Why Point-and-Click Politics? The "Control Revolution"
The Internet, of course, is only tool—or a cluster of tools—and shouldn't be viewed as a panacea. Most advocates agree that traditional methods of activism—one-on-one contact and physical, grassroots organizing—should never be sacrificed on the altar of high-tech faith.

The Net is good for trading ideas and getting information," says Rick Brandon, director of Human Services Policy Center at the University of Washington and a close observer of child advocacy. "But I haven't seen a problem presented yet to which the Internet is the sole answer." The main challenges child advocates face are mobilizing people at the grassroots, bringing them together face-to-face, and "defining a group in a way that is broad enough to include a significant number of people but narrow enough to be clear whose side it's on." The Internet, alone, can't accomplish those tasks.

He says the often unimaginative use of the Internet "is a specific example of the larger problem that child advocates have. They generally don't have good marketing skills. The Internet might be one tool for getting the word out and recruiting people, but you can't use it well until you have someone in your organization who generally knows how to market—with or without the Net."

True enough. However, child advocates who ignore the power of this communications tool do so at their own peril. It's essential for child advocates to maintain the older, more personal grassroots organization tools—to know how to work without a Net. But if child advocates fail to learn the new, multi-tiered media skills—including Net skills—other political interests will surely control the debate.

"I call what's happening the 'Control Revolution,'" says Andrew Shapiro, First Amendment Fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School, and director for the Aspen Internet Policy Project. His book, "The Control Revolution," was published recently by Public Affairs.

"The real upshot of the new communications tools is that they shift power and control from institutions to individuals. Many folks in the advocacy community I know—those concerned with environmental or race issues, for example—are getting hip to the control revolution. Activists around the world are learning that they're in as good a position as anyone to use these tools."

Shapiro rejects one argument sometimes used to discount the use of the Internet for advocacy, that the Internet is an elitist tool. A political brochure that reaches 1,000 households is no less elitist than a Web site available to anyone in the world capable of logging on. "Having a Web site is an incredibly important way to share your resources," he says. "It means you can offer an instant archive of everything you've done, all that you know, reports you've released. You can offer a FAQ [a document answering frequently asked questions]. All of this helps get the word out and helps journalists, too. It's quite economical and effective."

Certainly the Internet won't be elitist in five years, he says. By then, the social justice argument won't be about who has access to the Net and who doesn't, but about what people are doing once they go online. "Internet literacy will be the issue." Lessons From Pioneers and Politicians

The original pioneer in online political activism, possibly the first to understand the organizing power of the medium, was Dave Hughes, a retired Army colonel who, beginning in the 1970s, practiced what he called "saloon journalism."

Sitting in Roger's Bar in Colorado Springs, Colo., he tapped his screeds on his portable Radio Shack TRS-100 computer, then uploaded his musings through a nearby payphone receiver. Dateline: ROGER'S BAR, THIRD BARSTOOL FROM THE RIGHT.

Not only was Hughes the first netizen to figure out how to make money through online writing (he charged a royalty for every download), but among the first to use the Net as a political organizing tool.

"When the city council proposed a stupid ordinance changing the zoning to make it tougher to work out of your own home," he recalls, "we put out the word on the (electronic) bulletin board. Seventy computer users—from Libertarians on the Right to longhairs on the Left—showed up at the hearing to protest. The council didn't know what hit 'em." And during the 1984 presidential primaries, he set up an online campaign headquarters—the first of its kind—for Sen. Gary Hart.

Today, politicians, pundits, and political groups of every stripe have their own Web sites. Barbara Boxer has one. The Doles have His and Hers Web sites. Al Gore claims to have been present at the Net's creation. Even Mexico's Zapatista Army of National Liberation has a Web site, complete with a "What's new?" link.

