Where They Stand and Voters’ Guides

     Many news organizations have tried to help guide their readers by providing a synopsis of the major campaign topics under an “Issues” section.  Some news organizations like the Chicago Tribune have expanded their scope to include gay marriage and guns, while others have veered from the norm.  The Houston Chronicle for example, listed NASA, but did not mention Iraq as one of the major issues.  But on the whole, there was little variation.  The major issues were defined as Iraq, Iran, health care, climate change, the economy and immigration.

     Other organizations supplemented or substituted their “Issues” section with voters’ guides or questionnaires like the “candidates match game”.  Most of the questions stemmed from where the reader stood on the aforementioned “issues,” and at the end of the quiz, readers were told which candidate was “most like you.”  The anomaly, however, was the Christian Science Monitor, whose Patchwork Nation project categorized readers into 11 communities based not on issues but on personal questions like religion and income.  Instead of telling the readers which candidate they were most like, the Patchwork Nation unveiled how each community tended to vote. 

     The topic of executive power was never mentioned as a major campaign issue in the “Issues” sections or in questionnaires, not even by CNN who had the most comprehensive list of issues (abortion, economic stimulus, education, energy, environment, free trade, guns, health care, homeland security, housing, immigration, Iran, Iraq, same-sex marriages, social security, stem cell research and taxes), and whose phone survey at one point revealed that 25 percent of people were either unsure or believed that other more important issues had yet to be included under CNN’s list of issues. 

Media Coverage of Campaign Issues

The upcoming 2008 elections will be the first time I can vote since the 20 years I’ve lived in America (it took a little while to get my citizenship).  Undecided on a candidate and political party, I was intent on finding as much as I could about each presidential candidate.  Beyond their trademark characteristics (charisma, experience and military accolades), it seemed important to find out where each candidate, republican and democratic, stood on the hard, substantive issues. 

But first, what exactly were the issues?  I was on a quest to find out. 

The New York Times

My first stop was The New York Times.  Upon arriving at the politics page, I was bombarded with voting tallies and projections of who would win Wyoming.  Obama, said The Times, which probably meant Obama would lose.  Moving on.  After perusing the page some more, I found an Issues section.  Relief!  I was afraid I might have to scour the entire site for individual articles.  The Issues section was in smaller font but the section wasn’t too difficult to find.  It was neatly categorized, listing each candidate’s stance on the issues.  According to The New York Times, the issues were health care, abortion, climate change, immigration, Iraq, Iran and the economy.  That was it?  I was slightly disappointed to find that the only issues they listed were the same issues that had been discussed in debates ad nauseam.  What about the unprecedented expansion of executive power during Bush’s oligarchical reign?  This was The New York Times afterall.  Weren’t these journalists afraid the Justice Department might throw them in a cell, much the way the Justice Department had Judith Miller?  The torture tactics that kept leaking out of Guantanamo Bay had been covered by The Times.  Why wasn’t the root of that cause a primary issue?  I was ready to move on.  Surely, there would be another newspaper who would recognize its importance.

Washington Post

My next stop was the Washington Post.  Ooh, Obama did win Wyoming, guess I was wrong.  Anyway, where was I.  The Washington Post also had a neatly organized Campaign Issues page with some cool features.  The Post listed the number of times each issue was mentioned by each candidate.  When you slid your mouse over the candidates, the issues would change in font, some larger, some smaller, each proportional to the number of times the issue was mentioned by the candidate.  And vice versa, if you slid your mouse over the issues, the corresponding candidate’s face would enlarge or stay the same based on the same logic.  The feature was creative and technically savvy and gave you a sense of how important each issue was to the candidates.  But the issues listed were still limited in scope and similar to those mentioned in the New York Times: abortion, civil rights, economy +budget, education, environment, health care, immigration and the Iraq War.   It’s amazing.  They can increase Obama’s face with a click of the mouse, but they can’t touch upon an issue as important as executive power.

