As we’ve gone through some of the lectures in my Public Affairs class this semester, one theme has been emerging and that is the fact that public affairs and public relations are about images and perceptions. But we’ve also talked about influencing stakeholders. In fact, a recent paper that I just wrote for the class centers on the idea that messages intended to influence can be undermined depending on your choice of media outlet.

There is so much talk these days about social media: Twitter, Facebook, blogging, Digg, YouTube and so on. I started to wonder how effective some of these particular media outlets may or may not be. Then it just so happened that I stumbled upon (thanks, Google!) a blog post by Doug Pinkham is president of the Public Affairs Council (http://www.pac.org/). In his January 27, 2011 post titled “Is Anyone Listening,” he talks about some of these very things.

Based on a report released at the Public Affairs Council’s National Grassroots Conference (“Communicating with Congress: Perceptions of Citizen Advocacy on Capitol Hill”), Pinkham notes several interesting things:

  • Only 41% of Hill staffers think that email and the Internet have increased public understanding of what goes on in Washington.
  • The Internet has made lawmakers more accountable, but electronic communication “has reduced the quality of constituents’ messages.”
  • More than 60% of staffers think Facebook is an important medium for understanding constituent views and nearly three-quarters consider it important for communicating their members’ views.
  • YouTube is valued almost as much for congressional communication, but not as highly for understanding constituent views.

So, like any tool, social media and electronic communication can be used well and with influence, or wielded wildly and become scattershot and unfocused.

Take care when you’re choosing the media outlet for your message; it can make all of the difference.