Slashdot Mirror
Al Gore's Webmaster Answers Your Questions
1)
Internet Policy
by Uruk (#6)
Something that I've seen missing from all of the candidate's Web sites is their policy on the Internet. How can you campaign on the Internet and not discuss the issues pertaining to the very media you're putting your ideas out on?
Ben:
This is a great question and one I obviously cannot speak for other candidates on. As for Al Gore's policies on Internet and Tech issues, there is quite a bit of content on our site regarding those issues.
Making all our content easy to find is a challenge for sure. We recently added a search feature that returns 139 pages when queried for the word "Internet", and 164 pages when queried for the words "Internet Policy". Without going in to painstaking detail, some of the topics covered in relation to Internet policy at algore2000.com, are a comprehensive Tech policy paper, and answers to four questions posted by visitors to the Town Hall portion of the Web site.
Incidentally, video of Gore's speech from Baltimore on Monday, which addressed the issue of the "Digital Divide" is posted on the site, as well as a text version.
You can search the Gore 2000 Web site from the main index page, as well as all 50 state pages, Town Hall, The Agenda, and The Briefing Room.
2)
Why Linux?
by VP (#8)
According to netcraft, algore2000 is running Linux and Apache. What were the reasons for choosing that platform, and were they mainly technical, or political? Was this your initial choice, or did you change the platform at some point?
Ben:
Originally, algore2000.com ran on an NT box using the IIS Web server. The move to Linux came about for a number of reasons, and coincided with the campaign's move from K Street in Washington, DC to a new location on Charlotte Avenue in Nashville.
Our primary reasons for moving to Linux:
i) Performance ii) Reliability iii) Security iv) Cost-effectiveness
The move to Nashville and the subsequent reinvigoration of the campaign is in many ways analogous to our site's move to the Linux platform and what it has allowed us to do on the Internet.
Throughout most of last year, the campaign was overspending on many things and Web hosting was one of them. When Al Gore announced that he was moving us all to Nashville, we took a look at all our expenses to see where we could cut costs. When we determined that changing hosts would save us money, it allowed me an opportunity to fully explore the possibility of moving the site to a Linux environment.
Our long-term plans called for a lot of dynamic page generation and up until that point we had been using asps for our interactive forms. We also assumed that our site would start getting a lot more traffic as we moved into the primary season, so server performance was definitely an issue as well. Expanding the functionality of the site with asps and would have been expensive.
It became clear to me at that point that Linux was our best option, and given the chance to switch over it was an easy decision to make.
Since we moved to Nashville, this campaign has really turned around and our web site has improved a great deal. By using a tool called asp2php, we were able to convert our existing asps to a format compatible with Linux, and add a ton of functionality such a publishing system, state by state pages, and other stuff that you can see by visiting our site. Michael Kohn, (naken@i1.net) the author of asp2php, deserves much of the credit for making this happen. Our site wouldn't be what it is now without his help. There are other people who deserve credit for this as well Jeff Barger (maczilla-at-look-dot-net), who helps me administer our listservs, provided great advice and ideas.
The real heavy lifting was done by Eric Loeb, (frontaloeb@yahoo.com) who is one of the real pioneers of the field of politics and the Internet having worked on Clinton-Gore '92's e-mail distribution system, and the first - ever campaign Web site for Ted Kennedy's 1994 re-election. Eric is the chief software engineer at Gore 2000. During the month of January, he worked around the clock for three weeks to build algore2000.com's customized publishing system with php and mysql.
3) Marketing
by TheTomcat (#10)
What marketing and advertising methods have you found most successful for promoting the Web site? We all know that banners are dying, and the creators have to become more creative to get people to even NOTICE the banners. Is old media (television, print -- newspapers, magazines, billboards etc., radio.) the backend to the Web site's marketing campaign, or have you found innovative ways to make online promotion work?
Ben:
Probably the coolest promotion we have done so far has been our use of RealFlash. Back when Al Gore announced his candidacy last June, we bought 500,000 "pre-roll" impressions on the Real Broadcast Network to promote the live Web cast of the announcement speech. The click-through rate was very good, far better than we expected. If you aren't familiar with RealFlash, it is basically a flash presentation that is viewed in a RealPlayer, and is served to folks who are using the "presets" in the RealPlayer. Eileen Quigley and Sam Tucker at RealImpact helped us put that together, and it was the first-ever paid Internet advertising by a presidential campaign.
