<html>
<head>
<META name="description" content="Evaluation of the web sites of 'third' political parties in the United States of America">
<META name="keywords" content="evaluating web sites, evaluating political web sites, evaluate a web site, evaluate a political web site, web site evaluation, political web site evaluation, evaluating information, evaluting internet information, political marketing, political web sites, web site marketing, web site design, internet marketing, web site marketing, An evaluation of the web site marketing of USA Presidential candidates David Besag, Dave Besag">
<Title>An evaluation of the web site marketing of USA Presidential candidates</title>
</head>
<body>
<p><br><h5><A HREF="diss.html">Link : An evaluation of the web sites of 'third' political parties in the United States of America </A></h5>
<H1><center><br>An evaluation of the web site marketing of USA Presidential candidates</center></h1>
<br><br><h2><center>Dave Besag</center></h2>
<br><h2><center>June 2000</center></h2>
<br><br><br><br><h2><center>Abstract</center></h2>
<p><br><br>This article evaluates the web site marketing of four principal candidates for the Presidency of the USA. The four candidates examined are, Pat Buchanan, George W. Bush, Al Gore and Ralph Nader.
<p>It begins by explaining the reasons for the growth in the presidential candidates with a World Wide Web presence and the array of candidates.
<p>The article then explains the basis for the evaluation criteria which will be used and then separates the remaining criteria into two sections.
<p>Al Gore's site uses a poor quality display font, but his site contains a significant amount of information. George W. Bush's site uses images well, but contains a misguided youth section. Pat Buchanan site is organised quite well, but contains an annoying web browser window. Ralph Nader's site has an image map, but it contains too much text. Finally, it is mentioned that the web sites still lack enough marketing interactivity.
<h2><center><br>Politics, marketing and the World Wide Web</center></h2>
<p>The World Wide Web (WWW) is a very effective means for political parties and candidates to interact with potential voters and supporters. Marketing is an interactive process designed to produce benefits for both the consumer and the marketer. Therefore, political parties should ensure that their on-line presence and their marketing strategy complement each other. However, this is not always the case.
<p>An article explains that in 1998, twenty-five percent of the voters were on-line and that ten percent made their voting choices based on information collected primarily from the Internet(1). The politics1 web site lists at least seventy-five candidates for the Presidency of the United States who have their own web site(2). These range from the well known, for example George W. Bush and Al Gore, through the mainsteam third-party candidates and include fringe and non-serious candidates.
<br>The WWW supports presidential candidates because of the lack of cost compared to paid-for political advertising(3). This article examines the web sites of four of the main candidates for the Presidency. These are in alphabetical order, Pat Buchanan(4), George W. Bush(5), Al Gore(6) and Ralph Nader(7). No disrespect is intended to candidates such as Harry Browne of The Libertarian Party, Howard Phillips of The Constitution Party and Dave McReynolds of The Socialist Party. It would be difficult to include these candidates in an article of this size and cover the subject adequately.
<h2><center><br>Evaluating web sites</center></h2>
<p>There are many guidelines on the WWW explaining how to evaluate a web site. However, it is interesting that the most instructive advice is contained in a print journal article written in 1986(8). The advice contained in this article, combined with advice gained elsewhere results in twenty-four evaluation criteria(9-11). Ten of these evaluation criteria are ignored for the purposes of this article. These criteria are universality, worth, uniqueness, credibility, quality checks, how well known the author is, why the site has been published, whether it contains primary or secondary information, literary style, and whether there is a statement of the source of the information. The first nine criteria are ignored because all four sites satisfy them. Voters might disagree with the policies and views of some of the parties, but there is nothing to suggest that the information has not been correctly researched and that is not relevant. All four sites fail the final criterion, but due to the extent of the sites, it would be difficult for them to list the sources of all of the information.
<p>The remaining criteria are separated into two sections. These are information criteria and site criteria.
<h2><center><br>Information criteria</center></h2>
<p>The currency of the site is the first information criterion. Al Gore's site has no information explaining when it was last updated. However, the Briefing Room section shows that the site is very up-to-date. George W. Bush's site has the current date on its front page, and the news section is up-to-date. However, the On The Road section has not been updated since March 13. This section has regular information for earlier dates and it must be assumed that the lack of currency of this section is an oversight. The information supplied on the Pat Buchanan sites lacks dates but the information on the front page is current. Ralph Nader's site has a list of current press releases, but the section containing the columns that he has written is out-of-date by two-and-a-half months.
<p>The second criterion is whether is site satisfies the information needs of the visitor. Clearly, it will depend on the requirements of the relevant individual, but some generalisations can be made.
