Vanguard Communications InSites | Blogging for Social Change » Policy Communications

In Memoriam: Betty Ford, First Lady of Social Change Persuasive Storytelling

Crystal Borde — Sat, 09 Jul 2011 14:55:39 +0000

Living in the era of “Intervention” and “Celebrity Rehab” reality TV shows and pink ribbons for breast cancer awareness, it’s hard to remember there was a time when society viewed seeking treatment for addiction as shameful and battles with breast cancer were kept secret.

Photo courtesy of dbking on Flickr

Former First Lady Betty Ford, who passed away on Friday at the age of 93, changed that. During this time of mourning, we remember her as a masterful communicator who used persuasive storytelling to educate the public about critical social issues, such as addiction and breast cancer awareness.

By publicly sharing her own struggles with alcoholism, Ford began to lift the curtain of stigma for people and their families dealing with substance use and addiction disorders. Her courage to openly talk about her own challenges and hope for recovery empowered others to face, and treat, their own addiction issues as well.

While in the White House, she would answer reporters’ questions candidly about drugs, sex and other social topics perceived as taboo. Following the Ford presidency, she founded and served as the first chairwoman of the board of directors of the Betty Ford Center for substance abuse and addiction, which started the movement for similar facilities to open around the country, offering patients and their families the hope of recovery. She reinforced the belief that if the First Lady of the United States could successfully receive treatment at a rehabilitation clinic, then the average person could seek recovery too.

After undergoing a mastectomy for breast cancer shortly after becoming First Lady, Ford’s openness about her surgery and illness raised the visibility of breast cancer, a disease that few Americans were comfortable talking about at the time. She understood the power of using her own story to get news headlines and create a more inclusive, open dialogue about these pressing social issues.

Upon learning of her death, former President George H.W. Bush in a statement said of Ford:

No one confronted life’s struggles with more fortitude or honesty, and as a result, we all learned from the challenges she faced. The Betty Ford Center, which already has helped change the lives of thousands of people, will be her lasting legacy of care and concern.

President Bush is right; Betty Ford used her life as a classroom and demonstrated that sometimes the most persuasive argument for change is one drawn from personal experiences. When communicators share life lessons this personal, passionate and honest as Ford did, we give social issues a human face and voice.

If we’re lucky and follow her model, we too can hopefully change a few lives for the better. Hers is a powerful legacy laid by an extraordinary communicator.

It Gets Better: The Video Heard ‘Round the World and in the White House

Crystal Borde — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:14:29 +0000

Is it possible for one video to launch a social change revolution? Can one YouTube video inspire others to take action and become activists?

President Obama proclaimed June as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Pride Month and launched a new section on the White House website dedicated to the policies and issues impacting the LGBT community. Both are landmark civil rights statements never before made by a sitting President. One of the sections of this White House microsite worth noting is called “It Gets Better.” Sound familiar? It should. The section name is a tip of the hat to the successful It Gets Better Project launched to reach out to LGBT teens contemplating suicide due to bullying and prejudice.

The message discusses the happiness, potential and positivity that awaits youth after the difficult teen years. This project — started with a single YouTube video by columnist Dan Savage and his partner Terry in September 2010 — turned into an international movement, inspiring more than 10,000 user-created videos by world leaders, celebrities, activists and others. It has been viewed more than 35 million times and has inspired people around the globe. Watch Google Chrome’s recent tribute to Dan, Terry and their video:

What can we learn from the success of the It Gets Better Project for launching a social change revolution?

Be honest. Both Dan and Terry shared their personal stories regarding difficult teenage years. It was their personal accounts that made the video so engaging and inspired others to share stories.

Keep it simple. The majority of It Gets Better tribute videos have something in common — creators used a simple web or video camera to record testimony or a pledge of support. Most didn’t use fancy editing or production. The personal nature of this format eliminated those distractions, allowing users to just focus on the messenger and the message.

