This document discusses the impact of the internet on political parties and elections. It examines the Dean and Obama presidential campaigns' use of online tools, finding that Dean pioneered internet fundraising and meetups while Obama extensively used social media and small donations. Studies show more people got political information online in 2008 and participation in social networks increased, though worries of extremism also grew. While the internet's potential for more distributed power has not fully materialized, parties have adapted to using it for their advantages.

1. February 22, 2012

2. Key Claims about Impact of the
Internet on Political Parties
 Party Competition (possible lower cost to start a new
party)
 Power Diffusion (increased grassroots control over
candidates)
 Institutional Adaptation (parties adapt to the
Internet by using it to buttress their advantages, party
competition will not increase)

3. The Howard Dean Campaign
 2003-2004 Campaign
 Joe Trippi in charge of Internet
strategy
 Early alliance with meetup.com
 Early support from the Daily Kos
 Dean won in New Hampshire
but ultimately lost to Kerry

4. The 2008 Obama Campaign
 Extensive use of the Internet to solicit
small campaign contributions and to
build a network of campaign
workers/volunteers
 Extensive use of YouTube to spread
David Plouffe
awareness of the campaign by
repurposing campaign ads
 More limited use of interactivity to video
gather ideas from supporters and to vet
ideas from campaign headquarters

5. The 2008 Presidential Election
 What the Pew Internet and American Life Project has
to say about it (report).
 More got politic al info from the Internet, espec. online
political videos
 Increased use of social networking sites (MySpace and
Facebook)
 Increase in online contributors from 2 percent in 2004
to 6 percent in 2008
 Some self-reports of voter empowerment but also of
worries about extremism and misinformation

6. Discussion Points (Chadwick, ch. 7)
 Has the early potential of the Internet been realized
in the area of election campaigning?
 Why has the United States witnessed greater levels of
online campaigning than the United Kingdom?
 Assess the long-term significance of the Dean
campaign of 2003-2004.
 Is online interaction too risky for politicians?
 Have parties successfully adapted to the Internet?
 Evaluate the claim that the Internet will combat voter
apathy.

7. Defining e-Government
 “…e-government initiatives usually involve several
types of electronic and information systems, including
database, networking, discussion support,
multimedia, automation, tracking and tracing, and
personal identification technologies.”
 Can be used at all levels of government from local to
national.
 Goals for use are diverse.
 May be useful to distinguish among G2G, G2B, and
G2C communications.

8. Historical Developments in US
 U.S. National Performance Review (1993 supervised
by VP Al Gore)
 Creation of government portal, Firstgov (now called
USA.gov)
 Clinton memorandum to accelerate e-government
 Government Paperwork Elimination Act of 1998
 E-Government Act of 2002
 More history of initiatives can be found on the OMB
Office of E-Government and Information Technology
web site

9. Work of Darrell West
 IU Political Science PhD
 Until recently he taught at Brown
University
 Currently head of Governance
Studies at the Brookings
Institution
 Check out his web site,
Inside Politics, for data on e-
government at the state and
federal government levels and also
for international comparisons

10. Work of Stuart Shulman
 Univ. of Oregon PhD
 Taught at Univ. of Pittsburgh,
1999-2008
 Currently at U. Mass, Amherst
 Main research: federal agency
rule-making
 Founder of the
Journal of Information Technology and Politics

11. Discussion Points (Chadwick, ch. 8)
 What are the policy origins of e-government?
 Is e-government about better government, better
democracy, or both?
 How is e-government different from previous
government computerization initiatives?
 Doe e-government change power relations with
public bureaucracies?
 Does e-government redistribute power within the
political system?