Chicago Tribune

Maybe the folks at the Chicago Tribune would have incorporated it.  Undr their Issues section,  I had the option to choose two candidates for comparison.  I chose Clinton and Obama.  It was cool to see them juxtaposed next to each other, like seeing them go head to head.  Up first for issues was Iraq (of course), then health care, taxes, immigration, gay marriage, energy, trade, abortion, economy, education, gun and foreign policy.  Ok, so I gotta hand it to Chicago Tribune for expanding their scope to include gay marriage, education and guns.  But still no mention of executive power.  

The Boston Globe 

The Boston Globe wasn’t much different.  The issues, as they defined them, were Iraq, the economy, environment, health care, immigration and social security.  Using their site was also slightly irritating since they asked you to register.  

USA Today

USA Today also listed their issues in similar fashion, starting with Iraq, and then immigration, health care, education, gay civil rights and ending with abortion.  But what differentiated their Issues section was a feature called the “candidates match game.”  Based on how you answered the multiple-choice questions below, the match game would tell you which candidate was “most like you.” 

• Should The US have invaded Iraq and deposed Saddam Hussein?
• What should happen to the U.S. troop levels in Iraq?
• Should the U.S. government continue to fund the Iraq War?
• What should the federal government’s emphasis be in dealing with illegal immigration?
• What should happen to illegal immigrants already in the U.S.?
• What’s the best way the federal government can get more people covered by health insurance?
• What should be the federal government’s priority in reducing health care costs?
• What should the government do about same-sex couples that want to be married?
• What would be the best way to improve the federal income tax system
• What would be the best way for the federal government to deal with global warming?
• In terms of experience, which of the following matters most to you in a presidential candidate?

Of these 11 questions, 3 were based on Iraq, 2 on immigration, 2 on health care, 1 on gay marriages, 1 on income tax, 1 on global warming, and 1 on experience.  Did this mean that that Iraq was three times more important than the economy?  More important to whom?  And by selecting specific issues and ignoring others, and by formulating the questions the way they had, what exactly were they assuming about me?  Least impressive of all was the uselessness of this game.  After answering the 11 questions, I was told that the candidates most like me were 1. Dennis Kucinich 2. Bill Richardson.  3.  Chris Dodd – none of whom remain as contenders.  

Wall Street Journal  

Next stop – the Wall Street Journal.  Surprisingly the WSJ did not have an “Issues” section.  But they had a feature called the “Electoral Compass.”   The “Electoral Compass USA” seemed a website or company all its own, one that the WSJ sponsored.  Basically, it was another quiz, albeit slightly more comprehensive than the one USA Today featured.  The answer choices ranged from completely disagree to completely agree, and an option for no opinion. 

• People should have a background check and obtain a license before they can buy a gun
• Stricter gun control will not reduce crime
• All semi-automatic weapons should be banned
• The effects of global warming are grossly exaggerated
• An additional carbon tax on fuel will effectively reduce pollution
• The US should never sign international treaties on climate change that limit economic growth
• The US had ever right to invade Iraq
• The US is safer because of the invasion of Iraq
• The new president should begin to bring home all US troops from Iraq immediately
• The best way to reduce the federal deficit is to raise taxes
• The tax cuts for people with a higher income should be reversed
• The government has no responsibility to provide retirement funds
• Mortgage lenders should be more tightly controlled
• People with higher incomes should receive less Medicare benefits
• The federal government should reduce income inequality
• The US should reduce its financial contribution to the UN
• Iran is an imminent threat to world peace
• The US should decrease its spending on defense
• Same sex marriages should be made legal
• Abortion should be made completely illegal
• Abortion should be made completely illegal
• Using embryos for stem cell research is acceptable as it enables us to find cures for diseases
• To prevent illegal immigration, the US should complete the fence along the entire Mexican border
• All illegal immigrants without a criminal record should be given the right to stay in the US legally
• Illegal immigration threatens our national security
• Providing health care is not the responsibility of the government
• US law should obligate all companies to provide health care insurance for their workers
• The government should provide health care coverage for the millions of uninsured Americans
• The death penalty helps deter crime
• The government should spend money on keeping drugs off the streets, not on treating drug addicts
• For each crime there shold be a fixed minimum sentence
• Better teachers should be paid higher wages than their colleagues
• Creationism should be taught in science classes in school
• More government funding should go into public schools, not to education vouchers
• Anti-terrorism legislation such as the Patriot Act, unacceptably violates civil liberties
• Some form of torture is acceptable if it can prevent terrorist attacks
• Iraq is just one front in a broader fight against Islamic terrorists  