Use your connections. Dan Savage is a well-known journalist with a syndicated column, a weekly podcast and a spot on “This American Life.” To say that Dan is well-connected is an understatement, and he shared his video with as many people as possible, spreading his message far and wide. Like Dan, we all have family, friends, neighbors, co-workers or like-minded people in our lives who would be willing to share our message and call to action. Reach out via e-mail and social media to get your message to the right people.

Don’t overthink it – just act. Dan and Terry recorded their video in response to a wave of LGBT teen suicides headlining the front pages of newspapers around the country. To be responsive to the growing issue, they quickly acted by recording their video and posting it to YouTube. They were able to capitalize on a news cycle still covering this topic and received more exposure than if they had waited and posted the video a few weeks later. As my mom would say, “You have to strike when the iron is hot.”

Believe the sky is the limit. Did Dan and Terry know that a few months after posting their video, President Obama, Pixar employees or the World Series champion San Francisco Giants would make videos of their own? Probably not. They may have only intended their video to let LGBT teens in crisis know they aren’t alone, but by placing no limits on their efforts, their video led to a movement of love and support and a new non-profit organization focused on sharing that message of inclusion with others in need. Change is always possible with commitment, passion and a willingness to do whatever it takes to accomplish your social change goals.

Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu said: “A journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step.” In the case of June’s LGBT Pride Month Presidential Proclamation and It Gets Better Project, a moving campaign to help youth live for a brighter future can begin with a single YouTube video.

Federal Reserve Shows that Smart Event Planning Can Manage High Stakes

Crystal Borde — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 21:34:19 +0000

When communicators organize and stage a press conference for their organizations, the stakes are pretty high. We hold press conferences to support a variety of objectives — such as to address recent challenges or issues or to launch new programs — however, rarely do we have to think about how our press conference will negatively impact the U.S. economy. Well, that’s what the public affairs staff at the U.S. Federal Reserve is thinking about today as they plan their first public press conference to be held this week to discuss the new policy statement of the Federal Open Market Committee.

Photo courtesy of MedillDC on Flickr

What is said during the press conference by Chairman Ben Bernanke, whether in his opening statement or in responses to reporters’ questions, could sink the stock market in minutes — a hit that would further hurt the already floundering economy. A lot of pressure? You bet. Great advance thinking and planning by the Federal Reserve will help manage this press conference and its impact on the market.

As reported by The Wall Street Journal today, the Federal Reserve communications team has already taken steps to manage the message from Wednesday’s press conference. Many of their precautions demonstrate procedures that we should consider when planning our own press conferences as well.

Conduct research on similar events before planning your event. Since this was a first for the Federal Reserve, their team wisely spoke with other banks and global financial institutions with press conference experience to identify lessons learned from these events in the banking industry. Understanding and applying these tips and tricks prior to planning this press conference will help the Federal Reserve limit the pitfalls and challenges they might have faced without such important research. Learning from others’ successes and failures should always be the first step for communicators when planning press conferences, or any type of event.
Keep event agenda focused on communications goals. To keep on message and force the attending media to cover those key messages, construct the press conference agenda with the event’s communications goals as a guide. The Federal Reserve is planning for brief remarks by the chairman followed by a time-restrained question-and-answer session to keep reporters focused on their key messages and limit tangents that might have occurred if Bernanke delivered longer remarks.
Set rules for who attends and how people participate. While there is much interest from financial industry people in this press conference, the Federal Reserve decided to limit press conference attendees only to invited media. To attend, the Federal Reserve has stipulated that reporters must work for a media organization recognized by Congress and that each outlet may only send one reporter. By laying the ground rules early about who can attend, event organizers are creating a controlled environment, establishing expectations for how the event is going to be run and establishing their guidelines for how media should be covering the event.
Prepare the event spokesperson for everything. In the past when speaking with a room full of reporters, Chairman Bernanke answered questions received on notecards. At this press conference, the Federal Reserve is going a more traditional route calling on reporters with raised hands to ask questions. In either scenario, preparing the spokesperson by discussing potential questions and familiarizing them with good answers is key to help Bernanke feel (and look) comfortable during the press conference. Also, this preparation is the best way for the Federal Reserve to control the message and limit negative fallout impacting the New York Stock Exchange before the closing bell.

