Bloggen internetPartiet

Drupal kører 12 ud af danske top 100 hjemmesider på FDIM

Bo Arlind — Sat, 22 Jan 2011 18:53:48 +0000

Ud af de 100 mest besøgte hjemmesider i Danmark kører 12 af dem på Drupal, og står for 9 % af alle besøg (37.192.525). Hvis vi gør top 100 op efter antal brugere, så har Drupal 17 sider og 11,5 % af alle brugere (4.363.969). Drupal har dermed bidt sig fast som det førende opensource CMS, og med Drupal 7 kan endnu flere store sider tage springet til Drupal.

Tallene er udregnet ud fra Foreningen af Danske Interaktive Mediers (FDIM) statistik for november 2010. De enkelte hjemmesiders CMS er opgjort af Firefox modulet Wappalyzer.

2010 har været et rigtigt godt år for Drupal. Flere og flere af de store mediehuse lægger sine hjemmesider over på Drupal, og i august holdt brugerforeningen DrupalDanmark en konference i Bella Centeret med over 1000 deltagere fra hele verden.

Succesen kan nu aflæses med 12 sider i top 100 over mest besøgte hjemmesider i Danmark, og i top 200 har Drupal 35 hjemmesider. Den største Drupal side i Danmark er BT med 114 millioner sidevisninger i november. Den mest kendte i verden er Obamas Whitehouse.gov.

Drupal 7

Med den nye Drupal 7 så tager flere hjemmesider springet bl.a. Version2. Drupal 7 er omskrevet til mega-sider og har fået øget brugervenligheden markant. Successen for Drupal er derfor kun lige begyndt.

Joomla har den første side på plads 98, og Typo3 den første på plads 131. WordPress kommer først ind på en plads 136. Wappalyzer kender ikke Umbraco, og er derfor ikke opgjort.

Læs opgørelsen her:

Top 100 hjemmesider med Drupal.html

Drupal 7 er landet med 900 moduler

Bo Arlind — Sat, 08 Jan 2011 13:44:47 +0000

Drupal 7 er nu udgivet, og tager et kæmpe skridt fremaf. I dag er 1% af alle hjemmesider lavet i Drupal herunder WhiteHouse.gov, Berlingske koncernen m.f.

Jeg har allerede udviklet en ny hjemmeside i Druapl 7 til mit arbejde hos Netpointers. Mit indtryk er særdeles positivt - specielt brugervenligheden er kommet i top.

Her er en præsentation af de nye fordele:

7 x 7 improvements in Drupal 7 on Prezi

Dialog på Facebook fansider og Helle Thorning-Schmidt udelukkelse af en bruger

Bo Arlind — Fri, 21 May 2010 10:17:11 +0000

Helle Thorning-Schmidt har blokeret en bruger fra hendes fanside på Facebook, og sidenhen har Facebook slettet brugeren (Flere Facebook-fadæser + 2, Helle Thorning sletter kritisk Facebookbruger og 180grader.dk).

Det har rejst en debat om, hvordan politikere bør håndtere dialogen på sociale medier - senest på Trine-Marias blog: Politikere må forstå, at samtalerne på Facebook er åbne!, som skriver:

Socialdemokraterne henviser til at spøgeren ødelagde debatten ved at stille samme spørgsmål mange gange, men de overser, at det ikke er det, sagen handler om.

Trine-Maria fortsætter med at angive nogle flotte principper for dialog, men holder de i praksis, når det handler om en statsministerkandidat med næsten 60.000 fans?

Dialog kræver at alle parter overholder en debatetikette

Det er ikke kun politikerne, som skal ville dialogen - det skal borgerne også. Hvis det havde været i et forsamlingshus, hvor en spørger blev ved med at stille samme spørgsmål igen og igen, så ville der ikke være meget dialog, fordi de andre borgere ikke vil kunne komme til orde. Når man spammer en fan-side, så ødelægger man dialogen for de andre borgere og ikke kun politikeren.

Man må som borger acceptere, at ens spørgsmål vejer det samme som andres - man har ikke ret til fortrinsret, blot fordi man overdøver andre.

Viljen til dialog skal være der for begge parter, og ikke kun politikeren, som skal finde sig i hvad som helst. Det er derfor sagen netop drejer sig om, at borgeren spammede med det samme spørgsmål, så dialogen blev ødelagt med andre borgere.

