In case you weren’t at the IPDI’s 2008 Politics Online Conference, we released the March 2008 Politics and Technology Review, our newest regular publication.

In this issue, David Faris looks the way citizens used social networking sites and mobile phones to spread political rumors in Egypt. James Valentine questions whether the wisdom of crowds can produce creative thought. Lowell Feld Nate Wilcox analyze the online Draft Jim Webb movement in 2006. In our research section, David Karpf measures influence in the political blogosphere, while Christine Williams and Girish Gulati look at the political impact of Facebook on the 2006 elections and the 2008 presidential race. The full list of authors and articles are below and click here for the PDF version.

Drafting an American Hero
Lowell Feld (Editor, Raising Kaine, Editor, Badlands Blue, Netroots Coordinator, Judy Feder for Congress)
Nate Wilcox (Senior Advisor, WebStrong Group)

The Political Impact of Facebook: Evidence from the 2006 Midterm
Elections and 2008 Nomination Contest
Christine B. Williams (Professor of Political Science, Bentley College)
Girish J. “Jeff” Gulati (Assistant Professor of Political Science, Bentley College)

Uncreative Commons?
James Valentine (U.S. Coast Guard)

No Time, No Emails, No Problem: Translating American Online
Strategies into a Successful Latin American Campaign:
Rodrigo Lugones (Executive Director of Duran Barba & Asociados)

Measuring Influence in the Political Blogosphere: Who’s Winning, and
How Can We Tell?
David Karpf (PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, University of Pennsylvania)

Cyber-libertarians: The Internet Unleashed, A Government
Challenged?
Christopher Wimbush (The Institute for Politics, Democracy, and the Internet)

The Web, the Cell Phone and the Mubarak Death Crisis of 2007
David M. Faris (PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, University of Pennsylvania)

Scandal and the Possible Emergence of a Fifth Establishment:
The influence of partisan blogs and the mainstream media in political scandal
coverage
Alex Kellner (The Institute for Politics, Democracy, and the Internet)

P.S. We made a mistake in the publication and forgot to include the bio of one of our fantastic authors, Lowell Feld. We’ve included it below and we are very sorry that it didn’t make it to the publication.

Lowell Feld runs *Raising Kaine*, the largest Democratic political blog in Virginia. In December 2005, Feld co-founded the Draft James Webb movement, which was integral to the defeat of incumbent Sen. George Allen, widely believed to be the Republicans’ leading 2008 presidential contender. After helping Webb win the Virginia Democratic primary in June 2006, Feld joined the Webb for Senate campaign as its netroots coordinator. In this capacity, Feld helped the Webb campaign raise more than $4 million online m(out of $8 million total), and coordinate its “rag-tag army” of nearly 10,000 grassroots and netroots activists. Today, Lowell is a political consultant, blogger, and author of the forthcoming book, “Netroots Rising: How a Citizen Army of Bloggers and Online Activists Is Changing American Politics.”

Over the course of the last couple days, we have been posting videos from the keynote and plenary panels from last months 2008 Politics Online Conference on IPDI’s YouTube channel. As of right now, all of New York Times Magazine’s Matt Bai’s keynote and the following Q&A are posted along with portions of the Pervasive Politics panel featuring Google’s Bob Boorstin, USC’s Jonathan Taplin and author Adam Greenfeld. The rest of the video from the conference will be up in the next several days.

In case you missed this years Politics Online Conference or attended, but missed these sessions, these videos are definitely worth a view. From the reactions that I have seen/heard about this years conference, there were a lot of interesting and informative topics discussed. If you are at all interested in the interaction in Politics and Technology, then these videos are must-watch.

Special thanks to Chris Newbury at Free Country Media for taping the keynote panels and other portions of last months 2008 Politics Online Conference.

I would like to congratulate the winners of the 2008 Golden Dot Awards, which were announced Tuesday, March 4 at the 2008 Politics Online Conference. This year was a great success for the Golden Dot Awards as we democratized both the nominating and voting process, bringing it to the public via the Internet. There were over 100 nominations and saw 4,000 votes in only a 5 business day-long time period.

