how much would you pay?

One question I brought up was: At what dollar amount are you willing to go beyond the free account and into a paid account?

Most people said it really depends. I was thinking of my recent purchase of a pro account on Flickr, which is $25. One other person said $25 as well. Would you be willing to pay $25 per year for Twitter? I’d be willing to pay more, but I know a lot of people wouldn’t be willing to pay anything.

It’s actually quite an important question because the majority of social media tools out there are free and many people stick to the free ones. As the economic downturn continues, more and more companies are likely to ask themselves that same question about how much the market will bear in terms of subscription fees or ads. Their will likely depend on finding that balance.

Our next Social Web Meetup is February 2 at NAIT. There’s plenty of room, but make sure to join the group and RSVP. It doesn’t matter how experienced you are with social media. The point of the group is to share. I am a fairly experienced social media user and I learned a lot at this Meetup. I’m looking forward to the next one and hope to see you there too.

Alain Saffel

Mark Woods:

http://www.gigglechick.com
http://www.gigglechick.com/erin/blog/index.htm
http://www.iwilldare.com/
http://www.jeffreymorgenthaler.com/
http://bingfutch.blogspot.com/
and of course my own: blog.tikitender.com

Bertrand Leseigneur:

I can’t have a good day without visiting:
http://www.psfk.com/
http://infosthetics.com/
http://swissmiss.typepad.com/weblog/
http://www.yankodesign.com/
and of course the blog I’m working on for my company
http://www.snitts.com/blog/

Michael Davis:

http://www.lifehacker.com
http://www.ken-jennings.com

Hariharan N.N.

http://eerththathil.blogspot.com

Meredith Gould:

My own, of course! Favorite to write and read.

But also:
Links:
http://meredithgould.blogspot.com
http://www.chrisbrogan.com
http://concordpastor.blogspot.com/
http://blog.beliefnet.com/pontifications/
http://ironiccatholic.blogspot.com/

Charlene Davis:

So many blogs, so little time! I love to read blogs and I can’t wait to check out the ones listed here. In the meantime, I will list some of my favorites in different categories:
Busy Moms Recipes (cooking/recipes): http://www.busymomsrecipes.blogspot.com
Jacquelyn Lynn, Business Writer (small business and entrepreneurs): http://jacquelynlynnbusiness.typepad.com/
Cyber Journalists (latest news and developments for journalists): http://www.cyberjournalist.net/
Pragmatic Communion (inspirational): http://pragmaticcommunion.wordpress.com/
5 Minutes for Going Green (green living): http://www.5minutesforgoinggreen.com/
Perez Hilton (hysterical celebrity gossip): http://perezhilton.com/
Things That Make You Go Hmmm: http://www.makeyougohmm.com/

Craig Dunham:

http://editalk.com
http://blogs.Inovis.com

Marie-Claire Jenkins:

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/
http://glinden.blogspot.com/
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/

Daniel Thornton:

http://www.thewayoftheweb.net
http://www.140char.com

Alla Staroseletskaya:

www.allastar.net/blog

Jeff Carr:

http://battellemedia.com/
http://www.avc.com/
http://boxesandarrows.com/

Wade Muri:

http://www.matthewgood.org

Mari-Lyn Hudson:

www.heartatworkonline.org
www.love4.wordpress.com

Steven Cherry:

http://www.detroitblog.org/
http://hamtramckstar.com
http://www.snowsuit.net/

Dustin Miles:

http://happinessisbetter.com
http://techcrunch.com
http://simpledollar.com

Dennis Smith:

http://www.recruitingblogs.com