Specifically, I’m talking about the new 4G Internet service that’s just around the corner – aka mobile broadband. 4G allows you to open your laptop / iPad / etc anywhere in network range and have a high speed web connection. Like the 3G service you currently get on your smartphone, but about 5x faster. In many cities, its already here (you’ve probably seen a bazillion 4G ads already).

My question is, will the leap to 4G help social change organizers? How? What creative ideas could it enable? Like, what cool things could door-to-door canvassers do with mobile broadband? Or, how could 4G be used at a march or rally? Will it change the way we lobby Congress? Or revolutionize voter registration?

Some ideas that have been floated include:
• giving canvassers access to rich data and streaming media on iPads / laptops
• registering voters or recruiting volunteers at events
• setting up portable predictive dialer phone banks
• mobile live video streaming from direct actions, hearings, or board meetings

I’m sure there are a bunch of forward-thinking folks out there with other smart ideas. Here’s the thing — if your idea is great, it could get funded and developed. Will you take two minutes to brainstorm about it? You can either email me directly — tate-at-tatehausman.com, or fill out this two minute survey.

I ask on behalf of Mobile Citizen, a nonprofit project that provides 4G service to schools and nonprofits for just $10 a month. Mobile Citizen may subsidize as many as 20,000 4G accounts in 2011. They already have a good sense of how 4G can help schools and social service agencies. Now they are hoping to fund and develop breakthrough ideas or tools that would help social change organizers take advantage of 4G.

This is a unique opportunity for organizers to weigh in on what new tools they want in their work. Mobile broadband has the potential to create big breakthroughs. But will it?

Brainstorm with me in the Mobile Citizen survey.

Hello friends and family in NY –

Tomorrow is election day, and I’m excited. Prospects may look dim nationally, but here in New York, we have an opportunity to win a huge progressive victory. We have the Working Families Party.

Tomorrow, I’m going to vote for my all favorite candidates, including Eric Schneiderman for Attorney General, on the Working Families Party line. I hope you will join me. If you don’t know where to vote, find out here: http://gis.nyc.gov/vote/ps/index.htm

Voting on the WFP line (row E on the ballot) counts just as much as voting on the Democratic line. But it has the extra benefit of sending a powerful message to Albany — that I stand with working people, not party bosses. That I support the WFP’s fight for a cleaner environment, for raising wages, for clean energy jobs, for education funding, and all the other good progressive policies they champion. I know the folks at the WFP pretty well, and they say that to pass critical legislation next year, they need every vote they can get tomorrow.

If you don’t believe me, ask Matt Damon. Yep, the actor Matt Damon. He recorded this (pretty frickin’ funny) video for the WFP:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24m1PZ9iZoY

Basically, no matter what happens nationally, here in New York you can’t afford to stay home and not vote. Don’t get last-minute-lazy, don’t pretend your vote doesn’t matter, and don’t give up your democratic rights. Trust me, I have two kids under two, I know how easy it is to get distracted and overwhelmed. But millions of Americans fought — and some died — for the right to vote. Don’t take it for granted.

Plus, if you don’t vote, everyone will know. By law, anyone can get a copy of the NYS voter file and look you up. (They can’t tell how you voted, just if you voted.) It would be embarrassing for your friends to know you shirked your civic duty, right? :)

SO GO VOTE!!

Love,
Tate

I’m looking for volunteers to collaborate with me on a totally unique way to strengthen progressive politics — studying whether GOTV emails to friends make a difference in turnout. I think they might. And I want actual hard data to prove it.

The idea comes from the controversy sparked by my last blog post, “Let Them Send Emails,” in which I and two other progressive New Yorkers touted our very unscientific, but impressive results from sending out GOTV emails to our friends. Social scientists who read the piece dismissed my methodology, and rightly so. Now I’m actually designing a (fairly) scientific study to create measurable, accurate results.

If you want to join me, here’s all you need to do:

1. Write an email to your friends, urging them to vote. The shorter and sweeter, the better. I don’t care what it says, as long as the point is, “Get yourself to the polls on Nov 2.”
2. Make a list of everyone in NY to whom you could send.
3. Send me your list, no later than noon on Thursday, Oct 28.
4. I will then randomize the list, and send you back HALF of the list.
5. On Nov 1, you send your email out to that half of the list.

That’s it. Should take you an hour, tops.

Going through this process will create a “treatment” group and a “control” group of your friends. After the election, I will pull the voter file from the NY Board of Elections, and look at which of your friends voted and which didn’t. If the “treatment” group voted in higher numbers than the “control” group, then the emails worked.

It goes without saying that your friends’ personal data will NEVER be public, anywhere, and that your friends will only be contacted by you. Zero privacy issues.