Without further ado, here are the winners:

Technology Impact Moment of the Year- Ron Paul 4.2 Million Dollar Money BombOnline Politician - Obama
Online Dream Team - Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee
Best Website: Federal Candidate- Barack Obama
Best Website: State and Local Candidate- Daniel Biss
Best Website: Issue Advocacy Campaign- Team Darfur
Best EGovernment - Globalwarming.house.gov (Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming)
Best ECampaign Blog - Biss Blog
Best Political Coverage Blog - Marc Ambinder
Best Issues/Advocacy Blog - TreeHugger
Best Mobile/Text Message Campaign - Obama HOPE Campaign
Best Podcast - NYTimes on Politics
Best Networked Campaign - Barack Obama
Best Vlog - Playbook TV (James Kotecki)
Best Political Web Video - Yes, We Can
Best Political Animation/Mashup - In the Year 2007, JibJab
Best Online Collective Action Effort - Congresspedia
Best Online GOTV - Barack Obama
Best Online Political Application - I am Smoke Free, (Facebook Application)
Poli-Tech Innovator of the Year - Steve Grove, YouTube Politics
Best Political Advertising Campaign - Hillary Sopranos Ad

Congratulations again. If you have any suggestions for future iterations of the Golden Dot awards please send me an email at akellner@ipdi.org.

This post was guest blogged by Jesse Greenberg.  

Kudos to all the organizers of the Politics Online Conference for putting together an excellent program.  And special thanks to Julie Germany who invited me as a guest on IPDI’s blog.

I was fortunate to win Golden Dot Awards in the categories of Best Website for State/Local Candidate and Best e-Blog for my role as a communications advisor to Daniel Biss, Candidate for State Representative in Illinois’ 17^th district.  I was fortunate because working for the Biss campaign afforded me the opportunity to implement new political strategies needed to build relationships with voters, raise funds and construct the campaign brand.  Winning the Golden Dots affirmed that we’re on the right track. 

The candidate, however, did not see the value of attending the conference or receiving the awards in person and would not assist in supporting my trip to DC.  My argument for going was that this earned public relations was testament to the campaign running on a new model that utilizes technology to involve district voters in having a greater say in their politics than ever before.  We could build on this momentum, I argued, to achieve definitive, measurable results for the minor investment in going to DC.  Alas, my argument did not win this time.

I’m not sharing this because I have an axe to grind.  On the contrary, I wish the candidate only success.  Rather, I’m sharing this to demonstrate how difficult putting faith in politics 2.0 can be, especially on the state or local level where resources are often tight.  In that environment it is comfortable to fall back on the traditional ways of campaigning—canvassing, direct mail, etc.—that are often not as a good an investment (confirmed by Sara Parker, Edelman VP in the workshop, “Developing Mobile Social Software Applications”) but at least are more of a known quantity.  And despite having embraced new campaign strategies, this campaign found it difficult to let go of old campaign models.  This demonstrates it is going to take another election or two to really transform American politics down to the local level. 

My sense from the beginning was that politics 2.0 is applicable at the local level.  In fact, I argue new campaign marketing strategies can be more effective at the local level simply because the scale is so much smaller.  It is therefore easier to manage relationships and maintain relevancy to voters that is impossible to do in the same way in presidential or congressional campaigns. 

I’ll use this as an opportunity to challenge candidates running at the local level to use new campaign methods and bring down the barriers between candidate and voter.  We are in a climate today that demands a greater level of political transparency.  We must allow greater involvement from voters, many of whom a candidate does not know personally—and that’s ok. 

Lastly, local candidates need to trust new faces (Millennials especially) who bring new ideas to politics.  We’re the vanguard of change and despite our age, our perspective is fresh and helping bring about a new age of campaigning occurring most notably at higher levels of politics.  Thanks to the Golden Dots though, we’ve got a place that recognizes and rewards new thinking in political campaigns. 

