If you’ve been paying attention on Twitter, you may have seen a tweet from Jeff Bezos that’s caught some attention in political circles in the past few days. In fact, his latest spat with the Administration via Twitter prompted this scathing opinion piece by Politico…
In short, the Politico opinion piece calls on Bezos to engage in other types of writing, urging him to utilize other mediums “worthy of his station.” While I agree that Bezos’ rant was wasted effort, frankly their argument based on social station falls flat for me. Bezos’ choice to take to twitter wasn’t “dumb” (as the Politico piece says) simply because he “shit=posted.” Rather, it was dumb precisely because Social Media remains a massively ineffective way to get the proper attention of those who can really make an advocacy agenda move forward.
I’ve said this before: social media is an incredibly passive way to communicate your issues. Even for the ultra wealthy and socially influential, social media is not the marketplace of ideas for legislators, regulators, or political appointees. Despite the growth of social media in the past two decades, the truth remains that thoughtful policy advocacy doesn’t happen over 140 characters.
I understand the temptation to share what you believe with the masses. But if Jeff Bezos was serious about advancing an agenda, why not use his unique position to launch a full court advocacy press against the administration? Frankly, I think it’s a cop-out.
I think his real motive was to be seen in a new light by the Twitter user base, not to actually address a shortcoming of administration policy. So often overshadowed by the much spicier content of Elon Musk, Bezos may have simply wanted to rattle the cage to get some attention. He does this from time to time, when he posts passive-aggressive commentary about Musk in particular. It almost always comes across as petty and ill-conceived. And he invariably gets owned by Musk who is much more in tune with the milieu of Twitter.
For those of us lacking the nearly bottomless well of funding available to the Amazon founder, appealing to the Twitterverse – even when tagging a specific elected official – remains ineffective. It’s not a formal method of communication; you’re not getting a record of whether the official actually heard your concerns; and it ignores the most basic principle of advocacy: building credibility through relationships.
As tempting as it may be – your issue deserves more than a sharply worded tweet. If you’re serious about changing the world, you have to be willing to put more into the fight than that.
If Bezos was simply trying to earn some anti-administration street cred, well, mission accomplished. But if you are looking to advance an agenda, don’t follow his lead. Instead, practice the basics of good advocacy: join a coalition with others who care about your issue; engage in thoughtful, direct advocacy efforts; and build rapport with the decision-makers who can actually bring legislation forward that aligns with your position. Those tried and true methods position you to tell your story and deliver the real world impact of decisions made in Washington and state capitals across the country.
It’s a long journey, and you may never go viral, but you’re much more likely to find willing elected officials who’d choose to champion your position. And when they do, you can take to to social media platforms of your choice and thank them in public.
Part of the Possible 