While communicators, like those working for the Federal Reserve, may not have control over what reporters ask, there are preventive steps we can take in the research and planning phases for press conferences to create an environment that offers the greatest potential for desired outcomes for an organization’s communications goals and messages.

When Using Social Media, Follow An Open Door Policy

Crystal Borde — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 12:06:36 +0000

Photo by nanpalmero on Flickr

This past month, Governor Rick Perry (R-TX) made a critical mistake on Twitter. Out of the blue, he blocked several local reporters from reading his tweets. Members of the Texas media, including Tom Benning from the Dallas Morning News, received the blocked notice when they attempted to view the Governor’s Twitter feed. When asked about the message, Perry’s press office admitted to reporters that the governor is solely in control of his own Twitter feed, confirming that he personally blocked these reporters from his feed. As a result, Perry is the brunt of jokes and more news stories than his press office can handle.

While any social media platform user can block specific people from seeing content or information through privacy settings, it’s not the best approach. Unless your personal safety or security is in jeopardy, your social media profiles carry unstated “open door” policies. When you “open the door” and create a profile, you need to keep the door open and be transparent with your followers regardless of who they are. Pulling back, placing limitations or blocking access, especially when you are a pubic figure, fuels the media and the public to assume information is being hidden from them.

If you feel you need to build a wall around your social media presence, think twice about creating profiles in online communities. Public figures like Perry should think three times. The public expects access to public figures, thus they shouldn’t pick and choose who accesses their profiles. By doing so, their actions could undermine their credibility and lose the public’s trust.

Whether it was his intention or not, Governor Perry just placed a spotlight on his tweets. Now reporters, opponents and constituents will be paying more attention to what Perry says online. This incident gives further credence to why Twitter hired former Capitol Hill staffer Adam Sharp to represent Twitter in Washington, DC and help policymakers understand and use the platform.

Social media is not for everyone. It’s just one of the new tools we can use to communicate with others. If you, or your organization do not feel comfortable with its openness, avoid participating. It is better to find other ways to communicate with key audiences than publicly closing your social media doors, which could build suspicion and distrust among your followers.

The State of the State of the Union

Helen Mitternight — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 18:49:19 +0000

Photo Credit: MCS@flickr

How many times have those of us with children been asked, “Tell me the story about the day I was born” (or if they were adopted, “Tell me the story about the day you brought me home.”)? Children never get tired of hearing stories about themselves, because those stories help them define who they are. As a nation, we listen every year to the story the President tells us about our country in the State of the Union because it defines who we are, and who we hope to be.

The great speeches of our time are those that tell a story that unites us and that captures an emotion we all are feeling. Think about Ronald Reagan (or actually, the great speechwriter, Peggy Noonan) who captured the nation’s grief after the Challenger tragedy:

We will never forget them, nor the last time we saw them, this morning, as they prepared for the journey and waved goodbye and “slipped the surly bonds of earth” to “touch the face of God.”

Each year, I like to watch the State of the Union to see the story the President will tell. As communicators, we work to craft stories in a way that will compel and convince, and each year, it is fascinating to see how every President tells the story of the United States. We know that, whether we’re giving a speech or relaunching a brand, we need to know our audience, to control our own message, and to be prepared to defend our brand in a crisis. To accomplish all this, President Obama’s State of the Union speech needed to capture the somber mood of a nation still remembering the Tucson shooting, reframe the mid-term election which handed his party solid defeats, and convince the nation that “the state of the union is strong.” He also wanted to move the country away from “business as usual” in the ways it governed and invested. From a communicator’s perspective, how did President Obama do?