This post is guest blogged by Drew Clark.

Most Americans who have high-speed Internet can’t imagine life without broadband. How could you connect to the Internet of today without it? In today’s world, broadband is as basic as running water and electricity. And yet the U.S. is falling behind globally.

What can be done to Build a Broadband Strategy for America? That’s what we’ll be talking about on Tuesday, March 4, during the Keynote Luncheon at the Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet’s 2008 Politics Online conference. Read about the star-studded panel that I’ll be moderating. You can also read my previous blog post on why divergent parties do seem to be coalescing around a National Broadband Strategy.

As a technology reporter, I’ve been writing about the battles over broadband for nearly a decade here in Washington. There is one fact about which nearly everyone seems to be in agreement: if America wants better broadband, America need better broadband data. That’s why I’ve recently started a new venture to collect this broadband data, and to make the data available for all on the Web at BroadbandCensus.com.

Take the Broadband Census!

BroadbandCensus.com is designed to help Internet users measure and understand information about the availability, competition, speeds and prices of broadband within their areas.

When you go the BroadbandCensus.com Web site, you’ll type in your ZIP code. You’ll find out how many broadband providers the Federal Communications Commission says are available in your area. You can compare that number to your own sense of the competitive landscape. And now, with BroadbandCensus.com, you can help others understand the true state of broadband competition.

You can Take the Broadband Census by answering a short questionnaire on the site. Your answers will create linkages between a broadband provider and the ZIP codes in which they offer service. You can compare your notes about your service with the experience of other Internet users in your neighborhood.

This idea is by no means original. In recent years, more and more people have been urging the FCC to collect more detailed information about broadband – and to make more of that information publicly available.

Consider several pieces of legislation in Congress. Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, has introduced legislation that would provide the public with better broadband information. Markey’s “Broadband Census of America Act,” H.R. 3919, has passed the House of Representatives and is now before the Senate.

In addition to providing money for state initiatives to map out broadband, the Broadband Census of America Act also calls for the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to create publicly-available map of broadband deployment. The map would feature not only broadband availability, but “each commercial provider or public provider of broadband service capability.”

In the Senate, the current version of the farm bill, H.R. 4212, includes Illinois Democratic Sen. Richard Durbin’s “Connect the Nation Act,” S. 1190. Durbin’s bill would authorize $40 million a year, for five years, to state efforts to map out broadband inventory on the census block level. The “Broadband Data Improvement Act,” S. 1492, by Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, takes a similar approach. The goal is, in the identical language of both bills, to “identify and track the availability and adoption of broadband services within each State.”

Going Beyond Broadband Availability – to Broadband Competition, Speeds and Prices

These broadband data bills have been inspired by a growing movement in the states to map out broadband availability within their territories. This effort began with Connect Kentucky, a non-profit initiative designed to compile statistics about regional broadband deployment. In partnership with Bell companies and cable operators, Connect Kentucky identified gaps in coverage and underserved areas. Read about how the group has created a detailed map of broadband availability. It is now replicating its efforts in Ohio, Tennessee and West Virginia.

Connect Kentucky has spawned an entire movement – Connected Nation – which aims to map out broadband availability. Other groups unconnected to Connected Nation are engaged in similar mapping efforts, including the California Broadband Initiative and Massachusetts Broadband Initiative.

Knowing where broadband is and isn’t available is, indeed, the first step toward making sure that broadband truly is accessible to all Americans. But the next steps are broadband competition, broadband speeds and broadband prices. Filling out the rest of this picture is the goal of BroadbandCensus.com.

BroadbandCensus.com includes the names of the carriers offering service in each local area. Using the carrier name as a key, a consumer can rate and rank her broadband providers based on speeds and service. (We’ll be including pricing information in the future, too.) By rating their service quality, Broadband Census Takers and Broadband Census Users will be able to make true head-to-head comparisons. BroadbandCensus.com believes that meaningful information about customer service plans is an essential part of understanding broadband.

