Replies

Kind of off topic, but don't know if you heard about this yet.

MEMO

PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL

TO: Bob Mann

Communications Director

Governor Kathleen Blanco

FROM: John Copes

DATE: August 4, 2005

RE: web site project

It’s been a long time since my last memo, Bob, and it’s not like riding a bicycle, so I’ll simply try to restate and expand upon our conversations concerning various ways to more vigorously advance a coherent strategy to promote the governor’s (and, by extension, Democratic) policies, while blunting the increasingly intense attacks upon her and upon her administration.

As we have often discussed, the most serious problem Democrats in Louisiana now face is a Republican Party apparatus – including Republican elected officials – that becomes more organized, more belligerent, and more nakedly partisan by the day.

Just as worrisome is the relentless daily message-peddling by GOP surrogates operating in the traditional mainstream media, on talk radio, and through a collection of web sites on the Internet.

The "right-wing destruction machine," as President Clinton has termed it, with its goal of personal ruin through vicious attack politics, has finally arrived in Louisiana.

So what are we going to do about it? Currently, Democrats have no comparable structure from which to return fire, or even to begin correcting the calumnies hurled against us daily. It is clear that we must develop and wield an offensive capability of our own, as well as develop a much more agile and effective defense.

This would, of course, include our own web site. Such a site will allow us to quickly and cheaply reach several distinct audiences with an entertaining, informative message of our own design.

Overall, the target audience could be described as people who pay close attention to politics in Louisiana: elected officials; government employees, civil servants and bureaucrats at the local, state and federal level; individuals and businesses that rely on various levels of government for a substantial portion of their livelihood; the mainstream media, and more particularly the "opinion shapers," such as editorial writers, columnists and political reporters; and your generic "concerned citizens." Through these groups, the message filters out to the general public.

What we’re talking about could be more accurately described as a web log, or "blog," but since Andrew doesn’t like that term we’ll use "web site" instead.

How would such a web site work?

In operation, it’s pretty simple and not all that different from what we’re already doing in other aspects of our workdays. All we do is look at what’s available to us online or in public appearances or in the record or wherever -- we cast a wide net, regularly -- and that’s essentially our starting point.

We use this material as a starting point from which then we highlight their inconsistencies, or deconstruct their policies and reframe them to our advantage, in our own language. Or we point out where they’re engaged in folly or mendacity or just plain old greed or meanness. Sometimes we just poke fun.

All of this, however, while availing ourselves of the opportunity to exercise our wit. Such as it may be.

There also could be a daily roundup of links to online stories of interest, national and local. These links would help us get through those rare times when more suitable material is scarce, and also give readers a reason to visit the site every day.

At some point we also would open a comments section.

There are a couple key points to this operation, Bob, and No. 1 is that we all should be absolutely clear that entertainment is what engages people and keeps them coming back to the site. People don’t want to be harangued; they don’t want to be preached at. They want to be entertained, and if you can make them laugh or even chuckle, all the better.

Entertaining the reader – and us – is Rule One.

The other key point is this web site cannot be a one-person deal. It just will not work that way. There should be a consistent tone and direction, which I will help us achieve, but the site must have a variety of voices. We must have broad, consistent and engaged participation from a specifically designated group, which we will call the Working Group.

I suggest the Working Group, at least in the beginning, include representatives from the political operations of the governor, the senior U.S. Senator, the lieutenant governor, the state party, maybe the state Treasurer and/or Attorney General, and possibly someone either representing or familiar with the workings of the Legislature.

This group would conference once a week at a specific and regular time of day to discuss the issues and situations to be addressed on the site that week. You and I can establish the mechanics of the conference if you wish. For now, the key point is that everyone contributes to the discussion, and everyone posts to the web site.

On the geek side of this deal, I think at first we should go small, cheap and easy. A ready-made solution, something like Movable Type or Blogger, is pretty much all of those things. Should the site become popular and traffic exceed the limits of the first solution, we could always move to something larger, at which point the site could well become financially self-sustaining.

Also, as we discussed, there is an email component to the project that is just as important as the web site. In a perfect world, each member of the Working Group would bring their office’s file of email addresses, and we would use them to launch the site. I realize we do not live in a perfect world, but it’s something to strive for, don’t you think?

There are a couple of legal issues. Someone or some entity will have to sign up and pay the bills for the site and related costs. (For the reasons we discussed, it cannot be me. I am happy to be of whatever service I can to you and to the governor, and I look forward to whatever future use to which you may be able to put me. I can help you get the site off the ground and get it going in the right direction. But I cannot be out front with this project.)

It has been suggested to me that we consider forming a 527, a 501c7 (which I am told is a "social club") or a state PAC, and operate the site through it or under its auspices. I am ignorant of the advantages and disadvantages of them all and cannot advise. But this might be something to consider.

The other operations issue: pretty much every site I’m familiar with has a section titled "about us" or something of that nature, where the people who actually do the site tell the reader something about themselves, or something calculated to project the image he/she seeks. We’re going to have to decide exactly how we’re going to handle this.

One thought is to try to masquerade as some sort of anonymous non-partisan do-gooder group. That just won’t pass the smell test, especially after two or three months of consistently talking smack about Republicans and talking sweet about Democratic policy and never whacking a Democrat.

The point is, we’re going to have to come up with some kind of story about who’s doing the site and why. A plausible story in which the posters have a believable reason for wanting to remain anonymous.

A few other final items:

If you want specifics on cost, both for the site and for me, I have them.

It sure would be nice to sell this idea in person with each potential member of the Working Group, especially if they’re going to help pick up the costs.

It might also be helpful in selling them to have a site already up and running, with content already posted.

We need to develop a protocol for the Working Group meetings, and for how we’ll use the information we talk about during the weekly conference. Would we do multiple posts on a single topic? What if the governor and the senior senator happen to hold divergent views on an issue?

How do you think we’d handle, say, the feds raiding Jefferson’s car and homes?

You and I understand web sites, Bob, and so possibly in this memo I’ve unknowingly skipped over big portions of this project, or left big blanks. Which is why I’m considering this thing just a draft. After revisions, we might want to use this as a tool to help get folks interesting in both the site and the Working Group.

Finally, just between us, I think the project is doable, and I think it has a fair chance of success. But there are a number of tricky little aspects to be navigated here, and we should keep in mind that what we envision now might bear little resemblance to what we eventually develop.

I’m always available to discuss this or any other project you may have in mind, Bob. As for this document, mark it up, send it back, and we’ll start again!