Yesterday I spent the better part of five hours watching real Americans do something incredibly uncomfortable: testifying in public before a Congressional committee.
This wasn’t one of those highly visible, controversial hearings where partisan hackery dominates the agenda. No, this was a hearing for a subcommittee focused on agricultural issues and they were debating the next Farm Bill. Because it was so focused on a wide range of deeply technical policy issues – and not on scoring quick political points – this hearing won’t generate the kind of headlines you’ll see from other congressional hearings. It’s just not sexy enough.
Yet there they were. 10 average folks, showing up nonetheless, because they recognized the uniqueness of the opportunity. Would they have to face difficult questions? Sure. Would their assumptions be called into question by committee members? Absolutely.
But if it’s not publicly visible, and it causes your advocates to do something terribly uncomfortable (speak in public, testifying on complex issues), why do it? Is it worth it? Isn’t there a better way in the days of digital communication and social media?
Plainly, no. Because there’s no shortcut to winning in politics.
I say that, knowing full well one of the most effective ways to cause advocates to “take action” is to utilize technology that automates the process – simplifying it so we can generate groundswells around issues. And there is a time for that kind of advocacy. But there is no substitute for showing up in person to participate in an actual dialogue. The give-and-take, question-and-answer, difficult conversations we see in these rooms take on the often overwhelming task of bringing diverse ideas together.
In our rush to automate so much in life, we forget that our public discourse was never meant to be easy. Yes, we elect others to go and do the work of legislating and executing policy – but that does not excuse us from the hard reality that our expertise is still needed to inform their work. That expertise typically doesn’t fit into 140 characters on Twitter, or sixty seconds on TikTok.
Yet knowing the value of that expertise doesn’t help too many of us over our internal barriers to getting involved. We seek permission to opt out by claiming we “hate politics.” Even on our most dearly held causes we hunt for ways to stay engaged just enough to feel like we are still credible on the issue to those in our closest circles. But I want to challenge you to think deeper on that mindset today. I want you to ask yourself if you really think that tweet, or facebook article you shared, really answers the mail for your cause.
From a former congressional staffer, I can tell you – it doesn’t.
I want you to understand that reaching decision-makers requires more from us. It takes thoughtful, active engagement. And the systems that try to make it easier on you, usually result in too passive an approach. Prompting individuals to post on social media doesn’t guarantee their message will land on the desk of the right person advising an elected issue on the topic of the day. We can’t rely on the message being received.
Here’s what I mean – hashtags, and retweets, and form posts just don’t have the reach you think they do. They are like screaming into the wind and hoping it will carry your voice to the next town away. Sure, you’re making noise, but you have no control over where the sound goes or who will hear it. More than likely, it’ll just be the folks standing closest to you when you scream.
Sadly, that’s the typical impact of social media in advocacy. We place our stances in the open, sure. We share our values with those in our network, of course. But unless we reach a level of virality in our content, those opinions will never make it in front of a real decision-maker. It’s just not in the cards – at least not in a way you can guarantee.
By contrast, in-person advocacy removes the passive, uncontrolled elements of social media and replaces them with the reality of what’s right in front of the staff or decision-maker. Instead of screaming into the wind, this is pulling up a chair next to someone at the coffee shop. You create space for real engagement. And your words can be heard, in real time, and in the full context of your issue. You gain credibility at the expense of your discomfort.
You gain credibility at the
expense of your discomfort.
Leaning into that discomfort yesterday put the panel of witnesses in a fantastic position. They were literally in the room with those they hoped to influence. They were able to share their stories, and their unvarnished opinions. And more importantly, their words are now on the record. They’re being weighed and measured, and they may just move the needle on one big, challenging issue.
That’s the impact I want to see for you. That’s why I’ll stand on my soapbox today and beg you to quit confusing your social media posts with that level of engagement. It’s in an entirely different league – but it’s one that I want to help you reach.
Part of the Possible 