<p>The site for Al Gore contains a large amount of interesting information. Categories include, Gore's personal agenda; an issue briefing room; answered questions (named the Town Hall section); a Spanish version (named in Spanish); a section explaining how the electorate can become involved in his campaign; a section to elicit monetary contributions; a speeches section and an area for special interest groups.
<p>Bush has similar information to the site belonging to Al Gore. His site includes: a Spanish section (named in Spanish); an On The Road section (which gives his campaign schedule); news; speeches; his political views; volunteer information; separate sections for each State; a section to elicit contributions; a list of principal supporters and a youth section.
<p>Pat Buchanan's site contains some different information. His site also contains his political views, speeches, contribution information, volunteer information and local contact information. However, his site also contains information explaining why he should be allowed to be featured in the television debates and includes links to external polls.
<p>Ralph Nader's site contains information explaining which states currently include him in the ballot (and how to ensure the same situation will apply in the remaining states); his views on issues; contacts for each State; contribution information; volunteer information and a press room. The sites for the final two candidates reflect the slightly different priorities that they have compared to Gore and Bush.
<p>The third information criterion is the format of the web sites.
<p>There are a number of problems with the site of Al Gore. The main sections of the site are too compressed. The main page consists of two main columns with too much white space on either side. The font size within the agenda section and the section mentioning the family of Al Gore is too small. Too much information has been included within the space allocated in the site. The font type used for the text is very difficult to read and there is too much text which is not split up. There appears not to be a non-frames version of the site which could cause problems. There are also some strengths within the web site. The frames at the top of the main web page work very well. In addition, the 'how to get involved' section looks excellent and the map of the United States is very clear. Interestingly, the Spanish section is easier to read than the rest of the site. There is less in this section than in the English language version, but it is organised in a clearer format. Furthermore, the web links to State Democrat web sites give a professional appearance.
<p>The site of George W. Bush is clearer than the site belonging to Al Gore and it uses a more readable font type. However, this site also contains some of the weaknesses which affected Gore's site. This site is also designed in a manner which is too compressed. There is a lack of effective bulleted sections in a significant amount of the text sections. The font size on the issues page is too small, although the use of images is effective. The archive of the On The Road section is not well designed with the text box too small. In addition, the Spanish section is more difficult to read than the English language sections and there does not appear to be a non-frames version. The final problem with the site is its youth section. The intention of this section is not very clear. The designers of the site have produced a very curious result. This section appears to believe that all 'youths' are approximately fourteen years of age. It contains the phrase 'Just For Kids', and apparently uses the Comic Sans font. It includes an analogy between baseball and politics which is not very effective and contains short story about a cat which is totally irrelevant to anyone older then twelve. The section mentions that people must be eighteen to vote, but the picture within the section shows young people who are no older than mid-to-early teens. This section gives a 'mixed message' and fails to achieve any discernable objective. In contrast, the youth section of Al Gore's site appears professional and treats young people in an intelligent manner. It is a pity that Bush's site does not do the same.
<p>The site belonging to Pat Buchanan also contains a front page which is too cluttered. A blue strip takes up too much space on the right hand side. This strip should be decreased allowing the remaining sections to be widened. However, the site is quite well organised and uses a clear and large font style. Buchanan's site also does not include a non-frames version. Finally, an annoying web browser window continuously starts when you visit the main page.
<p>Ralph Nader's site is reasonably well designed. The site uses frames in a well-structured manner. The site also includes a site map. This will prove very valuable for people who do not have a web browser which can view frames. Nader's is the only site to include this option. The borders could be reduced in size and the remaining sections could be widened. The type and size of font appear to have been well chosen. However, the site contains too much text and not enough images. There has been too little attempt to break the text and make it easier to digest. Parts of the site read like an essay rather than an interactive web site.
<h2><center><br>Site criteria</center></h2>
<p>The first site criterion is whether the links are appropriate and working. Al Gore's site has external links to State Democrat parties and to merchandising sites. These are appropriate and working. Pat Buchanan's site has appropriate links but the link to 'Blue Collars Find a Voice' does not work. Ralph Nader's site has internal links which do not work (columns sections) and Bush's site does not appear to have any external links.
<p>The second, third and fourth criteria are whether the site has an index, whether it has a search facility and whether it has an archive. All four sites have a main index page (the main page of their document). Ralph Nader's site is the only one without a search facility. All four sites contain archives. Gore has archives of speeches, videos and information from the Briefing Room. Bush has an archive of speeches, news and the On The Road section. Buchanan has an extensive archive in his library section, while Nader has an archive containing press releases and his columns (although as stated previously, the column links do not work).
<p>The fifth criterion covers contact information. Bush's web site includes an address, telephone, fax and e-mail. Gore and Buchanan have an address, telephone and e-mail. Nader only has a contact form that can be sent to the web site, although there are links to State organisations.
