One of the fastest growing and potentially empowering technologies for engaging citizens, interacting with elected officials, and building better communications is virtual town hall meetings. These meetings can take two forms: a telephone town hall or an online town hall that employs other technology beyond the “conference call” experience of a tele-town hall.

This post will reference two content pieces that can improve telephone and online town hall meetings. The first, Feeding America, a national nonprofit that organizes food banks in the U.S., delivered an outstanding presentation at this year’s National Grassroots Conference hosted by the Public Affairs Council. They offered “10 Rules” for conducting virtual town hall meetings, presented below. The second is a substantive research report conducted by CMF entitled “Online Town Hall Meetings: Exploring Democracy in the 21st Century,” which included extraordinary results on how virtual town hall meetings could increase trust in Members of Congress, improve voter participation rates, and actually change people’s opinions on divisive issues of the day.

Here are Feeding America’s 10 rules for virtual town hall meetings, slightly adapted for this post with a little explanation.*

1. Identify a “hook” to make it interesting. Make it topical and relevant. People don’t tune into a program unless they find it interesting. A virtual town hall meeting won’t be successful if the topic doesn’t connect with the audience.
2. Maintain control of process. This doesn’t mean censor ideas your Member or organization disagrees with. It does mean have a clear process, a thoughtful moderator, and a method for vetting questions to ensure that constituents have an opportunity to ask intelligent questions.
3. Spread the word early and often to promote the event. A Member or organization can promote a virtual or telephone town hall in a variety of ways, including social media, external stakeholders (and their email lists), and your website. To put this in monetary terms: every person recruited to a virtual town hall meeting by one of these methods is a person that you don’t have to pay your telephone town hall vendor to recruit.
4. Build a narrative. Keep it simple and personal. Complicated pitches never work. Interaction with constituents and supporters needs to appeal to basic, emotional, actionable issues.
5. Maximize time for Q&A. The interactivity of virtual town hall meetings is what attracts supporters and constituents, and what gets them to ask for more. Don’t be afraid that someone is going to ask a tough question. If your Member or organization leader can’t handle the occasional tough question they should probably be brushing up their resume.
6. Take on challenging questions. CMF’s online town hall meeting research involved 13 members of Congress who discussed with constituents the topic of immigration – not a softball topic. Prior to the online town hall, 20% of the participants approved of the Member’s handling of the issue of immigration. After the online town hall, 58% supported the Member’s handling of the issue. Support more than doubled … in less than 60 minutes.
7. Have subject matter experts available. It’s okay to say, “You know, I don’t have an answer for that question – but I know someone who does.” Principals don’t need to have all the answers, and the occasional Member of Congress or Association president who admits they are human actually scores points with stakeholders as being a normal person.
8. Make it fun. Washington needs a LOT more humor. Take the off-beat question, not just the issue-based question.
9. Have an “ask.” If you’re a nonprofit, association, or corporation hosting a town hall for your members or advocates, what do you want the participants to do after the meeting? If you’ve discussed a key issue and educated them through a thoughtful virtual town hall meeting, the “ask” might be to engage with a legislator. (Hidden secret: Members of Congress will thank you for your efforts, as the Member or staff will be interacting with someone who went through actual training and understands the issue at hand – as opposed to the constituent who interacted via a one-minute robo-call.)
10. Follow up. Very few Americans participate in virtual or telephone town hall meetings. If they do, legislators and organizations have built a relationship with someone stronger than you realize. Take advantage of that relationship, and follow up with more information on the topic or with a request to get more involved in the public policy process.

Virtual town hall meetings are an emerging technology. So it’s wise to experiment with small groups at first to build a comfort level with senior managers, make mistakes, and figure out how to do it best. Yet it is also an extraordinarily promising technology. In a CMF survey of congressional staff, 85% of respondents said that comments at a telephone town hall meeting would have “some” or “a lot” of influence on an undecided lawmaker. That’s a statement about a powerful medium.

[*Editorial Note: CMF thanks Brett Weisel and Feeding America for allowing us to use their presentation at the National Grassroots Conference as the basis for this blog. Otherwise, we would have had to think it up by ourselves … and that’s hard work.]