Indeed, the Internet is becoming a political battlefield, according to The Wirthlin Report, which tracks opinions on Capitol Hill. In 1997, Wirthlin reported:

Development of the Internet in recent years has taken online interaction to a higher level by opening a new and innovative medium for research, communication, commerce and entertainment. The amount of information available on the Internet is staggering. Equally amazing is how fast users can find and retrieve this information.... In our latest Congressional Omnibus survey, we talked to 150 congressional staff members about the Internet and how they use it. Nine out of ten (91 percent) respondents say they use the Internet for online research, while seven in ten (70 percent) say they use it to respond to e-mail. Other frequent uses include receiving constituent e-mail (65 percent), maintaining a Web site for the office (60 percent), and writing or updating legislation (39 percent). Republican offices are better represented on the Internet than Democratic offices, as 71 percent of GOP offices say they maintain a Web site for their office, while only 47 percent of Democratic offices do.

Adam Graham-Silverman, a student at Pomona College has written one of the best overviews on the political use of the Internet in 1998. He reports that, during the November election, 39 percent of voters said they regularly used the Internet, according to exit polls. Web visitors spent four or more minutes reviewing comparisons between candidates—eight times longer than a typical television ad. And the Internet helped candidates recruit fresh volunteers: of those enlisted through the Internet, most had never volunteered before. Half of the candidates encouraged online visitors to donate money—via credit card. (Only one candidate provided a secure server so that credit card numbers remained confidential.)

One of the most impressive sites belonged to Jeb Bush, now governor of Florida. Bush's page employed a "cookie"—an invisible electronic tracer—that recognized individual visitors and updated the site based on what had happened since their last visit. On the weekend before the election, his site drew 2.6 million visits, and crashed when too many people used it to send pro-Bush electronic postcards to friends.

The political site most worth emulating by child advocates—or at least most inspiring—probably belonged to former outsider Jesse Ventura. The former wrestler—now governor of Minnesota—credits his surprise victory, in part, to his supporters' use of the Web. Working on the cheap, Ventura's staff created a "virtual campaign." Volunteers and staff kept touch with each other primarily through the Internet. The Ventura campaign also raised $43,000 through the Web site.

While the Net seems to be a logical tool for the political outsider, few outsiders use it well. Sixty-three percent of Democratic and 68 percent of Republican campaigns had online sites in November; but only half of the third-party candidates did.

"Use of the Internet by politicians has followed pretty predictable lines, which tells one more about politicians than the net," says Hughes, who now focuses now on setting up wireless, low-cost Internet access for schools and Indian reservations. "Candidates prefer to use the Net for one-way communication—them to the public—just as they use television. They're also reluctant to reveal their positions on controversial issues, online, in any detail. Harder for them to shift with the wind and deny what they said."

Politicians may use the Net like, well, politicians. But as advocacy organizations enter the arena, they could better monitor campaign promises made on the Internet, and force an increase in candidate accountability. Gaining Sophistication: Role Models in the Nonprofit World

Child advocates are not alone in their quest for cyber-sophistication. Advocates for other causes have, in some cases, are far enough along the learning curve to be worth emulating.

"Not surprisingly, the some of the earliest and most effective political uses of the Internet have been organized around online issues such as freedom of speech on the Internet," says Shapiro. "For example, the people who opposed the Communications Decency Act—the so-called Internet porn bill—organized the Blue Ribbon campaign, encouraging people with Web pages all over the world to place an image of a blue ribbon on their Web site, in protest."

The environmental movement has also made impressive point-and-click progress. Last year, the Rockefeller Technology Project, which tracks innovative environmental Web sites, reported that most nonprofit environmental groups use the Internet "as more than a brochure in cyberspace." Increasingly, "nonprofit organizations are using audio and video clips, advanced database applications, interactive discussion groups and much more to reach different audiences and provide expanded services."

Tom Wathen, executive vice president of the National Environmental Trust, in Washington D.C., says his organization offers an informational Web site. "We prefer to use e-mail and electronic mailing lists than Web sites to keep in touch," he says. "If you want to organize like-minded people, e-mail and electronic mailing lists make more sense, as tools. If you want to recruit new people, the Web works best."

Other organizations have been more experimental. Some groups' pages offer "maps, cartoons, news articles, search engines and more links than a chain fence," according to Eunice Moscoso, a reporter for the Cox News Service. "With elaborate Internet sites, environmental groups have gained a public relations advantage over the better-funded farm industry."