There’s a lot of buzz these days about using new technology to turn out votes. As someone who cares deeply about democracy and elections, I want to learn everything I can about how to get more voters to the polls. So why wait for someone else to do the study, when we can do it ourselves?

Email me — tate-at-tatehausman-dot-com — if you want to collaborate with me.

The original post is below. Note that I changed the headline, to make sure no one misconstrues it.

As election day 2010 draws near, political campaigners are gearing up their GOTV plans. In the coming weeks, volunteers will be asked to phone bank, knock doors, pass out literature, plant lawn signs, and perhaps even stand on street corners waving banners at passing cars.

I’ve got a new idea — let them send emails.

Sound boring? Or ineffective? In my experience, it’s not. In a recent totally un-scientific analysis, a couple of friends and I found that sending out GOTV emails to our personal lists was by far the most efficient and effective use of our time.

The election in question was the Sept 14 New York primary. On Sept 13, I sent out an email to 225 New Yorkers, reminding them of the election and asking them to vote for Eric Schneiderman for NY’s Attorney General. My appeal was short and sweet — four brief paragraphs, starting with, “Just a friendly reminder that tomorrow, Tuesday, is Election Day in New York, and you should go vote!” I followed that with an exhortation to vote Schneiderman.

I didn’t expect much — perhaps one or two courteous replies, and a few more “don’t spam me!” complaints. Instead, I was pleasantly surprised by the response. Six people — Laurie, Bob, Patty, Danika, Julia and Matt — individually emailed me to say that they had voted for Schneiderman because of my email. Patty also told me she forwarded it to her entire New York list. Not a single person complained.

Inspired by this “turnout,” I contacted two friends who also sent out similar personal endorsement emails on Sept 13, and I asked for their “response rates.” Their results confirmed mine:

• Andrew sent his email to about 400 New Yorkers, “a mix of friends and cultural / business / political acquaintances.” He got five responses saying that they had voted on his recommendation; and one person who acknowledged forwarding the email to her New York list.

• Elana sent her personal endorsement email to 75 New Yorkers, and posted it to her Facebook page. She got 16 responses saying that they had voted on her recommendation. Her email was also forwarded to a high-profile magazine editor, who blogged and tweeted it.

Between the three of us, our emails reached 700 New Yorkers and generated 27 votes (or at least, people who reported voting because of it). If the numbers are accurate — a big if — hat’s a 3.8% conversion rate — a tremendous success for any GOTV activity.

In terms of votes per hour, it was an efficient use of time.

• My email took about 90 minutes; 15 minutes to write the email, 45 minutes to collect addresses from my address book, and 30 more to send (in batches, so spam filters wouldn’t nail it). I earned six votes.
Rate: 4 votes / hour.

• Andrew spent two hours on his email. He earned five votes.
Rate: 2.5 votes / hour.

• Elana spent four hours on her email, most of it researching down-ballot candidates. She earned 16 votes.
Rate: 4 votes / hour.

Averaged out, our rate was 3.6 votes / hour.

As someone who has run countless phone bank and canvass efforts, these numbers strike me as surprisingly efficient. When compared to the tactic of sending volunteers door to door, or phone banking, or lit dropping, the personal endorsement email seems like a totally viable tactic.

Not that all of those other tactics aren’t legitimate GOTV activities. They certainly are, and they should be used as part of a holistic GOTV strategy. My point isn’t to abandon traditional GOTV tactics. My point is to add a new tool to the toolbox.

In short, campaign managers should ask every volunteer willing to phone bank or knock doors also to send a personal email endorsement to their lists. And the campaigns should provide volunteers with support to make it work. Specifically, they should:

• Explain to volunteers the power and value of their personal email list

• Set aside time in the campaign office to do it, especially during periods when phone banking and canvassing aren’t effective (late night, middle of the day)

• Give volunteers template emails (plain text, plain English, low-pressure tone) so they don’t get stuck on the writing — but ask them to use their own words if they can

• Set up a “technical support” structure for folks who need help using their email clients to send out personal blasts; have your more computer-savvy volunteers be tech support for the less savvy

• Ask volunteers to report “response rates”

Of course, I fully admit that my un-scientific analysis could be inaccurate. Self-reporting vote counts are never reliable. My friends may have reported to me that I swung their vote, even if they would have voted for Schneiderman anyway. Other friends might have voted on my suggestion but not thanked me (I never asked for a report from anyone). And the impact of Patty forwarding my email to her list can’t be measured. My best guess is that these corrupting factors even each other out, and thus I did generate six(ish) votes for Schneiderman. [Note: after this was published, another friend emailed me this: "PS: By the way I just read your post and you can add me to your response rate. I am embarrassed to admit that I hadn’t really been following the primaries. Your email prompted me to make it to the polls 3 mins before closing (literally) ... and voting for SChneiderman who I voted of because of you."]