Know Your Audience
The Congressional cliques were broken up when Democrats and Republicans comingled in the audience, instead of sitting along party lines, for the State of the Union. But Congress still looked to their party leaders — embodied by Vice President Joe Biden and Speaker John Boehner sitting behind the President — for how to react to the speech. President Obama began by praising and welcoming Boehner and by mentioning the empty chair where Representative Gabrielle Giffords should be sitting. We often counsel clients giving speeches to include “shout-outs” to people so that the audience is immediately engaged. While President Obama went on to do the traditional shout-outs to people who were brought in because their stories proved a point, these first two acknowledgments were clever because every member of Congress was likely to applaud either Boehner or Giffords, if not both.

Control Your Story
You might never have known that the Democrats suffered bitter defeat at the hands of Republicans in the last election if you listened to President Obama’s speech. In his speech, the American people had voted to ensure that government ruled with strong voices from both parties, and the divisiveness was really just the “contentious and frustrating and messy” process of democracy. Obama went a step further, making the party differences seem trivial compared to the big picture:

We may have differences in policy, but we all believe in the rights enshrined in our Constitution. We may have different opinions, but we believe in the same promise that says this is a place where you can make it if you try. We may have different backgrounds, but we believe in the same dream that says this is a country where anything’s possible. No matter who you are. No matter where you come from.

Defend Your Brand
Anyone who has fundamental policy differences with the President represents a dissenting story from the one the President wanted to tell during the State of the Union. Obama preempted much of the dissent by painting disagreement as a welcome part of the democratic process and by making the villain of the story — because every good story must have a villain — not the Republicans, but the other countries who are poised to take advantage of any competitive weakness we show:

Half a century ago, when the Soviets beat us into space with the launch of a satellite called Sputnik¸ we had no idea how we’d beat them to the moon. The science wasn’t there yet. NASA didn’t even exist. But after investing in better research and education, we didn’t just surpass the Soviets; we unleashed a wave of innovation that created new industries and millions of new jobs. This is our generation’s Sputnik moment.

Some criticized the President for a lackluster delivery, especially after the rousing speech he gave in Tucson.

But, from a communicator’s perspective, I think he did what he needed to do, which was to turn down the heated rhetoric. He acknowledged that he knew his audience, he reframed his “story” and he preempted some — although certainly not all — criticism from Conservatives. And how did he communicate about innovation? Interestingly, if you look only at the words that Obama used, you will see the hot-button issues he emphasized, despite the tone. “Americans,” “jobs” and “work” — all key issues. But also one other word, which has not played a large role since Johnson and Kennedy State of the Unions: “new.”

A Year of InSites: Real-Time Communication is Critical

Brandi Horton — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 18:48:36 +0000

In the public relations world, we’ve always known that being responsive to hot stories is a great way to get your issue, organization or idea out there. While the old rules still apply, the game changed a little in 2010. Responsiveness still reigns supreme, but with a twist. The faster we respond with bold, sensational commentary, the more likely we are to make it into prime time.

With political discord reaching new heights from coast-to-coast in this election year, the media proved that the old rules regarding responsiveness are important. Stories evolved quickly to incorporate new elements and points of views. But these days, it seems cable news and online channels are giving the most attention to those who can yell the loudest. Whether an opinion is sane, sound, or evidence-based seems to be of little interest. Death panels come to mind. If a pundit or a pundit-in-waiting rants about something remotely relevant, they get the top spot on evening broadcasts and homepage treatment on conservative and liberal blogs alike.

It sounds like a scary world out there in the media. I won’t lie, I’m often afraid – terrified, actually - of what constitutes news today. But I think we can learn something from these ravenous ranters in punditville.

Many nonprofits think long and hard – and then think some more – about what they want to say, how they want to say it, and where it’s safe to say it. In the mean time, it’s already being said by those ravenous ranters, and likely in a way that isn’t very flattering to the issues that matter so much to all of us working hard to change public discourse.

For the sake of our credibility, we want to be sure that we only craft messages based in fact and driven by sound advice, rather than emotion. But let’s resolve in 2011 to be more prepared to respond quickly, with bold, relevant ideas that can compete with some of the death-panel-proponent types on the six o’clock news. Let’s make social issues a prominent part of the real-time, 24/7 news cycle.