In addition to offering standard forms of information about ecological issues—visitors to the sites of such groups such as the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council and The Environmental Defense Fund provides online information about toxins, organized by zip code. Or a visitor can click on a map and find out about animal waste problems in a state and county. They can e-mail pre-written letters, urging tougher regulations, to the Environmental Protection Agency. Or they can try out the North Carolina Environmental Defense Fund's "poop counter" to get up-to-the-second estimate of manure production by North Carolina's 10 million hogs.

Use of the Internet helps North Carolina group "counter the millions of dollars spent by hog farmers on lobbying and in advertising against candidates who favor more regulation," according to one activist quoted by Moscoso. Another organization, the League of Conservation Voters, campaigns on the Internet to create "a pro-environment majority in Congress." The LCV Action Fund voter education campaign publishes, on the Web, a list of the "Dirty Dozen" environmental offenders in Congress, targeting them in elections. And the fund rewards political "environmental heroes" by placing them on its EarthList. LCV claims a perfect success rate in 1996—100 percent of the EarthList candidates won.

Beyond the environmental movement, other nonprofit groups also are experimenting with point-and-click politics. Among some of the efforts worth studying by child advocates:

The Democracy Network engages citizens, candidates and public officials in online debates and discussions, and publishes information about current campaigns. Smart Voter is a non-partisan site that covers several counties in Northern California. During election seasons, it encourages users to type in their address and zip code to learn the location of their polling place and to review the ballot. It also offers downloadable voter registration forms.

Other Web sites include Minnesota E-Democracy, which offers an interactive political issues discussion list (available through e-mail), an event and candidate announcement e-mail list and tracks information about current state political races and legislation. Netline to Congress attempts to convey the "Will of the American People" to Congress through a simple yes/no voting mechanism on a "Question of the Day," the results of which are e-mailed to every congressperson. The Benton Foundation's Destination Democracy uses the Web and other participatory tools to educate Americans about campaign finance reform.

And visitors to CivilRights.Org, created in response to the rise of web sites that promote hate, can search for how their elected representatives voted on a particular civil-rights piece of legislation, or sign up to receive e-mail news alerts.

One recent study suggests recognizable trends in how nonprofits are using the Net.

In 1998, the Nonprofits' Policy and Technology Project released the report, "Democracy At Work: Nonprofit Use of Internet Technology for Public Policy Purposes," a snapshot of how nonprofits utilize newer information technology tools to engage in public policy activities.

Among its findings:

• Creating a strong identity on the Internet is important for nonprofits.

• "The enormous growth in the number of nonprofit web sites and organizations using e-mail (during 1997 and 1999) has not yet translated into widespread use of the Internet by nonprofits as an important policy tool." Nor has there been rigorous assessment of these tools' effectiveness in shaping policy.

• The best overall approach seems to be a combination of e-mail alerts to convey basic information which then guide readers to a Web site with effective tools.

• Politically conservative and progressive nonprofits use the Internet differently. "Conservative sites often use higher-end Internet tools to coordinate pre-defined public policy activities that encourage people to respond to issues. Progressive web sites, in contrast, tend to emphasize access to available Internet tools—and learning how to use those tools—to help individuals and groups better develop their own public policy efforts." In other words, conservative sites tend to cut to the chase.

• "There appears to be a disconnect between nonprofit interest in using technology for public policy purposes and funding for such activities. Foundations are often reluctant to support advocacy activities. In addition, there are indications that many foundations do not have Web sites and, in general, do not fund many technology-related projects."

While the study's findings are less than encouraging, use of the Internet is fluid, and its evolution fast. Who would have thought, five years ago, that e-mail would become such an integral part of our lives? Pioneers move ahead. For instance, Michelle Strasz is frustrated by technology-shy foundations, but she hasn't let that stop her.

Children's advocates, and other nonprofits, are learning as they go, and the best of them are learning from each other.

Point-and-Click Collaboration
No organization has to go it alone in cyberspace. Child advocates can learn from and link to other advocacy groups, as well as more general sites offering political information.

One example: The Michigan Campaign for Children site, along with several other child advocacy organizations, is hosted by Web White & Blue. "Their site provided a lot of great links to other organizations, which I was able to pass along to our people," she says.