Man kan heller ikke have det naive udgangspunkt at borgeren vil dialogen - specielt ikke hvis fjernelse af indlæg tolkes som bevis på, at man har ret.

Ingen statsministerkandidat kan svare på samtlige indlæg fra 60.000 fans, som Trine-Maria foreslår - der er så og så meget tid, og den skal bruges bedst muligt på borgere som vil dialogen.

Facebook gør ondt værre

På vores almindelige profil kan vi blokere for personer ganske let, men på fansider er det en umulig funktion, hvis man har mange fans - du skal nemlig selv finde frem til personen blandt titusinder af fans og du får kun vist 100 ad gangen.

Den eneste mulighed man reelt har for at blokere bestemte personer er ved at "markére" kommentarer, og derefter er det op til Facebook, hvad der sker derefter.

Alt i alt, hvis man vil af med en spammer, så er der kun en mulighed - "markér" kommentarerne. Derefter er det Facebooks ansvar hvad der sker.

Dialog kan ikke foregå 60.000 til en person

Det er lidt utropi, at tro at en person med 60.000 fans kan besvare alle spørgsmål - det er ganske simpelt umuligt.

I stedet bør borgerne organisere sig i grupper, og har gør web 2.0 gruppedannelsen meget lettere - og partierne bør gøre gruppedannelsen let på deres hjemmesider, så partierne også opbygger en tættere relation end på Facebook.

Vi vil derfor se flere og hurtigere grupperdannelser. Og grupperne kan internt bruge nettet til at samarbejde om poltiske forslag med wikis m.m. Og kommunikere ud ad til til nye medlemmer og resten af samfundet.

Det er menneskeligt umuligt for politikkere, at svare på alt og inddrage alle, og derfor fungerer grupper som et filter. Politikeren skal kun kommunikere med en kontakt, fremfor alle gruppens medlemmer hver for sig.

I stedet for at fokusere på direkte borger-politiker inddragelse, så hjælper web 2.0 de eksisterende metoder til gruppeinddragelse + skaber nye muligheder for gruppedannelse og internt arbejde:

Dannelse af nye grupper, som ikke var mulig før
gamle grupper bliver større
(usynlige) grupper kan få deres budskab ud til andre (intet medie-filter)
de kan internt arbejde på nye måder til vidensdeling og politik-udvikling

Guide: Guide til lokale kandidater til sociale medier

Bo Arlind — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 13:12:15 +0000

Jeg har fundet en engelsk guide til lokale politikkere/kandidater om, hvordan de bedst kan bruge sociale medier til borgerindragelse og kampagner.

Læs guiden her:

Using Social Media: A Guide for 21st Century Councillors

OBAMA’08: Fra passive vælgere til selv mobiliserede partivælger kampagner med sociale medier

Bo Arlind — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 16:57:56 +0000

Jeg har skrevet et oplæg til Socialdemokratiet om Obamas brug af sociale medier under primærvalget - selvom oplægget blev skrevet under primærvalget, så ramte oplægget plet under præsidentvalget og teorien bag udvikles fortsat.

Hent og læs oplægget her: "OBAMA’08: Fra passive vælgere til selv organiserede partivælger kampagner med sociale medier".

Clintons valgkamp fra 92/96 har gået sin sejrsgang verden over med Blair, Schröder og Fogh. Hillary har forfinet strategien igennem så mange år, at hun til sidst så uovervindelig ud til at blive Demokraternes præsidentkandidat. Hillary tabte og dermed også Blairs, Schröders og Foghs strategi.

Enhver politisk kampagnestrategi har taget udgangspunkt i vilkårene for kommunikation og organisering af aktive. Den politiker, som har forstået og udnyttet vilkårene bedst, har vundet. Dette er derfor ikke kun historien om Obamas sejr, men om nye sociologiske vilkår for kommunikation og organisering.

Obama førte ikke en bedre Clinton valgkamp end Hillary – han førte en hel anden og overlegen form for valgkamp baseret på en ny sociologi for selv organisering og netværkskommunikation. Obamas organisering har været den traditionelle partiorganisation overlegen til mobilisering af trofaste vælgere. Obamas kommunikation har været de gamle massemedier overlegen til at overbevise nye vælgere.