Other than paid promotion, we have seen traffic on our site affected by news events. Obviously the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire Primary generated a lot of traffic to our site, which has tripled since the first of the year. We are now averaging slightly less than 20,000 user sessions per day.
Whenever Al Gore is out on the campaign trail he mentions the Web site, the news media picks it up, and the site gets hit. One day last fall when Gore was on the "This Week With Sam & Cokie" he mentioned the site address - we signed up 1000 volunteers in less than two hours.
4) Bad Press
by Signal 11 (#11)
In an increasingly wired society rumors and myths propagate at incredible speeds - how do you diffuse rumors and myths. For example, if I start a rumor that Mr. Gore said he "fathered Linus Torvalds" - how do you diffuse that? Rumors and myths often come about as a minor distortion of the truth which then goes through the "telephone game". How do you keep the public informed about what a candidate /really/ thinks, as opposed to what other people think the candidate thinks?
Ben:
This type of thing is dealt with on case by case basis. Most of the time these things don't even warrant a response. If you respond it only lends credibility to the charge.
5) External links?
by Pseudonymus Bosch (#20)
Linking to another sites is an essential feature of the Web.
Would you recommend linking to another sites from your boss' site? If yes, what kind of sites (supporters, other candidates, ~independent~ media, Slashdot :), supported campaigns)?
Would you object to being linked from another sites, even from opponents?
Ben:
Our links are mostly to voter registration information sites, such as Motor Voter registration forms and the like. As a general rule linking to other sites from a campaign page should be done selectively, because it can potentially detract from the purpose of having a campaign Web site in the first place.
Of course, we have links to download tools like the Adobe Acrobat Reader, RealPlayer, and QuickTime as well.
To the extent which an external link helps Gore supporters in having a better experience on our site we will add them.
This is an evolving area of campaign finance law, and as I understand it, other sites can link into ours, but FEC regulations are very clear in prohibiting links from corporate sites.
6) What's the true measure of success?
by A Big Gnu Thrush (#29)
This Wired article talks about the flood of donations received through McCain's Web site after a win in NH. Increasingly, the most effective form of political activism appears to be cash. While a strong Web presence could promote a dialogue of issues, this does not seem to be taking place.
If a Web site brought in little or no money, could a candidate still view it as successful, or is income the final measure of success?
Ben:
Excellent question. Every campaign has different sets of priorities. Obviously, raising money is a challenge for every campaign and we are no different in that respect. For Gore 2000, using the Internet to expand participation in the political process is more of a priority than using the Internet to raise money. Although we have been very successful in that regard, having raised over 1.1 million online since the site launched last April.
In my humble opinion, the degree to which the Internet is integrated into every aspect of a campaign is the degree to which that campaign will succeed on the Internet. At Gore 2000, it is ubiquitous - almost everything we do has an Internet component - including fundraising. This article, which ran on the New York Times Web site last Saturday, sheds some light onto how the various campaigns are raising money on the Internet.
Over 100,000 people have joined our online community, by volunteering, signing up for Gore Mail, or joining our voter outreach programs. This has allowed many people to get to know Al Gore, ask him questions, and become connected to the process. By that measure, our site and our Internet campaign have been a tremendous success thus far.
7) Interactivity in sites?
by Saige (#47)
The current political candidate sites seem to be little more than political rhetoric and volunteer information. Are there any plans to treat the Web site differently than a broadcast medium? I mean, including interactivity, such as message areas for open discussions, polling booths to get a feel for what people are really interested in. And also perhaps for offering large amounts of data about a candidate's past actions in government, such as voting records (and perhaps reasons for the vote).
Ben:
Our site offers users two-way communication and a vast amount of information on all things Gore. Of course there is a lot more we can do, and as the campaign progresses you will see the addition of more features that facilitate greater interactivity. We are also getting a steady flow of great ideas and insight from those that know the Internet best.
8)How long will the site be up?
by Pseudonymus Bosch
Disk space is cheap.
