Resource Type: Tips & How-Tos

Last week, the Lab tried something new. Three dozen advocates and organizers joined us for a two-day workshop with their draft 2019 campaign plans in hand, and together we worked through how each of those plans could incorporate evidence-based insights from the Lab and our huge network of organizing and advocacy nerds.
Folks who attended our Evidence-Based Campaign Planning Workshop seemed to love it so much that we wanted to give the broader network a readout of the toplines as well. Enjoy!
(All of the Lab’s workshop slide decks, handouts, and worksheets* are available here.)

OK, let’s talk elections! While the Lab doesn’t cover electioneering or lobbying work, election outcomes have public engagement implications that do fall within our wheelhouse. So, what do the results from a mixed-bag election for climate advocates across the country mean for mobilizing our supporters going forward and how do you help your activists make sense of it?

We often hear about framing and message testing as one messenger communicating to one audience, but things  are rarely ever that simple. Instead, like the celebrated format of cable news pundit shows, the communication landscape usually consists of two sides talking against, over, and past each other. This week’s alert digs into the true contested nature of framing and  some tips on  how to use  counterframing  for more effective engagement. 

Last week, the Lab hosted a Peer Learning Exchange on communicating with conservatives. We had a lively conversation with panelists from Environmental Defense Fund, Chambers for Innovation and Clean Energy, and more. We covered a lot of ground, but if you missed it, don’t fret! We have the recording along with the accompanying slide decks here*. To stay on theme, we thought this would be a great opportunity to revisit the Lab’s learnings and best practices on how to effectively communicate with conservatives and Republicans on climate and clean energy.