Groups attempting to influence public opinion seem to rely on two major strategies:
- Give people more information about an issue, or
- Attempt to keep information about an issue away from people.
Example of clear thinking on this point:
Yup. We have a great job: just tell people about guns. The more they learn, the cooler with gun rights they are. We like being the group that succeeds by spreading knowledge. Gun control orgs have a PR problem: their success depends on keeping knowledge away from people.
Open Source Defense on Twitter
Of course, the most effective strategy is a bit of both: tell people what you want them to know and hide information that you don’t want them to know.
This gives you a litmus test for judging an organization, an idea, or an argument. If you get information and are encouraged to judge for yourself, it’s probably good information. On the other hand, information suppression is an indication that your source is weak.
Bring that down to the individual level, because all growth is one person at a time. I don’t care as much about “them” as I care about me.
If my ideas and principles can be offered up, without exhortation and emotion, then they are likely to be sound.
Sound principles are like gravity. They are irresistible. You can deny gravity only briefly, and at your peril.