[Lnc-business] Social Media Messaging Recommendations

Wed Apr 19 08:10:29 EDT 2017

Did I miss the addition of the two non-LNC members to this committee? Who
are they?

On Apr 19, 2017 5:25 AM, "Daniel Hayes" <danielehayes at icloud.com> wrote:

> My concept of what the scope of the committee does is to examine the
> process of how our social media is disseminated.  It also should be what to
> do when it is disseminated, the PR relative to the reactions of our target
> audience and beyond.
>
> What exact name for the committee was on the motion?  At this point I have
> the preference for calling it the Social Media Process Review Committee.
> Social Media Review Committee gives the wrong idea of what the scope of
> this committee is.  Such a committee could come out of the recommendations
> of this committee I would guess but that remains to be seen.
>
>
> I nearly hit send before I wrote this. Notice I had not mentioned
> messaging yet?  Right now I am focused on scope.
>
> Daniel Hayes
> LNC At Large Member
> LNC Social Media Something or other Committee
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 19, 2017, at 12:46 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I would agree with some fine tuning to social media realities, but it is
> bold, it is libertarian, it is worth having.  But let me raise two issues
> (one that has bothered me since the meeting and one raised here):
>
> We were exhausted on Sunday and I came in late to the discussion (the
> amount of time for people to check out was NOT long enough - I have a bad
> back and going down with two pieces of luggage, a line at the front desk,
> and then stowing the luggage with the attendant was not speedy speedy for
> me) - I am unclear and I think the committee itself is unclear on what its
> scope is.  I hope next time we give a larger window of time to check out.
> Women in particular *generally* need longer.  We have earrings and other
> misc item that we need to make sure are not left in the room and are often
> in heels.
>
> My understanding - the committee scope is to recommend *oversight* *only *NOT
> to determine our messaging strategy.  Three LNC members and two non-LNC
> members* have not been empowered* to determine our messaging strategy.
> Though I have gotten an impression that some think that is not what is
> happening.  The immediate crisis was oversight - a post that most of us
> believe should have not went through, went through.  Our system failed.
> The messaging strategy is a larger issue that the oversight will serve.
> Nick is already taking decisive steps on instructions to the volunteers.
>
> If we are going to have a strategy discussion, this needs to be the full
> LNC.  Perhaps... it *gasp* needs to be a special meeting.  In person or
> online I don't care.  *Arvin is doing the precisely right thing by making
> this a full LNC discussion.  *
>
> But if we followed this never have one kind of libertarian against another
> is impossible.  Rather than wording it that way, let's word it to the end
> game of the Statement of Principles must never be contradicted. Government
> must never grow.  But sometimes there are disagreements on paths, and that
> is okay.  Our bylaws don't place the arbiter on whether or not libertarians
> may disagree.  It places it on the Statement of Principles.  That is the
> reality of our Purpose per our Bylaws- *to implement and give voice to
> the principles in the Statement of Principles.*  I know some people
> prefer the much more malleable (and I don't mean that in a positive way) of
> "moving policy in a Libertarian direction" (also in the Bylaws but *subservient
> to the Statement of Principles) *which has been massaged by some (not
> saying here, I am speaking of the wider world) to mean sacrificing the
> rights of the few for the benefit of the many in some kind of net utility
> calculator when our Statement of Principles says we defend the rights of
> the individual.  Not just ones we deem expandable for the good of the
> collective.
>
> ;tldr I like what Arvin said.  Messaging strategy is not the job of the
> committee this weekend (it was OVERSIGHT and it was in oversight that
> failed this past week).
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Arvin Vohra <votevohra at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi All -
>>
>> As we look to revamp our social media in the context of greater exposure,
>> here are my recommendations for messaging strategy for facebook and other
>> forms of social media. This also applies to traditional media. Most of this
>> is based on the Libertarian Solutions model created by Carla Howell.
>>
>> 1. Set the debate.
>>
>> We can set the debate topic. We can make it minor, esoteric stuff around
