From Dean Scream to #FeelingTheBern: What Presidential Elections Have Taught Us About Digital Fundraising
“Decision 2016” is in full effect all around us. You can’t open a device or stroll past a newsstand (those are still a thing, right?) without hearing about Donald Trump’s latest hijinks, or how Bernie Sanders really doesn’t care for the banking industry. Many think we’re at a political crossroads, evident from the rise of two candidates lacking support from their respective political parties. While Americans have eight more months before they’ll decide on who will be our next Commander in Chief, higher education is faced with a decision of our own: Bern or burn?
Bernie Sanders may not be our next president, but he has already revolutionized political fundraising, something no one thought possible, especially considering the record-breaking Obama campaigns of 2008 and 2012. Nevertheless, the 74 year-old curmudgeon from one of America’s smallest states has captured the imagination of voters around the nation, millennials in particular. How has he done it? Is it his message? Are people giving because they’re inspired by the sight/sound of a balding man with a heavy Brooklyn accent ranting and raving about wealth inequality? Is it technology? Have we finally reached a point where digital media creates an environment where you can bring in millions of dollars just by asking for it? Anyone working on behalf of an annual fund can answer that.
So what is it about this campaign that has resulted in the breaking of presidential fundraising records and what are the lessons higher ed can learn from it? To answer that we have to travel back to a time when a “text” only referred to your giant academic books, and owning a smartphone meant the cordless in your house had a button you could press to make it beep so you could find it.
2004: The Dean of the Internet
“The Dean campaign boasted the first campaign blog, the first formal interview of a presidential candidate with a blogger, the first online volunteer organizing operation, and the most successful online fundraising operation to date, with 40 percent of his $50 million haul coming from clicks.” (Scher)
Before Bernie, there was another Vermont politician threatening to defy the status quo. Howard Dean, a name that may be unfamiliar to those on the younger end of the millennial spectrum, was a progressive governor who decided to run for president despite having nothing going for him…well, ALMOST nothing. He had one thing that none of the other candidates on either side of the aisle had: a web presence.
Now let’s remember, we’re talking about an era where the web was referred to as “The Net” and social media didn’t exist outside of your AOL Instant Messenger “buddy list” and the three people using Friendster. There were, however, many other untapped resources at the disposal of open-minded political candidates.
"The Internet community is wondering what its place in the world of politics is. Along comes this campaign to take back the country for ordinary human beings, and the best way you can do that is through the Net. We listen. We pay attention. If I give a speech and the blog people don't like it, next time I change the speech."- Howard Dean, 2004 (via Gary Wolf/Wired Magazine)
Dean and his staff knew in 2004 what we’re trying to convince our industry of in 2016: the online user dictates the rules of engagement. Dean’s use of the term “blogger people” probably disqualified him from achieving power-user status, but his ability to see the importance of online communities is more crucial than his participation or understanding of them. That’s leadership and that’s what we need more of in higher ed. Dean didn’t try to hammer his square peg of policy into the round hole of the blogosphere, he listened, adapted, and mobilized supporters by speaking their language.
Are we confident we’re addressing our constituents with the same respect?
Dean’s Data Science Discovery
“The internet made a difference in helping campaigns decide who to contact, what to say, when to say it, and, crucially, who to send to say it.” (Wolf)
To use “data science” to describe Dean’s campaign is agreeably ridiculous, but their realization that you could learn from online engagement and use that information to shape your communications strategy, was huge. Today, audience segmentation is commonplace...or is it? Are we, as an industry, learning from our online engagement or do we continue to blast messages based on the ancient assumptions we’ve made about our audience?
We might mix up whose name appears at the end of a solicitation email and we have a pretty good idea of what days/times are best to send an email, but are we doing all we can do to deliver tailored content to our people? When it comes to “who to send to say it” have we aggressively explored the mapping of online networks to see if our message is more likely to be acknowledged if it’s delivered by a “virtual volunteer?” This degree of analysis isn’t quick or easy, but it’s time well spent and it represents the kind of effort we need to take on if we hope to remain relevant to our alumni.
