Analytic Activism
Dave Karpf, Ph.D.
George Washington University
@davekarpf
Shoutingloudly.com
davekarpf@gmail.com
I’m going to try to cover a lot of
ground in this talk
Main findings from The MoveOn Effect (2012)
Major findings from Analytic Activism (2015 or 2016)
Early findings from The New Infrastructure of Cross-National
Activism (2017? 2043? Who knows.)
(…Yes, I’m writing a trilogy. And yes, that’s a little weird.)
Current scholarship tends to highlight examples
of “bottom-up” or “organizationless” political
activism.
The Main Theoretical
Takeaways
1. The digital age features organizing with different
organizations, not organization-less organizing.
1. Rather than focusing on how disorganized masses use the
internet to speak, we ought to pay attention to how
organized interests use the internet to listen.
2. The focus on organized listening points us toward different
research objects, which remain obscure in the rush to
embrace “big data.”
The MoveOn Effect
Rather than focusing on individual digital tactics (e-petitions)
or digital platforms (YouTube, Twitter), I focus on the
“organizational layer” of American politics.
Major differences in membership and fundraising regimes,
which in turn influence organizational structure, leadership
styles, and preferred strategies and tactics.
Disruptive implications for existing organizations.
Partisan dynamics/Outparty Innovation Incentives.
A Generation Shift at the Organizational Layer
of American Politics
Imagine the membership affiliations of a
college-aged activist today.
Membership is an organizational
construct:
This has all happened before
Skocpol (2003) describes the displacement of cross-class
membership federations by professionally-managed
advocacy groups.
Membership went from
attending/participating to
supporting/check-writing
This was a technologicallymediated transition. And we’re
experiencing another one
(Bimber 2003)
Membership: Sedimentary organizations
• Waves of mass mobilization leave behind
sedimentary member lists
• Those lists become organizations
• New orgs focus attention on the issues
dominating the media agenda, rather than
staying within an issue silo.
• Resultant shift in issue choice, tactics,
mobilization campaigns.
3 Elements of the Netroots
Fundraising Model
1.
Zero-(marginal) cost scaling. 100 e-mails cost the
same as 10,000 e-mails.
2.
“A/B Testing.”
• (sometimes) A form of passive democratic input
• (sometimes) A form of tactical optimization
1.
“Headline Chasing.” Targeted Appeals, Timely
Issues.
Note: this is all small-donor fundraising. Many TNGOs rely on
corporations, foundations, patron donors, and government grants
instead.
Fundraising Styles
SaveOurEnvironment.org
“We have less than 48 hours to
reach our goal of raising $10,000 by
11:59PM on December 31 – and
we’re not there yet
There are lots of reasons why you
should give to
SaveOurEnvironment.org right now:
First, because we’re counting on
you. [...]
Second, because the year is
coming to a close. [...]
And third, because there is no time
like the present. The time for
excuses is over: America needs
MoveOn.Org
“Dear MoveOn member, You’ve probably
heard about how Wall Street financier
Bernard Madoff scammed investors out of
at least $50 billion. But you may not have
heard that his victims included the
foundations that support some really
important progressive organizations.
Groups that fight for human rights, fair
elections and racial justice are getting hit
hard - just in time for the holidays. We’ve
worked side-by-side with many of them.
If these groups can’t replace the funding
that came from investment accounts that
Madoff stole, they may be forced to start
cutting important projects or, in some
cases, even lay off staff. Can you pitch in
Generation Gap
Questions?
This netroots model is now
global in scale.
OPEN’s Core Organizations
MoveOn.org (US) – 8 million members (2.5% of national population)
Campact (Ger) – 1 million members (1.25% of national population)
GetUp (Aus) – 640,000 members (2.7% of national population)
38 Degrees (UK) – 2.7 million members (4.2% of national population)
Leadnow (Can) – 360,000 members (1% of population
Meanwhile Change.org has 79 million members in 196 countries, and
Avaaz.org has 39 million members globally.
21st Century Consumer
Organizing
5 million members since 2011
Global in scope
All corporate campaigns
Zero traditional boycotts.
Analytic Activism
Two Classes of Analytics
Tactical Optimization
From simple (A/B) to
complex (Field
Experiments).
Performance improvement
of existing mobilization and
persuasion efforts.
Passive Democratic
Feedback
From simple (A/B) to
complex (mass sentiment
analysis)
Strategic directionsetting/agenda-setting
Slight governance input
through computational
management (Kreiss 2012)
Substantial governance input
– new form of quantified
public opinion.
