[Lnc-business] Social Media Messaging Recommendations

Wed Apr 19 08:14:16 EDT 2017

I think they are being decided.  I missed how they are being decided, but I
think it was by the committee.

-Caryn Ann

PS: FWIW and I am sure the committee will be consulting the APRC, we are
back on typical process there.

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 6:10 AM, Whitney Bilyeu <whitneycb76 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170419/d15db945/attachment-0002.html>