Is the DNC’s Email Marketing Strategy Right for 2020?

✍️ This piece was originally published as part of my new Substack newsletter, the Marketing Mind Meld. Subscribe there for weekly marketing reads!

It’s been a week.

From Joe Harris to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, my twitter feed has been a cacophony of takes from a Democratic National Convention warning of peril to the bloodthirsty battles of the NBA Bubble (Go Celtics!) — but the real damage was not so much to my Twitter feed as it was to my email inbox.

These were ~10 of more than 50 emails I received over the course of the week, covering the nomination of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.

Having lived in DC for a while, email marketing in politics is nothing new. For the 50 I received, I have friends who received hundreds, if not more.

But it brings back to mind one of my common frustrations with the DNC and other party-level political marketing:

• Their audience is likely progressives who are already donors, potentially active organizers, and will unequivocally vote for the Democratic ticket
• They are subscribed to PAC mailing lists, DNC mailing lists, candidate mailing lists, and even mailing lists for marches and more
• They are more than familiar with the severity of the asks, the importance of the moment, and the necessity of continuing to dream as the world gets destroyed

Do these same people need fifty emails to remind them?

The devil’s advocate I find in this situation is not so much: “Yes, it never hurts to have fifty reminders that this is the important election in our lifetime” but more logistical in nature:

• “How could any one organization know how many emails their audience is receiving about roughly the same topic?”
• “How could any one organization resist newsjacking the DNC, the most important event of the year for the Democratic National Party?”
• “If someone hasn’t donated to the DNC but has donated elsewhere, how could the DNC know?”

All fair points — and before continuing this piece, will fully acknowledge that I have never worked in digital marketing for one of these organizations. Anything else I say can and should come with a grain of salt.

I’m strictly coming from the perspective of a marketer and a consume. That comes with all the biases of someone who gets inundated with hundreds of emails.

With that caveat, what would be my one thought on what the DNC can double down on? If you’ve been reading the Mind Meld, you may have guessed that my thought has little to do with politics — and everything to do with human psychology.

Why don’t people vote?

Let’s zoom out to the question that is on the minds of everyone at all of these organizations:

“How might we get everyone registered to vote and follow through on voting for Joe Biden in the November election?”

That’s the simplest interpretation of course — but ultimately every communication comes down to this as the end objective. Take a look at those subject lines above.

• President Obama is Right: Vote for Joe Biden this November
• Tom Perez wants you to Donate: Give us more money so we can do more marketing to get people to vote for Joe Biden this November
• Elizabeth Warren is warning you that this is our moment to decide who we are as a country: You guessed it, vote for Joe Biden this November

If you’re reading this and don’t see any reason not to vote for Joe Biden (even before this digital onslaught of marketing emails) — then you probably don’t care much about what the DNC does moving forward.

But they’re not so much concerned about you as to the value you can provide in pushing any missed votes towards the finish line.

Let’s back up: Why are there missed votes in any given election?

A quick list:

• People don’t logistically know how to vote or vote to do on election day
• People don’t have time to research and don’t want to make an educated guess
• People have major misconceptions about voting and what they need to do
• People haven’t checked their registration or aren’t aware of their status
• People feel disconnected or disaffected by their political system
• People don’t feel like their vote matters in the greater electoral chaos
• People are too busy to vote and require time and effort taken from priorities
• People don’t inherently trust politicians or believe most are corrupt liars
• People are inherently disenfranchised (voter ID laws, gerrymandering and voter roll purges etc.)

For now, I’ll disregard voter suppression (a larger legal issue that can’t necessarily just be solved by good marketing but has many great organizations working on it), and inherent trust of politicians (another issue that is rarely solved, and in fact, sometimes more exacerbated by marketing).

Let’s focus on some of the others, which I’ll divide into two categories:

• Logistical Gaps: Registration status checks, not enough research, misconceptions about voting
• Commitment Gaps: Too busy to vote, too many other things in the way, lots of time and effort taken from priorities

So how do we close logistical gaps and commitment gaps ahead of the election?

Enter psychology.

Mere Measurement and Channel Factors

Surveys are nothing new.

In surveys, people are often asked whether they are likely to engage in a certain behavior — i.e. “How likely are you to vote for Joe Biden this November?”