<p>Criterion six is whether the site contains any typos or grammar and spelling mistakes. None of the sites appears to have any problems with this criterion, although Al Gore's site does include a fifty-seven word sentence. Criterion seven examines whether the sites are easily navigable. Again, no discernable problem can be found.
<p>Criterion eight examines the uses of maps, graphics and images. All the parties include graphics and images. The sites belonging to Gore and to Nader also include maps. Bush's site makes the most effective use of images while Nader's site makes too little use.
<p>Criteria nine and ten cover the cost of the site and the speed of access to the site. All four sites are free and the speed within the sites is very quick.
<p>Finally, criterion eleven examines the amount of web sites linking to the relevant home pages. The most effective manner to do this is to use www.altavista.com(12) and type in link: www.algore2000.com (or the other three sites) and press return. Bush receives 4005 links, Gore receives 2,838 links, Buchanan receives 151 links and Nader receives 51.
<h2><center><br>Conclusion</center></h2>
<p>An article written in 1996 explains that the presidential web sites for Bill Clinton and Bob Dole were only on-line TV commercials(13). The author contends that these sites lacked objectivity and balance compared to the sites run by Libertarian and Natural Law Party candidates. It is claimed that the web sites of 'third-party' candidates were more informative and balanced than those belonging to the two main parties. It was also claimed that the sites were not interactive.
<p>Has the situation changed? To be frank, the Stone article may have made an inaccurate assumption. It is not very likely that the main presidential web sites will be balanced. Third-party sites need to consider balance in order to generate debate and interest in their web sites. However, it is uncertain whether the public can expect balance within the sites in support of Al Gore and George W. Bush. The purpose of these web sites is to gain votes for their respective candidates. There are many others sites on the Internet which deal objectively with the Presidential Election. All the sites have their strengths and weaknesses. To conclude, the extent of the web sites for Al Gore and George W. Bush makes them slightly stronger than the site in support of Pat Buchanan. The site in support of Ralph Nader is weaker than the other three in terms of presentation. This site is slightly disappointing because he is the candidate who needs to make effective use of these types of 'free access' media. The unofficial www.nader2000.org(14) is a more effective site.
<p>Certainly, the current presidential sites contain much greater interactive measures. There is a definite increase in the marketing effectiveness of political web sites. The reinforcement of the support from current activists will be increased by the existence of the sites. However, it is difficult to assess whether the relationship between the voters and the candidates will have been increased. There is still too little interactivity.
<h2><center><br>References</center></h2>
<p>1) Edward J. Harpham. <b>Going On-Line: The 1998 Congressional Campaign.</b>
URL : http://pro.harvard.edu/abstracts/038/038001HarphamEdw.html
<p>2) <b>Politics1: Presidency 2000 - The Presidential Candidates</b> :
URL : http://www.politics1.com/p2000.htm
<p>3) Tumber, H. and Bromley, M., <b>Virtual soundbites: political communication in cyberspace,</b>
Media, Culture and Society, 20 (1), Jan 1998, Sage Publications, p159
<p>4) <b>Buchanan Reform</b> : URL : http://www.buchananreform.com
<p>5) <b>George W. Bush for President Official Home Page</b> - georgewbush.com :
URL : http://www.georgewbush.com/
<p>6) <b>Welcome to algore2000.com, Al Gore's official Presidential campaign web site</b>
: URL : http://www.algore2000.com/
<p>7) <b>Ralph Nader for President Home Page</b> : URL : http://www.votenader.org/
<p>8) Lang, J., <b>Evaluation of references sources published or about to be published,</b> Reference Librarian, (15), Fall 1986, The Hawthorn Press, 1986, p55-64
<p>9) Cooke, A., <b>A guide to finding quality information on the Internet : selection and evaluation strategies,</b> Library Association Publishing, 1999, p58, 61, 63, 65, 66, 70, 72, 82, 83
<p>10) Notess, G.N., <b>Tips for evaluating web databases,</b> Database, Apr/May 1998, Outline Inc., 1998, p69-72
<p>11) <b>TONIC : internet detective</b> :
URL : http://www.netskills.ac.uk/TonicNG/cgi/sesame?detective
<p>12) <b>AltaVista - Search</b> : URL : http://www.altavista.com
<p>13) Stone, B., Politics '96, <b>Internet World,</b> November 1996, Mecklemedia Corp, 1996,
p44-45
<p>14) <b>Ralph Nader for President 2000</b> URL : http://www.nader2000.org
<p><br>Copyright : Dave Besag, 24 Glenthorn Road, Jesmond, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, NE2 3HN
<br>e-mail dhb12@hotmail.com
<br>www.valbesag.co.uk/market.html
</body>
</html>
No comments:
Post a Comment