Web White & Blue is sponsored by the Markle Foundation and Harvard University's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy. The site's goal: promote easy access to election-related information on the Internet. It offers voter information, polling locations and youth resources, a state-by-state guide to government and nonprofit election-oriented Web sites and other election information. "I couldn't have developed these resources on my own," says Strasz. "Web White & Blue saved me a lot of work, because I didn't have to recreate the wheel."

Child advocates have also joined forces with the Benton Foundation, which focuses on the public interest uses of communications. During the past few years, Benton has helped create the groundwork for more sophisticated use of the Internet by nonprofits—especially those working on behalf of children.

In the 1990s, for example, Benton sponsored the "Who's For Kids and Who's Just Kidding" campaign, a national multimedia effort - including use of the Internet—designed to insert children's issues into local, state and national political campaigns. Child advocacy organizations across the country participated.

During the 1996 presidential campaign, Benton hosted the first online presidential debate on children's issues, hosted on America Online. That same year, Benton launched the KidsCampaigns Web site, the predecessor to Connect for Kids—the most encyclopedic site for child advocacy on the Web. As part of its mission, Connect for Kids highlights child advocates who use new media to campaign for kids. (If your child advocacy organization is using the Net for political campaigns, let us know: send email to rlouv@cts.com

Just as Strasz found, an advocacy site can't exist in a vacuum. By creating links with as many other sites as possible, and tapping the existing knowledge base in the new media, a site's designers and operators can avoid mistakes—and exponentially increase its point-and-click power.

Advice From Internet Gurus, and a few Cautionary Notes

So far, the Internet seems to be a more effective set of tools during political campaigns, than after the election is over. A second recent report (December 1998) by the Nonprofits' Policy & Technology Project reveals that, when it comes to using the Internet, they'd rather talk than listen.

"Congress has a substantial and growing presence on the Internet," according to "Speaking Up in the Internet Age: Use and Value of Constituent E-mail and Congressional Web Sites." But the use of it is increasingly one-way. Among the findings:

• Personal communications with congressional offices regarding viewpoints on policy issues is most effective. For e-mail—or any other form of communication—to be taken seriously, it should be both personalized (as opposed to a form letter) and from a constituent.

• Members are not using e-mail to respond, even when they receive e-mail from constituents.... E-mail is likely to have a powerful role in the near future, although it does not rank high today in terms of how seriously members take it.

This report, according to its authors, raises concerns about democracy, because the House is planning to eliminate members' public e-mail addresses, replacing them with Web-based e-mail systems that will filter out mail not from a constituents' address, in an effort to eliminate "spam." Another disturbing finding, according to the report, was the lack of substantial policy information on congressional Web sites. "Over 50 percent of the Web sites surveyed have little and superficial policy information (for example: position papers, voting records and press releases that deal with policy matters)," according to the report. Beyond the philosophical questions the survey raises, it contains some practical advice:

These findings ... have significant implications for nonprofit organizations, which are increasingly working to encourage their members and the public to engage in public policy matters. The message for citizens and for nonprofits is that, although e-mail is not now as well regarded as personal letters, its popularity and regard are likely to increase significantly. At the same time, the advent of e-mail requires even greater attention to traditional advice about communicating with a member of Congress: be clear, be brief, and be a constituent.

Experts offer a few notes of caution and advice on how to get started in point-and-click politics, maximize the power of the Internet, and avoid the pitfalls:

• Weave a Web site. Doing so is easier than you might think. Several "portal" sites, such as GeoCities, Yahoo! and Tripod offer free Web site hosting. "Oh, and while you're at it, tap into the Web site 'reservation system' and get your organization's name reserved now," says Brock Meeks, a pioneering online journalist and chief Washington correspondent for MSNBC, specializing in the politics of the Internet. "If you don't reserve your name, you might just find all the legwork you've been doing to establish credibility and name recognition in cyberspace useless because some pornography site now owns the name you were thinking of applying for." (Meeks cites the classic example: www.whitehouse.gov is the actual White House web site; www.whitehouse.com is a porn site.)

• Be clear about your nonprofit status. If your organization launches a political campaign on the Internet—or in any medium—review your 501 status. "If a nonprofit is doing anything that looks like campaigning or electioneering, that needs to be reviewed," says Jillaine Smith, senior associate of the Benton Foundation's Communications Policy and Practice Program.

