After the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary, interest in the presidential election intensified, with all eyes looking forward to the next primaries. As the campaign progresses, political advertising will pick up and we wonder what role broadband video advertising will play. This election has seen a rise in video activity on the part of presidential candidates, but not video advertising, at least not yet. Robert Millis, co-founder of Hudson Street Media, a New York production company that created Political Lunch, a daily webcast, and manages Capitol Hill Broadcast Network, a user-generated platform for politics and government, discusses the growth of political video content and the potential for political video advertising later this year.
iSPOT: How are the candidates using video?
Millis: It’s been interesting to see the candidates take on web video. In some ways they’ve managed to get around the paid advertising standards and put out creative content that goes viral. Once in a while they miss the mark with a joke and it goes viral in a bad way. They’re trying to imitate what the other advertisers are trying to do which is get something catchy out there that the bloggers will pay attention to. Obama Girl has wound up being the biggest success by accident. It was a sort of spoof that wound up being a very catchy viral video series where everything that comes out from the producers gets a fair amount of play. A lot has been accidental. I haven’t seen any direct paid video spots from campaigns yet but I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s next.
iSPOT: That was my next question. The candidates don’t seem to be using video advertising, even though they run so much TV. They’re not running those ads online.
Millis: A lot of campaigns are creating ad spots but they’re posting them on their own websites and then letting supporters put them on their blogs. I would expect to see video advertising pick up when we get out of the primaries to the national election. It will increase if only from the 527s and the other outside organizations that aren’t directly associated with the campaigns. They’re the issue advocates. 527 is a tax exempt organization named after a tax code number, like the Swift Boat group.
iSPOT: Where would they run the ads?
Millis: We’ll see some at CHBN.com but also I think it depends on what their target audience is, whether they’re going to be targeting political insiders or youth voters with the Facebook audience. Like other advertisers, it’s who they’re targeting with each issue.
iSPOT: Do you think the advertising will be done on a state or local basis?
Millis: There are some online blogs that are focused on states. We had a partnership with Iowapolitics.com recently. Posting video through them would target that particular audience. That’s one thing the campaigns are waking up to, ways they can target online advertising. There’s been a misconception that there’s no way to target this. But there are a lot of sites that get targeted views. CHBN is national but gets a well educated, informed group. Iowapolitics gets a much larger group that’s specific to the state.
iSPOT: Most political videos seem to be produced in house by the candidates’ staffs. Are there any agencies involved?
Millis: I’m sure there are a few agencies involved. McCain had some ties in Texas to an agency that was previously used by the Bush team. Some specialty agencies that work with lobbyist groups are involved.
iSPOT: How will video advertising activity pick up after the primaries?
Millis: Now you have constraints on the ad budget with targeting on the community level. When you reach the national campaign, the influx of cash changes the game a bit. Running a national ad campaign changes strategies. Online media will be tied into traditional forms of advertising so they can do a national ad campaign simultaneously with related coverage online that’s more targeted. The national campaign will open it up quite a bit.
iSPOT: Does the fact candidates use so much TV limit their use of video advertising?
Millis: Not necessarily. It’s one more tool in the toolbox of the campaigns. This year we’ll see record numbers for TV ads but I don’t think one negates the other. Web advertising is relatively affordable and it’s more efficient so it won’t take away from TV budgets but it’s going to take a piece of it.
iSPOT: Does the fact that there are so many candidates involved increase the use of video since it’s so wide open at this point?
Millis: Yes, it does. In each party now there’s a lot of effort to draw attention and online video is one of the best ways to do it. There’s definitely been more video competition between the candidates because of the sheer number of candidates.
iSPOT: Can you provide other examples of candidate videos besides Obama Girl?
Millis: There was an interesting series from Guiliani, but we’re not clear if it was from a supporter or someone who was trying to undermine him. Someone named abrad2345 posted a series of ads at YouTube that talked about the issues bluntly, but the intention isn’t clear and no one’s figured out who the user is.
iSPOT: What kind of videos are the candidates making?
Millis: It’s been interesting to see the candidates step into this new form. A lot aren’t comfortable addressing people directly in this way in an interactive format. Some of the campaigns are doing what they’ve always done. Clinton at first felt very awkward with online video but now she’s coming around. Her campaign is doing more creative stuff that’s more involved. They tried to find a campaign theme song and turned it over to YouTube and asked viewers to submit their own ideas. The YouTube debates changed the use of content and forced them to create things to engage the audience. Without that they could stand back and not touch it.
iSPOT: Regarding Clinton’s attempt to get users to submit their own ideas, how do candidates use video to interact directly with people and get them to respond with their own videos?
Millis: It still depends on how big the audience is. There was one effort at 10questions.com where people submitted questions that were voted on by users and candidates were supposed to respond to the top questions in their own videos a few weeks later. It was a great idea but never reached a critical mass and only a few candidates participated. The heavy hitters stayed away. Unless it reaches a large number of people, it’s still an uncontrolled environment. The front runners don’t like to risk it, they’re still being cautious.
iSPOT: How long has CHBN been around?
Millis: A little over a year now, it started at the end of 2006.
iSPOT: How has the use of political video advanced since then?
Millis: 2007 was really the year that changed political video when it comes to a growing audience being reliable every day. It created a clear destination that’s dedicated to political content. Two years ago it wouldn’t have succeeded in the same way. It’s incredible how in a year the amount of content and the number of viewers has changed.
Copyright © 2008 DCA Business Media LLC. All rights reserved. All text, photos, graphics, artwork, and other material on the SHOOTonline.com site are copyrighted. All copying, reposting or reproduction, especially for commercial publicity use or resale in any manner, form, or medium, requires explicit, prior, permission from the publisher. If you have any questions regarding copyright or use of the materials on this site, are interested in article linking, reposting, pdf creation, or any form of article re-distribution contact permissions@shootonline.com, we will try to address your needs and concerns. SHOOTonline.com may, in appropriate circumstances and at its discretion, terminate the accounts of users who infringe the intellectual property rights of others.
