Steele vs Anuzis Part One: Technology - Web Presence and Twitter

[Jason Taylor]

(Click on pictures for a larger view)

Looking at the candidates' Twitter accounts, there several very interesting things to note:

1. Customization. Steele is using the stock background. Anuzis has a custom background with his picture and name in "logotype".

2. Profile Steele has not added a profile. :( I know that this is very basic, but that's the point. Anuzis has linked in his website, and provides additional details.

3. Activity Steele's Activity is as follows: Following 0 people, 311 followers, 13 updates. Anuzis's Activity: Following 2,424 people, 2279 followers, 1803 updates. For you non-Twitter folks, you can't send a direct message to anyone unless you are following each other. Every comment you send is an "update".

4. Content Steele's most recent update was 1 day ago, and his updates are usually a one-way conversation - a posting of what he's doing today. Anuzis, on the other hand, updated 13 minutes ago, and uses Twitter to have direct conversations with people like you and I about political issues. In fact, I sent him a message yesterday and he responded within a minute. Pretty impressive, considering he doesn't even know me.

Advantage: Anuzis

Why This Matters: Twitter is a very powerful communications tool in that it can be used anywhere, even on a standard $50 cell phone. Communication is instant, and many people can join into a conversation. Anuzis uses this tool effectively to communicate with every day people about what they feel is important. Wouldn't it be cool to have instant access to the RNC chair, to actually have a 2 way chat about real issues?

Nail in the Coffin: Note that Steele chose the username "Steele4Chair". He is not up to speed on this, folks; he just started using Twitter as part of his campaign. But the problem is that he is clueless to just how it's supposed to be used! He is totally squandering an amazing opportunity to connect with us.
________________________________________________________________________________

Now let's do a quick Google search for each candidate. See what the results are?

Saul's chairman site comes up #1 on Google, and #2. This is followed by his Michigan site, ranked #3 and #4.

Steele's site comes up at #19! To be fair, the "Draft Steele" website comes in at #9 and #10, but that is not his official site. In fact, the disclaimer reads: This Site Is Not Paid For Or Authorized By Any Candidate or Candidate Committee. Verdict? Steele's camp can't even get his site listed on the first page of Google.

Advantage: Anuzis

Why this Matters: While both candidates have good looking sites, it is very important to build a site which is both aesthetically pleasing and search-engine optimized. In the Internet age, you must be able to use all means at your disposal to control the delivery, saturation, and presence of your message.

Nail in the Coffin: Anuzis's #1 result was the main page of his website - the prime real estate. Steele's #19 result was an interior page. Steele's main website page did show up in the search, though... at #70. :(

Next time, we'll look at web content and branding.

Please generously contribute your comments below!

[Brew_Crew]

Saul was pushing for Ron Paul to get kicked out of debates right after the Iowa primaries, where Huckabee with 34%, Romney with 25%, Thompson and McCain each with 13%, Paul with 10% and Giuliani with 4%. Why would Saul want to do this? I can only figure that 'HE' wanted to have a unified set of candidates being pro war. Putting aside the morality of the Iraq war for now, what if next time this tyrant decides that the candidate representing your views can't have a vioce in the party?

[Randy Covington]

I have looked at Steele's site where he is posting his "Plan". The site is done in Joomla which is fine, but the mechanism he is using for posting his plan seems very contrived and awkward to me. Overall I rate the site mediocre and not very attuned to current standards.

[Amy Tucker]

I think that Obama's campaign was a perfect example of "who owns the media and technology wins the election" Obama charmed the media and because of that, the media threw softballs at Obama and didn't question Obama's experience [or lack thereof].

Unfortunately [for Obama], the charm is wearing off and questions are finally being asked.

The point is that a firm grasp on the wonders of the interweb can give a savvy candidate a huge advantage but you have to have something to back up the flash and sparkle.

Anuzis is doing a great job of connecting with people and Steele is doing a great job of being boring. Though both may be equally qualified, Anuzis projects an air of authority and with his large amount of followers his popularity will only continue to grow - people like "winners".

[Jason Taylor]

Does twitter or other such sites prove a candidate is qualified to lead the party and rebuild the Republican Party?

Not alone; however, in my opinion it is a deal-breaking issue. Our leader must be able and willing to use efficient means of involving grassroots voices in the decision making process. More importantly, he must be able to guide candidates and activists in utilizing the tools necessary to do the same. Any candidate for Chair who does not immediately see the value and importance of this is, in my opinion, not qualified.

Talk is cheap, action is proof. A candidate who effectively manages this part of their own campaign has proven that he understands.

[Artemio Temo Muniz]

Jason this is awesome analysis. We have to discern wether the next guy really knows his stuff or does he just delegate positions. The GOP needs a guy who can delegate and knows Politics 2.0

[Jason Taylor]

So decisions should be made looking at the whole, not just one aspect of what they "stand" for.

I agree with this - remember, this post is only one part of a series. That said, I do think that it is very important to realize the difference in styles presented here. I prefer the leader who wants to be in touch with the foot soldiers.

I really believe that the era of running a party like it is a corporation - top-down leader-makes-the-rules style - is ending. One of the Republican Party's greatest problems is that the "rank and file" feel that their opinion doesn't matter. Saul's philosophy of open, direct communication - even from the chairman straight to the grassroots - is exactly the sort of thing that will energize the Party.

[Audrie Zettick Schaller]

Truly, Saul does "get it" and has integrated technology into his efforts. If you are going to use Twitter, it should be 2-way. But do I think Michael would be any less sufficient in wiring the party's efforts? No. Many CEOs and others haven't actually figured out how to use Twitter in their daily lives...or have decided that it's rude to be constantly using the text message cell while in the middle of high level meetings. But as leaders, they bring great talent on to do the work....a chief financial officer, a chief technology officer, etc. So decisions should be made looking at the whole, not just one aspect of what they "stand" for.

[Whitehorse (Robin Ray)]

Mobile 'net is fun! I like Steele, Blackwell, & Saltsman - don't know enough about Dawson. Duncan is a non-starter for me. I have to say I'm changing from backing Steele to backing Anuzis.

[Jason Taylor]

Haha, nice.

Actually, Twitter can be run completely from a standard $50 cell phone with text messaging. Many of his updates are made while waiting at the airport, waiting to be interviewed, etc. So technically you're right.

[asp]

If he can answer in 60 seconds or less, he must be standing by just waiting for someone to call. (smiley face)