Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean someone isn’t watching you

I realized that political parties buy consumer lists and information to better tailor targeted messages, but even I was surprised to see the scope and breadth of the Republican information-gathering machine.

The GOP’s mastery of data is changing the very nature of campaigning.

Rather than concentrating on building the widest possible support, the Republican Party now focuses on finding known and potential Republican voters, learning about their interests and concerns in unprecedented detail and then delivering to them a tailored message.

Both parties gather data on registered voters through public records such as voting history, voting registration rolls, driver’s and hunting licenses and responses to issue surveys. Consumer data, often gathered from supermarkets, liquor stores, online book vendors, drugstores and auto dealerships and used increasingly in marketing campaigns, also are finding their way into the voter files kept by both parties.

But the depth of the Republican files is greater — they have been around longer and include more information — increasing the data’s predictive power. The Republicans also have more money to buy top-notch consumer data from, say, supermarket chains and other retailers.

That’s right, as silly as this sounds, the Republican Party may very well have bought information about your shopping habits from your local grocery store.

It’s part of what’s called “micro-targeting.” Parties have historically crafted generalized messages to appeal to a very broad audience. But with newly-bought consumer information about your likes, dislikes, and purchase patterns, parties (primarily the GOP) can custom tailor a message specifically to you and a small number of people like you.

They do this, of course, because it works.

Republican and Democratic strategists refuse to reveal much detail about the consumer information they collect. But strategists did offer some examples.

Bourbon drinkers are more likely to be Republicans; gin is a Democratic drink. Military history buffs are likely to be social conservatives. Volvos are preferred by Democrats; Ford and Chevy owners are more likely Republican. Phone customers who have call waiting lean heavily Republican.

Strategists said that cross-referencing such seemingly disparate data can produce powerful correlations — and draw a roadmap for targeting messages to specific voters. Where a voter lives, what car she drives and what magazines she reads are all used to predict her position on specific issues.

Remember, just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean someone isn’t watching you. In this case, the “someone” is probably Ken Mehlman.

Let me get this straight. The RNC is gathering all kinds of data about me and my lifestyle (such as it is). The TSA and other agencies within the executive branch of the federal government, controlled to an unprecedented extent by the Rethugs and headed by Bush and his minions, are doing the same thing in spite of contrary instructions by Congress, the GAO, and federal law.

Would I reveal myself as a full-fledged member of the TFHC (Tin-Foil Hat Club) if I worried that the federal agencies have been slipoing the illegally gathered data to the RNC to assure a Rethug majority forever? I’m just askin’ ….

  • AL – are you afraid that they will use your information to target you so effectively that you’ll become Analytical Conservative?

  • There has got to be a point of information overload, doesn’t there? No variables are all that predictive of anything (and when we learn that they might be we tend to be ornery enough to act contrary anyway). I’m suggesting that there’s a lot of “noise” or “static” or “uncertainty” in the social world. I think all this information gathering is a little like the ancients rattling knuckle bones before the battle, simply something to do. The Republicans have a lot more money to waste than we do, so they do more of it. A good issue and a good candidate and a little boldness can render all that data useless in a single Tuesday in November.

  • smiley,

    No, with my most out-there TFHC tongue firmly planted in my cheek, I’m most worried about becoming “nul Analytical mortis causa” which, in Latin, is “no Analytical by reason of death.”

    If you think about all of this digital information so easily appropriated by thieves, the RNC, or the government, with the resultant theft (i.e., the “death”) of one’s own identity, maybe my “nul Analytical mortis causa” isn’t quite so loony…

  • This isn’t new and it’s not particularly scary—this isn’t the government, it’s politicians trying to target and audience. Dems do it too, just not as well and not as much, to their discredit. Ed, didn’t the Dems outspend in certain areas this year? That was the mistake in putting the convention so early–we didn’t need public $$$ after all. And this strategy, while it might seem like noise, worked. Clearly. They won.

    Dems, instead, have relied too heavily on broad approaches to sway swaths of voters, a terribly outmoded strategy. I saw a great analysis of the difference in media spending in 2004, and Dems outspent Repubs on national public air, while the Republicans focused on specific messages to specific cable audiences. Look what happened there.

    I think the current issue with the AFL-CIO demonstrates that relying on massive outreach doesn’t work in today’s world, where unions are relied upon to secure too many votes. People simply don’t think that way, and a declining union membership shows how this once powerful lobby has been undermined and outmoded. Kudos to the Teamsters and others for going out to get the job done. Smaller, more efficient units are the political operatives of today’s world.

  • Comments are closed.