In modern campaign history, the use of the most current technology to influence outcomes of an election is far from being something new. Over the years, many successful candidates have used technology to win an election. The first candidate to uses technology was Franklin D Roosevelt. His preference was the radio. John F Kennedy used television to reach his voters because he was more appealing with his good looks and charm. Ronald Reagan used satellite technology and prerecorded videos to be at every GOP campaign rally and fundraiser across the country. Lastly, Barack Obama’s election team used digital technology and social media to win over young voters and raise a lot of money in small quantities.
Despite the increased use of technology and its influence on political campaigns, the basic methodology and fundamentals of getting elected into office have not changed. Those basic fundamentals are still about getting a candidate’s message out, raising money, connecting with voters and building support, raising more money, and, finally, getting voters to the polls on Election Day to cast their vote. Technology is helping candidates achieve the basic methodology of getting elected into office faster, more effectively and at a lower expense. Given the increased use of technology and all of the various mediums in which voters receive information, television is still the primary source where voters are introduced to candidates. Once introduced to a candidate, voters are then driven to the candidate’s website, which is the central hub of their political campaign. The candidate’s website is where the messaging is expanded, volunteers are mobilized and most importantly where contributions are made. The big question about all of this is does technology make a big difference in winning? If you were running for something, what type of technology would you use to reach the voters?
politicsandmediablog 