I got another text message from Barack Obama’s campaign this week. The latest missive mentioned that Joe Biden was coming to town. “Doors: 10:30 a.m.,” it read succinctly. “Free & open to public.”

Short. Simple. Informative.

I’ve received maybe 20 such texts since I signed up for them a couple of months ago, and almost all of them have been helpful and timely. I was notified in advance of the three debates, asked to tune in to Obama’s speech at the DNC, and informed when the window for registering to vote in Colorado was closing as well as when the early-voting polls opened. And many messages included a phone number or URL I could use to access more information or get involved with the campaign.

Compare that to the “robocall” I got at home from the McCain campaign a couple of days ago. A recorded voice told me that the Democratic candidate “has worked closely with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers,” cited the Weather Underground’s crimes, and warned that the party “will enact an extreme leftist agenda” if Obama wins the White House.

Robocalls are a very different kind of campaign than the text alerts I’ve received, of course. I opted to receive the messages from Obama, while McCain’s camp was trying to sway a voter (me) who had never contacted their campaign.

But I was struck by how the McCain call underscored the effectiveness Obama’s use of SMS as a political tool. The Obama messages made me feel engaged and informed, and gave me the opportunity to get involved with the campaign by contributing or showing up at a rally. One text asked me to reply with a little information to volunteer for a day, and another asked me to forward the note to five friends.

The robocall, on the other hand, left no opportunity for viral spread and no chance for interaction. And the call went to my home phone, whereas the texts could stay on my handset where I could refer to them at any time.

Interestingly, both efforts can be done on the cheap — a huge benefit in an era where dollars seem directly proportionate to votes and volunteers are precious recources. MT (mobile terminated) messages can cost senders half a penny or less with a flat-rate deal, while a VoIP-based automated call can cost as little as a quarter of a cent.

Carriers — which are already paid by consumers who receive the texts — are sure to ramp up their prices for those kinds of messages as SMS traffic surges, which will force aggregators and their partners further down the value chain to tweak their business models.

But in the course of a few weeks, Obama’s text-messaging effort has grown from a national curiosity to a bona fide new way to register volunteers, create stickiness with potential voters and keep supporters in the loop. Unless operators get greedy and drastically hike the price of MT messages, other politicians and public-policy groups are sure to build on the candidate’s success in coming years. And that’s not just good for wireless, it’s good for the American public.

  Email Article   |   Print Article   |   Permalink  |  

One Response

1 through 1  

1. scott kline
   October 22, 2008 01:03 pm

   It is very clear that consumers are driven by promotions in the physical world to use the mobile device as a RESPONSE MECHANISM TO INTERACT WITH BRANDS! At Adheadz.com, we continue to see Mobile Response rates higher than 15% when Brands run radio, TV and traditional advertising with their Mobile Tag like 'Text BMW to 95613 for More Information". The increase of Mobile Tagging, where marketers add their brands’ Keyword and Short Code (like 'BMW to 95613 for More Information") onto their brochures, collateral and marketing outreach, is similar to the use of URL tagging which happened at the onset of the Internet. All the best - Scott Scott Klinescott@adheadz.com

   2036513

1 through 1