>> the edges of liberty. Or we can go for the heart, and make a debate worth
>> having.
>>
>> Examples of debates worth having: Government out of education, government
>> out of healthcare, end the drug war, end the income tax, military for
>> defense only, end the patriot act, abolish the FDA, end corn subsidies.
>>
>> Yes, we'll get pushback, but that's the whole point. The pushback turns
>> it into a debate, and makes the question about the very existence of, for
>> example, government schools, rather than something minor.
>>
>> We're going to get pushback on everything now. We're in the mainstream.
>> So let's make the debate worth having.
>>
>>
>> 2. Give your team the ammunition to fight the battles they actually want
>> to fight.
>>
>> The ammo we post on social media is what Libertarians use in their
>> personal debates. If we give the right ammo, we'll help the win the debates
>> they want.
>>
>> For example, anyone who wants to End the Fed actually wants to end the
>> income tax. The latter is a harder debate to have, so they go with the
>> easier one. Since no statist knows what the fed is, they don't push back.
>> Similarly, it's easier to argue in favor of charter schools than in favor
>> of abolishing government schools entirely. But the debate worth having (and
>> the one set forth in our platform) is abolishing government schooling.
>> We'll get the same pushback either way. Let's make the pushback worthwhile.
>>
>> Ammo, btw, isn't just a funny meme. It's a meme, essay, or video that
>> people can use as part of a debate. It's not just for morale boosting; it's
>> ammo to actually use. Don't worry - winning a debate boosts morale plenty.
>>
>> The ammo should target the end goal. There are many brilliant people who
>> have written about ending government schooling. Many are former government
>> school teachers. Finding them and quoting relevant parts is the type of
>> research we can do that will help our people spread real liberty.
>>
>> 3. Stay on the offensive.
>>
>> It's not enough to block new government. We should be blocking and
>> attacking. Instead of "No new wars," it should be "No new wars, shut down
>> foreign military bases, bring the troops home, cut military spending by
>> 60%, and cut taxes accordingly." Instead of, "Don't raise taxes", it should
>> be "Stop this tax increase, and also eliminate the income tax, which will
>> grow the economy, increase the number of jobs, and attract entrepreneurs to
>> America."
>>
>> 4. ABC - Always Be Cutting
>>
>> Every image, essay, video, should have at least one cut, and it should be
>> big, bold, and comprehensible. You can post them in the comments. The cut
>> can be eliminating an agency or tax, or simply reducing the size of an
>> agency or tax. Not every cut needs to be enormous, but it does need to be a
>> cut.
>>
>>
>> 5. NBG - Never Be Growing
>>
>> Huge one: a cut should be a cut only, not a cut here with a growth here.
>> "Lower property tax and increase sales tax" is not a cut. "Lower property
>> tax" is.
>>
>> "Cut military spending to spend more on government schools" is not a cut.
>> "Cut military spending and cut taxes accordingly, so people can pay for
>> better education" is.
>>
>>
>> 6. Avoid grey areas.
>>
>> Grey areas are interesting late night discussions. They are terrible
>> political strategy. If there is no obvious libertarian fact of the matter,
>> skip it. There are plenty of things that can stir up controversy. Ending
>> government schools, ending the FDA, ending all censorship, getting the
>> government out of marriage are all obviously libertarian. Let's create
>> controversy where it's libertarian vs. statist, not libertarian vs. a
>> slightly different libertarian.
>>
>> 7. Benefits.
>>
>> Always mention benefits to normal people.
>>
>> WRONG: "Ending the war on drugs will lower the price of cocaine, so you
>> can sprinkle it on your pancakes."
>>
>> RIGHT: "Ending the war on drugs will reduce violence since drug
>> businesses will be able to settle disputes by using dispute resolution
>> services from companies like Amazon, eBay, and Visa instead of resorting to
>> violence."
>>
>> In Liberty,
>>
>> Arvin Vohra
>> Vice Chair
>> Libertarian National Committee
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *In Liberty,*
> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
> Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> <http://www.lpcolorado.org>
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>
> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>
> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
> *We defend your rights*
> *And oppose the use of force*
> *Taxation is theft*
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170419/482a9ee3/attachment-0002.html>