A Year of InSites: Successful Efforts Rely on Resourcefulness

Crystal Borde — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 17:47:21 +0000

Year of the Rooster by eugevon, on Flickr

While I know 2010 was the Year of the Tiger according to the Chinese calendar, it felt more like the Year of the Rooster. Those born in the Chinese zodiac’s Year of the Rooster tend to be quick thinkers who are practical and resourceful. During this very busy news year, resourcefulness was a key element to successful campaigns. Being able to identify and utilize appropriate sources for information, news, statistics, policy updates, and other resources helped campaigns achieve their communications goals for the year.

Breaking news stories this year, such as the BP oil spill and midterm election results, impacted ongoing campaigns as well as created new outreach opportunities for new or existing campaigns. What’s more, many of these stories took on new dynamics in real-time, and had additional nuances or complexities depending on the medium in which information was delivered. Relying on just one or two sources for news is limiting.

2010 reinforced that diversifying information resources is key. We should monitor traditional and online news sources, social media channels and pop culture trends to find the next big news angle or outreach opportunity. While tracking many resources may seem to reap more work than rewards, it’s the only way we can keep our outreach efforts whether to the media, policymakers and/or the general public, current, relevant, and effective. To aid your resourcefulness in 2011, use these free online tools to help you keep up with the news and political cycles. They will help you become more proactive and strategically reactive in future campaigns.

Although we are entering the Year of the Rabbit, let’s keep the resourcefulness of the rooster ever present in all the communication work that we do. Forgive me for referencing another saying, but how can we make lemonade in 2011 if we aren’t able to find the lemons?

Is Political Polling Dying Out or Evolving?

Crystal Borde — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 17:00:49 +0000

With the 2010 midterm election behind us, we’re also past the peak of political polling. But with 2012 presidential contenders lurking around the corner, we can be assured that a new round of polls are about to bombard us in the news media.

Around election time, news coverage is littered with poll results indicating how voters feel about candidates, specific propositions or ballot measures and key social issues discussed in campaigns. These findings help political analysts make predictions on how national and/or state politics will be impacted by these polling trends. In the months before elections, we frequently answer calls asking us to participate in one poll or another.

But how accurate are these poll results anymore?

New phone by AMagill, on Flickr

With more people using their cellular phones as their primary phone contact, how accurate can demographic information gleaned from these polling calls be, especially in state contests? Will it be harder to get people to participate in polls via their cell phones?

As a recent article in The Economist argued, “cellphone-only” users are less-likely to answer pollsters’ calls or participate in polls, even if they answer. Also, it’s difficult to pinpoint participants in a specific area or state since where they vote and their cell phone area codes may not match up. For example, once a long-time resident of Los Angeles, my primary phone is a cell phone with a Los Angeles-based area code, even though I’ve been living in the DC area since 2005. I’m not alone.

Including more “cellphone-onlys” in polling may also statistically throw off poll findings as well.

Perhaps the future of polling lies in social media. Along with the new profile design, Facebook also recently launched a new feature — Facebook Questions — where members can ask questions and provide answers. As pollsters explore this new feature, they may identify ways of using it and similar social media tools and networks for political polling.

While traditional phone polling may be dying out, it’s clear that new digital innovations may be giving this vital audience research tool new life.

A Crash Course in Congressional Caucuses

Scott Rieder — Tue, 30 Nov 2010 16:33:13 +0000

What is a congressional caucus? Is it that piece of road kill you had to avoid when driving to work this morning? No — that’s a carcass. Some people might think that it’s the capital of Venezuela. No — that would be Caracas. If you’re thinking that it’s that town in Jersey that you’re not quite sure how to pronounce, you’d be wrong again. That’s Secaucus.

So what is a congressional caucus? We’ve all heard of it before, but if you ask most people outside of Capitol Hill to define what a congressional caucus is, they likely don’t know the answer.

U.S. Capitol Building at Night 2 by Kevin Burkett, on Flickr

So let’s clear all of that up. A congressional caucus is a coalition of House of Representatives and Senate members that meet to discuss specific legislative priorities and policy issues.

