By Kathy Mitchell, 02/06/2006 - 10:09am

I had the pleasure recently of speaking on a panel about web-based organizing to a group of people advocating against the death penalty. I immediately lost my audience when I began to talk about message testing--and I really lost them when I hit the topic of online promotion.
It took me a moment to realize what had happened. My audience thought that all this sounded like a lot of money and staff time, and these were mainly folks from small organizations with neither. Many of the people in the room were dedicated volunteers, or the sole staff person supporting all the organization's work.
Small organizations can benefit from web organizing as much or more than large organizations, and the size of the direct benefit depends on the amount of money the organization already spends on direct communication to its members. But gaining that benefit does require some committment of time, and ideally a small committment of money. It's important not to tune out at this moment!
Most people think the internet is free. Email is so cheap to send that spammers make money even if only an infinitesimal share of people actually fall for their scams. People know they can put up a website using any number of helpful online services and a simple template. Blogger lets us all blog away for free! And yet, soon after we put up our website or start our blog, we realize that someone has to actually have something to say on a regular basis and someone to say it to (readers!! what a great idea!!).
Small organizations sometimes spend considerable time worrying about their web content--how to keep it fresh and interesting, and what kinds of reports and documents to post. Clearly you must have something there for your readers, but the web really isn't a static roadmap of places that are interesting or uninteresting--nor are nonprofits small cities competing with each other for highway traffic.
That common metaphor for the internet doesn't capture some key truths about its invisible motion. The internet is a giant, instant communication system where millions of people can share ideas and direct others to new information in seconds. And the invisible flow of information on the internet is largely driven by email (and instant messaging, which is starting to supplant email for some users). So even a generally static website that seems way off the highway can have its day if a particularly interesting post is linked through an email to many people who forward it to many more.
Most people who would like to see a more fair death penalty -- people who get a pang of conscience when they read about an innocent person on death row -- will never actively seek out a nonprofit website on the death penalty. But if a friend sends them an email about a particularly egregious case that has a link to a page on that website, they might click through and read. In fact, its likely that the readership on that day due to that single email will surpass the website's entire readership over several days or a month.
With the exception of the very most popular blogs, the very most popular national media websites, and the very most popular search engine sites--web traffic is largely driven by email. Today, people increasingly get their information by email, and they select lists they wish to be on in order to get the kinds of information they want delivered to them directly. If you have ever taken action after a friend forwarded you an email from an organization you don't usually think about, then you have directly participated in this instant mass information sharing phenomenon.
You can start sending compelling email (I'll have to save some discussion of compelling email -- and message testing -- for another day) if you have only a few supporters' email addresses. Give your supporters an action they can take to help the cause, and remind them that their most important job is to forward your compelling messages to others. Those new people get information they wouldn't otherwise learn, and hopefully a way to agree to get your email in the future.
At that moment, you have just a few seconds to convince most people to give you permission to communicate with them again through email. In today's world "attention" is a precious thing and you won't keep their attention for long. Most of these folks are not going to wander around your website for thirty minutes or read your last opus on death penalty law and policy. They want to see that you are credible (more on that later too) and that you have a good strategy to fix the problem you presented in your compelling email. Now of course, I'm speaking in generalities here, and lots of people don't fit this description. But you can start building your email list on this model and then adjust as you get to know your own new audience better over time.
This simple approach to email communication can be started by any small organization with just a small investment in a few tools. Democracy in Action provides a good starting tool for action alerts and simple email communication for a small organization. They even offer a good "letters-to-the-editor" tool for campaigns directed at your local media. CitizenSpeak offers an easy to use, free action alert tool that lets you connect people to policymakers, but it doesn't provide a way for new people (the friends of your constituents) to sign up for email when they take action. ActionStudio offers basic action alerts with more robust list development for $50 per month plus a penny per email sent to your constituents. The Tides Foundation has invested in GroundSpring, which offers email and fundraising but not action alerts for small to medium size nonprofits for a very low monthly fee. Eventually there may be far more options. Jeff Patrick has noted that the small nonprofit market for good email tools is essentially untapped.
As you move forward, you can post questions and start some dialog about the tools you are considering at TechSoup, on their community-building board. I find that the discussion there is dominated by site development issues with far less about building a good email list, but there are some very good people there who respond to questions. The folks blogging over at IdealWare have also put together some good information about the tools that are out there for small nonprofits.