Af Bo Arlind, cand. scient. soc. og tidl. kampagnekonsulent hos S med ansvar for sociale medier

E-bog: Sådan kan kandidater bruge internettet til at vinde (USA)

Bo Arlind — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:57:48 +0000

Bloggen e.politics har lavet en god og kort introduktion til, hvordan kandidater kan bruge internettet til at vinde. Den er bestemt værd at læse for alle som har en interesse for web-kampagner, hvad enten man er kandidat eller rådgiver.

Bogen beskriver de næste skridt for den danske web-kampagner:

Mail-kampagner
Online Fundraising and Mobilization

Begge dele bygger på Constituent Relationship Management (CRM), som Progrssivt NET tilbyder. I kan også læse min analyse af Obamas valgkamp og brug af sociale medier.

Bogen består af følgende afsnit

Introduction: How Candidates Can Use the Internet to Win in 2010
Chapter Two: Tools, Time and Resources
Chapter Three: Online Outreach
Chapter Four: Online Fundraising and Mobilization
Conclusion: Putting the Pieces Together

Opsamling på blogs om Barack Obamas kampagne II

Bo Arlind — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 21:16:13 +0000

Obama's Donor Base: A Partial Revolution, At Best - techPresident.com:

The most interesting finding of the CFI analysis is how many of Obama's donors started out "small" and then, by giving repeat donations, became mid-range or large givers. This, no doubt, is where the online revolution probably had its biggest influence, because now it is so easy to move from information to motivation to action, with just a click or two of a mouse:

Many of the repeat donors who started off small ended up in the $201-$999 middle range. Among Obama's total pool of 403,000 disclosed donors on August 31, more than half (about 212,000) started off by giving undisclosed contributions of $200 or less. About 93,000 of these repeaters gave in cumulative amounts of no more than $400 for the full primary season. Another 106,000 repeaters ended up between $401 and $999. Finally, not many of Obama's 212,000 small-donor repeaters ended up in the top group. Despite colorful press stories, only about 13,000 crossed the $1,000 threshold in their cumulative contributions.

A 10-point action plan to strengthen and modernize the Republican Party - rebuildtheparty.com:

2008 made one thing clear: if allowed to go unchecked, the Democrats' structural advantages, including their use of the Internet, their more than 2-to-1 advantage with young voters, their discovery of a better grassroots model -- will be as big a threat to the future of the GOP as the toxic political environment we have faced the last few years. The time is now to set in motion the changes needed to rebuild our party from the grassroots up, modernize the way we run campaigns, and attract different, energetic, and younger candidates at all levels.

A Different Kind of Offline Campaign - thenextright.com:

Many of the tactical postmortems on the Obama campaign have been focused online. But it's worth remembering that that is only one piece of the puzzle. The fact is that Obama ran a better kind of offline campaign. A couple of parts really stand out from the Lloyd Grove interview of David Plouffe:

David Plouffe: The Obama Campaign Used Grassroots Data and Computer Modeling to Allocate Resources in Real Time - e.politics:

David Plouffe gave an extended description of how the Obama campaign used volunteer-produced data to create computer-generated models of states — down to segments of a media market — to determine how the campaign was doing at any given moment. And it wasn’t an idle mental exercise, since they used these simulations to make essentially overnight changes in how and where to concentrate resources, including candidate and surrogate visits.

Marshall Ganz on the Future of the Obama Movement - techPresident.com:

More important for the present moment, Ganz was the architect of Barack Obama's grassroots organizing juggernaut. He played a central role in the "Camp Obama" training sessions--three-day intensive workshops attended by something like 23,000 local organizers--and his teachings on the theory and practice of community organizing were widely influential on the campaign's local efforts.

merchandise: The swag they carried - beaconfire:

I’m going to focus on a very small part of the Obama electoral machine and the lessons non-profits can take away: merchandise. So what lessons can non-profits take from the Obama campaign if they aren’t as big or cool as Obama? Four do’s and one big don’t, and how your non-profit can learn from their example:

Opsamling på blogs om Barack Obamas kampagne

Bo Arlind — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 20:40:00 +0000

John McCain v. Social Media: The People Win - e.Politics:

The lesson: political professionals need to realize that they don’t have a monopoly on political messaging — from T. Boone Pickens to Will.i.am to Ms. Hilton, average citizens can now go toe-to-toe with them and even win a few rounds. It helps to have Pickens’s millions to spread the word, but good creative and a good subject can combine with the world of blogs, social networks and free video hosting to get a piece in front of a massive audience. How many more people will see Paris Hilton’s response than McCain’s original video? By which I mean, how many more people will imbibe an anti-McCain message presented by a compelling host?

