— by T. “Isaac” Meyer, Head, Strategic Planning & Communications
One thing we have to add to this discussion is how media, news, and analysis enter into the political and policy-making process. One clear objective of science communications and even any corporate communications activity is to influence decision makers. But are the traditional streams of media still relevant?
Fortunately, our excellent and thoughtful friends at the National Journal have just publicly released a detailed study of U.S. federal senior executive, Capitol Hill staff, and professional lobbyists that documents how information arrives and is used “inside the Beltway” in Washington, D.C. The study is entitled “Washington in the Information Age” and is, lightly put, brilliant.
With grateful flattery, I reproduce some of their conclusions here.
1. As the dust settles, traditional platforms (TV, print media, and radio) remain essential components of the media mix. The report compiles hundreds of interviews and surveys to map out how U.S. political and policy staff receive their news. Perhaps as a surprise, it is NOT all by Twitter and Facebook. Rather, the new technologies serve as alert mechanisms with trusted, credible analysis still being sought from the traditional sources.
2. Despite the plethora of choices, opinion makers associated with long-established brans carry the most influence online. We all worry that a random citizen in Darkmoor, Pennsylvania, or Blackwater, California, can publish an online blog and start a slanted or even misinforming news source. It looks like the folks in Washington still rely on verifiable, credible, long-established names and resources to gather their views.
3. Yet, Washington insiders value a long tail of unique opinion makers. More than 400 distinct names were cited as credible sources for opinion from among the survey group. So the Beltway doesn’t follow one columnist or one voice; rather, each person tends to accumulate a set of trusted brands/thought-leaders and then sticks to them over time. So less fly-by-night than perhaps expected!
4. Washington insiders favour news sources that share political point of view. Perhaps obvious, but results show that Washingtonians cluster around columnists, news sources, and so on that reflect their own ideologies.
5. No longer just for e-mail, mobile devices are a gateway to news and information. Many Washington insiders now read news and analysis on the small screen and some actually do a good portion of their composition and analysis on the small screen.
6. Mobile devices and new digital communication tools continue to blur the line between the personal the professional. As in, with 24 hour news cycles and multiple streams of referrals and content providers, Washington insiders often mix work and play when communicating digitally. As anyone who has visited Washington knows, this is supported by the standard screens at a sports bar. Not only are two or three games showing at the same time, but at least one TV shows CNN and CSPAN.
7. Online video and audio have yet to infringe on the dominance of TV and radio. Despite the prevalence of online videos and podcasts, few Washington insiders report that they rely on these sources for content. They are viewed primarily as entertaining.
8. The national obsession with Twitter fades inside the Beltway. Results suggest that Twitter is not a preferred communication tool and the common conception is that 50% of tweets are pointless babble, and the next 30% shameless self-promotion. Beyond that, there is some real content.
9. Social networking sites are popular inside the Beltway. As a tool to track contacts, trade views, and keep up with the vast network of potential wanna-know-yous, social networking tools are growing in use. Perhaps not surprisingly, the growth area for these tools is with Capitol Hill staff who have a tendency to involve more younger people than senior executives or K Street lobbyists.
10. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Washington’s reliance on proven relationships extends online. That is, the influencers of the influencers still have specific, personal, trusted connections. Other results of the study show that Washington insiders filter their e-mail by known e-mail addresses, then subject lines, again caring more about WHO than WHAT.
The study is powerful insight into how Washington is adapting to the age of information overload.
When I look at my own day, I can see some parallels to the report’s results. I spend quality time with print media most often in the form of magazines (monthly more often than weekly) and I rely on news aggregators and other alerts to queue me to new content, but I hunt down my favourite sources to find out “what is really going on.”
Please read, compare, and comment!