Will somebody maintain the site up after the election, even as a frozen site? It will be valuable for historians (and electors who would check the promises).
Ben:
One of my colleagues here has the greatest (and largest) collection of political memorabilia I have ever seen. In fact, it is so large that he recently added a 2000 sq. foot addition to his house to accommodate it. Our plan is to archive the site at this facility, which is not far from Nashville and is complete with a DSL connection. If anyone has any ideas about this, please feel free to e-mail me (ben@min.net) about them.
9) How does the Web site affect the candidate?
by Silas (#62)
Many of the questions posted so far ask you to discuss how the Web site and its upkeep influence the voters and the campaign. I'd like to you to discuss how having a Web site affects the candidate, his views, his methods, his public personality.
That's my main question, here are some points to ponder:
It seems that having a Web site as large and significant to the campaign as Gore's or most of the others would tend to force them to be more responsible, to be held more accountable for each and every utterance. In a world where disinformation and twisting of facts is commonplace in the popular media, how does a Web site like yours influence the candidate's` ability to take advantage of this?
Are Gore or any of the others more or less likely to refer back to their campaign managers and Web site before making statements about policy and moral issues? Or is it just as easy to perform an "about face" because the Web site can be updated just as quickly? Can campaigners now say "please see the FOO section of my Web site" instead of answering questions about specific issues?
Ben:
Al Gore visits algore2000.com every day, and I get regular feedback from him - and ideas for what we can do with the site. He frequently mentions the url at campaign appearances, and is so familiar with the content that he can direct people to its various sections when asked about specific issues. His detailed knowledge of policy and issues allows him to interact with voters AND refer them to the Web site at any time.
10)
Lowest common denominator
by BOredAtWork (#195)
I'm a 20 year old male; this will be the first time I can vote in a presidential election. I am one of your target demographics. I'm a student; so my time to research the candidates is limited. One of my major sources of information is the Web - cnn.com and the various candidate sites in particular. At this point, my vote is up for grabs.
Algore2000 is a good site. I'm sure there was countless hours of thought put into each and every detail, especially the "agenda" page. That page in particular is a work of persuasive art, right down to the picture of Al with a pair of cops (tough on crime), and the (over)use of red, white and blue. The list of catch phrases is an especially nice touch; who could possibly NOT support "Saving Our Schools," "Fighting for America's Seniors" and "Improving Health Care," right?
My question for you, sir, has to be this: Why does algore2000.com seem to think I'm a fool? Am I supposed to be genuinely impressed by the load of press releases and speeches? I hate to break the news to you, but I want to see real content, NOT glazed over executive summaries. Take for instance something VERY relevant to me as a college student - the link from the front page about Al's Plan to Make College More Affordable. It leads here. The extent of the "details" stated is this:
"Gore announced new details of his National Tuition Savings Program, which is designed to help families save for college. The plan allows families to invest funds in an account where their money will be protected from inflation and can be withdrawn to pay for higher education expenses tax-free. The plan will also guarantee the cost of college tuition at any participating college or university in the country."
The rest of the press release is all fluff. No mention of whether this is limited to public or private universities, 2 or 4 year degrees, graduate school, part or full time study, etc. And this is the *basic* stuff. I'm also interested in why this would be a better option than, say, investing in short-term CD's.
That's just ONE example from the many I could have chosen. Nearly all the "content" of algore2000.com is fluff. And shots at Bill Bradley. The simple fact is this does not impress me. Actually, since this site represents Al Gore, I'm inclined to believe Al relatively clueless - if he wasn't, surely he'd tell us HOW he plans to fund his proposed programs, tax cuts, etc. Any politician can CLAIM to support any number of things. Algore2000 picks popular issues, and loads the wording of them such that ANYONE would be nearly forced to agree. Come on, who on earth DOESN'T support "A better educational system?"
What I could like to see from algore2000.com, as well as EVERY OTHER CANDIDATE is DETAILS. I want to know HOW you plan to provide a tax cut - will this come at the expense of the defense budget? Money always comes from somewhere; I want to know what has to be CUT to lower taxes. And don't tell me "unnecessary pork" or some trite answer. I want to see numbers.