36 questions in total, 3 questions each for gun control, environment, Iraq, economy, income, national security, family, immigration, health care, law & order, education and terrorism.  The Electoral Compass didn’t weigh Iraq more heavily than gun control, but it still framed the issues around these 13 issues.  

The Los Angeles Times, surprisingly, did not have an Issues section – and no quiz to supplement or substitute it.  The only summary they provided of the candidates was “Snapshots of the candidates,” and an editorial at that (“As a candidate on the trail, Clinton doesn’t dazzle, but she isn’t bad”).  

The Los Angeles Times, Philadelphia Inquirer, Baltimore Sun, San Francisco Chronicle, San Diego Tribune

As a matter of fact, several large papers did not have an Issues section, including The Los Angeles Times, Philadelphia Inquirer, Baltimore Sun and the San Francisco Chronicle.  

I decided to track some local papers.  The San Diego Tribune did not define their issues either.

CNN 

But CNN did.  They probably had the most extensive list of issues: abortion, economic stimulus, education, energy, environment, free trade, guns, health care, homeland security, housing, immigration, Iran, Iraq, same-sex marriages, social security, stem cell research and taxes.  They also had an “issue tracker” that answered the question, “What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?”  Based on a phone survey of 1,266 adults, the following results were posted: 33 percent for Economy, 20 percent for Iraq, 7 percent for health care, 5 percent for terrorism, 4 percent for immigration, 3 percent for budget deficit, 3 percent for gas / heating oil.  And a whopping 25 percent of people were either unsure or believed there were other more important issues not included in CNN’s list of issues.  

Houston Chronicle

The Houston Chronicle also had an issues section called “Find your presidential candidate.”  Many of these sites spent a lot of technical and creative energy on attracting readers.  I entered this section to be greeted by revolving faces of Hilary, Obama and McCain.  By clicking on any one of the rotating faces, each candidate’s position on the aforementioned issues were summarized.  The Houston Chronicle listed the following issues: immigration, trade, energy, budget, social issues, NASA.  Wait… NO IRAQ?!  Interesting.  The Houston Chronicle also employed a quiz made up of 8 questions on Immigration, 6 on trade, 8 on energy, 9 on budget, 8 on social issues and 8 on NASA.  While it was refreshing to see other topics of coverage, it was simultaneously disconcerting to see that a topic like Iraq was not incorporated.  Didn’t the Houston Chronicle consider Iraq an important campaign issue?  Perhaps the Houston Chronicle simply tired of the issue, or perhaps they opted to address issues that were important to their community. 

The Christian Science Monitor 

Which broaches the unconventional manner in which the CS Monitor attempted to assist their readers and voters.  While the CS Monitor did not have an issues section either, they too offered a quiz.  The quiz, called “How do you fit in?” is part of a larger project called Patchwork Nation, which is funded by the nonprofit organization Knight Foundation.  The quiz consisted of questions that ranged from income and race to religious affiliations, but did not address political views on issues; it did not attempt to tell their readers which candidate they were most like.  Instead, it categorized you into one of 11 distinctly defined communities: Monied Burbs, Minority Central, Evangelical Epicenters, Tractor Country, Campus and Careers, Immigration Nation, Industrial Metropolis, Boom Towns, Service Worker Centers, Emptying Nests, and Military Bastions.  The logic behind creating 11 communities was that the issues influencing voters’ decisions were not black and white, or rather red and blue.  