And judging by last week’s hearing of the Federal Communications Commission in Cambridge, Mass., it looks like this is principle with which everyone can agree. FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said that broadband providers needed to be transparent with their customers about the speeds, prices and terms of service at which they offer broadband. Speaking at the hearing, Professor Tim Wu (a panelist at Tuesday’s keynote discussion), Professor Christopher Yoo, and Verizon Communications Executive Vice President Tom Tauke all agreed.

Keeping Tabs on Broadband Speeds and Service Plan Information

At BroadbandCensus.com, we’re going forward with the next step: last week we launched a beta version of an Internet speed test. It is called the NDT, or the Network Diagnostic Tool. The NDT is under active development by the Internet2 community, an advanced networking consortium led by the research and education community. The NDT has been used by other broadband mapping endeavors, including the eCorridors Program at Virginia Tech, which is working to collect data of residential and small business broadband trends throughout the state of Virginia.

Additionally, the Pew Internet & American Life Project has contracted with BroadbandCensus.com to gather anonymized information about users’ broadband experiences on the web site, and to incorporate those findings into Pew’s 2008 annual broadband report. BroadbandCensus.com is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License. That means that the content on the site is available for all to view, copy, redistribute and reuse for free, providing that attribution is provided to BroadbandCensus.com, and that such use is done for non-commercial purposes.

But the Broadband Census will only succeed if you and I go online and Take the Broadband Census! And don’t be shy in letting me know what you think! You can e-mail me at: drew at broadbandcensus.com.

We’ve pulled together a group batch of IPDI Fellows for Winter/Spring 2008. Over the next six months, their research will look at practical applications of technology in the political space.

They will all blog on this site, and their research will be profiled at future IPDI events. You can even see most of them at our 2008 Politics Online Conference next week.

Meet the first batch of our 2008 Fellows:

• Charles Ellison
• Mindy Finn
• Judith Freeman
• Alan Roseblatt
• Lisa-Marie Von Raepke

Charles Ellison

Mr. Ellison is a widely-known and reputable public policy analyst, media and government relations expert with over a decade of experience. Based in Washington, D.C., Mr. Ellison serves as a Senior Advisor to the Center for African American Policy at the University of Denver (CAAP-DU). He is also a CAAP Senior Fellow in Public Policy and Chief Editor of the center’s popular flagship website Blackpolicy.org, providing key government relations support on major policy issues important to the Center. He is Chief Editor and Contributor to the ASCENT Journal of Public Policy at AscentPress.org and served as managing editor for the 2005 release on modern political development titled “Standing in the Gap - Leadership in the 21st Century” by ASCENT Press.

Mr. Ellison is a critically-acclaimed author, co-host of the weekly Blackpolicy.org LIVE on XM Channel 130 (POTUS ‘08) and a frequent analyst for XM Radio. He is considered a leading expert on the use of technology in modern politics; e-governance; African American political development; the intersection of media, pop-culture and politics; modern American political and public policy trends; the U.S. Congress; state, local and federal political campaign trends. His highly anticipated political thriller, TANTRUM, is scheduled for release in February 2008.

A former local news radio correspondent and 2000 recipient of the Washington, D.C. “Top 40 Under 40” Award, Mr. Ellison is a former Congressional staffer, award-winning Internet content executive and former public relations director for Mt. Nebo Records, catapulting it from small, independent status to international rotation and recognition. He is a former associate producer for C-SPAN Networks and former marketing and public relations director for Votenet Solutions, Inc. As a commentator and lecturer, he has been featured in numerous television, radio and publishing venues, including: XM Radio, BlackAmericaWeb.com, The Source, Salon.com, BET, ABC News, The Los Angeles Times, The Boston Globe, Washington Business Journal, Roll Call, National Journal, George Magazine, Pacifica Radio and National Public Radio, among others.