Five Simple Rules for Online Politics - e.Politics:

1. Think about the ends before you think about the means
2. Brilliance almost always takes second place to persistence
3. Integrate, integrate, integrate.
4. Content is key
5. Is selling an idea (or a candidate) like selling soap? Yep.

Which ad would you click through? - The Next Right:

So I was doing some research for a panel that I am speaking on at RightOnline, and I was curious. So I searched on Google for "obama healthcare" and "mccain healthcare". I was shocked by what I found. First the ads:

Which of these would you click on? The one that asks you to register at campaign events or get to know someone? Or the one that asks you for money. I bet that Barack Obama's ad has a lot higher click-through.

Microtargeting Myth vs. Fact - The Next Right:

There's a lot of hype surrounding microtargeting -- which is the process of targeting voters scientifically based on consumer and demographic data. This piece in Salon yesterday on "Obama's super marketing machine" is no different. But as someone with a bit more than a passing understanding of what microtargeting is, I have to shake my head a little at articles like this. Because the media gets it almost completely wrong -- whether it's hyping relatively mundane technologies or celebrating "sexy" examples (dial up 40 year old Vodka drinking Volvo drivers!) that have almost no bearing on microtargeting's usefulness in real life.

Insider's Guide to Video and YouTube for Nonprofits - frogloop:

In keeping with our coverage of video for nonprofits, we spoke with Ramya Raghavan, Nonprofits and Activism Specialist at YouTube. In this interview, she shares her insights into the strategic and the tactical information nonprofits might find useful as they consider their approach to using video to reach their communications goals.

PdF2008: Shirky, Teachout, Rushkoff, Jones, Clift Keynotes Are Up on Blip.tv + Final Plenary on Leadership - techPresident.com:

We've posted another chunk of video of plenary sessions from "Personal Democracy Forum 2008: Rebooting the System"

Interview med leverandøren bag Obamas hjemmeside

Bo Arlind — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 20:10:30 +0000

Her er 3 videoer med Blue State Digitals Jascha Franklin-Hodge, CTO and co-founder, som leverede Barack Obamas hjemmeside.

Her hovedpointerne:

Here are a few observations I took away from our conversation:
Online U.S. political communities will morph from a campaign fundraising role to a governing role. Regardless of whether Obama or McCain wins in November, every 2012 political campaign, even the laggards, will be as sophisticated as Obama is today- and any campaign with that much momentum won’t be able to stop community participation at the White House door or the Capitol steps (“thanks for all the money and support, I‘ll see you in four years”). Online communities will follow politicians into their governing roles. This summer when MyBarackObama experienced the FISA revolt within his own community this became clear. This has far more transformative potential than the fundraising juggernaut we are seeing now. Powerful communities may come to dominate the agenda of incumbent politicians providing feedback, direction and policy input.

Microcampaigns and Swarm Politics: Rather than one centrally governed behemoth, MyBO is enabling a thousand small campaigns to flourish. MyBO puts the tools into the hands of anyone that wants to get active; from having your own blog, downloading voter lists to make calls with “Neighbor to Neighbor” or having your own fundraising dashboard to mark your progress. This kind of swarm politics has generated enormous amounts of energy (and money) from ordinary citizens. Jascha sums it up best “We are helping them run thousands and thousands of little local campaigns that roll up to a central set of issues or candidate or goal” That is unbelievably powerful.

Technology (infrastructure and know-how) will become a necessary core competence in all U.S. political campaigns. Jascha points out that campaigns traditionally mirror movie productions, with all of the resources, technology and logistics brought together for a short burst of activity and then disappearing once the final scene is shot; this results in an enormous loss of knowledge and skills that need to be relearned once the next campaign begins. Campaigns that maintain or are able to tap into a continuity of software, infrastructure and human capital will have serious advantage. Blue State Digital was conceived to fill that gap on the Democratic side of the aisle…

Open Data and transparent government. Part Three of the video series digs into the value of open data in government to allow citizens to hack and remix at will. When lobbyist data, earmark data etc. is available in standard formats it will be a great leap forward for more transparency in government. Great stuff.