Talking Turkey with Your Audience
“In July 2003 the Dean campaign took advantage of news reports about an upcoming $2,000-a-plate Republican luncheon featuring Vice-President Cheney. Up, out, and around the Dean network went word of “The Cheney Challenge” -- could Dean supporters raise more money than the luncheon by the time it took place?-- accompanied by a web video of the candidate munching on a“three-dollar” turkey sandwich. Cheney’s lunch raised $250,000 from 125 guests. The online fundraising gimmick netted the Dean campaign $500,000 from 9,700 people, and great publicity about its grassroots enthusiasm and prowess.” (Wolf)
Dean’s success in challenging his online supporters to beat his wealthy rivals, provided an early glimpse of the future of online fundraising. A presidential candidate posted a picture of himself eating a $3 turkey sandwich to inspire supporters to donate and it resulted in $500,000 from nearly 10,000 people?? How horrifying this must have been for long-time political campaign managers who were committed to raising money the same way they had for the last thirty years. It worked for Dean because he understood the character of the online community and he delivered his message in a way that resonated.
You have probably posted something on Facebook that received a huge response from your followers, but have you doubled down on that post to aid development? Dean’s campaign showed us how important it is to create content that fits the both the space and the audience. You most likely won’t turn a $3 sandwich into half a million dollars, but you could turn a $5 boosted photo of campus into a dozen prospect leads and depending on the prospects, you could clear $500k faster than you think.
Dean’s Digital Fundraising Legacy
“The internet was seen as the primary instrument through which his (Dean) political power was accruing. If one had to single out a shared moment of realization among political professionals that henceforth they had to take the internet seriously, this was it.” ( Wolf)
Just incase you don’t recall, Howard Dean didn’t win his party’s nomination. A couple of campaign strategy mistakes derailed his momentum, highlighted by his infamous “Dean Scream” that followed the Iowa caucus. But his foray into the internet, a place political campaigns dared not go before him, sparked an awakening. For the first time, someone infiltrated the sacred, skeptical world of online communities and not only earned their support, but their money as well.
DEAN SCREAM
"I wish I could tell you we were smart enough to figure this out. But the community taught us.”
- Howard Dean, 2003 (Wolf)
Many of you reading this may still be frustrated by your inability to secure a legitimate investment in digital/social media. There are a number of reasons your institution is choosing not to put money into digital strategy and there are even more reasons why you SHOULD be doing it, but the bottom line is the cost of NOT doing it is immeasurable. The Dean campaign provided an early blueprint for how to turn online engagement into dollars, but 12 years later our industry is largely refusing to adapt. With regards to their online strategy, Howard Dean said “the community taught us.” Well, the communities are STILL teaching us. The question we have to ask ourselves is: are we taking the time to pay attention or are we flunking out?
2008: The Facebook Election
“Facebook was not unaware of its suddenly powerful role in American electoral politics.” (Dutta/Fraser)
In 2007, then SENATOR Barack Obama saw opportunity in the access social media provided to young voters. His opponent, Senator John McCain, remained committed to “old school” campaigning. The rest, as they say, is history. The Obama campaign began where Dean left off and then took huge leaps to shatter presidential donor and fundraising records. How much difference could four years make? It’s the difference between an army of bloggers and the rise of a little online community known as Facebook.
Now, to be fair, Obama had other factors making him popular and like most things popular on the web/social media, the original content must be good. Social media doesn’t transform the unappealing into appealing. He was young, energetic, and an inspiring performer. Facebook didn’t make him those things, but it introduced him to millions of young people who don’t watch CNN. While Facebook was certainly entering into it’s golden age in 2007/2008, the Obama campaign didn’t rely solely on Mark Zuckerberg to spread their gospel.
(Pew Research, 2007)
The above image shows you which networks each candidate was on during the early portion of the presidential primary. Nothing startling about this, though McCain’s absence on Twitter is foreshadowing for a campaign that was consistently late to the social media party. You can see, despite being less popular, the Obama campaign made sure to cover any space they felt they could find an audience. This serves as a reminder to us that we don’t have to spend time/money on EVERY network, but it never hurts to put your flag in the ground early. It’s much more difficult to wrestle your name away from someone once they have done your work for you.