Much ballyhoo has been made about the loosely coordinated mid-January effort to encourage citizens to contact Congress and voice opposition to two pieces of Internet-related legislation. The much-publicized darkening of major websites has been hailed as a wake-up call for Internet advocates. However, the strategies and tactics of those opposed to the Stop Internet Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA) actually just relied on some tried and true elements of advocacy which have existed for the last 50 years.

The Narrative. People are motivated to act by emotions, not reasoning. Arguments that touch an individual’s values are the building blocks of getting people involved in public policy. “Censorship” is a powerful word, especially to those in any way connected to the Internet industry. It is laden with images of government intrusion, restriction of freedoms, and Orwellian consequences. The specter of censorship was used effectively by anti-SOPA/PIPA advocates. Yet this is not new to homegrown advocacy. In 2006 many right-of-center groups and columnists bandied about the word “amnesty” in opposition to immigration legislation pending before the Senate. The lesson is, to induce action, it is always best to tether the reasoning to a broader story – a connection between the target audience’s belief system and the cause.

Accountability and a Clear “Ask.” You’d be surprised at the amount of money and effort invested in Washington to create targeted advocacy campaigns towards Congress with no clear and specific request to the legislator. Sometimes, vague statements such as “support a clean environment” and “get the government out of our business” are the product of coalitions which need to find broad, commonly agreed to themes. Unfortunately, the result is these advocacy organizations lose credibility with Congress when they’re not specific in what they want. (And, of course, Congress will never tell advocacy groups that fact because the groups are usually tied to constituents, and who wants to insult them.)

During the nomination consideration of then-Supreme Court nominee John Roberts, a nationally recognized group organized an email campaign to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee calling on the senators to “ask tough questions” of the nominee. Is that it? Was the group worried the senators were going to ask Roberts about his favorite movie? The anti-SOPA/PIPA efforts had a clear ask: don’t cosponsor or vote for these bills, and if you have cosponsored it, withdraw your support. One of the binding tenets of our democracy is those who are governed holding the governing class accountable. You can’t do that without a specific metric to measure accountability.

Time-Limited. The physics of good advocacy usually have a degree of concentrated pressure, focused on lawmakers for a short period of time (usually less than a month). This allows lawmakers and staff to easily measure the support or opposition because they can “see” the impact, either through phone tallies, “mail” reports, or people showing up at town hall meetings. This month’s Internet bill-related efforts concentrated their effort on a single day, the week before the Senate was scheduled to vote on a bill. Perfect. They also combined the time-limited focus with a neat gimmick (and I mean that in a positive sense). By closing down or altering their own websites they gave the mainstream media “news” – something that hasn’t happened before.

I realize that a great deal of focus in the advocacy community and Congress is on the “innovations” in advocacy, whether it be social media, mobile apps, or crowd-sourcing efforts. Yet, none of those gadgets mean anything without tapping into the fundamentals of citizen engagement. It’s still all about: telling a good story, keeping government accountable, and focusing legislators for a very specific period of time.

I believe that we can occasionally inflate that medium’s effectiveness as a recruiting tool because we believe that our online relationship reach and sphere is wildly different than our real world connections. New research tells us something different about that theory.

Twitter Ties are the Same as Off-Line Ties

New findings shed light on the reality of Twitter connections. According to the researchers, ”Social ties in the real world powerfully predict what kind of connections we have in the online world.” (Gruzd, Wellman and Takhteyev, 2012) In other words, the majority of the ties that bind online are also the ties that bind off- line. They found that the majority of one’s Twitter connections, especially those who are “mutuals” (they follow each other and retweet content) are in the same geographic space or at least one plane ride away. They aren’t spread across the globe, unless you have real world connections across the globe.

That’s why it’s important to understand what is and isn’t possible (or likely) when it comes to building your grassroots network. I think many grassroots leaders feel that if they just post enough tweets, that star grassroots team members will fall into their laps and become committed stakeholders.

Off-Line Ties Promote Activism

From the Howard Dean campaign, to Organizing for America, to the Tea Party, the relationship between social ties and activism is clear. Interviews with members of these organizations reveal that a major motivator of their activism is friendships with fellow group members. Their anecdotes are supported by peer-reviewed research. No fewer than four studies have shown that “social ties are critical to propelling activism.” (Klandermans and Oegema, 1987; McAdam, 1986; Morris, 1984; Rockford, 1982)

In fact, as I wrote about in The Underdog Edge, according to the CIA World Factbook, only 25% of Egyptians have Internet access. Were the vivid street protestors who pushed Mubarak out of office only those who had Internet access? If not, how were those without Internet access recruited? Through off- line ties.