Our nation’s largest caucuses belong to the two major political parties. These are the House Democratic Caucus and House Republican Conference, along with the Senate Democratic Caucus and the Senate Republican Conference. Issue-related or race- or ethnicity-related caucuses also play a large role in defining policy issues by uniting Congressional members of the same ethnicity, such as what is known as the tri-caucuses: Congressional Black Caucus, Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus.

Staff at Vanguard Communications had the pleasure of speaking with Joseph P. Mais, legislative assistant to Rep. Raul Grijalva, about congressional caucuses. Mais discussed their various elements and dynamics. He mentioned that due to their small size, the vast majority of caucuses do not meet. He also noted that advocacy and non-profit organizations can influence agendas for active caucuses by:

Working with members to bring forth issues
Working with caucus chairs or task force chairs to bring forth issues
Highlighting connections with current issues that are of importance to Congress

These Congressionally-exclusive, closed-door caucus sessions are critical to our nation’s legislative agenda, as caucuses can influence Congressional members’ stance on our nation’s most critical issues. Caucuses allow members to discuss issues frankly with one another, to determine their positions and make sure their votes are both informed and strategic. They can also give advocates a chance for a body of legislators to champion their issue on the Hill.

Stephen Colbert’s Testimony Shows Potential Pitfalls of Celebrity Spokespeople

Chris Connelly — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 15:58:09 +0000

All eyes in Washington were glued to a House subcommittee hearing last Friday. Members noted as the proceedings began that it was probably the most attention paid to the body by the public and the media since Bill Clinton’s impeachment. They owed it all to Comedy Central funny-man, Stephen Colbert, who was invited by Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren to share his experiences with the United Farm Workers “Take Our Jobs” effort. Lofgren praised Colbert’s ability to bring public attention to an important issue as a media celebrity.

You don’t have to look much further than a Google search on “Colbert” and “Congress” to realize this wasn’t the attention Lofgren intended. Stories about Colbert dominate the coverage, while discussions of immigration and agriculture are buried, despite being the focus of the hearing. Regardless of whether you believe Colbert was in line by cracking jokes during a Congressional hearing, his testimony is a perfect reminder of some of the potential pitfalls of enlisting celebrities to support a cause.

Celebrities do have the ability to shine a light on important issues. But how that celebrity represents the issue—and how the public and media respond to the celebrity’s involvement—is key in their ability to help. If it is believed that the support is disingenuous or inappropriate, their participation can distract from your core message. It is a danger that House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers clearly recognized: He thanked Colbert for drawing attention to the hearing, and asked Colbert to withdraw himself from the proceedings before testifying. Conyers anticipated that the testimony would do the issue a disservice.

Before inviting a celebrity to represent your cause, consider the most appropriate way to engage them and a target audience. It made sense for the United Farm Workers to engage Stephen Colbert for the “Take Our Jobs” initiative. Colbert could—and did—use his show on Comedy Central to highlight the issue in his own way to an audience that loves him. Inviting him before the United States Congress, however, places him in front of an audience that doubts his sincerity and qualifications from the start. As a result, any mistake or questionable decision is amplified.

It is important to choose a celebrity that will represent your cause well and help deliver the message you intend. As Scott LaLonde recommended in his tips for celebrity recruitment a few weeks ago, providing talking points and preparation is key. Had Colbert delivered testimony that was an earnest, honest and straightforward perspective on the issue, the tone of the coverage could have been much different. It would have been a newsworthy departure from Colbert’s well-known persona.

Instead, Colbert advanced his own comedic agenda. Lofgren either didn’t anticipate that Colbert would testify in character or didn’t consider the reaction that could have resulted if he delivered a comedy routine in a Congressional hearing. Either way, the focus was on Colbert instead of on immigration and farming.

Celebrity involvement can provide a big boost to a cause. But like any other communications tool, you must consider your goal, audience and message before extending an invitation. Be sure to prepare your celebrity and make sure he or she will represent you well. Otherwise, the celebrity might be the story and leave your message behind.