And I want a big ass chart, with a column for every candidate, and a row for every issue. "Do you support abortion as it currently stands? y/n" "Do you support the abolition of legal abortion under all circumstances? y/n" "Do you support abortion under limited circumstances? If so, when?" Things like that. REAL questions. Some more: "Do you support the reverse engineering of software for porting and compatibility purposes?" "Do you support CDA in its current form?" And more of the like. I don't want to read "Al Gore supports technology and innovation" - I want to read HOW he supports them.
Simply put, algore2000.com seems to play to the lowest common denominator - the average american, who sadly enough has little interest in politics, and little technical knowledge. I think this is a mistake; this audience doesn't read political advocacy Web sites on a wide basis. You'd do better to use the Web site to provide details and elaborate on Al's statements and ideas rather than just rehash them.
One more side note: I followed Jesse Ventura's campaign slightly - I don't know his stance on most of the issues. I dont live in Minnesota, so I didn't take the time to research him. What I DO know is that I was very impressed when a reporter asked him if he supported some obscure bill I'd never heard of. Ventura replied something like "Well, to be honest, I'm not familiar with that at all. I'm not gonna lie to you; I don't know everything, or have all the answers you wanna hear. But I learn fast; I'll read up on it." When can we expect Al Gore to say something like THAT?
Ben:
Ø Algore2000 is a good site.
Well, that's a good start. I like this guy already.
Ø Why does algore2000.com seem to think I'm a fool?
Hmmmmm. Sounds like he changed his mind. Uh-oh.
>Nearly all the "content" of algore2000.com is fluff.
I disagree.
> Simply put, algore2000.com seems to play to the lowest common denominator - the average american, who sadly enough has little interest in politics, and little technical knowledge.
To answer this question in all candor, I would remind everyone that the average American is our target audience! However - I for one take exception to your assertion that "average Americans" have little interest in politics or technology. Working on this and other campaigns has shown me that average Americans are driving the demand for technology and therefore are driving the technology industry in this country. The large number of volunteers we have recruited through the site is also and clear indication that we are connecting with people interested in helping the campaign. algore2000.com is for all everyone - not just geeks like you and me. Our site has the most content, the most detailed content, more interactive features of ANY of the presidential campaign sites - AND it runs on Linux and PHP!
Hey - don't get me wrong - you and I know that we can always do better with our Web sites - so your point is well taken.
Thanks, and now I'm going back to my duties as Al Gore's Webmaster.
The last question, 'lowest common denominator', was one that I would have most liked to see answered. I was very annoyed that the response was utterly content free, like much of the algore site appears to be. I too want to see real answers and specific statements from politicians.
But the thing to remember is that elections are about popularity, and these guys are here to try to get the most votes - and nothing more. If a propaganda web site brings in more votes than a truthful one, the propaganda will win every time. These guys only care about getting elected, and you stand a better chance of being elected if you have more people on your side.
Specifically, people who are easily swayed by propaganda of this sort: the lowest common denominator.
However, I don't think we can find fault with the web master. A question like that should really be directed at the politicians themselves, the policy makers. They are the ones who decide what the content of the site is, and it is unfair to ask a sysadmin why his users refuse to put up anything more than fluff.
-dennis towne
Alter Aeon Multiclass MUD - http://www.alteraeon.com
It was a poor choice of phrasing, but the fact is that Senator Gore did sponsor the legislation that created NSFNET, which ultimately became what most of us think of as the Internet. At the time, DARPA was cracking down on non-military use of the ARPANET (ultimately creating the MILNET). Most University and Corporate sites (with the exception of those with large military contracts) were to be cut off or forced to pay enormous fees. NSFNET was funded by the National Science Foundation rather than the Pentagon, and although initially limited to research and education, opened the door to access by just about anybody. Commercial restrictions were gradually lifted, and the NSF played a smaller and smaller role (though it still paid for the Internet backbone until just a few years ago). And then things really started to grow like crazy...
As an engineer, what I mean when I say "create" ( == "invent" or "build") is a lot different from what a politician means when he/she says "create" ( == "pass a law" or "spend tax money"). And it was probably one of Gore's staffers and not Gore who actually "got it" on the Internet's potential (both back then and now); he's not shown himself to have any great technical savvy personally. But from his perspective as a politician, "Created the Internet" isn't that far from the truth.