Implications for Grassroots Professionals

If you want to expand your network, start from your strengths. Random tweeting with hopes of recruiting an influential, engaged person absent of their real world connection with one of your existing evangelists isn’t a viable recruiting strategy.
Take an inventory of your best advocate’s off- line and online connections. Search for their online activity to determine if they are even a viable online recruiter.

To increase your online presence, seek ways to create off- line community ties among your advocates. If you have an off- line engagement structure, it will be easier to eventually leverage it in the online world.

The Bottom Line. . . .

As I wrote in my last K St Café blog post, social media is an indicator of what is going on off-line. It’s the dependent variable. So pay attention to your stakeholders off-line activity. Do you know what they are doing, and to whom they are connected? Recruit from the existing real world ties of your committed members to expand your online presence.

Lada Gaga

Justin Bieber

Kim Kardashian

The Onion

Ashton Kutcher

Charlie Sheen

Mashable

Hell, even Ryan Seacrest

Identifying valuable influencers to target your audience has nothing to do with quantity. That’s the problem with all of the “influence measurement tools” such as Klout. The metrics of these tools are limited – there is no human analysis. There is only an algorithm which measures quantity. I suspect that the owners of these influence measurement tools would argue otherwise, making a case that the quantity is tied to like-minded social groups.

Not really.

Want to raise your Klout score? Do this: Tweet constantly and tweet about whatever the hottest topic of the day is, regardless if you give a damn about it or not. Tweet about the latest trending topic, scandal, and celebrities to see your score rise.

Determining the quality of a network is not a task for computerized algorithms. It requires human intelligence. It requires a discriminating approach to whom your audience is, and who the most valuable surrogates in that audience may be.

Let’s consider the legal community. If you have a massive network of Twitter followers filled with spammers, product promoters and porn stars, your reach is limited. If your network consists of legitimate individuals that have a limited to non-existent interest in legal theory or practice, but who are trying to build their own networks through use of automated tools, you’re not building an influential network. You might be building a broad network, but one that is untargeted and unhelpful.

Be selective. Know your audience. Weed out anyone in your network that does not advance your purpose for being online. Think of it as compound interest. If you build a small group of in-the-know followers – no matter your industry – then you will be reaching the holy grail of what PR folks refer to as target audience. Each of these finely selected individuals will, in all likelihood, have their own networks of various sizes, with a significant degree of others who follow your issue and care about the topic you’re promoting. They can, in turn, then share that information with their networks of similarly minded individuals. With each circle outward that you go, the value of the network diminishes of course. However, that is the very nature of social networks.

Do the unthinkable: Make your network small. You will be far better off with a smaller network of people whom only you can know fit the profile of infuencers within your target audience. In the old days, these folks were called surrogates. So shrink. Klout will frown on you. All the social media mavens will frown on you. But your audience will smile. As the content you’ll be providing, and the content you’ll be receiving will be relevant.

Chris Battle, Partner at Adfero Group, provides his view of the best approach to social media. He highlights the importance of engaging your audience and finding the most interesting information to keep your fans or followers coming back, especially when in the government realm.

How Suntrust Uses Social Media to Engage Customers and Comply with Regulation
(SocialMediaToday)

This video interview of Bianca Buckridee, AVP of Social Media Engagement at SunTrust, discusses the perfect balance between risk and reward to meet customer expectations and improve customer experiences in the social media space.

Doug Pinkham, President of the Public Affairs Council, explains why public affairs is one of the most important corporate functions by discussing Americans’ views on ethics, honesty and lobbying. He provides analytical insight to why companies need to remain driven in the public affairs industry.

Public Relations in 2012 and Beyond: Integrated Strategic Consulting will Replace Silo-Based Execution (Adfero Group)

Chris Battle, Partner at Adfero Group, provides his view of the best approach to media relations. He stresses the importance of having team members on a client account early on so they share the client’s goals in order to provide the highest quality results.

Occupy Facebook: Social Network for Protesters in the Works (Mashable)
The new site will be called The Global Square, and it is intended to unite Occupy protesters across the world. The hitch? In order to join, you have to have a sponsor to “ensure you are trustworthy.”