Mindy Finn

Mindy Finn is well known in grassroots politics for her work in leveraging technology to promote democracy at the legislative, campaign and political committee level. Most recently, she served as the Director of “e”Strategy for the Mitt Romney for President campaign.

Finn was selected by Campaigns & Elections as a Rising Star in American politics in 2007 and was recently profiled in a cover story for the Washington Post as part of its Political Operatives series. She has appeared on Hardball, PBS’ the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, NPR, BBC Radio, among others speaking about the use of the role of new media and technology in the political process.

In her role on the Romney campaign, she directed the effort to maximize technology and the web to best communicate the candidate’s message, raise money and mobilize a strong base of support. Tactics included web video, social networking, blog outreach, user-generated content gathering, email list building and online advertising. Through her team’s efforts, the campaign was recognized for such innovative efforts as Sign Up America!, MittTV, mini-Mitt, the Create Your Own Ad contest, and the Five Brothers’ Blog.

In 2006, Finn served as Director of New Media & Technology for U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, where her job also included guiding the campaign’s use of microtargeting to contact and turn out key voters.

Her team helped Senator Santorum recruit over 50,000 active volunteers, provide outreach vehicles to more than 20 affinity groups and raise more than $1.2 million over the Internet, more than any other candidate in cycle. Finn was recognized by the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review for being the Republican’s best cyber campaigner in the nation and recognized by PoliticsPA for being one of Pennsylvania’s most accomplished political operatives 26 and under.

Prior to serving Santorum, Finn served as Deputy Director of the Republican National Committee’s eCampaign and Deputy Webmaster for Bush-Cheney ’04. Both entities won the Golden Dots for their superior websites.

Finn resides in Washington, D.C. and Boston, MA and originally hails from Houston, Texas. She has a B.S. in Journalism from Boston University and is pursuing an M.S. in Political Management from George Washington University.

Judith Freeman

Judith Freeman is the co-founder and CEO of the New Organizing Institute. Previously, she was the senior political strategist at the AFL-CIO. During the 2004 presidential election, she worked on the Kerry campaign’s internet operations. She advises political and non-profit campaigns on organizing and campaign strategy and technology infrastructure. She worked for 5 years as a Network Engineer and Systems Programmer for the Network Security Center at the University of Chicago.

Alan Rosenblatt

Alan Rosenblatt, Ph.D. is the Associate Director for Online Advocacy at CAPAF. He is a frequent speaker and author on digital media, advocacy, and politics, including social networking, blogging, grassroots, and mobile advocacy strategies. He is the founder of the Internet Advocacy Center; an adjunct professor at Georgetown and American Universities, where he teaches Media and Politics in the Digital Age, Internet Politics, and Internet Advocacy Communications; and a blogger at TechPresident.com and DrDigiPol.com. Alan is also a founding team member of Media Bureau Networks (MBN), a pioneer in streaming media services; a contributing editor to Politics Online; and serves on the editorial boards of several scholarly journals dedicated to the study of the internet, politics, and government. He taught Political Science at George Mason University for nine years. Alan Rosenblatt has a Ph.D. in Political Science from American University, an M.A. in Political Science from Boston College, and a B.A. in Political Science and Philosophy from Tufts University. He lives in Arlington, Virginia.

Lisa-Marie Von Raepke

Lisa-Marie is a Fulbright Scholar from Germany and is currently pursuing her Master’s of Political Management at GSPM, specializing in campaign management. She graduated in August 2007 from the University of Applied Sciences Bremen, Germany, with a Bachelor’s degree in Political Management. As part of her program, she studied a semester abroad at Malmö Högskola, Sweden, as an ERASMUS scholar (sponsored by the European Union) in early 2005, and interned in 2005/06 with the Public Relations Department of the Malaysian-German Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Lisa-Marie was an active participant for the Young Social Democrats of the University of Applied Sciences as well as a member of the Student Council of her department during her undergraduate studies. Furthermore, she interned with the Public Relations Department of the Social Democratic Party of Hamburg, Germany, in 2003, and attended the 2nd International Summer Academy on Political Consulting a nd Strategic Campaign Communication in Mannheim, Germany, in 2006.

