The DA, social media and the masses

I need to say this out loud and as bluntly as I can. It's cool that the DA are trying to get social with social media and a newly launched website but are we "social media experts" all so far up our own arses that we can't see that in the big picture of the 2009 elections the DA's social media campaign is relatively insignificant.What the DA is trying to do is actually COMPETE IN THE 2009 ELECTIONS. I am extremely curious to figure out how the DA's social media campaign fits in to the bigger picture of their general election campaign.I'm not convinced that social media is going to make much of a difference in the numbers that the DA is looking for as the official opposition for the 2009 elections. I think that it's essential that they are in the space of social networks, mobile activity and engaging with an online community. But let us get real here for a second, when we say "engaging with an online community", who do you think we are talking about? Is it 500 000 South Africans with broadband access? I don't think so. My 20 or so friends who aren't particularly active online have never seen or engaged with DA online. So what's the point? When we talk about engaging with social media we are probably, effectively talking about 20 000 or so people at an absolute push. I stand to be corrected here, these numbers are thumbsucked so please correct me if you know the figures.Why should we be criticising the DA, analysing their every move and be excruciatingly anal about the things they do and the way they do it online? It's actually ridiculous.I asked Helen Zille a question online a few days back on twitter. I was wondering what her stance is on Cope integrating politics and religion. I didn't receive a reply. But let's be honest Helen Zille is competing in one of the most important elections since our democracy came in to existence, what the hell difference does it make if she answers my question? I want her to do the best job she can do in POLITICS not in social media to be perfectly frank.And don't try and pull the Obama card here. We are not the USA, we cannot claim to be and we should try to be. This would lead us in to all sorts of confusion and trouble. We are, majority of the SA population, without Internet and in need of some very distinct things, one of which is not social media let me tell you. The important things right now, in the build-up to election day 2009 (22 April) is to keep the focus of this election on the people, the rights, the voting, elections, masses and not on social media unfortunately.Many people have covered, blogged and written about the DA and what they are doing online. It's quite interesting to me that there isn't much hype, noise or talk around the other political parties. Yet the DA is getting it in the neck. It's like we, the online community, are berating one of the few political parties who bothered to actually make an effort. Why are we not giving the other parties hell as openly as the DA? Why does it matter? Surely our countries democracy is more important than proper use of Facebook, social tools and multimedia?I am interested to know how much money has been put in to the DA's social media campaign and what sort of return of investment they have and will receive? I wonder if in our country that money could not be better used somewhere else? Marketing the DA differently to a wider audience? Because let me tell you, if we all praise and hail the DA as the online guru's in politics but they get trumped in the election then I will feel betrayed by social media and so will they.Walter wrote that the DA's response has him puzzled well my response is simple, in South African politics I would be more concerned if the DA was spending more time answering the social media folk than concentrating on their political campaign. We, as social media people, need to get over ourselves and look at all of this in context.I want democracy, I want a viable opposition and I want leaders who can engage without being sidetracked from what is important. I also want politics and religion to be separate but that's another story that shall be told at another time.

Online politics - Zoopy and Helen Zille

I have quite enjoyed watching Zoopy's extensive coverage of Helen Zille over the past few months. But today for the first time I found myself questioning their coverage.Why is it that Zoopy covers Zille so extensively? Why is the coverage not more representative. I am sure that Jason is going to come on here and tell me that they have covered Patricia de Lille too, but that really doesn't count as extensive.Just as the SABC is pressed for equal representation I think that an organisation such as Zoopy should be too. If nothing else, they need to be weary of aligning themselves subconciously with a party. It appears to me that this might already have happened...This comes directly from the Zoopy "about us" section:

Who’s behind it all?At Zoopy HQ it’s just the three of us, for now: Jason, Gerry and Pat. And a few carefully selected contributors.

Hmmm... carefully selected, sounds intersting, lets find out more.I emailed Jason from Zoopy to get some comment on the issue and see if this is a definite trend that is to continue or an incidental happening. This is what he had to say:

Thanks for giving Zoopy some blog space – and on such a relevant topic too. It needs to be said that we’ve personally spoken with Ebrahim Rasool, Jacob Zuma, Trevor Manuel and indirectly with Patricia de Lille. None of them have responded in any way. Helen grasped the technology available from the first meeting we had with her and her team. They have a handheld video camera with them and have chosen to upload a range of political and non-political issues, ranging from aerial shots of a dam through to her new electric car and more. She responds in person to users who send mail via Zoopy and those who leave comments on her Zoopy profile.There are also occasions when we’re out at events that she happens to be shaking hands at, or attending, and in those cases we upload any relevant footage ourselves. So really this is not a case of us showing favouritism toward any party or individual. It’s a case of the individual getting involved themselves, and us facilitating it as much as possible. We’d love to host social media relating to every South African on Zoopy (politicians, lawyers and bloggers included! hehe) and always promote the possibilities when meeting with interesting people.That said, there are more high profile people going Zoopy very soon. Because of the technology, functionality and community available to them. Not because of who they are or whether or not we believe in their cause.

I think that is fair and valid justification of their stance. I wait with anticipation for the "high profile" people to get involved with Zoopy. Let's see if this becomes a case of YouTube and CNN joining forces for the next American election.