As you all know, I am obsessed with culture and how we can use it to build, grow and sustain movements for social change. I mentioned earlier in my blog the founding of an organization called the Culture Project that is dedicated to using culture to forward a conservative agenda based around liberty. I signed up for their mailing list, and received this in my box this AM announcing their efforts to get conservatives into jobs in the cultural industries. From the email, "We have to do more than complain about mainstream media bias; we need to infiltrate the media with multitudes of Foundational thinking individuals."

The tone of the email (see below) makes me realize that in addition to a post-election retreat to regional and state levels of governing, conservatives are thinking about how to “dethrone” the left’s influence over culture. Elsewhere in their publications they talk about Liberals as controlling culture and their institution is the only think tank out there to do cultural battle.

Perhaps the culture wars are not over…Perhaps they are just beginning.

From: admin@thecultureproject.org
Date: November 19, 2008 8:15:53 AM PST
Subject: The Culture Project Announces Job Search Links Page
Reply-To: miked@thecultureproject.org

Dear Erin,
Since the election, we at The Culture Project are more convinced than ever that the conservative movement is going to have a very difficult time gaining political power if it continues to think that cultural influence professions somehow eternally belong to the left. 



We have to do more than complain about mainstream media bias; we need to infiltrate the media with multitudes of Foundational thinking individuals.

The same goes for other professions that have powerful and lasting cultural impact on the hearts and minds of the American people. 

To that end we’ve created a page of job search links so that there can be no doubt about the mission of The Culture Project. This is a tiny step toward our objective of one day dethroning the left as the arbiters of the American worldview through our cultural institutions. As we grow there will be many more programs and strategies deployed to tackle this Herculean task, but the journey of a thousand miles . . .



Any suggestions on your part would be most welcome.


Cordially,

Mike D'Virgilio
Founder and Executive Director
The Culture Project
http://thecultureproject.org/

Some progressives have offered that in this financial crisis whoever can be the “prosperity maker” will win. But prosperity doesn’t reinforce our frame (to use a term that is so 2004 that even I cringe to write it).

If the conservatives are about liberty, let progressives be about opportunity. We have a leader in Obama that can be the symbol of opportunity and the American dream. We have an activated grassroots that is ready to be a movement. We have issues—the economy, health care and education-that reinforce this value and each other. Opportunity through economics, health care and education, is the path to the American dream.

Republicans at the Republican Governors’ Association last week talked about the need to reposition their party as the one with “the solutions to fulfilling the American Dream”. Their path will surely be many of the frames they’ve used to date: liberty, small government, lower taxes. And they’ve framed the Democrats and progressives as irresponsible on these values.

But what if we started talking about taxes as a path to opportunity? About responsible government that makes sure that free markets and Wall Street don’t take away Main Street’s opportunity to live the American Dream. Health care and education as pathways to opportunity (for all).

America has always been an aspiration-based culture. It is why Nike commercials give us goose bumps and the realm of possibility (like sending a man to the moon) excites us. Opportunity reinforces this cultural orientation. And when we step into culture’s stream, our work becomes much, much easier.

As un-sexy as it is to say about the most exciting electoral win in the history of American politics, the Obama win was all about organizing and infrastructure. For several decades, progressive infrastructure has been waning, and we’ve been organizing like it was the 20th century with “fold” rather than “baton” media models and “we-just-need-to-be-louder” broadcast rather than conversational engagement strategies. Yeah, we needed help communicating our values, too. But when it comes down to it, the quantity and quality of organizing and infrastructure is what allowed the Obama campaign to have so much engagement with voters and volunteers.

An engagement marketer named Alan Moore explains how by looking at exit polling and determined that Obama was able to contact 11 million more voters than McCain. (Obama reached 34 million. McCain reached 23 million.) This means that the Obama campaign had contacted one in every four people who voted in this year’s election. Through an incredible field operation that was “disciplined volunteer-driven bottom-up-AND-top-down, distributed and massively scalable organizing campaign”, according to the NY Times, Obama was also able to convert more of his contacts.