Lisa-Marie wrote her Bachelor’s thesis on the Americanization of German campaigns with a special focal point on how American grassroots tactics modernize German electioneering. Her work as a fellow at the Institute for Politics, Democracy & the Internet will continue her research on German electioneering, particularly online campaigning in the upcoming state as well as federal elections.

Just recently, Professor Adam Green’s Politics and the Internet class in the GW School of Media and Public Affairs hosted Justine Lam, the online director for Ron Paul 2008. Lam, who will be speaking on Alex Hunsucker’s panel on building grassrooots momentum at the upcoming Politics Online Conference, appeared with Jonathan Bydlak, the finance director for Paul’s campaign. In response to a student’s question about which candidate has most effectively leveraged new media in this election cycle, Bydlak and Lam opined on Obama’s use of the Internet.

The video has drawn widespread attention in the blogosphere so far, most notably on DailyKos, where some readers have taken to chastising Lam and Bydlak for implying that Barack Obama’s campaign was too “top-down” in its use of the Internet.

Many have pointed out that while this may seem like a legitimate criticism, Obama’s campaign has ultimately been more effective in the long run with its online strategy. It seems fair. When I spent my winter break in New Hampshire volunteering for the Clinton campaign, I remember thinking before the day of the primary that Ron Paul was a force not to be underestimated. Of course, January 8th came and Ron Paul failed to make the impact that I had anticipated.

Despite all of the hype, Paul’s online army of sorts did not translate into any significant amount of votes for the libertarian 10-term congressman from Texas. But in the aftermath of the failure of support to materialize, the online component of the campaign (arguably the campaign itself) seems to have fizzled even further, with the Los Angeles Times blog reporting that Paul’s online supporters:

have been less evident, effusive and at times abusive in the last couple of weeks.

Lam and Bydlak’s point that the Obama camp’s use of the Internet is “ironic” in that it centralizes operations that should remain decentralized (i.e., donation, volunteer coordination, and event information functions) via the Internet is bound to provoke a spirited discussion because the citizen-based model evidently did not produce the results that many had predicted.

One of the most thought-provoking soundbytes came when Ron Paul said:

I could not stop this movement if I tried.

That, to me, raises the question of “What is the nature of the movement that he could not stop?” A well-organized campaign with an effective online strategy? Or a grassroots movement that, while admirable in its intensity and passion, has failed to deliver votes?

Perhaps there is a way to integrate a strategy that combines the decentralized elements of Paul’s operation but still sufficiently organizes supporters. To me, it is certainly not altogether inconceivable. But as Julie made the point a little while ago, it is important to consider that we are still navigating the waters of the new media and we have not yet necessarily found the perfect solution with regard to incorporating the Internet in a presidential campaign. Perhaps there is no “one-size-fits-all” solution. Ultimately, though, this is yet to be known.

Ron Paul can fight on, although it is becoming increasingly difficult to claim that his cadre of impassioned online supporters will cause a noticeable difference in the amount of delegates he attains throughout the primary season.

For now, I have learned to not become overly consumed by a campaign that appears highly energized online but is lacking in traditional GOTV and mobilization strategies. In any case, Hunsucker’s panel (on which Lam is sitting) will examine why there is an apparent disconnect between the online community and offline results and what campaigns can do to manage this gap.

For those of you attending (or thinking of attending) the upcoming Politics Online Conference, consider attending two panels I have assembled: Social Networking/Media Strategy of the Presidential Campaigns and Open Source Advocacy. While it may be too soon to say that this aspect of online campaigns is the “be all, end all” of online strategy, there have been some great innovations in this space this campaign cycle.

Social Networking/Media Strategy of the Presidential Campaigns

The panel includes Justine Lam, eCampaign Director for Ron Paul; Amy Rubin, former Deputy Director of New Media for John Edwards; Katie Harbath, Deputy eCampaign Director for Rudy Giuliani; and Michael Turk, former eCampaign Director for Bush-Cheney ‘04 and my fellow blogger at techPresident.com.

