Here Are the Facts -Vote No on Constitutional Amendment 36
This piece is an example of the activist approach Winning Mark takes to voter and audience research. Whenever appropriate, we prefer to directly participate in the polling and focus group process. We believe there is a real value to having those who will ultimately be creating communication products in the room to understand firsthand the nuances of what respondents are saying.
This campaign, which opposed an initiative instituting a state constitutional ban on gay marriage, had the benefit of extensive polling, focus groups and dial testing research. Winning Mark directly participated in framing and observing the research. Polling showed that one of the many challenges facing the campaign was that voters did not necessarily believe that denying same-sex couples the ability to marry would result in actual harm. Focus group research indicated that we needed a combination of specific harms and a credible messenger to provide believability. Finally, direct mail was dial tested along with radio and television spots.
The dial tests revealed this to be the single most believable voter communication. It combined a detailed list of legal rights, protections and responsibilities associated with civil marriage with the validation by a prominent former state Supreme Court justice. In fact, based on the research response to this piece, the campaign commissioned a television ad to match the mail piece. In the difficult environment of the 2004 General Election, all of the state-based gay marriage bans were successful on the ballot. The No on 36 campaign, however, achieved the best result in the nation. The basic premise of the direct mail program was that television would be the primary voter persuasion medium, with radio and mail playing more targeted roles.
June 2, 2006 | Filed Under: Direct Mail | Permalink
