 |
| Richard Sheehe |
The landscape of advocacy communications is undergoing a seismic shift. The rollback of federal government support – both financial and informational – has effectively privatized much of the advocacy that previously relied on governmental backing. This change places the onus on healthcare organizations, academic institutions, consumer advocacy groups, and other stakeholders to fill the void.
As a communications professional with a background spanning crisis communications, strategic public relations, reputation management, and other subdisciplines, I have witnessed firsthand how periods of upheaval can drive innovation. What we are seeing now is nothing short of a transformation in the way advocacy is conducted.
We are in a “post-government” era of advocacy where traditional reliance on government institutions for support in areas like evidence-based healthcare, consumer protections and education is disappearing. This shift necessitates a strategic, modular approach to issue management, reputation management, fundraising communications and more.
At its core, this is not a political argument but a practical reality. Regardless of where one stands – whether in agreement, shock, or somewhere in between – there is no denying that certain forms of advocacy that were once the domain of public institutions are increasingly being privatized. Whether such a realignment should happen is a separate debate; the fact is, it is happening, creating an open space for advocacy that lies outside government influence.
The question, then, is how to respond. From a communications perspective, the answer is clear: you adapt, you innovate, and you find new ways to engage.
Crisis and Disruption as Catalysts for Innovation
Periods of crisis have historically led to innovation in communication strategies. For example, in the early 2000s, the field of crisis and emergency risk communication (CERC) gained significant traction in response to events such as 9/11 and the anthrax attacks. The funding that followed enabled myself and others to develop best practices for communicating effectively in high-stakes situations. Over time, these practices were codified, trained, and tested in real-world applications.
Today, we find ourselves in a similar moment of disruption. The retrenchment of government support is forcing advocacy organizations to rethink their communication strategies. Rather than despair, we should view this as an opportunity to develop a more resilient, self-sustaining model of advocacy communication.
In a previous era, whether it was funding for public health campaigns or official endorsements for consumer protections, government institutions played a central role in elevating causes. With that backing diminishing, organizations must take a more proactive role in defining their messages, reaching their audiences, and shaping public discourse.
How PR Professionals and MarComm Agencies Can Respond
The PR and MarComm industry can ideally respond to the “post-government” advocacy need with a modular approach to core issue management, reputation management, fundraising, and other communications specialties. These subdisciplines can be strategically combined to suit the mission and organizational structure of groups ranging from small non-profits fighting rare diseases and universities advocating for institutional research, to global healthcare firms promoting cancer screenings or multi-national banks advocating for consumer fraud prevention.
Modular flexibility of communications services is key. Consider the example of vaccine advocacy. Government agencies such as the CDC and NIH historically led the charge in vaccine education. Now, organizations ranging from small non-profit vaccine advocacy groups to large pharmaceutical vaccine manufacturers must fill the gap with core issues advocacy communications. But the small non-profit may also need additional fundraising support to compensate for lost federal funding; whereas the large pharmaceutical company may pivot more to reputation management to shift negative public perceptions around “big pharma.”
Throughout, demonstrating value remains essential. Fundraising pitches, for instance, must go beyond mission statements to incorporate clear impact metrics, compelling narratives, and business-minded accountability. That’s because venture capital firms and philanthropic organizations like the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and Pew Charitable Trusts receive countless funding requests already. As the waiting line to the pitch room lengthens, organizations face even more pressure to differentiate themselves by demonstrating unique missions and tangible, measurable outcomes.
Conclusion: The Future of Advocacy Communications
We are only a few months into this new era of government transformation, and many organizations are still grappling with the implications. However, those that move swiftly to adapt will be well-positioned to lead. As we step into this post-government advocacy era, the question we must ask ourselves is not whether we can replace government support, but how we can build something even more resilient in its absence.
By leveraging the tools at our disposal and adopting a forward-thinking approach, communicators have the potential to turn disruption into progress. A modular approach to advocacy communications – one that integrates advocacy, reputation management, fundraising and more – can serve as a sustainable framework that ensures critical causes continue to receive the attention and support they deserve.
***
Richard Sheehe, MA, is a veteran communications consultant in private practice and Senior Research Fellow in Strategic Communications at George Mason University. He is also a Strategic Adviser at Leidar, a global communications firm. Please connect with Richard on LinkedIn.
Communicating the value of public relations to the C-Suite means doing much more than simply talking about communications.
Why brands must seize the opportunity in times of uncertainty.
Success in today's dynamic environment hinges on adaptability, authenticity and a strategic blend of earned, owned, and paid media.
As marketers and communicators in the supply chain industry, we also are facing dynamic change—not just because of the trends. The way audiences consume our messages, as well as the things they care about, are evolving quickly. The way we think, market and communicate must evolve just as fast.
In-house communications teams are strapped. Here’s how vendors can add more value than ever before.
Have a comment? Send it to
No comments have been submitted for this story yet.