The Obama campaign structured this organizing and infrastructure based on engagement strategies of this century not the last. “Thomas Jefferson used newspapers to win the presidency, FDR used radio to change the way he governed, JFK was the first president to understand television, and Howard Dean saw the value of the Web for raising money. But Senator Barak Obama understood that you could use the Web to lower the cost of building a political brand, create a sense of connection and engagement, and dispense with the command and control method of governing to allow people to self-organize to do the work.”

Indeed, the field operations that Obama campaign created and ran seem to be completely different than previous efforts. They spent considerable time and resources identifying, recruiting and training volunteers who would identify, recruit and train more volunteers. “We decided that our volunteers would not be measured by the amount of voter contacts that they made in the summer—but instead by the number of volunteers they were recruiting, training and testing,” said one Field Organizer. In doing this, the Obama Campaign amassed an army of volunteers across the country that were able to have millions of conversations with would-be voters on issues of the day, and those millions of conversations are now part of the organizing and infrastructure legacy of this campaign because they imbibed a sense of ownership in the campaign. As the NY Times recently reported, “Now Obama’s 20-month conversation with the electorate enters a new phase. There is a sense of ownership, a kind of possessive entitlement, on the part of the people who worked to elect him.”

Beyond the Obama Phenomenon there was a huge amount of progressive infrastructure being built. In 2004, the Democratic retreat and navel gazing inspired more focus on a state level. Organizers in places such as New Mexico and Michigan (and by the time of the 2008 election in a dozen states) began to focus on building power at a state level. The progressives got together to agree to utilize a single database for voter activation. And more than in previous years and election cycles, a renewed focus on how independent nonprofits and advocacy organizations could play a role in electoral politics, as well as leadership development. The results can be seen in places like New Mexico where a clean sweep has transformed the state from red to solidly blue.

Now what remains to be seen is how will Obama continue to nurture the campaign organizing and infrastructure as he and his team transition into governing? Will he be able to apply his community organizing skills in governing? Reports such as the Obama administration’s intention to put all government contracts online and his indication in his text message to his list that he will “be in touch soon on what’s next make me think he will.

One way that Obama could do this is to set up a Community Outreach position in his administration to liaise with the young people and the nonprofit world that helped him move voters and issues in this election. This position could include a national coordinator in the White House that coordinates “State Ambassadors” who play an active role in maintaining and enhancing the Obama Movement, or what I like to think of as the “Opportunity Movement” (more on this in a later rant).

The second thought is that the progressive movement needs to immediately come together around an issue that will activate and reinforce and connect the Obama + state infrastructure. The ideal for this kind of a campaign would be an issue that has national scope, but is legislated at a state-level; that is connective, meaning that it incorporates multiple issues rather than silos them; and that is not distinctly progressive in nature, but can reach across the divide of partisan politics to, as the Obama field operation was fond of saying “Respect. Empower. Include.” the 46% of the country that voted for McCain.

The issue that stands in my mind as fitting of these needs is Energy, as its policy is decided largely at a state level, it has national and even international implications and consistency, it incorporates economics (think green jobs), environment, and American innovation. We have seen a few wins at a state level (think Missouri’s Prop C). And we might even find that our greatest foes in this battle--corporate lobbyists—might have other worries given the economic collapse. Finally, energy has incredible existing infrastructure to build upon in organizations like the Apollo Alliance, Green for All, 1 Sky, and Energy Action Coalition.

Next, given the economic situation our country finds ourselves in, we also need to immediately prepare our organizations and organizers for lean resources and extraordinary possibility. If enough of us can get together to think this through, I think we can find a sweet spot between what resources we think will be available next year, and the quick and successive waves of opportunity that we are sure to face in the coming 12-24 months.

I tend to think that all of the leadership development we’ve been doing across the country could lead to efficiencies that organizers are not often known for. We need to be able to do more with fewer resources. Again, innovation, collaboration, making connections between organizations and issues, and focusing on proven engagement strategies that will reach people outside of the Moveon.orgs and other established and successful organizations. The best way to find innovation, to inspire collaborations and to make connections is by bringing people, particularly organizers, together.

We also need to make sure that whatever we embark on has cultural relevance, or is framed in a way that it can be carried by the stream of culture. By this I mean that we need to think about issues and campaigns that can tap into our American identity, how we form community, and how we find meaning in our lives. When we do this, we win not just on issues and in election, but we win the hearts and minds of America.