“It is no coincidence that one of Obama's key strategists was 24-year-old Chris Hughes, a Facebook cofounder. It was Hughes who masterminded the Obama campaign's highly effective Web blitzkrieg—everything from social networking sites to podcasting and mobile messaging.” (Dutta/Fraser)
Like Dean, the Obama campaign realized A) that the social web was crucial and B) they weren’t the experts. So they went out and hired talented young people to design their digital strategy. A big piece of that strategy was video:
(Pew Research)
Obama O-bliterated McCain on the video front. Their campaign was aware of the rise in popularity of web video and knew they needed to capitalize on their candidate’s camera-friendliness. YouTube didn’t exist for Howard Dean, which may actually have been a blessing...but by 2006, there were over 100 million video views per day. By October 2008, one month before the election, 15 hours of video were being uploaded to YouTube every MINUTE. The Obama campaign made sure they were present, McCain not so much.
YouTube was exploding in the mid 2000s, but so were a couple other networks. Obama killed McCain on FB, Twitter, and MySpace...yes, Myspace. There was a day when MySpace had a critical mass.
When it came to social media, one candidate was an adopter, the other was an elder. McCain’s people may have decided the social media demographic was not an important part of their strategy, wrongfully assuming young people don’t vote or mobilize on behalf of political campaigns. But clearly the Dean campaign proved the power of online communities, yet the McCain camp still put their resources elsewhere.
We as an industry have to decide if we’re going to be “Obama” or “McCain.” Obviously I’m not talking about political ideologies, but digital media ideologies. No schools would ignore the web in 2016, but being on the web and having an institutional presence on social media, is different from proactively using the platforms to get the most out of them.
The Obama Online ATM
“From now on, success in electoral politics depends on having friends in low places.” (Dutta/Fraser)
So let’s focus back in on what this all has to do with US, higher ed advancement professionals. Presidential campaigns over recent years have been beautiful examples of how people connect to the people whose money they seek. WE are people, paid to connect with people, whose engagement and money we seek. Politicians ask for time and treasure on behalf of advancing a nation, we ask on behalf of advancing an institution. A few politicians have excelled at doing something we still struggle with: converting online engagement to donations. In 2008 and 2012, Barack Obama did it the best.
“When counting only fundraising that was initially generated by digital efforts, including email, social media, mobile and the website, the 2012 campaign raised $504 million, up from $403 million in 2008.” (Scherer)
Yes, the Obama had tens of millions of followers on Facebook and Twitter, but it was their ability to convert these brand fans to dollars that separated them from their competition. Despite many thinking the 2012 Obama campaign would struggle to capture the same amount of enthusiasm that it did in 2008, they actually surpassed all of their engagement and fundraising numbers. One of the ways they did this was by unleashing a game-changing software known as “Quick Donate.”
“Quick Donate was simple — appropriately named, it allowed Obama's campaign to store the credit card information of supporters upon their first donation. Once a supporter's card was on file at campaign headquarters, that supporter could give more money to Obama's campaign with a single action via an email, text message or the web.” (Mashable)
Higher ed is really good at frequent solicitations, but we’re not always the best at user experience. While I don’t have stats to prove it, I’m guessing we spend much more time thinking about how we convince alumni to donate than we do how they’ll donate. Sure, we know we need an online giving portal, but do we focus enough on usability? The Obama campaign knew the key to converting internet buzz into donations was making the donation process uber user friendly. So they decided to build Quick Donate to ensure technology worked in their favor, versus being a barrier for potential donors.
In 2016, most schools see the majority of their donations come in electronically. We know how important it is to have a giving site so that we can receive gifts, but possessing a giving site is different from possessing an optimized giving site. With the thousands of people we’re engaging on social networks, the end goal is to help our audience find their way to a giving portal. Your content strategy could be flawless, but you could be losing potential donors because it’s just too painful of a process, or you’re not taking full advantage of all the technology at your disposal. Imagine slicing of just a section of your direct mail budget so you could build the giving experience of your dreams?
Obama’s campaign used the latest technology to build a fundraising juggernaut and when the technology didn’t exist, they invented it. But their innovation wasn’t reserved solely for fundraising, they also recognized the power social media with regards to organizing volunteers.