Engagement matters because the world is driven to distraction. With engagement, your stakeholders give you the benefit of the doubt when you screw up. They also have your brand as a part of their own identity. They can’t imagine a world without your organization or cause, and criticizing your organization means criticizing themselves.

Gallup conducted research with over 17,000 social media users to determine how people interact with social media and its effectiveness as a marketing tool. Gallup doesn’t conduct shoddy research, so I think it’s worth our time to see if there are applications for those of us in the grassroots persuasion business. After all, we are marketers of ideas and action. 

In this post, I’ll feature the first engagement myth busted by Gallup, and feature additional research findings in subsequent posts.

Myth #1 – Social media initiatives drive loyalty and acquisition.

Gallup Fact: Engagement with a brand drives social engagement.

Many of us believe that if we get enough online participation, it will lead to offline engagement. But according to Gallup, organization-sponsored social media initiatives “have very little impact on decision making.” Nor do they drive prospects to recommend your cause to those in their social network. According to Gallup, it’s actually the reverse: engagement with your brand drives social engagement. In other words, as my very smart colleague Dr. Kelton Rhoads said, “It’s the dependent variable. Social media is the result, not the cause. It is the result of political or social action and conversations. It’s a marker that something is happening.”

I was reminded of this rule when talking with my friends at Southwest Airlines. They are frequently asked to speak at marketing conferences about their social media prowess. They said that as much as they hoped other organizations could maximize their customer relationships through social networks, the inherent challenge for their audience members is that their corporations belatedly came to the “customer is king” philosophy; Southwest has held that belief system and ingrained it in their culture since its genesis. A corporation that uses social media to drive customer loyalty like what exists at Southwest Airlines will fall short because they aren’t Southwest Airlines. Online engagement is the result, not the cause.

What does work? Engagement is the result of psychological needs and rational needs. For your organization to benefit from social media, it must create stakeholder engagement by meeting those needs.

How You Can Drive Engagement

Now, so that we don’t see too many rainbows and unicorns, here is my real-world application on how you as a grassroots leader can, through your behavior and creating a culture of engagement, fulfill those needs. I have listed these from the lowest level of engagement to the highest. At the lower end we have the rational logical elements of engagement and then we get to the good stuff – the emotional side, where your behavior can make the difference.

1. An overall satisfaction with the organization – not particularly outstanding performance, but you are honest, forthright and don’t try to manipulate your audience.

2. Delivers on promises – you do what you say you’ll do. You don’t over promise. I see this most pervasive when we exaggerate the power of “advocacy.” Sometimes we make our advocates believe that their form email or letter will change a lawmaker’s mind, or that one good story is all it takes to persuade someone. If that were true, every group would win its legislative issues.

3. Treats me fairly – When you screw up, you admit it and make it right. Have you ever had a grassroots volunteer treated poorly by a legislator or his or her staff? How do you address that situation? Who do you defend? Do you make excuses for the legislator or kindly remind the lawmaker that such behavior isn’t appropriate?

4. Treats me with respect; I feel proud to be a customer – Do your grassroots volunteers get to use their talents? Do you know what they are? Do you ask for their opinions, either formally or informally? Do you incorporate their suggestions?

5. Can’t imagine a world without your organization – At this level, your stakeholders will mentally resolve discrepancies about your organization or brand in your favor. You get the benefit of the doubt. This is exemplified by volunteers who view you as a friend, coach or mentor vs. a transactional figure.

The bottom line? Encourage your team to be evangelists with their networks, and focus on the most engaged volunteers. As the Gallup report stated, “They are most likely to advocate on your behalf and least likely to criticize you.”

Do you know who your most engaged volunteers are? How will you engage them on your behalf in 2012?

18 Ways to Promote Your Blog Offline (Business2Community)
“The traditional idea of a website is turning into a changing, content rich environment where visitors can learn and interact with your business or nonprofit” – here are some easy ways to promote your blog offline.

Learn How to Leverage LinkedIn, or Fall Behind (Fast Company)
LinkedIn is far behind Facebook and Twitter in terms of popularity, and many people wonder if having a profile on LinkedIn is worth all the work. Douglas Crets explains why (and how) to embrace LinkedIn today.