I spotted an interesting story on Talking Points Memo about how John McCain had a menu item "Golf Gear" on his campaign website. My first thought was that this must have been clever hacker trying to make McCain look like an elitist. But no, the McCain campaign earnestly thinks golf gear is that important to America’s future.
14 Comments
14 Comments
Comments
And, many of us use AdBlock Plus and miss most of the adverts on this site and many others.
This has got to be one of the dumbest articles I’ve ever read, and that’s saying a lot.I mean c’mon, seriously - golf gear and JavaScript? SearchEngineLand needs to do a lot better than this
Jason, a great majority of websites have issues. It this is so simply to get right, why is everybody screwing up? My sense is that your criticism is more about politics, and less about search marketing. "Let them play golf," is a terrible message to share with people when (1) we’re at war, (2) gas prices are causing hardships for average Americans, and (3) lots of families are having their houses forclosed on. As a marking consultant, I see this as a huge, huge blunder.
I echo Jehochman’s sentiment, McCain was sending the wrong message with that golf gear thing he had going on, especially given the current economic circumstances. Why let political leanings distort the reality?
The only politics in my criticism is my resentment when the conversation about this country’s direction for the next four years gets sidetracked by trite, irrelevant bs that gets blown way out of proportion. Tripe like who’s pastor is saying what, or who’s site supports JavaScript or links to branded golf accessories.I’m an Obama supporter, and I still find it self-serving and intellectually dishonest for people to imply that a link on McCain’s site means he’s fiddling while Rome (er Washington) burned. My opinion would be the same if people tried to accuse Obama of the same thing based on his regular basketball game or the fundraising golf tournaments that are listed on his very site.
I think Jason’s on point here. I was frankly appalled to read the story on SEL as I think if the most serious criticism on usability of the site is the Javascript - then McCain’s farther ahead in the field than I expected. Honestly - you think he has to worry about googlebot indexing his site? Go ahead, search it - seems like the bot managed to fight through it. And is that really the motivation of this "news" item? I doubt it. And golf gear? That’s a huge marketing win!! Take a look at his base. His supporters aren’t going to buy messenger bags and hoodies.Presidential races are not run on nor do they rely on W3C compliant, usability certified web sites. Thank goodness. And I’m guessing there’s nary a McCain supporter out there that knows what javascript is, much less how to disable it. Do you imagine swing voters are hitting that site and deciding on who to vote for based on the site architecture, or the swag? If so, we as a nation have much bigger problems than I imagined.
First let me say, I am taking an unbiased approach to this topic. The site’s usability issues existed regardless of who’s side it was for. That is what makes it an interesting topic for us. Does it matter to McCains supporters? Probably not. Should they care? That’s a debate in and of itself when you think of how much money is being spent.I’m afraid I have to disagree with Michelle. I don’t think the golf gear was a good marketing win, because it is bad branding. Yes, it gets in the media which causes buzz, but this isn’t Hollywood and McCain ain’t Brintey Spears. Both candidates have careers that are directly connected to public opinion. But, i really am enjoying the discussion this sphinn post is creating. That is what social media is all about. Kudos to Jehochman and Rizoh!
@SEMChamp - I don’t pretend to be a marketing genius, but I’m thinking an old, wealthy, conservative, republican, white guy selling golf gear to his old, wealthy, conservative, republican, white guy constituents is pretty much the opposite of bad branding. Please tell me how this is a mistake for him. In fact, I think it’s interesting that everyone is keying in on that - and your calling it a mistake baffles me. This is his image. He is being true to his image and reaching out to his core base. So how this harms him or how it’s bad marketing is lost on me. As far as the usability, which should really be the issue here. Again, I think using his site vs. Obama’s site, is weak. I think there are far many other sites that could be used if someone was really interested in tackling the subject of how site architecture and usability should be foremost the consideration. For example - Disney. Now there’s a really interesting case - a site with truly broad appeal, spanning multiple demographics. Check out disney.com with javascript disabled. Now *there’s* a problem. At least McCain’s site still displays! I don’t think the McCain v. Obama comparison was truly a study (or even a footnote) in usability issues. I think it was a thinly veiled political statement. And for the record, I support neither candidate so I don’t have a dog in that fight. And I think golf courses are a giant waste of land and water. Lest you think I’m just defending McCain - or golfers everywhere. ;-)
I guess it is more complicated when it comes to content of a site and its intended target audience. We all know that McCain is trying to chip into Obama’s base, but, as Michelle has pointed out, the "golfing" material was probably meant for his own existing base. So, behavioral targeting might be a better solution.I still don’t think a "Sphinn" Dr. was working the post. ;-)You win this round Michelle! :)
The mistake: sell to those who are on the fence, not those who are already, definitely, positively are going to vote for you. As Samuel Clemens said, "Golf, a nice walk, spoiled."
I don’t think you can have it both ways. Are you really advising that the site hide - or otherwise make less easy to find - what the core customers (his base) are looking for? That’s awful usability. Going with a traditional business analogy - are you suggesting he alienate repeat, existing customers (which comprise the majority of a business’ income) in deference to hoping to acquire new customers, that may or may not ever walk through the door, and may or may not ever buy anything? Would you recommend Hot Topic remove the pictures of the pierced kids from their site so that the J. Crew crowd might shop there? I don’t think you would. You’re a really smart guy, and do really great work. That’s why this article felt so off the mark to me.
Michelle’s dead on - why alienate your evangelists and ’repeat customers’ in order to sway the minds of people who aren’t going to vote for you anyway?Now that we’ve had a couple presidential cycles with the internet, i think it’s pretty clear that a pattern has emerged where candidate websites are only good for three things - 1) fundraising 2) rallying your base and 3) engage your volunteers. (You could also argue that there is a media outreach component as well)
thumbs down - this piece is extremely poor, both as a political and search critique. It is amateurish and shallow.
Agree wholeheartedly with Jason. Thinly veiled political statement.