delicious
digg
technorati




An E-Mail Campaign
Mainly to Kathy Mitchell--
(It seems odd that it's not obvious how to send you an e-mail.)
I hope you will read further because it should be quickly clear why I read "Why E-Mail Still Matters" with rapt attention when I discovered it last night. I immediately signed on to PersonalDemocracy and this is my first post there. You will see that my interest is different from those you usually address because my goal is access to certain people whose names most of us have heard, not connecting with more people than are needed to serve that end.
The following, which I have posted in several forms to the MoveOn forum, should explain itself. I hope it receives enough credibility in your thought to deserve a bit of advice as to how I should proceed.
--Eric Howlett
HOW THE RACE TO WAR WITH IRAN CAN BE STOPPED IN FIVE STEPS BY PARTICIPANTS IN THIS FORUM
We cannot wait for a new administration to stop this race to war with Iran. By that time the American dictatorship that Justice O'Connor warned about could be well entrenched. The new war has to be stopped before it becomes an excuse for continuing support of the present administration in November. In five steps we can provide a special pledge for the officers. (Thank you, Harriet Jones, paralegal, for calling this suggestion "....so incredibly do-able and brilliant...")
WITH A PLEDGE IN THEIR POCKETS OFFICERS IN THE FIELD CAN STOP THE NEW WAR BEFORE IT STARTS
PRELIMINARY STEP: Forum participants find an organization (MoveOn or another?) respected, with good access, that is known to oppose a new war and is willing to assign a few people for a few days to set up an e-mail data base and take the following 4 steps. (The rest of us collect important names for the data base. I have made a start below.)
STEP 1. Make a layman's draft of a new pledge – an affirmation of the officer's oath, and solicit the help of lawyers versed in international and military law to criticize, edit or amend the draft (* A first, first draft is below.)(** And a list of possible lawyers -- can you suggest others?)
STEP 2. Get e-mail or telephone access to retired senior officers known to oppose a new war and request endorsement of the revised pledge and willingness to make public announcements of their endorsement and where on the internet the pledge can be found. (*** Some senior retired officers who will likely be sympathetic)
STEP 3. Prepare a final pledge document, with endorsements.
STEP 4. Circulate the pledge document with endorsements and a note about the strategy to the data base list, to news media, to the appropriate blogs and to (**** Other responsible and influential persons. Collect names and e-mail addresses. Can you suggest others -- with addresses, if possible?)
HOW THE PLEDGES WILL STOP THE RACE TO WAR: Officers in the field need only sign a copy of the pledge and put it in a pocket. Within days, even if only a small minority signs and pockets the pledge, officers all the way up and down the chain of command will be uncertain as to whether their subordinates have the pledge in their pockets, and therefore will hesitate to issue or pass on an order in violation of the pledge. The scuttlebutt will be intense. A good answer to any officer asking a subordinate if he or she has the pledge in their pocket is, "Not yet."
* Draft of the private Oath for a Commissioned Officer of the U.S. Military: (first, first draft) "I ,__(name)__, having been appointed a __(rank)__ in the U.S. __(branch of service)__, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend and bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and to the international laws, protocols, accords, treaties, and conventions to which the United States is a lawful signatory under the Constitution; that I will stand against all persons, foreign and domestic, seeking that I act against the Constitution and those agreements; that I will not obey orders that, in my private and sole discretion, I believe suggest or can cause a violation of universal human rights or that suborn or support an act of preemptive war as both are specified in those agreements; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of my office, so help me God."
** Possible lawyers -- Sandra Day O'Connor, Dinah Po Kempner, Conn Hallinan, Robin Cook, Hans Blix, Shane Darcy, John Pace, Francis Boyle, Elizabeth Wilmshurst, Global Policy Forum (gpf@globalpolicy.org), Jenny S. Martinez, Robert Drinan, Mark Brzezenski, (Find good e-mail addresses. Suggest other names.)
*** Senior retired officers who will be sympathetic -- Wesley Clark, Anthony Zinni, John Murtha, Colin Powell, Gregory Newbold, Paul D. Eaton, John Batiste, John Riggs, Charles H. Swannack Jr, Eric Shinseki, Thomas E. White, Gregory Newbold, John P. Abizaid, George W. Casey Jr, Paul Van Riper. -- A swelling crowd of retired senior officers of whom only ten or so are needed. (Find good e-mail addresses. Suggest other names.)
**** Other responsible and influential persons who might take the idea seriously and publicly support it. Paul Krugman, Bill Maher, Seymour Hersh, Bob Woodward, Howard Dean, Walter Cronkite, Jimmy Carter, John Kerry, Bill Clinton, John Conyers, Dennis Kuchinick, Ralph Nader, Leon Panetta, Bruce Bartlett, Carl Hiassen, Sidney Blumenthal, Farnaz Fassihi, James Gerstenzang, George Soros, Bill Gates, Sean Monkhouse, Alex Beam, Ron Reagan, Paul O'Neill, Dan Payne, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Richard Clarke, (Find good e-mail addresses. Suggest other names.)