Also, I realize that this tactic won’t be appropriate under all circumstances. A high profile Presidential campaign probably doesn’t room for last minute persuasion. Very local races probably won’t attract volunteers with enough personal contacts in district to make an email effective. So, under what circumstances will this tactic work?

1) You need the right races. This tactic is probably best in a statewide, low profile campaign. Most volunteers do not have social networks confined to one State Senate or Assembly district, or even one U.S. Congressional district. So ballot initiatives, gubernatorial races, mayoral, AGs, comptrollers, US Senate primaries, and “at large” citywide races are good opportunities for this tactic.

2) You need the right volunteers. Not every person will have the same ability to reach out to a like-minded social network and activate them. Elana, Andrew and myself are all professional political or social change activists who are involved in our communities. We have more email addresses of like-minded voters than the average Joe — and more willingness to contact them. But, so will most campaign volunteers. They, too, tend to surround themselves with like-minded political friends and acquaintances, and they usually have enough commitment to contact those folks with a low-pressure email.

3) You need the right support. Navigating email programs may be difficult for less tech-savvy volunteers. If you don’t have someone who can walk a volunteer through using their BCC function, your efforts will be frustrated. But if you’re using volunteers for GOTV work at all, then you probably do — because someone is training them to phone bank, knock doors, etc.

4) You need the right sender. Meaning, volunteers must send these emails, not the campaign. Research has conclusively shown that campaigns sending GOTV emails, either to their list or to bought / rented / swapped lists, does not make one iota of turnout difference. The only thing worth trying is personal emails, authored by real live volunteers, sent out authentically to their social networks.

Variations on this tactic have been used for centuries, of course. A friend-to-friend endorsement is often seen as the most valuable coin in politics. Whether it is or not is debatable — at least one piece of research suggests it is not. Nevertheless, many campaigns and organizations have systematized this kind of contact into formal programs. Here in New York, the Working Families Party has long delivered “Friends & Neighbor” mailings to their volunteers’ lists, and they are about to launch an equivalent email tool. The League of Young Voters pioneered the concept of user-generated “ballot guides” (still very much active at theballot.org), which are intended to spread to friends and allies. And the geeks at the Democratic Party are building a ballot guide tool that looks more like a social media platform.

My suggestion is much simpler than all of that. There’s no new technology to adopt, no privacy issues to navigate, no websites to visit. Just plain old email, to plain old friends and acquaintances.

So, campaign managers, next time your volunteers are standing around waiting for the canvass to start, or hanging around after the phone banks have closed, plop them down in front of a computer and let them send emails!

You may have gotten solicitations from [email vendors] that essentially say, “Buy our emails, it will help you get more votes for your candidate.” It won’t… Email is a medium where people only want to hear from those with whom they have a relationship and have given permission. The Analyst Institute says ”At least eight studies have show that GOTV emails are not an effective way to increase turnout.”

Campaigners, take heed — in your final (sometimes desperate) push for increased turnout, don’t waste precious time and money on this discredited tactic.

Right-wing activist Andrew Breitbart has admitted—on tape—that he’s a terrorist-lover. So why isn’t the media covering it? Sign our petition demanding that the media cover this shocking new revelation.

Ok, so the tongue is fully in cheek. I think this is a fairly clever little reflection of Breitbart’s tactics, and helps to defang his conservative mud-slinging. Hopefully so. Breitbart has become a true 21st century demagogue, with infinitely more media power than wisdom or morals. One can only hope that campaigns like this will help fair-minded Americans see him as a discredited hack, rather than anything resembling a journalist.

Today at the Personal Democracy Forum, my buddy Matt Ewing announced the launch of his new Democracy Alliance venture effort that’s looking to spend serious seed money on progressive technology start-ups. From their site:

Unknown candidates are raising millions overnight. Huge Internet fueled movements are rising up from nowhere. Long-standing powerhouses are struggling to adapt. Progressives have reaped huge rewards by successfully leveraging innovation. New Media Ventures was created to make sure we can stay ahead of the curve.

Anyone got a good idea out there waiting for some seed capital? This is your chance!

Check out the video, courtesy of Treehugger.com:

Tides is now accepting nominations for the $10,000 Pizzigati Prize for Software in the Public Interest, an award that honors open source software developers who add significant value to the nonprofit sector and ongoing efforts for positive social change.

Nominations for the prize, the largest annual award in public interest computing, will be accepted through February 1, 2010, and the winner – the fourth to be selected – will be announced at NTEN’s 2010 Nonprofit Technology Conference in April.

Complete application information for the Pizzigati Prize is online at www.pizzigatiprize.org.