The panel will explore two contrasting views of using the social web for campaigns: it has not been useful (for some) and it has been essential (for others). I suppose where you sit is where you stand.

In any event, come join us at 3:30p on March 4 and join the debate.

Open Source Advocacy

On March 5 at 3:00p, I am chairing a second panel on Open Source Advocacy. This panel will explore how open source software, software that is free to use, though not necessarily free to implement, can help advocacy organizations. The panel includes Michelle Murain, who blogs on Non-profit technology at the ZenofNPTech.org; Ryan Ozimek, President of PICnet and a core Joomla developer; Michael Haggerty, President of Trellon and a core Drupal developer; and Jo Lee founder of CitizenSpeak, an open source advocacy campaign tool that integrates with CiviCRM.

Both panels should be very interesting and I encourage all to attend.

This just in from the Campaign Finance Institute: the presidential candidates in 2007 raised more than double ($552 million) what they raised four years ago in 2003 ($273 million).

The Democrats raised $292 million for the primaries, and the Republicans raised $260 million.

According to CFI, small contributions (under $200) increased by four percentage points, from 22% of all individual contributions in 2003 to 26% in 2007. Here’s the breakdown of small donors by candidate:

• Ron Paul raised 61% of his individual contributions from small donors.
• Fred Thompson raised 43% of his individual contributions from small donors.   
• John Edwards raised 36% of his individual contributions from small donors.
• Barack Obama raised 32% of his individual contributions from small donors.
• Mike Huckabee raised 35% of his individual contributions from small donors.  
• John McCain raised 25% of his individual contributions from small donors.  
• Hillary Clinton raised 14% of her individual contributions from small donors.
• Mitt Romney raised 12% of his individual contributions from small donors.
• Rudy Giuliani 8% of his individual contributions from small donors.

More information is available at http://www.cfinst.org/pr/prRelease.aspx?ReleaseID=179.

Speaking of fundraising, be sure to check out the panel on Techno-Powered Fundraising that Patrick Ruffini is chairing at the 2008 Politics Online Conference. Not yet registered? You can sign up at  https://www.online-donation.com/ipdi-polc/.

For the first time, all of the 2008 Golden Dot Awards will be completely determined by a public vote. Today, the voting form is up on the website of our March ‘08 Politics Online Conference and will be open until 5pm on Tuesday, February 19.

I want to quickly highlight the nominees for Technology Impact Moment of the Year, the award that is given to the most influential event of the last 12 months. These four events should be judged on how they will effect the future of the intersection of the politics and technology worlds.

• $4.3 Million Dollar Money Bomb (Ron Paul): This was the first incredibly successful “money-bomb”, or one day online fund-raising effort. While in 2004, we saw online fund-raising take off, the September 2007 money bomb was the moment online fund-raising entered the mainstream of campaigning.
• Interactive Voice Response Technology (International Republican Institute): The IRI used Interactive Voice Response Technology (IVR) to track in real-time the elections in Nigeria much more quickly in years past. The process led creedence to Nigeria’s democratic process and utilized existing technology creatively for political interests.
  
• Faith in America Speech (Mitt Romney): Using online viral strategies and other tactics, the Romney campaign was able to secure a 7,500 person live-online audience for Mitt Romney’s December speech about faith. This was the premier example of online video deployment and framing of a message on the campaigns terms instead of the media’s.
• Hillary 1984 Video (Phil de Vellis): This parody of a 1984 Apple Superbowl Commercial was the first viral political video that didn’t involve a political gaffe (see: George Allen). The ad, which did not come from a member of the Obama campaign, spread quickly across the Internet with millions of viewers and also earning coverage on the traditional mainstream media.

Vote online today for this award and more to make this the most democratized Golden Dots in IPDI’s history.

If you have any questions about voting or about the Golden Dots as a whole please email me.