“More than 1 million people downloaded the campaign’s Facebook App, which allowed the campaign to overlay its own voter files with the friend networks of its supporters. In the final weeks of the campaign, the campaign used this information to ask its supporters to directly contact their friends who were targeted voters in key swing states via Facebook, with specific requests for everything from voting early to watching a specific persuasion video.” (Time)
Volunteers. The first and second “Ts” of “time, talent, and treasure.” For many, volunteers are the lifeblood of the institution, whether they’re hosting events, interviewing students, or chairing fundraising campaigns. The Obama campaign understood that generally speaking, people’s networks are more valuable than their checkbooks. That’s not to say we don’t still need their financial support, but when forced to allocate our resources, it might be more worthwhile to empower alumni with tools that take advantage of their networks, rather than spin our wheels convincing them to pledge a $50 gift. There’s also a good chance if we succeed with the former, we’ll still get the latter.
Howard Dean was the father of internet fundraising and using the web to organize volunteers. Barack Obama showed the value of tapping into social media communities and staying in step with a rapidly evolving digital universe. Both had the foresight to embrace emerging technologies, while understanding they could only succeed online by relinquishing control, something that didn’t sit well with “the establishment.”
“Political professionals were horrified at Dean's willingness to cede so much control of his campaign to whomever showed up online. ‘Some of these Meetup [.com] events look like the bar scene from Star Wars,’ one rival campaign aide infamously said to The New Republic. The official Dean campaign blogger retorted, ‘Will they never learn? They're called voters.’” (Scher)
This probably hits close to home. As an industry, we’re frequently terrified by the idea of giving up control. But if we want to be successful at digital engagement, we have to learn from these campaigns that have mobilized and fundraised by the millions. We have to honor our constituents by recognizing we’re guests on their platforms. We’re there because they are there, not vice versa. Embracing this concept and allowing our audience to assume some of the control can result in a positive outcome for all.
"If you are willing to let things happen from the bottom up, you can scale without doing all that planning." - David Isenberg
If we’re not able to invest in digital because of budgetary restrictions, than that’s even more of a reason to embrace the words of David Isenberg. Proper strategy can actually save you time and money, while generating a thriving community of online ambassadors. This is not a GAMBLE, it’s a science, proven again and again by presidential campaigns and non-profits that have come of age in the same era. One of the most recent examples of this is another presidential campaign that features a 74 year-old who looks more like a man who should be sitting in a diner, demanding his unsatisfactory meal be sent back to the kitchen, rather than running for the highest office in the land. But that’s exactly what Bernie Sanders is doing and how he’s doing it demands our attention.
The Bern Within
“Despite appearances, the strategy behind Sanders’ small-donor juggernaut is deceptively sophisticated, using cutting-edge technology and techniques to create a perfect fundraising storm never before seen in presidential politics.” (Politico)
Dean and Obama both ran innovative campaigns, but Obama made it far enough to receive the full backing of his party and all the benefits that come with it. Obama also didn’t shy away from big money to help set his fundraising records. Enter Bernie Sanders. A presidential candidate that began his campaign by not only asking for big money, but made it clear he is taking the fight TO big money. The result? He shattered Obama’s fundraising records.
Imagine if your school decided to stop pursuing major gifts. That absolutely would not and should not happen, but if it did, how would you inspire your donors to make up for it? We’re basically doing this anyways, only there’s far less pressure because 95%-99% of the funds are coming from 5%-1% of our donors. Our current focus on the major gift is eerily similar to politicians reliance on corporate money and Super PACs. The latter has worked for a long, long time, but the Sanders campaign is showing us a scary reality: digital evolution has put donors/voters in the driver’s seat and they’re prepared to “hold out” if we don’t honor their rules of engagement.
