Who Gets Heard—And Why That’s What Moves Policy

By Jeannette O’Connor

In today’s communications landscape, it’s not enough to be right. The same research can be praised as “evidence-based innovation” or dismissed as “ideological overreach”—depending entirely on who says it.

In an era shaped by declining trust, rising partisanship, and AI-generated everything, audiences are scrutinizing not just what they hear, but who they hear it from. According to Gallup, only 20% of Americans trust national media—yet 71% trust their local news. That’s not just interesting—it’s strategic. It tells us where credibility lives.

From Message to Messenger: Why Facts Alone Don’t Land

I’ve seen campaigns with rock-solid data fall flat because the messengers weren’t trusted. And I’ve seen modest, human stories break through in ways no fact sheet ever could.

Some of the most effective messengers we’ve worked with were a school principal who saw how hunger affected student learning, a small business owner frustrated by child care gaps, and a community health worker helping new moms navigate postpartum depression. These voices weren’t delivering “talking points”—they were the message.

Their messages worked because they were unexpected, grounded in lived experience, and spoken with authenticity. We sometimes call them “unexpected validators,” but that undersells what they do. These are people who build bridges—across political lines, professions, and places—because they speak from proximity, not position.

Trust Lives Locally

National voices are often too easy to dismiss. Local messengers—teachers, pastors, clinic directors—are seen as more credible, especially in polarized or high-stakes moments. When a community leader says why something matters, it lands differently than when a national expert says the same thing.

This is especially true when:

• A policy window opens and decisions move fast

• Your issue is pulled into a political storm

• A program needs buy-in, not just awareness

In these moments, messenger strategy isn’t just a bonus—it’s essential.

We’ve shifted our approach over time. Instead of building campaigns around spokespersons with titles, we start with people who touch the issue every day. We look for shared goals, not shared jargon. And we build trust long before we need someone to speak publicly.

It also means giving up some control. We help messengers use their voice, not ours. That may mean fewer soundbites and more real talk. But authenticity always beats polish.

What Happens When You Get It Right

Organizations that center messenger strategy see real results.

They earn broader media coverage, shift narratives, and spark social media buzz across platforms—from short videos and co-authored op-eds to podcasts, live forums, and memes. Their messengers show up everywhere because their message resonates.

Even more importantly, they build coalitions that are hard to dismiss—rooted in diversity of background, perspective, and experience. These aren’t campaigns built for a single moment. They survive leadership turnover, expand their base, and move policy forward.

That’s the power of a smart messenger strategy. It’s not about visibility for visibility’s sake—it’s about who gets heard, and why that changes what happens next.

In a time when attention is short and skepticism is high, people still move people.

And the messenger—now more than ever—still matters.