Resources:

Alan Moore’s website


How Obama Tapped Into Social Networks Power

The New Organizers, Part 1: What's really behind Obama's ground game

The Other Winner

A new conservative culture think tank started last month called the Culture Project. It claims it is "a revolutionary initiative to change the American cultural paradigm from liberal to conservative" and it intends to "inculcate into the American people via professions of cultural influence".


There have been other more moderately conservative efforts along this line. As we've talked about before in this blog, the Washington Institute convenes "conversations of consequence" in an effort to "renew culture". While their efforts are underlined with a strong theme around serving and social justice, The Culture project is focused on what they call "Liberty Culture".

The Project goes on to explain why it is needed:

A recent article at The American Thinker, by Bruce Walker, included an interesting passage indicating exactly why we need The Culture Project:

A lot of persuasion is necessary before Americans (including our elites and their institutions) change their way of thinking. We in fact still need a crusade to change hearts and minds more than a candidacy.


Exactly! Top-down action will never change hearts and minds to the degree necessary to make a fundamental difference. Focusing on politics alone will continue to leave us frustrated. The Culture Project offers a bottom-up approach in the cultural influence professions. Nothing like it has ever been attempted before.

A new "crusade to change hearts and minds" has begun.

The Culture Project claims that it is basing its strategies on "a different approach, one that has worked for the liberals and can work for conservatives." While there is likely more liberal-identified than conservative-identified institutions that work in part or whole in the cultural realm (not to mention culture makers and leaders), there is no single progressive think tank working in the focused way that both The Culture Project and Washington Institute do to act as a hub for thought, activity and leaders on strategies for moving culture.

That leaves liberals at a distinct disadvantage. They have all the makings to excel in ways that corporations, religions and conservatives would die to achieve, and squander it because they don't realize its power and their advantage in using it.

Perhaps they are looking right at it but instead of seeing power and opportunity, they are blinded by celebrity. As a colleague said to me the other day in talking about the Obama-Phenomenon: "This is not something that Obama created. He has just figured out how to use culture to create a movement." (See our blog posting the other day on cultural indicators in this election.)



A side note: Our intentions with this blog have always been to gather thoughts on this subject. Tell us what you think about the idea of creating a think tank to be more serious about furthering work in this field.

Two new developments in the continued blurring of culture and politics this election cycle:

1.) will.i.am's video and song "Yes We Can" is currently in the running for MTV's Best Video award.



2.) Last night Colbert, the comedy show host and one-time Presidential candidate, has asked for a chance to speak at the Democratic National Convention. Will he get it? There are already several petitions launched for just this effort.

As you probably know, we're pretty obsessed with the role that creative communities can play in change-making. I just found that Americans for the Arts has put together a database that maps creative industries by state, city, congressional district, state legislative district, county, etc.

Because it is an election year, I started looking at swing states, and noticed that some--like OH, PA, OK, + CO--have more than one city in the top 50 most creative industrial base-cities. It seems to me that this information can be useful somehow in our efforts to move the cultural needle on issues. Maybe someone out there has some ideas as to how.

Polling in election years usually capture how would-be voters feel on issues and whom they think will be the better candidate. Perhaps this election cycle is unlike any before in that there are also cultural indicators to be watched:

UPDATE: In the continuing blurring of culture and politics this election cycle, will.i.am's video and song "Yes We Can" is currently in the running for MTV's Best Video award.

UPDATE 2: As reported on Future Majority, McCain's "celebrity" attack on Obama deployed web ads, one of which featured a clip from Wayne's World. Mike Myers, Wayne in Wayne's World, demanded that the McCain campaign remove the video from YouTube or face legal action for copyright infringement.

• Songs written about each candidate

o McCain 2
o Obama 28

• Designs on Café Press (a user-designed online merchandise company)

o McCain 17,50
o Obama 53,500

• Appearances since 2000 on cultural TV shows

o The Daily Show

• McCain: 12
• Obama: 3

o Colbert Report

• McCain: 0
• Obama: 1

o Letterman

• McCain: 8
• Obama: 4

o Saturday Night Live

• McCain: 2
• Obama: 1

• Movie appearances

o McCain: cameo in Wedding Crashers

A deeper look at these indicators might be useful in modeling voter behavior. If not, it definitely illustrates the connection between culture and politics. Indeed, politicians are quoting musicians , musicians are creating songs about politicians, and sometimes it is unclear who is the bigger draw.