“Internet fundraising is about taking potential energy and converting it into kinetic energy, and nobody has done that better than Bernie Sanders. They really tap into small-donor psychology. Small donors go where they’re needed. If you’re a candidate who can raise all the money in the world from the establishment, they don’t think they’re needed. Bernie Sanders, his whole message is that he’s running against the establishment, and that their $20 matters.” - Ari Rabin-Havt
We might be disappointed to learn how many of our alumni see our institutions, especially the larger ones, as “the establishment.” Not in a “controlling the world” kind of a way, but in a “you have millions or billions in your endowment and tuition is $45,000 a year” kind of way. WE know these numbers don’t reflect the true need for philanthropy, but we also know we can do better in telling the story of these numbers. Millennials flock to Bernie because “his whole message is that their $20 matters.” We’re not anti-small donations because we value participation, but we also reserve most of our attention for our minority of wealthy donors. Again, I don’t want to dispute the effectiveness and necessity of that attention, but we can’t do it at the expense of the pipeline. We’re fortunate because, while Bernie is 100% dependant on micro-donations, we’re better positioned to have our cake and eat it, too.
“Some of these folks invented Internet campaigning methods back before Obama ran. They know narrative, strategy, tactics, innovations, expansion of the medium into more than an ATM, but into a full blown channel for participation. They are badasses.” (Politico)
Here Bernie teaches us, or reminds us, how important it is to have a COMPLETE digital strategy. I’m a social media junkie and I tend to focus on those networks when speaking/writing, but I do NOT want to undersell the importance of your social, mobile, email and web working in unison. Social is not the end of the engagement cycle, it is the very beginning. Another way in which a presidential campaign has an advantage over institutional advancement, is that all areas of a campaign operate within the same framework. Institutions, conversely, are infamous for being decentralized and siloed. It’s hard to be a well-oiled machine when each wheel is attached to a different engine.
Again, most of our industry is beginning to accept the importance of digital strategy, but do we REALLY appreciate the potential? Do we REALLY understand how many resources required to do it right? I can honestly say, after researching these campaigns, I underestimated how much thought needs to go into digital engagement. Not only is it necessary to grasp the many aspects of a strategy, but you also have to possess the ability to sense opportunity, and be nimble enough to take advantage of it.
Bernie’s Day of Giving
“The way to fend off the coming attacks “and take our country back from the billionaire class,” Sanders wrote, over a hyperlink to the campaign’s donation website, was a $3 contribution. The donations flooded in at a record-setting pace ― $6.3 million in the 23 hours after the polls closed and counting ― at one point coming so furiously they overwhelmed the interface that processes them.” (Politico)
Howard Dean may have invented the political internet, but Bernie Sanders broke it. Apparently, in 2016, you can still collapse servers. You might expect that for something like a livestream of a Trump v. Rubio MMA match, but we’re talking about micro-fundraising here! How did this happen? Opportunity mixed with a genuine solicitation.
Once it was clear they were going to win the New Hampshire primary by nearly 20 points, the Sanders campaign doubled down. Knowing their supporters were excited by the big win, they immediately pivoted to a call for donations. Bernie himself turned his victory speech into a five-minute fundraiser in which, much like Dean’s turkey lunch, encouraged supporters to show the world he didn’t need to host a high-profile fundraising event in New York City. In that moment of victory, the campaign challenged their followers to bet on a winner. Here are some other Bernie fundraising highlights:
2.3 million contributions to his campaign through December 2015 (Broke Obama’s record)
To date: Over 4 million contributions from over 1 million donors
$6.5 million raised in one 24-hour period (Broke Ron Paul’s record)
72% of donations are $200 or less (compare to 16% for Clinton)
“You do have your moments. Not many of them, but you do have them.” - Princess Leia
These moments of public success are much easier to achieve if you’re a politician as opposed to a college or university. But that doesn’t mean we don’t have moments where a large portion of our alumni feel really good about their alma mater. National sports events, reunions, homecomings, famous alumni making headlines, and yes, even an internet listicle. None of these will inspire $6.3M in one day, but they all represent an opportunity to fire up your donors. Certainly, you need to be genuine and not be perceived as opportunistic, but if you have cohesive strategy in place, you should be able to deliver the message in an authentic way and at the very least use the moment to bring a crop of previously unengaged alumni into the fold.
