The Limitations of a Political Web Strategy

It is becoming the mantra of politicians across the country: “we must have a coherent web strategy!” Derek Draper’s increasingly laughable LabourList is the latest addition to numerous attempts by political parties to “capture the power of the web.”

I can see the appeal – after all, the web is cheap (over a thousand posts over several years and this blog has still yet to cost me a penny) and the web is also fashionable. After all, the internet helped Obama get elected and if it worked for Obama, then everyone else must jump on the bandwagon. If nothing else, then at least you look hip.

The problem that both the Labour party and the Tories find and will continue to find in relation to exploiting the web is that the web is simply a tool for communication, and it works best if a party is struggling to get into the limelight. Put simply, the Labour party doesn’t need another mouthpiece – pretty much the whole of the population learns what the Labour party is saying as soon as a government minister opens their mouth. It hits the front pages, it hits the newspapers – if people don’t hear of the government policy, then it is because they choose not to interact with numerous different media outlets and, let’s be honest, probably don’t want to hear about government policy. The same applies to the Tories. By trying to hit people with information through, say, Facebook, all the Tories and Labour are likely to do is piss people right off by effectively spamming them with unwanted information.

A web strategy produces better results for smaller organisations and insurgent campaigns. One of the many, many failings of UKIP is that it has failed to get a decent online presence and spread the word through the online world. The Lib Dems have also failed to truly grasp the potential of the internet. Likewise, I’d argue that the success of LPUK may yet hinge on how we use the internet as a tool to spread understanding of what Libertarianism actually is and why it should appeal to people across the UK. One of the reasons why Obama is now resident in the White House is because his campaign realised the potential for both spreading the word about the then little-known candidate, as well as enabling his at one time quixotic campaign to make millions through small donations.

And, as well as not automatically suiting larger parties, there is a further problem with pinning your hopes on a good web strategy. You actually have to have a good candidate to promote. Howard Dean over in the US had a great web strategy – yet as soon as he started screaming like a man possessed, web strategy or nor web strategy, John Kerry over took him in the 2004 Democratic primaries. So, and I’ll direct this comment in particular towards Labour – if your candidate is crap, nothing is going to save you. The Labour party could have the whole internet behind them, but as soon as that glowering, grey gimp Gordon opens his inarticulate and bitter mouth, they are, against every available parameter, fucked.

Ultimately, I’d say this. It really doesn’t matter what your web strategy is if you don’t have something to communicate. And that is the problem that both the Labour party and the Tories have. They can pour thousands of pounds into their web strategies and potentially millions into their communication schemes. But they don’t actually have anything new or inspiring to say. They need to work out why they want to be in power first – actually figure out what they have to offer people. Once they have done that, then it will be the time to worry about how to communicate their message. As it stands, a lack of a valid web strategy is not the main problem for the ideologically inert and flaccid Labour party. And the Tories can continue to be better than Labour at the whole interweb thing, but whilst their message is one of broad consensus with those they wish to oppose, they aren’t going to achieve a great deal.