The goal of developing a relationship with the editor of your local paper or the editorial board of it is to both promote the policies you believe enhance peace, justice, nonviolence, and democracy, but also to hold them accountable. You want them to think about you when they make the many decisions the editor makes--assigning stories, writing editorials, endorsing candidates, etc.
Be prepared for the meeting. Surprise the editor by asking more questions than making argumentative pitches for your ideas. Know the content of the paper, past endorsements, and arrive with questions, not debate points.
· Thank you for meeting with me. I'm a loyal reader and thank you for practicing the grand American tradition of a free press. I'm here for my own knowledge but also as a member of (e.g., Peace Action, Greenpeace, Rotary, County Democrats) and they are also curious about your thinking on some topics. Can you please help me understand, for starters, why you endorsed the Republican candidate for US Senate last year?
Then practice reflective listening, in which you ask clarifying questions, not debate answers. Draw out the editorial board, don't alienate them. Really listen. Then seek to understand and learn more. This is not easy for many activists, most of whom have talking points more than a listening strategy.
· OK, thanks. What I am hearing--and please correct me if I'm wrong--is that you weighed the evidence you had and overall felt like that candidate would accomplish more for the citizens of our state, our town, and, of course, your readership?
Even if you never come to the point where you begin your own talking points, you are now in relationship, something that will serve you and the groups or campaigns with which you are associated very well.
At times it's valuable to bring representatives from groups you believe need credibility to the editors. For instance, a local teacher when the editor has been gatekeeping against teachers who promote diversity, equity, and inclusion. In other words, when stories about such debates only feature school administrators who are eliminating DEI and experts who oppose DEI or present a preponderance of evidence purporting to highlight the problems of militant, calling out, extreme DEI, that is gatekeeping that might tend to skew the views of readers who need exposure to the most compelling analysis from all legitimate sides. The teacher you bring along--hopefully after you've established that relationship with the editor--can help explain the need for the editor to monitor the gatekeeping each reporter does for fairness and in the interest of the community's knowledge base.
At times you may wish to contact the editorial board and openly explain that you and representatives from four groups want to lobby them. This sets a different framework and being transparent ahead of time eliminates the anger and defensiveness that can quickly arise if the editor or editorial board feels ambushed and attacked. Prep your folks by stressing that you have a relationship, that you don't want to endanger that by calling out behavior, but that the board understands they will be lobbied. Moderate the meeting with rigor and, when necessary, vigor.
· Thanks to the Chair of the Eastside Democrats. Let's give our friendly editor a chance to practice her profession by seeking information from us.
In other words, take the microphone from the person either talking too long, too often, or with accusatory language, and hand that mic back to the editor with a nod toward her craft, her skills, and her responsibilities.
Try to avoid being the person the editor wants to avoid and instead be the person the editor gets back to quickly when you leave a friendly message. You do actually want the editor to visualize your response, your take on an issue as the editor writes the op-ed, endorses a candidate or a yes/no on a ballot measure, or assigns a sensitive story to a reporter (and edits that story later).
No comments:
Post a Comment