Damien has an interesting catch today -

Damien’s take:

This will scare the total crap out of the parties here in Ireland. Give someone a sign you paid for and let them fill in the bits? Lack of control, lack of control! This is what this whole new web thing is all about though and now it’s being re-applied in “the real world”.

Blogs, social networks, YouTube etc. - Give people the space to express themselves. Their dime, their time, their effort. Build those places and let them be creative. They’re better than you at being creative, they’re more intelligent than you. Be the provider, let them play. Give them the tools to spread the word and evangelise their work which is on your space. They’ll bring the traffic. For Jason they’re expressing themselves on “his space” (his sign).

I should think that entrusting someone with one of those signs means they’ll appreciate that trust and be more proud of supporting you and showing off their creativity.

There’s only one problem. Even if you accept the premise that nobody has really ever owned their brand, in the sense that they have total control - and that it’s the community who ultimately define the brand - that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t. Right? The my.barackobama.com website allows volunteers to create their own content, for example, and doesn’t monitor all the contributions on the site. Obama is far and away the politician closest to embracing the “give up control” ethos, by empowering volunteers to do their own ‘viral’ organising.

But the ‘give up control’ thing has limits, no? Martin Luther King Jr and his leadership team were extremely disciplined in removing unauthorised signs from the crowd who heard the the “I Have A Dream” speech, precisely because there were legitimate concerns about provocateurs planted to discredit the movement. And Obama’s social networking-style website does allow users to post nearly whatever they like, but offensive material is removed - and some allege that the ‘offensive’ material is just embarassing. But in this case? You’d be relinquishing control - more or less permanently, even if you require the supporter to sign an agreement not to do something dumb - and have little recourse if the reason for voting for Jason Kander is changed to “he’s a terrorist” or “he’s a paedophile” - or more realistically, picks something non-defamatory but embarassing, true, and desperately hoped to be forgotten - “against mandatory sentences for crack dealers”.

I’m absolutely for power to the people, but there are some cases where caution has to be exercised. This may be one of them.

There’s no delete key for a yardsign.