Campaign.org

Source:  The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=384

Overall, 26% of Americans mention the internet either first or second as their main source of election news. Among young people, the internet is eroding television’s advantage as a main source for election news. Six-in-ten of those ages 18 to 29 cite television as their main source for election news, down from 75% four years ago. Over that time, the proportion citing the internet has more than doubled – from 21% to 46%.

Notably, while newspapers were mentioned more often as a campaign news source among young people four years ago, today those under age 30 are almost twice as likely to mention the internet as newspapers as where they get most of their news about the election (46% vs. 24%).

 but not yet the primary source of campaign news.

From CNET:

The share of Americans who say they “regularly learn something” about the presidential contenders from the Internet jumped to 24 percent for this election cycle, nearly double the 13 percent figure when that question was asked during the 2004 race. In 2000, the level of use was even more minuscule, at 9 percent.

And for the 18-29 demographic, perhaps unsurprisingly, the numbers are vastly different: some 42 percent of respondents said they’re learning about presidential campaigns online, which outnumbers all other news sources. Cable news networks came in second for that age group, at 35 percent.

Full story… http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9849169-7.html?tag=nefd.only

From The Times:

The entry of Michael Bloomberg, the Mayor of New York, as an independent candidate could see election spending for 2008 move towards $5 billion – compared with £50 million for the British general election in 2005.

Jan Baran, a Washington lawyer who specialises in campaign finance, said that the open contests for both party nominations – and intensity with which they are being fought – meant that spending would smash all previous records.

Full Article:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3168726.ece

In the democratic race, is it really a surprise the win was taken by the candidate who has been using the Internet to energize young voters and brings a fresh appeal to politics? Barack Obama has embraced the Internet as a tool to target, reach and inspire voters to take action.  So far the Internet has seemed  an awkward dance for Hillary Clinton and indeed the Iowa caucus numbers show she has underperformed.

For the republicans, the impact of the Internet is less clear as no candidates have been seriously focused on using the web to an advantage. It is reported that Mitt Romney outspent Mike Huckabee 10:1 in Iowa, paying $10 million for the privilege of getting hammered in the final numbers.  How much of that was tossed into the empty hole of traditional media?

Obama gets it. His campaign is highly engaged on the Internet and right now he is on his way to spending time in the oval office. Does Huckabee get Internet politics too? Voted to the top by a base of evangelicals in Iowa, can Huckabee become an Internet evangelist to reach beyond his current constituency?