Sources: IMDB Movie + TV Database, Cafe Press product search, Air Traffic Control Research.

Clive Thompson writes in this month's Wired Magazine about researchers at MIT's Media Lab who are studying the differences in how people connect and organize in the real world and in online worlds. What they have found is that the two are completely different, and the people who play vital roles in making things happen in each are also completely different:

On the Web, the best way to solve a problem is to engage an extensive network; the person who provides information, advice, or answers is often someone you know only vaguely — a weak link.

In the face-to-face world, though..., groups are more productive when the team members know each other well, sharing extremely strong links. That's because face-to-face teamwork requires intimacy, he says, and "when you're among friends you can really capitalize on preexisting protocols" — nods, grunts, in-jokes — for talking and listening.

Using a method for tracking interactions within a group (based on with whom and when individuals have conversations), these researchers can do incredibly useful things like: predict with incredible accuracy when conversations will take place (very useful in cause-related word of mouth campaigns), locate and resolve inefficiencies in a working environment (usually by introducing people that don't know each other or resolving personal conflicts between key connectors), or model how to create or manage groups to maximize their productivity (creative groups apparently work best when allowed to "fan out to gather information, then regroup").

The research shows us that we cannot create online and real-world networks in the same ways, nor tap the same types of leaders. If we want healthy online AND offline networks and groups that are ready to solve problems, we need to think differently about how we organize them, and specifically who we should invest special support in in their role as "super-connectors" within the group.

Rolling Stone Magazine interviewed Barak Obama and asked a number of interesting questions related to music + culture.

You've gotten enormous support from the music community. Why do you think they've responsed so strongly to your campaign?

Musicians and creative folks, generally, may be inclined toward the idea of change, or at least open to it--to not just settle for what is, but what might be...


Overall, what do you think of pop culture today? It is harmful or a healthy influence?

I'm not somebody who thinks that popular culture should carry the whole freight; it both shapes and reflects what's happening in the country as a whole. What I have seen is a shift in attitutdes of young people wanting to be more engaged and more involved, and you're going to start seeing that increasingly reflected in music as well...

We were having beers with a colleague who does design for a traditional ad agency that works primarily for nonprofits. They do a lot of beautiful communication materials--ads, websites, annual reports, membership materials, etc.

Deyden and I were explaining our philosophy on engagement strategies and how different it is from the traditional marketing that our colleague is so good at. At one point, we were talking specifically about membership programs and materials, how many established organizations know their membership is graying, and how desperately they want to attract younger members.

From our perspective of engagement, the new model of membership cannot be that of the card-carrying member that gives their annual donation and self-identifies as a Sierra Club (or other organization) member. We've written at length here and elsewhere about changes in how young people engage in the world that make most membership programs look ridiculously outdated.

At the same time, we understand that organizations rely on individual membership dues to support the important work they are doing. In fact, relying on thousands of individual donations of $20-100 is the sign of an economically healthy organization whose programs aren't dictated by major donors and foundations. So individual, small donations to nonprofits are imperative to maintain and even to increase.

But we need to find ways that membership can provide new types of value + benefit exchanges (what the members get in exchange for their donation or membership), while still providing the organization with vital resources. We think that in doing so nonprofits will deepen their relationship with their support community. And when this happens, the community is likely to increase its support.

One of our ideas for how to do this is to focus membership benefits and earned income strategies around providing supporters with experiences. Events of all sorts can be once-in-a-lifetime experiences for participants, can raise money, can nurture community, and can be an introduction to new supporters. Retreats seem to be extremely successful in engaging and growing communities of support, as has been employed by evangelical churches and others. Storefronts like that of 826 Valencia also provide opportunity for unique experiences for would-be and existing supporters. (Remind us to post our interview with Dave Eggers on the benefits of having a storefront from a few years back.)

Of course, there are ways to produce these experiences that will encourage and satisfy a new type of membership for nonprofits, and there are ways to totally botch them. We'll put try to put more thought into some of the criteria for success for this soon. But in the meantime, feel free to post your thoughts.