But, this may not be the most effective lever for influence. In the book Nudge by economist Richard H. Thaler and Professor Cass Sustein, the two authors discuss choice architecture, a method to nudge consumers to make certain choices without depriving you of your agency to choose.

Of course, no one is tying you to a chair and forcing you to vote for anyone — but how could entities like the DNC nudge you to complete the action without force or coercion?

In Nudge, Thaler and Sustein discuss the concept of measuring intentions.

“Those who engage in surveys want to catalogue behavior, not to influence it. But social scientists have discovered an odd fact: when they measure people’s intentions, they affect people’s conduct. The “mere-measurement effect” refers to the finding that when people are asked what they intend to do, they become more likely to act in accordance with their answers.”

How do this work in a practical context?

If people are asked whether they intend to vote in a much more specific way, the answer to the question might actually affect behavior. In other words, if you ask people to predict their behavior, the behavior is likely to confirm that prediction.

According to a study by Anthony Greenwald and his team at Ohio State University in 1987, groups of students were put into two groups where they were asked a set of questions. Both groups were asked if they knew, first, where to register to vote and, second, when the registration deadline was. Students who indicated lack of knowledge were given the correct information.

Then, an experimental group received a third question:

What do you expect to do between now and the registration deadline of Tuesday evening? Do you expect that you will register to vote or not?

Simply asking people before the election about their plan or expectation to vote increased probability of their voting by as much as 25 percent.

This goes back to the impact of the mere-measurement effect, with the large expectation that merely measuring or questioning has a chance to change his or her subsequent behavior.

But if simply querying people about intended behavior gets them to perform the behavior more frequently, why doesn’t this work more?

Of course, intention has its own barriers. Even wanting to vote has obstacles that inhibit its completion. People could be working long hours, feel insecure about their choices, be unaware of their polling place or a number of different, unsure of their registration or a number of factors that fall into our logistical and commitment gaps.

Psychologist Kurt Levin uses the term channel factors, small influences that could facilitate or inhibit certain behaviors.

In a study at Yale University in 1965, groups of students were encouraged to take a Tetanus shot — one group simply received a lecture about it. The other group received a lecture and then were given a map where they decided which route they would take on this day. Nine times as many students got shots in the second group.

This is all part of a broader concept in social psychology known as priming, a phenomenon whereby exposure to one stimulus influences a response to a subsequent stimulus, without conscious guidance or intention.

It differs greatly from peer pressure or emphasizing the stakes, which are two methods political organizations currently do very well.

So how could we incorporate this all back into marketing?

• Mere Measurement via Subject Lines: Subject lines are an easy way to incorporate mere-measurement. Subject lines like “Calling all organizers!” can easily be re-arranged to a more salient ask: “Can you join one organizer training before August 1st?” — While I may not be committed, I’d be curious to see what it consists of. More likely to open than before. (Channel Factor bonus: Schedule a time!)
• Mere Measurement via Text Messages: I just got a text message as I was writing this (creepy!) from Biden HQ: “Are you registered and ready to vote?” — A simple yes or no question. Love it.
• Channel Factors — Maps: A dream marketing initiative would be if the DNC sent every registered voter a mailer or a link to a digital map that had circled all the polling places in their area. A simple way to remove inhibitors.
• Channel Factors — Quiz and Voting Checklist: Do you know everything you need for election day? Do you even know who is and isn’t able to vote? Another simple way to understand whether or not you’re prepared without feeling like you’re doing too much work.

As I said at the beginning, I’m not a political marketing quiz and likely don’t understand why March On has to send me four emails just to reiterate that the USPS is burning. So I’ll give everyone here a benefit of the doubt.

But if we truly want to make history this November, let’s remember that the people who don’t vote aren’t all terrible people — they are normal humans with everyday constraints, frustrations, and apathy.

Remember the stakes is an important message. It just can’t be the only one.

I’m currently a growth marketer based out of the Bay Area and enjoy sharing insights around growth, careers, and personal anecdotes. I also like meaningless controversies (check out ranking of the best fast food fries) and spending my days finding the best Super burrito in San Francisco. All opinions are my own. Get in touch here or via @kushaanshah on Twitter.