In theory, those engaged online would be the most concerned by an iPod tax. It’s an unproven theory since I can’t say for sure the folks contributing to election chatter on Twitter are also the most likely to have iPods or be affected by the controversial (and possibly non-existent) iPod tax. However, since it’ll make this post more interesting, I’m going to make the assumption Tweeters are also most likely to be worked up into a frenzy (cue ass-u-me jokes now). Let’s call this campaign a safe bet with an expectation of a good ROI.

How does this campaign look?

Well… I’d be wrong. That’s right. I’d be wrong. And so would the Conservative party if they’re gambling on this being a pivot issue for the online world.

How do I know?

Tweets about the iPod tax make up just slightly more than 3/10ths of 1% of all election related tweets for the period of March 26 through April 15 (1,178 of 369,844 Tweets). Even if we remove the April 12th spike of 70,315 tweets (more than 50% of which was debate related) as a statistical anomaly (most days hover between 10,000 and 15,000 tweets), iPod tax related tweets only gain 1/10th of 1%.

In fact, the most tweets in one day on the iPod tax (338) barely edged out the Twitter “spanking” directed at @senatorjake (324) for his “attack dogs” tweet.

UPDATED: After four days, the above video has been viewed just 6,376 times and boasts no comments. The Stop the iPod Tax Facebook Page has only 405 fans with very mixed debate going on, a good measure of which is questions and snipes directed at the Conservative Party.

I expected a different result. It seemed logical that reminding Canadians a vote for the Liberals would mean a vote to pay an additional $75 on each purchase of an iPod would send people to the web with torches and pitchforks (whether or not the actual claim is true). Despite all the media attention, and the slick ads, it just doesn’t seem to land.

Maybe $75 isn’t sexy enough to launch this as a campaign issue. Perhaps it might get more attention online if this particular attack involved an integrated strategy with engaging, purpose-built content. But, that’s a whole different discussion.