When Facts Are Not Enough: Re-thinking Advocacy Strategies in the Era of Fake News

Two intense competitions kicked off this week: college basketball's end-of-season tournament and the release of the Trump administration's budget blueprint for Fiscal Year 2018. In both cases, winners and losers already are beginning to emerge; but in Congress's version of "March Madness", elimination of a program in the budget is not always fatal.

How do you save a program you're passionate about? What are the key arguments for pulling your program from the chopping block? With such drastic, sweeping changes proposed in the budget, do the traditional tactics and messages still apply?

While overcoming the ideological fervor attached to many of the proposed budget cuts can be daunting, there are proven, scientifically-based methods to help. 

Three recent pieces provide valuable insights into the most effective ways to persuade, especially when one side has strongly-held views not necessarily based in fact.

1. "This Article Won't Change Your Mind", by Julie Beck, The Atlantic, March 13, 2017.

The Challenge: Individuals convinced of their beliefs, even in the face of clear, conflicting evidence, will seek out and learn information consistent with their views and avoid, ignore, devalue or forget information that contradicts them.

What NOT to Do: Rely only on facts and figures in your presentation or use fact-checks for identifying erroneous information about your issue

What to Do: Emphasize there's a lot of misinformation out there about your priority. When it exists, stress bi-partisan support for it and/or the existence of disagreement within a party about whether it's effective. If possible, have a trusted colleague or friend of your advocacy target help in delivering your message, 

2. "Why Facts Don't Change Our Minds", by Elizabeth Kolbert, The New Yorker, February 27, 2017.

The Challenge: Once formed, impressions are remarkably difficult to alter. Presented with someone else's argument, humans are skilled at poking holes in it; the positions we're blind about are our own. Strong feelings about an issue don't necessarily emerge from a deep understanding of it.

What NOT to Do: Attempt to refute opposing views point for point 

What to Do: Include emotion as an aspect of your presentation, in addition to merely facts. Talk specifically about the implicationsof cutting or eliminating your program in more personal, rather than abstract, terms.

3. "When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions," by Brendan Nyhan (University of Michigan) and Jason Reifler (Georgia State). 

The Challenge: The least informed people may be the most confident in their beliefs. 

What NOT to Do: Present "corrections", particularly for the most ideologically committed. That may actually increasemisperceptions about an issue - triggering a so-called "backfire effect".

What to Do: If a misperception about your issue becomes more widely discredited in the media and in public opinion more generally, it may be easier to persuade someone to abandon his or her previous position in favor of yours.

In an atmosphere of fake news, "alternative facts", and official statements later explained away as not "literally" true, persuasion strategies need to be adjusted accordingly.

The political earthquake that struck the U.S. is re-shaping the policy terrain. Navigating in this new environment requires adjustments and a thorough review of previous tactics and strategies for advancing your agenda. Try these tools, shape them to fit your own specific situation and let me know how things turn out. Good luck and never give up!