High Tech Vs Low Tech Campaigns
For some time now many consultants have talked about the advantages of social media, tech, and data. But are those advantages real or measurable? Do they work in all circumstances? Do social media and/or digital really outperform some lower tech methods of communications?
On many occasions I have been contacted by clients who are concerned about some activity on social media that’s targeted against them. Though everyone prefers not to have any negative opinions against them expressed anywhere if it’s going to happen (and more than likely it is) social media is the least damaging place electorally that it can take place. Social Media is most useful on the extremes when it comes to the size of the electorate meaning in very large electorates or very small electorates, everywhere in-between the effects of social media are small. This doesn’t mean it should be ignored or never used, but just given its proper place and use.
Digital and CCTV Advertising does have some advantages over television/cable especially in races that have a geographic footprint much smaller than the area covered by television channels or cable providers. Digital/CCTV especially with the advent of geo fencing allows you narrowly focus on your geographic target making sure a much greater proportion of your ads actually reach their intended target audience.
Still today the lower tech forms of communication like direct mail, phone banking, email and door to door canvassing are the most effective ways to deliver your message. That doesn’t mean this will not change it more than likely will with further technological advances and as Gen Xers and Millennial’s continue to age.
Whether using high- or low-tech methods it is very important to track and store data as it relates to contacts or interactions. This is the best way to monitor and measure the effectiveness of you message and the method used to deliver it.