“(Tim) Tagaris grew frustrated with veteran Democratic operatives who shrugged off the power of the Internet. ‘They just didn’t get it,’ he said.” (Politico)
Well, that sounds familiar, right? As we’ve seen, the truth of the matter is that MOST people in politics didn’t “get it.” But within that group were a few people who realized there were people who DID get it and they should hire those people to help them. We don’t need everyone in higher ed to “get it” we just need the leaders of our industry to acknowledge the importance and complexity of digital media, and hire the people who do get it. Dean did, Obama did it, and now Sanders has done it. Each campaign has learned from the one before it and then taken another step. Are we learning? Are we adopting the successes of political campaigns and even the private sector? Or are we continuing to do business the same way we’ve done it for decades, all while shrugging our shoulders to plummeting participation rates?
I’d like to take a timeout and reassure you that I respect the work and history of our industry. Just like with my children, I yell because I care. We do good work, we do important work, but there is so much potential to do even better work. Some think converting and retaining new donors at low giving levels is both a fool’s errand and not worth the effort and expense. Generally, I don’t maintain a defeatist attitude...well, unless we’re talking about the Buffalo Bills. I think we can bring more people in and I think we can do it more efficiently and cheaper than many may believe. We have to look beyond initial start-up costs and seize the moment, recognizing the long-term benefits that come with it.
The Message and the Messengers
“When we are talking about the youth vote, we’re talking about the people who are saddled with debt, their economic opportunities are far more limited than that of any recent generation, and while they are working three jobs and paying for the SS benefits of current and soon to be retirees, they’re told they are being selfish by the Boomer generation.” - John Cole via MotherJones
There is much debate, but little hard data to explain why an overwhelming majority of millennials, and even a decent amount of Gen Xers are supporting Bernie Sanders. The above quote is one of the more popular opinions for why America’s youth is feeling the Bern. What isn’t up for debate are two major pieces of the Sanders platform, student loan debt and access to higher education- both of which are major issues for this demographic.
While it’s encouraging for us in higher ed to see someone mobilize the younger generations, it could also tell us why we struggle to engage them. If they are drawn to Bernie over his stance on student loans and his dream to make public universities free, then it’s not hard to imagine our institutions could be seen as the problem. These charts below offer some insight into why our young alumni get angry when we ask for money:
Bernie’s campaign just might be showing us how much animosity really exists amongst students and recent graduates. He’s teaching them about the trillions of dollars the government holds in student debt and paints a picture of students being penalized for trying to become educated. Understanding the technological tactics the campaign has used is very important to our industry, but we also have to consider why this demographic is attracted to this candidate. One of the key’s to Dean’s success was his willingness to listen to what the audience was telling him. The Sanders campaign might be showing us that we need to listen to the frustrations that exist within our young alumni population.
Bern or Burn?
For the last 12 years, three politicians have changed the way we think about fundraising and volunteering on the web. The size of online communities is what usually stands out, but those communities mean very little without the adoption of tools like Quick Donate and online payment processing. A large Facebook following is helpful, mapping the networks of your followers is a game-changer. These campaigns utilized trends, while inventing solutions at the same time. In many ways, they wrote the book on not only building an online audience, but mobilizing that audience on your behalf.
Websites, social media, mobile, email - at times it feels we’ve jumped from these terms being new, straight to being cliche without even doing any of them well. There are some already saying it’s time to move on from Facebook. Spend an hour exploring Facebook Ad’s Manager and you’ll soon realize Facebook is just getting started. Perhaps the main takeaway from all Bernie and company is that social/digital can deliver amazing results, but not without a tremendous amount of work, risk, and ingenuity. These campaigns don’t merely show us that success is possible on the social web, but they show us just how much thought and human resources go into achieving that success.
You could certainly argue this whole concept is an apples to oranges comparison. It could be said political movements inspire people in a completely different way than higher ed ever could. I thought long and hard about that and then I realized something. Bernie Sanders found a way to convince over a million people that $27 can change a country. Why do we struggle to convince alumni that $27 can change a campus?
If the answer to that were simple, we wouldn’t be talking about it. However, these campaigns have shown us that a well orchestrated digital strategy is crucial to delivering the right message, to the right people, in the right places, at the right time. Our jobs are becoming more difficult as alumni are presented with a growing number of ways to make a charitable donation and those jobs are also becoming more important, as the funding of education is frequently under scrutiny. To succeed we need to utilize every weapon in our arsenal, which may include building some new ones. We’re reaching a point where we’ll need to decide if we’ll Bern, or burn.