Primary applications have
been electoral.
Primary applications have
been non-electoral.
Tactical Optimization Is
Now Well-Known
But there’s more to analytics
than simple fundraising
optimization.
Passive Democratic Feedback
Affects Tough Strategic Choices
Analytics also supports a broader “culture of
testing.”
Key Limitation:
The Analytics Floor
Analytics becomes increasingly useful as your supporter list
grows. (think KKV)
The analytics floor is the practical threshold below which
analytics cannot be effectively used.
Particularly important for day-to-day computational
management
Less important for tactical optimization if lessons are shared
within-sector.
Gives rise to new industries of service-providers. Some help
analyze results (optimize.ly, shareprogress), others help build
lists (change.org).
And that brings us to“social
petition sites”
Social petitions appear to be a
classic case of disorganized
“connective action”
But social petitioning is also big
business, governed by multiple,
competing (organizational) logics.
(for-profit)
(nonprofit)
Change.org’s petition engine
MoveOn Effect 2: Electric
Boogaloo
Triggering
Media Event
Staff Create a
Strategy, Craft
an Email.
Weekly
Member
Surveys Gauge
Interest.
A/B Testing
Refines the
Tactics and
Messaging.
Either Engage
Members in
Higher-Level
Tactics or
Pivot to a
Different
Issue.
MoveOn Strategy
1.0
Triggering
Media EVent
Members
Create
Petitions,
Member
Surveys and
Petition
Signatures
Gauge
Interest.
Staff Leverage
Top Petitions,
Coach
Members and
Refine
Tactics.
A/B Testing
Refines the
Tactics and
Messaging.
MoveOn Strategy 2.0
Either Engage
Members in
Higher-Level
Tactics or
Pivot to a
Different
Issue.
What I Did
Data collection & content analysis
Top 10 “featured” petitions at Change.org and MoveOn
Petitions
6 months of data (November 2013-May 2014), collected
daily
269 distinct petitions appeared at MoveOn, 283 at
Change.org
Coded for petition rank, author, organizational affiliation,
topic area, target, and total petitions.
How often do petitions on the
two sites overlap?
In six months, only six issues were featured with
petitions at both sites.
1.
Shawn Carter aka Jay Z: End all partnerships with Barneys New
York
2.
Tell Russia to Release Greenpeace Activists
3.
Students at Eastside Catholic School stand up for fired Vice
Principal
4.
Stop the George Zimmerman Celebrity Boxing Match
5.
Veto SB 1062: Arizona’s bill legalizing discrimination
6.
Dueling Duck Dynasty Petitions.
What is the topical breakdown
of the petitions featured on each
site?
Issue Breakdown
Change.org
MoveOn
48
47
41
37
35
33
24
21 21
15
9
3
1
0
7
0
1
4
3
17
14
16
15
5
8
32
1
7
4
0
3
1
0
12
6
3 4
0
3
10 9
8
4
0
9
67
0
5
11 10
2 3
5
6
RQ3: Who are the targets of
these petitions?
Petition Targets
Change.org
MoveOn
155
131
76
61
46
43
23
11
state/local
National-State
4
2
0
national
international
corporate
0
no target
Who are the petition-creators?
Petition Authors
Organization-Sponsored
No Organization
208
150
119
75
Change.org
MoveOn
How many signatures does the
average petition receive?
Signatures/Petition Box-and-Whiskers
1000000
100000
10000
1000
100
Change.org
MoveOn
Social Petition Sites Are Promoting
Very Different Types of Politics
Change.org produces huge petition signatures around personal
stories. But it avoids the most prominent political issues of the day.
And the big numbers support a “reverse mullet” business model.
What looks like spontaneous citizen campaigning is actually a
sophisticated, analytics-informed business plan.
MoveOn.org produces moderate petition signatures around
prominent political issues. And those signatures help swell the
membership rolls of allied organizations, while providing signals of
MoveOn member interest.
What looks like “clicktivism” is actually the first step in a longerterm plan to build grassroots power.
In summary
Digitally-enabled social movements still feature a lot of
organizations.
These organizations face traditional challenges (fundraising,
public education, mobilizing long-term power), but have
invented new techniques for meeting them (analytics and the
culture of testing).
When we look for digital footprints in the most obvious
places (twitter, web pages), these organizational routines are
invisible.
So we need to study digital NGOs using a combination of
very new and very old research methods.
Questions?