  Nonprofits with 501(c)(3) are limited in what they can do, politically. When a nonprofit wants to campaign for particular candidates or raise political funds, it usually creates a cousin or daughter organization, with a slightly different name, as a 501(c)(4) status. "Some nonprofits may be campaigning politically on the Web without realizing it—for instance, by publishing a scorecard on candidates."

• Be a quick responder. "The Net is all about immediacy, so take advantage of that," advises Meeks. If your Web page is interactive, or if you're managing an e-mail list or listserv, don't keep your "customers" waiting. Respond quickly, make sure your online information is up to date, and refresh your page with new information often—daily if possible. By doing so, you'll greatly increase return visits.

• Don't be a spammer. That is, don't expect to gain much by flooding candidates or other public figures with e-mail. "Spamming, or mass, unsolicited, e-mail similar to junk mail has been one use not met with support from Internet users," reports Adam Graham-Silverman. "Political candidates who have tried to spam their message usually find the technique backfiring. Users are much more likely to react with anger to spam than postal junk mail." Child advocates could cause the same reaction if they overdo mass e-mailing.

• Pierce the data smog. "Early online activists have learned is the simple fact that you've sent a lot of e-mail is not a guarantee you're going to be heard," says Shapiro. One reason is that, when a government official or agency is flooded with e-mail, they're unlikely to read it. "The truth is that some of these offices don't read their e-mail. A fax, letter or even a phone call may be more powerful"

  The encompassing issue is the phenomenon of data smog. "This is a major question for activists: What do you do when a major constraint to effective communication is not the scarcity of channel space (for instance, it's hard to get on TV) but a scarcity of attention? There's so much information out there that it's hard for folks to absorb. Activists are empowered by the new media, but now they must also pierce through all that data smog, according to Shapiro. "Smart activists have learned that you don't send super-long e-mail or clog up the recipients' electronic mailboxes. What you want is to send are short, pointed, action-oriented messages—telling the recipient 'what to do' or 'how to act.' Sloppy, run-on messages aren't read or effective."

• Consider point-and-click fundraising. The notion of asking for political donations—or nonpolitical contributions—over the Internet may seem radical today, but within a few years it will likely be commonplace.

  "The first obstacle is just habit," says Charles Firestone, executive director of the Communications and Society program of the Aspen Institute. "But online giving is coming. Already, the top button on the Red Cross home page is 'Donate Now.'" Click it, and you learn how to send money via phone, mail—or the Internet. "Until quite recently, people weren't used to shopping on the Internet, either. But now they are. As people increasingly engage in e-commerce, they'll feel more comfortable sending their charitable gifts and political contributions that way, too. Giving over the Internet will be seen as just another form of e-commerce."

• Use a multi-media approach. If a Web site exists alone, does anyone see it? The most effective sites are linked not only to other Web sites, but through other media—in a concurrent campaign using a some combination of television, radio, print, fax, phone and Internet.

  "We are in a crowded, media-saturated world, so to be effective in communicating your message, you must use a variety of media, having each medium do what it does best," says David Weiner, director of the Benton Foundation's Neustadt Center for Communications in the Public Interest.

• Don't be contagious. "Whatever you do, make sure that what you send out over the Internet does not contain a computer virus," says Firestone. "This is a risk. You could suddenly be identified not as an organization with a political cause, but with a social disease."

• Be high-touch, not just high-tech. There's no real substitute for pressing the flesh and knocking on doors. Plus, a point-and-click campaign needs personal follow-up. "An Internet campaign won't have a long-lasting political punch unless there's a hard-edged after-campaign strategy to hold office-holders' feet to the fire, to hold them accountable," says Rick Brandon. He recommends that child advocacy organization use the Internet to provide lists of questions and talking points to their constituencies, including PTAs and chambers of commerce, and then organize personal contacts with the office holders—to ask them, repetitively, if they've fulfilled their campaign promises to kids.

