Voter Use Of Internet During 2010 Campaign
Pew Internet Research has released new survey data on Internet usage by American onliners during the 2010 election campaigns. Should be of special interest to our advocacy group communicators and fundraisers.
Here are some findings. Among online adults:
- 16% sent email related to the campaign or the elections to friends, family members or others;
- 12% revealed online which candidates they voted for in the November elections;
- 7% used the internet to organize or get information about in-person meetings to discuss political issues in the campaign;
- 22% used Twitter or a social networking site for political purposes;
- 6% took part in an online discussion, listserv or other online group forum such as a blog, related to political issues or the campaign;
- 5% used the internet to participate in volunteer activities related to the campaign—such getting lists of voters to call or getting people to the polls;
- One-third (35%) went online to look for information about candidates’ voting records or positions on issues;
- 8% of online adults signed up online to have updates about the campaign or the election delivered to them directly;
- 31% viewed campaign-related videos online (jumped from 19% in 2006 Congressional elections);
- fully 20% went online to follow an interesting election campaign in another part of the country.
And for you fundraisers, 5% of Republican voters and 6% of Democratic voters donated money online in 2010.
The study includes plenty of demographic and political affiliation breakdowns of the stats. Naturally, on a trend line basis, virtually all of these numbers are up over the 2008 election, even though that election was a — presumably — higher interest Presidential year.
Tom
One response to “Voter Use Of Internet During 2010 Campaign”
Behavioral Science Q & A
Integrating an individual giving appeal with other communications from a charity can have both positive and negative effects, and the outcome largely depends on how it’s executed. Advantages of Integration Brand Consistency: Maintaining a consistent appearance and messaging across all communications can reinforce the org’s brand identity and strengthen brand recognition and trust among your […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not aware of any in-market tests specifically comparing recurring vs. gift frequency language. I suspect the answer might not be the same with all gift frequencies, nor with all people. It sounds like a great opportunity for you to test and find out what works for your audience. Based on the literature, here’s a couple […]
Read Full Answer
Based on what we know from existing data, those renewal notices can actually be pretty effective in getting people to donate. They tap into our psychology – creating a sense of urgency, reminding us of past support, and using personalization to make the message hit home. They’re playing on our natural tendencies to feel obligated […]
Read Full Answer
Interesting question. I had a quick look at the testing done on this topic. On the positive side, in all cases, over half of donors decide to cover the fee. In some cases, it goes as high as 65%. Not a negligible percentage at all. Here’s another test from iRaiser showing consistent results (see point […]
Read Full Answer
There’s just one thing to consider when designing a supporter journey: the supporter. More specifically, you need to take into account: Who the supporter is i.e. their identity, which is the reason they support this cause, and their personality, which describes the way they “see” and process the world. These will determine the kind of […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not an expert in this but a quick search surfaced this article on the effect of tax reforms on 2019’s charitable giving. The researchers didn’t find a reduction. Actually, they observed an “increase in charitable contributions in 2019, even with the lower tax rates and the dramatically smaller number of taxpayers who itemize their […]
Read Full Answer
Did Pew take into account exactly what content was forwarded? 2010 was banner year for politics of the absurd, scary and ridiculous – so much worth forwarding to friends! Was our internet usage because we cared deeply about politics or because we wanted to mock or alarm? In other words, were the “campaign-related videos” Pew cites from the Daily Show (where there was much political material worth forwarding)? I followed the “interesting election campaigns” in both Delaware and Nevada, though I live in New Jersey. Why?