6. Splash page experiment
Variations:
Button: Media:
• Sign Up 1. Get Involved Image
• Learn More 2. Family Image
• Join Us Now 3. Change Image
• Sign Up Now 4. Barack’s Video
5. Springfield Video
6. Sam’s Video
11. Splash page experiment
Variations:
Button: Media:
• Sign Up 1. Get Involved Image
• Learn More 2. Family Image
• Join Us Now 3. Change Image
• Sign Up Now 4. Barack’s Video
5. Springfield Video
6. Sam’s Video
18. Splash page experiment
Variations:
Button: Media:
1. Sign Up 1. Get Involved Image
2. Learn More 2. Family Image
3. Join Us Now 3. Change Image
4. Sign Up Now 4. Barack’s Video
5. Springfield Video
6. Sam’s Video
27. Modeling is using the data you have about a
voter to make an informed judgment about:
- whether they will vote
- who they will vote for
- what issues affect their vote
- any other question you think has
predictable (reproducible) behaviors
28. humans make models all the time, as we
collect data & make informed judgments:
80%
?
likelihood of voting
for Obama
30. - knowledge management
- master data management
- data harmonization
- voter relationship management
OBAMA CAMPAIGN’S PROJECT NARWHAL
31. Slowly lowering
the wall
between online
& offline data
1. Data providers
William Alexander Lundry,
2. Targeted Display Ads
Registered Republican 3. Facebook Apps
4. Volunteered Association
38. Responds to DM Likelihood to vote
Partisan Affiliation
Top Issue
Likelihood to unsubscribe
Likelihood to volunteer
Best Channel for Giving
Receptiveness to treatment
47. As it gets harder to ask...
What if we get better
about listening?
48.
49.
50. Sentiment? I can go to
twittersentiment.appspot.com
and get an analysis.
51. Does “Who said it
- Newt or Buzz
Lightyear?” really
count as a positive
tweet?
52. “Gingrich had 6 percent more activity
than the other candidates and the positive
sentiment on him related to Super
Tuesday is at 84 percent. Sentiment in
general online conversation about him is only
at 45 percent. So it seems his folks are
Photo: Marc Grob for Time
working the online world hard.”
-From POLITICO “Playbook,” Super Tuesday (March 6 2012),
quoting an email from a Washington-based public affairs consultant
53.
54. Survey Sentiment Analysis
• Landline bias • Online/activist bias
• Contained universe • Variable universe
• Concrete results • Subject to interpretation
• “Snapshot” in time • Real-time, evolving
• Message testing • Identify new trends
Notas do Editor
Talk about how historically, data has been tightly guarded by political parties and big organizations. And it’s also been limited by available tech. Technology to handle terabytes of data was expensive, and even out of reach of a lot of organizations.
But we’re seeing change. One great example of this is NationBuilder. Anyone who signs up can get access to the voter file. This is a slow but steady movement to a greater number of people having access to the data. Some examples: (1) Democratic Data Coop, (2) Catalist, (3) New Koch Brothers Data Organization on the right
But we’re also seeing a democratization of the technology. It used to be that if you wanted to handle terabytes of data, you had to go to either a Teradata, Netezza, or Oracle. More and more, organizations are using Hadoop + Hive and other technologies in order to process and query large sets of data. This also corresponds to the commoditization of the hardware required for these big clusters (and the cloud is becoming a better and better option).
Talk about starting to put more real time measures into models -- VF data updates once a month, maybe, but online data sources are dynamic and change on a day to day basis. Your voter contact system is producing new day thousands of times throughout a day. This shouldn’t be a process that moves once a month.
Shift of what we are modeling FOR
Calling more cell phones isn’t the answer because of TCPA - regulates when/how pollsters can call, makes cell interviews expensive and a major burden
Some online panels are great for understanding specific audiences but there’s still debate about their use and ability to be representative of large populations for something like a ballot test.
This is creating a massive new industry at the intersection of tech and opinion research. I’ve even had friends and colleagues tell me they’ve built models that can predict ballot share by looking just at online conversation and activity data.
Here’s one race that threw a wrench into the idea of monitoring online indicators as a way of predicting ballot share.
You can see in that 2010 election, sure Christine O’Donnell had a LOT of search traffic, and up until election day always had a higher search volume than her opponent. But did it matter? Nope.
It’s not hard to generate a sentiment analysi.. Take Twitter. Here, I can plug in and get an analysis fast. However, note in my example the first “positive” tweet...
Really? And look - nobody gets it perfect. That’s the point. It is very, very, very hard to get this right.
Sentiment analysis is working its way into the political conversation as a way, in addition to polls, to understand public opinion - but does it matter?
If Gingrich’s online buzz was so great ahead of Super Tuesday, why did he only win one of these ten states that day? (TELL ANECDOTE ABOUT NG CAMPAIGN)
The point isn’t to rain on the parade of sentiment analysis. I think traditional research’s days are numbered if it doesn’t evolve. But I think sentiment analysis has a lot to learn from traditional survey research for campaigns. (Explain pros and cons)