Linking With the Future
Imagine the future. The information superhighway of 2010 probably won't look much like today's Internet, and political campaigning may have changed just as much. Though the effectiveness of the point-and-click politics has yet to be proved in any scientific way, anecdotal evidence strongly suggests that it works—especially when its users know the pitfalls and the medium's current limitations. As an increasingly accepted and expected political tool, the Internet's use is bound to grow quickly and on all fronts. Recent reports and political events suggest just how fast and pervasive that change may be:

• In 1997, The Digital Citizen Survey done by Luntz Research for Wired and Merrill Lynch Forum, found that 29 percent of Americans would vote by e-mail if ballot security were ensured.

• In a survey of its visitors, Web White & Blue found that, for 84 percent of survey respondents, 1998 was the first year they had used the Internet to get election information; 61 percent said they expect to use the Internet as their primary media source for election information in 2000.

• In California, the Silicon Valley millionaire who sponsored the 1998 initiative that ended bilingual education in the state, has introduced a new initiative called the California Voters Bill of Rights. Among other things, it would require all contributions of $1,000 or more to be disclosed over the Internet within 24 hours.

• In 1999, Steve Forbes became the first presidential candidate to announce his candidacy on the Internet - before he went to older media outlets.

Politicians know a source of power when they see it. With multiple Web sites and what he calls his Internet Brigade, presidential candidate Pat Buchanan, often says it's time "to lock and load." More constructively, it's time to point and click. The findings of the Web White & Blue study "indicate that the American public wants political information that is easy to use, and that the Internet can provide it," says Markle Foundation president, Zoe Baird. "Efforts like Web White & Blue can transform citizen involvement in politics."

So can child advocacy organizations, which have just begun to link. .

"Obviously we're entering a huge growth period, when it comes to the Internet" said Bob Felmeth, director of the Children's Advocacy Institute, during a recent phone call. "Today, in fact, I'm at a statewide conference of children's advocates. A few minutes ago, a piece of paper went around the room. We were asked to identify ourselves. The only question was: 'What's your e-mail address?'"

A Toolbox for the Point-and-Click Organizer

Here's a list of 20 Internet tools, gleaned from the point-and-click campaigns of child advocate groups, other nonprofits, as well as candidates and political organizations. Create a basic e-mail list; use it to broadcast general information and news of upcoming political actions. Form an e-mail media list to inform newspapers, television stations and radio of your organization's positions on political issues and candidates. Establish electronic mailing lists for specific issue alerts. Publish a listserv—an electronic newsletter sent to your e-mail lists. Design a Web site that not only offers organizational information, but political surveys, candidate comparisons and other interactive tools. Encourage visitors to click on links that give information about specific national, state, or local races. Provide updated information—preferably daily—about political campaigns and proposed legislation, and their potential impact on children. Use your Web page, e-mail list or listserv to announce awards to favored campaigns, and also provide information about candidates unfriendly to kids' issues. Publish a political report card on current candidates and incumbents, as well as periodic reports on incumbents' and candidates' positions on the issues, bill sponsorships, and voting behavior. Create an interactive voting record database that allows visitors to search for how an elected representative voted on a particular piece of legislation. Use a zip code based database to help visitors to your Web site find information about voter registration and polling places. Provide an online questionnaire that allows visitors to find out which candidate matches their own views on children's issues. Use your Web site to recruit volunteers and to add new names to your e-mail and snail mail lists. On your Web site or through e-mail lists and listservs, solicit political donations or goods-in-kind online. If possible, set up a secure server so that donations made by credit card remain confidential. Link to other child advocacy organizations that provide information about kids issues, or that take political actions. Pool your resources: create collaborative point-and-click partnerships. Empower your visitors with downloadable political/informational handouts, sample op-ed pieces, and letters-to-the-editor. Create an e-media watch. Use the Internet to monitor the Web pages and e-mail newsletters of political candidates and political organizations. Be a road warrior for kids; while traveling, use your laptop computer to add names to your mailing lists, update your Web pages, or publish news from the campaign trail. Make sure your nonprofit status allows you to endorse political candidates, or to solicit political donations. Use the Internet as part of a broader, coordinated media and marketing campaign—both before and after an election, to hold office holders accountable. Use high-touch, not just high-tech.

Related Articles