Government Communicators Say Politics, Disinformation are Top Trust Impediments
Public trust in government is declining, some surveys indicate. As such, a portion of the public believes companies and other organizations should fulfill some government duties, taking stands on social and political issues and effecting change.
Not so fast, says veteran government communicator Scott Thomsen. For Thomsen, director of communications and public affairs for Ventura (CA) County Fire, government’s loss of public trust is critical. “When [the fire department] issues a message about something that is dangerous and the public ignores it, lives can be lost,” Thomsen says.
Examining what communicators perceive are reasons for the loss of public trust in government is at the center of a new survey of more than 200 PR professionals.
Two groups of communicators were surveyed. First were PR pros working in federal, state and local governments. The second group was composed of public affairs and government relations officials at companies and nonprofits, many of whom interact with government communicators.
Part of the survey was a self-assessment exercise. The communicators were asked to assess the effectiveness of government messaging.
The results were sobering. Only 3% of respondents felt government PR pros’ messages were “very effective.”
External Factors Reduce Trust in Messaging
Yet, more important is that the communicators believe outside forces–not practitioners’ skillsets–were the major issues behind the lack of effective government communication and the resulting loss of public trust.
Communicators cited disinformation’s rise, hyperpolarized politics and political motivation as the main roadblocks hurting governments’ ability to produce impartial messaging.
A more positive result was that 62% said government communicators were “somewhat effective.”
Meanwhile, a worrisome finding is that 35% said government communicators were “somewhat ineffective” or “very ineffective.”
Lack of Public Trust
Questions about public trust and government messages produced similar sobering results.
For instance, the communicators said just 3% of the public trusts government information “a great deal.” And 40% said the public trusts government information “not very much” or “not at all.” Slightly more than half (56%) said the public “somewhat” trusts government information.
Yet, as mentioned earlier, communicators said government PR practitioners are not to blame.
For example, only 8% said government spokespeople aren’t “trustworthy.” And just 4% said “the government can be deceptive.”
On the other hand, 19% admitted “the government has withheld information in the past.”
A whopping 68% said the rise in disinformation is at the heart of governments’ communication problems.
Similarly, 58% said governments, and by extension their messages, are “viewed as being politically-motivated.” As such, politics and politicians may block well-meaning government communicators from issuing authentic, effective messages.
Beyond those factors, there are internal issues depressing the public’s trust in government messaging.
For example, government communication policy is inflexible and adopts a one-size-fits-all approach, 31% of communicators said.
A traditional criticism of governments is a lack of speed and innovation. As such, 26% said governments share information “too slowly.” Nearly the same amount, 23%, said governments’ communication approach is “outdated.”
Somewhat surprisingly, just 8% attributed government communication woes to an “inability to effectively use social media.”
In addition, the respondents pointed to budgets: 19% said governments lack resources “to effectively communicate.”
Yet comparing internal issues with external ones, the results were clear. External problems are the major problem.
Overall, nearly 60% (59%) said hyperpolarization of politics “limits officials from…communicating fair and balanced information.”
However, there were some differences: 51% of government communicators felt polarized politics was the problem, while 70% of government relations executives did.
Just 36% overall blamed a lethargic communication bureaucracy and outdated PR approaches for the lack of public trust in government. The splits: 41% for government PR pros and 28% for government relations executives.
Though disinformation and a hyperpolitical environment pose massive trust and communication hurdles, respondents said improving other issues will improve trust, according to Lawrence Parnell, associate professor and director of the Strategic Public Relations master’s program at George Washington’s (GW) Graduate School of Political Management.
The respondents urged more training for communicators, better use of Instagram, YouTube and Twitter and augmenting government messages aimed at diverse audiences.
Schoen Cooperman conducted the survey in November and December 2022. It closed prior to a spate of stories that seemingly could further harm trust in government: the hubbub over Rep. George Santos, former president Trump’s pair of NY-based legal challenges and ethical issues about Supreme Court justices.
The study was part of a multi-year research partnership that includes GW University, the National Association of Government Communicators, PR Daily and Axios. Parnell said a future survey will question citizens about their views of government communication.
