• by Kate Kaye , June 21, 2004

Online ad dollars supporting political campaigns could double to around 2 or 3 percent of overall cross-media campaign expenditures, according to political consultants speaking at last week's AdWatch: Outlook 2004 conference in New York. The consultants speaking on The Political Advertising Landscape panel took turns prognosticating about online political ad spending during the 2004 campaign season.

Internet spending by political campaigns during the 2004 election cycle may hit $20-$30 million, forecasted Kim Alfano, President and CEO of Alfano- Leonardo Communications, Inc., who tempered her prediction with the suggestion that the bulk of campaign cash will be spent by 527 groups. Federal Election Commission rules regarding advertising by such issue advocacy groups, named after their tax code, remain murky.

"Hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars will be spent" across all media during the 2004 election cycle, "and no one will have any idea where it went," Alfano said.

When the discussion turned to 527 organizations, many of which were spawned as a result of campaign finance reform, some nostrils flared. Panelist Steve McMahon, Partner, Trippi, McMahon and Squire, inveighed against the groups and what he considers their proclivity towards negative campaigning.

Since accountability rules requiring candidates to identify themselves and approve broadcast ad messages do not currently apply to Internet advertising, some believe the Web could become a haven for dirty campaigning. An extension to the Net of the so-called "Stand by Your Ad" provision has been proposed, but Jonah Seiger, Founding Partner at Connections Media, remains skeptical, arguing that today's broadcast requirement fails to suppress negative campaign advertising. However, during a post-conference phone interview he admitted that the lack of regulation of political ads online "provides opportunities to be under-the-radar."

Regardless of regulatory squabbles, AdWatch panelists were upbeat about the emergence of the Web as a significant communication vehicle for campaigns. "The Internet has become a 'can't ignore medium' in politics," pronounced panel moderator Evan Tracey, COO TNS Media Intelligence/Campaign Media Analysis Group.

2003 was the first year that the Internet had a "meaningful impact" on political campaigning, said Seiger. Indeed, the supporter interest and fundraising success driven by the Dean for America campaign's Internet prowess this year and last demanded recognition by the panel. Rather than using the Internet as a blast-fax style medium to deliver information, commented McMahon, who worked on the Dean campaign, online viral marketing strategies and a real-time website donation monitor were employed to build community and grab media attention.

Political campaign success, whether online or offline, ultimately depends on the strength of the candidate, asserted Jim Courtovich, SVP National Media, observing that campaigns are essentially the same now that the Internet has become a viable medium. "It's just that the technology is better and easier to quantify," he added.

Strewn throughout the conversation was the notion that corporate marketing campaigns influence political campaigns, and vice versa. Just as the Dean campaign changed politics," suggested McMahon, "it has the capacity to change business."

Alfano agreed that political campaigning and issue advocacy strategies can -- and sometimes should be -- applied for corporate marketing efforts. Corporations are realizing that when legislation can affect their bottom lines, they must be as nimble as political advertisers in order to respond immediately to events of the day. In such cases, she stressed, the more cautious, less swift approach typically taken by advertising agencies won't suffice. Instead, political consulting methods should be used. "Once the Boston hospital doesn't work," she quipped metaphorically, corporate advertisers "come to the MASH unit."