Using E-mail as an Advocacy Tool

Nonprofit organizations with a mission that includes social justice, human rights or environmental protection are frequently involved in either promoting or opposing state and federal legislation. The widespread use of e-mail by supporters of these organizations, plus the (much slower) adoption of Internet connectivity by legislators, means that many are now considering the use of e-mail as an advocacy tool. After all, it's cheap, easy and fast, so why not?

Amnesty International offers an example of an e-mail campaign that had a positive result. In August 2002, U.S. Representative Lynne Woolsey of California was asked by an Amnesty International local group in her district to find other representatives to co-sign a letter to the Turkish government calling for the release of Prisoner of Conscience Leyla Zana. Despite several weeks of effort by her office, only nine other Representatives had signed the letter. The number was much too small for the letter to be effective. Amnesty encouraged local groups and volunteer legislative coordinators across the country to set up meetings with their local representatives, while also mobilizing through the Human Rights Action Center . Within a week, the number of co-signers had increased by 900 percent.

Despite stories like these, e-mail isn't always such a powerful tool. Unfortunately, by being cheap, easy and fast, e-mail comes at the bottom of the scale in terms of its impact on the target. First of all, it has to get to the right target, and the sender's relationship to the target (i.e. as a constituent) must be clear.

From OMB Watch : "Hill staffers and system administrators, in sharing their views on how incoming electronic mail is handled, continually make clear that their primary concern is addressing and responding to electronic mail from constituents, and effectively weeding out mail from non-constituents and routing that to the appropriate member. An additional problem is meeting the expectations of people who send electronic mail. They expect their e-mail to be answered online and immediately. It's even worse if you do manage to respond immediately to an e-mail, as that only raises the expectation for all subsequent mail to be answered as quickly. Staffers have said that if you are not a constituent, and if you do not provide contact information, including an address and phone number, then your e-mail won't be answered."

However, there are ways to use e-mail and increase its effectiveness. One method is to turn the e-mail into paper. This is most easily achieved by using your organization's Web site to generate the e-mail letters, and designing the page so that a copy of the e-mail is sent to your organization's e-mail also.

This points to the need to see e-mail as only one component of a strategic campaign to achieve the ultimate advocacy goal. E-mail messages must be accompanied by faxes, letters, phone calls, Congressional visits, and media visibility. When your office has accumulated a significant batch of constituent e-mail messages, it is time to schedule a visit with the appropriate Congressional or state representative. Take the printed e-mail messages to the meeting and hand them over, saying, "These are (number) e-mail letters from your constituents who care as much about this issue as we do!"

The role of the Internet (more specifically, e-mail) in advocacy increased significantly in the aftermath of 9/11. Lawmakers, responding to the anthrax mail scare and new security measures, became less accessible by personal contact and written correspondence. Letters mailed to members of Congress and their staff on Capitol Hill now take between 21 to 30 days to reach their destination after being processed in at least four sorting and irradiation facilities.

But as advocacy e-mail has increased, so has the recipient's ability to avoid or ignore it. Many senators and members of congress don't even accept e-mail now -- instead they have set up Web sites with forms for electronic mail. Often there are pre-set topics that you have to conform to. For example, the senators from California each offer a different set of headers to choose from; one has 36 choices (with no "other" choice), and the second has 32 choices including "other."

It has become clear that any message, be it via e-mail or Web form, that does not come from a constituent is considered spam. This means that e-mail messages often do not reach their intended target. Yet those who send e-mail are likely to be unaware of this, assuming instead that e-mail has given them fast and free communication with their elected representatives. This disconnect weakens the power of constituents to influence government, and hinders the ability of legislators to contribute effectively to the policy-making process.

If a mass but targeted e-mail campaign is what you want, then the Progressive Secretary cooperative may be the service for you. Progressive Secretary sends out progressive e-mail letters to Congress, the President, and other officials on peace, ecology, civil rights, and other issues. The letters are suggested by participants (currently there are 2,800) in the cooperative and are sent to each member by e-mail as a proposal. If the participant approves the letter and wants to send it, they reply that they would like to "send" to the e-mail. Then the letters, with the participant's signature and return address, are sent to Congress people and others noted in the proposal. A monthly report is sent to each participant. (Read Progressive Secretary's answer to the question, "Does e-mail really work?" )

NetAction offers an online training course that covers not only e-mail advocacy, but also using your organization's Web site to promote your concerns and using mailing lists and discussion boards to involve more citizens in your organization.

In June 2002, the SPRY Foundation produced a report, "Understanding Internet Use and Advocacy: A Report on the Current Use of the Internet as a Tool for Older Adult Health Advocacy." A public report and Web-based model will be available at www.spry.org in August 2003.The foundation studied 20 advocacy organizations, interviewed their staff, and also interviewed staff in legislative offices at the state and federal levels. From the recipients of e-mail advocacy messages, they learned that while their current understanding of Internet advocacy is limited, both advocacy organizations and legislative offices use the Internet widely. At the same time, Internet advocacy largely is limited to e-mail. Personal contact remains the primary and preferred method for advocacy.

Finally, what about those petitions for women in Afghanistan, or ones that say Congress is on the verge of terminating NEA, NPR, PBS, etc., etc. or that the FCC is going to charge for Internet use? A colleague became exasperated after receiving the same e-petition from several people in as many days. So he decided to set up a site that explains the problem and tries to suggest other ways of sharing concerns. The idea is that when you get an "chain letter" e-petition you politely reply to them with this link: E-petition.org.