Respect. Empower. Include. - bagom Obamas selv-organiserede kampagne

Bo Arlind — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 21:44:51 +0000

Her er lidt blogs og artikler om, hvordan Obamas kampagne var selv-organiseret på græsrodsplan.

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

It was a huge risk for the national field program to have paid staff take the time to methodically build volunteer teams instead of rushing directly to spend all their time running voter contact activities themselves. From the point of view of the conventional wisdom of much of the pre-Obama field organizing world, the campaign is actually taking two big risks: first they are risking everything on the effectiveness of masses of volunteers, then they are risking everything again by relying on volunteer teams to lead those masses. What if teams was just a bunch of hippy nonsense? What if it turned out there just weren't that many unpaid activists capable of running high-quality canvasses?

Jeremy Bird, the Ohio general election director and one of the driving forces behind making teams a national strategy, said, "We decided in terms of timeline that [our organizers] would not be measured by the amount of voter contacts they made in the summer—but instead by the number of volunteers that they were recruiting, training and testing. It was much more an infrastructure focus. So there would be no calls from Chicago saying, 'Why haven't you made more calls?!' Instead there would be calls saying, 'Where are your neighborhood team volunteers?' Or, if the numbers seemed high, 'Are they real?' It was a whole shift in mentality that was really, really good."

We saw glimpses of the potential for this kind of organizing campaign in MoveOn's 2004 and 2006 volunteer operations, the Dean Campaign and even the Bush and Kerry campaigns. And there are great examples of this kind of organizing if you go back to the social movements of several decades ago. But the Obama campaign is the first in the Internet era to realize the dream of a disciplined, volunteer-driven, bottom-up-AND-top-down, distributed and massively scaleable organizing campaign. For anyone who knows how many times this has failed to happen, this is practically an apocryphal event. Marashal Ganz, who is an advisor to the national field campaign, and one of the main architects of the team model, said he's been waiting 40 years for it.

Obama basic training

She urged volunteers to hone their own stories of how they came to Obama – something they could compress into 30 seconds on the phone.
"Work on that, refine that, say it in the mirror," she said. "Get it down."
She told the volunteers that potential voters would no doubt confront them with policy questions. Mack's direction: Don't go there. Refer them to Obama's Web site, which includes enough material to sate any wonk.
The idea behind the personal narratives is to reclaim "values" politics from the Republican Party, said Marshall Ganz, a one-time labor organizer for Cesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers who developed "Camp Obama" training sessions for volunteers.
When people tell their stories of how they made choices and what motivates them, they communicate their values, Ganz said in an interview.

Marshall Ganz (professor, som teoretisk har lavet Obamas organisering af kampagnen)

Welcome to Marshall Ganz’s Web module on organizing. Professor Ganz is a long-time organizer; a Lecturer in Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University; and a principal of Harvard’s Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations.

Obama's Secret Weapons: Internet, Databases and Psychology

In 2003, the Sierra Club realized that its local grassroots volunteer programs weren't effective. In late 2005, it commissioned the Harvard scholars to undertake a two-year research project to figure out why, and how to fix it. The researchers discovered that the kind of volunteers that the Sierra Club attracted were "lone ranger" types who focused on accomplishing goals on their own, rather than effectively working with others with "shared purpose."
The danger of this approach, Ganz says, is that individuals burn out easily. They try to do everything themselves rather than breaking the goals out into specific tasks that members of interdependent teams can accomplish in pieces. That's why relationships are so important, they found. Ganz and Wageman's model gets members of teams to find out more about one another's experiences, and draw on each member's expertise. The model also uses personal storytelling during workshops as a way to motivate peers and potential recruits to action.

"Ultimately, your story should move people to specific action by painting a detailed picture of how things might be different if we act, giving us hope that if we act now we can make real that different future," explains the training manual.
The stories are an exercise in relationship building, says Ganz.
"What we've been doing is trying to teach people to do what Obama does during his speeches — to tell their own stories to motivate others," he says. "You're building this sense of commitment to both the values and people, but you're structuring it purposefully to achieve goals like, 'In this district, we need 2,000 votes.'"
The Obama campaign first experimented with the Ganz-Wageman system during the primaries, trying it out in Iowa and South Carolina. It won in both states, while in New Hampshire, where it ran a more-traditional marketing campaign, Obama lost. The campaign began phasing in the system nationwide in June. More than 23,000 people have participated in at least eight or more hours of leadership training provided by Camp Obama, according to Ganz.