“Nearly 305 million people live in the United States, according to the US Census Bureau.  Yet in recent elections, it’s all been about fitting into two categories: red states that vote Republican and blue states that vote Democratic,” said the CS Monitor.  ”But the red/blue breakdown of political opinion doesn’t explain what underpins the voters’ decisions.”

So they expanded their spectrum to include 11 different hues.  I was apparently the shade of “Evangelical Epicenters.”  Based on the limited questions that were asked, I presume it’s because I considered myself a “born again” and had no household income.  I’m currently a student and so is my husband.  According to the Monitor: 

“Evangelical Epicenters are found mostly in small towns and suburbs.  About 46 percent of their residents are younger than 50.  With a median income of roughly $37,000 a year, households in these counties are almost even with the national county median.”  It gets worse. “This was President Bush’s stronghold territory in 2004, giving him more than 64 percent of its votes.  It will certainly be a GOP stronghold again in 2008.”

Not if I can help it.  They couldn’t have been more wrong about my “community.”  George Bush and I may qualify under the same religious affiliation on paper, but the difference in our political views are as vast as heaven and hell.  

“As the 2008 campaign progresses, the Monitor will write about what issues matter in each of these communities, how the issues affect residents’ votes, and how the candidates tailor their message to a particular audience. This is a site based on evidence that people’s voting patterns are at least partly informed by where they live,” said the Monitor.  ”The project covers the election from the voter’s point of view.”

But by telling me which “community” I fit into, and which issues were prominent in these “communities,” weren’t they in essence forming what my point of view was? 

Media Business Model

“The Root” Web Magazine   What is the business model for building a Webzine?  I found a bunch of technical terms and business elements, and tried to relate to “The Root” where applicable.  

• CPM ads (“cost per thousand views”; banner ads online and regular ads in print, TV and radio.  Advertisers running CPM ads set their desired price per 1000 ads served; you get paid for every 1000 impressions.) – Not yet certain if “The Root” utilizes any CPM ads
• CPC ads (“cost per click”; think Google ads) – HBO, Showboat (the mardis gras casino), Epson (Discover your episonality at episonality.com), University of Phoenix, Slate, Extended Stay Hotel, classmates.com, Vonage
• CPT ads (“cost per transaction”; you pay only if the customer brought to you from a media sites becomes a paying customer) – Roots is a free service so does not apply.
• Lead generation (An agency develops a website or partnerships with several websites in which they promote and advertise your product or service. A buyer is able to request information from several businesses that offer the product or service that they are looking for and the seller is given the opportunity to pitch their product or service to someone who has given them permission.  but most industries using this type of marketing include insurance agencies, education institutions, office suppliers, and furniture stores.)
• Subscription revenues  – The Roots does not generate subscrition revenue.
• Affiliate revenues – The Washington Post created The Roots in hopes of reaching broader audience.
• Rental of subscriber lists
• Sale of information (selling data about users–aggregate/statistical or individual–to third parties) – While the geneaology section does not charge, the site urges people to have DNA testing to help trace backgrounds.  It links to companies that provide testing.  One such company, www.AfricaDNA.com, is co-owned by Mr. Gates – a relationship that would be prohibited by some publications, Jilian Michaels (how big is your weight loss goal? 5-25, 25-75, 75+),
• Licensing of brand (people pay to use a media brand as implied endorsement) – The nascent website has yet to establish itself as brand.
• Licensing of content (syndication) – The Washington Post
• Getting the users to create something of value for free and applying any of the above to monetize it – Genealogy section again.  
• Upgraded service/content (ed: aka “freemium”)
• Alternate output (pdf; print/print-on-demand; customized Shared Book style; etc.) – Adobe Flash Player 9 for video
• Custom services/feeds
• Live events - HBO (Saturday, February 23 In HD, Eastern Time 8PM, An HBO Sports Presentation Joe Louis)
• “Souvenirs”/”Merchandise”
• Co-branded spinoff - Slate, The Washington Post, “The Roots of Oprah”
• Sponsors - Coca Cola, HBO

Additional revenue generating elements for media business:

• Cost Per Install (popular with top Facebook apps who can help others get installs)
• E-commerce (selling stuff directly on your website)
• Sponsorships (ads of some sort that are sold based on time, not on the number of impressions)
• Listings (paying a time based amount to list something like a job or real estate on your website)
• Paid Inclusion (a form of CPC advertising where an advertiser pays to be included in a search result)
• Streaming Audio Advertising (like radio advertising delivered in the audio stream after a certain amount of audio content has been delivered)
• Streaming Video Advertising (like streaming audio but in video)
• API Fees (charging third parties to access your API)

Media business model provided by Chris Anderson, as referenced in the Poynter Institute http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=31&aid=136871 

Other Business-Related Details…

 The Washington Post recently launched “The Root” in an attempt to broaden its on-line audience.  In an interview conducted by The Post, Donald E. Graham, Chairman of Post Co., said he doesn’t expect “The Root” to be profitable initially, but hopes it won’t lose money for as many years as Slate.  Slate was founded in 1996, but did not reap profits until 2007.  

“The Root” is distinguished by a genealogy feature.  There is no fee to use the genealogy application, but the site encourages DNA testing to help trace family roots.  ”The Root” links to companies that provide such testing.  One such company, www.AfricanDNA.com, is co-owned by Mr. Gates – a relationship that would be prohibited by some publications and has already raised the eyebrow of at least one blogger Cobb:

“As for the genealogical stuff, well. Let’s hope that it’s more than just a marketing honeypot for the DNA industry. We’ve been over that scandal before.” 

Several well-known authors and scholars have agreed to contribute to The Root, including Malcolm Gladwell and William Julius Wilson. The managing editor is Lynette Clemetson, who was until recently a reporter in Washington for the The New York Times and previously was a national and foreign correspondent for Newsweek.

Blog comment by Cobb:

“As for the genealogical stuff, well. Let’s hope that it’s more than just a marketing honeypot for the DNA industry. We’ve been over that scandal before.”

Henry Louis Gates Jr. is the author of ”Finding Oprah’s Roots.”  Also, on Feb. 6th, Gates’s “African American Lives 2,” a documentary series using DNA analyses to help trace the ancestry of prominent black Americans such as Chris Rock will air on PBS. 

  

Is Money Growing on Trees?

The business of tracing ones family tree through a genealogy website is a growing and profitable trend. 

As seen in the Daily Deal:

Generations Network Inc., which owns genealogical site Ancestry.com, sold a majority stake to a group led by Spectrum Equity Investors for $300 million, including debt.

Generations Network, which changed its name last year from Myfamily.com, has more than 900,000 paying subscribers. It receives 8.2 million worldwide monthly unique visitors, a company statement said.

Revenue in 2006 was $150 million, up from $47 million in 2002, according to Sullivan.

“We’re growing and we’re profitable,” Sullivan said. “We’ve rebuilt and relaunched a new platform that will maintain and extend the lead for family social networks on the Web.”

Generations has also opened an office in Beijing.  “We believe China is a hot potential market,” Sullivan said.

Mail on Sunday (London):

“A UK spokesman for Generations Network said the family history market here had grown enormously in the past few years due to the internet and media programmes. ‘Since we established an office here in 2004 we have had a 500 per cent increase in our turnover,’ he said. ‘The growth has been absolutely massive. The most popular collections for research are our births, marriages and deaths records and the censuses.’ Being owned by private equity groups, the company’s financial figures are not publicly available, but the financial success of other genealogy websites in Britain is undisputed.”

 **

Free on-line sources:

 www.familysearch.org. This site is run by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints – or the Mormon Church – which requires its members to research their family trees to baptise deceased relatives.

http://www.squidoo.com/free-genealogy-websites

www.usgenweb.com  Provided by a group ov volunteers for genealogical research.   

www.iberia.lib.la.us/genealogy.htm

http://www.socialsecuritydeathindex-search.com/ssdi/2007/11/20/the-internet-is-a-genealogy-playground-by-christine/