“People don’t know or care about your issue” Vaclav Smil.
Just because you are passionate/ obsessed about an issue, don’t make the mistake that many other people are.
And, just because you are surrounded by people who are passionate/obsessed about an issue, don’t make the mistake that many people outside are.
I’ve worked on some niche issues that I was passionate about – bushmeat, oil spills, fish quotas – it is a long list, and once I sobered up pretty quickly I realised that very few people knew anything about the issue or cared about it.
This simple realisation is important. Most lobbyists go about their work as if 99% of officials and MEPs are very interested in new pipe rules (add in your issue).
This has a practical impact. I’ve found that issue experts lead most campaigns by industry and NGOs. They likely did their PhD in the issue. They spend every day, often for decades, working on one issue. They find the idea of simplifying things down for people who have not spent 20 years of their life on the issue akin to blasphemy. And as a consequence, the information the campaign puts out is gibberish to all but a few issue experts.
You may strike gold and find a technical officer who has spent 20 years on one issue. Enjoy the moment, and realise that the hierarchy does not have the same passion for the issue.
Sure, if you were going to a meeting of pipe obsessives, you could deep dive. And you’ll be surprised at how many conferences there cater to fetish issue/policy communities.
But, back in the real world, here are some easy ways to get broader policy taken up
- Translate what you want to say so it makes sense to your audience.
- Making it simple, clear and accurate is hard work.
- Reframe the issue into terms that will interest the audience.
- Explain your issue so it goes to the values of your audience.
- Realise that the audience is the officials, politicians, media, and public. It is not you.
Completely agree, and bears repeating! Perhaps worth adding that all the above are, however “necessary but not sufficient” requirements. I’d add “Lucky timing” to the mix.
Over my (somewhat unusual) career as a national newspaper hack and academic, I’ve seen many campaigns in both these worlds meet all the above criteria and still fail to get any traction, despite their importance. Those that succeed often seem to benefit from a hefty dose of lucky timing, when the target audience is just more than usually receptive.
Of course, am not saying “So there’s no point” – a campaign can’t benefit from lucky timing if it doesn’t exist. But equally one shouldn’t be discouraged if the campaign just falls flat. It doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a stupid campaign and/or poorly executed. Persistence counts for a lot: even low-probability events happen if given sufficient opportunities (think “lottery”!).
Robert, agree. Luck is important. You can do everything right and still come short. Aaron