HOW DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY IS CHANGING TRADITIONAL PUBLIC POLICY ADVOCACY

The Internet has radically altered the lobbying arsenal. This was brought home with a vengeance in 2011 and 2012 in the United States by the failure of traditional lobbying strategies to win approval of the "Stop Online Piracy Act" (SOPA). In early 2011, by all normal standards, the odds were with passage of SOPA. The legislation had the backing of some of the most powerful companies and associations in Washington D.C. In addition, the measure had strong bipartisan support. SOPA promiszed a brave net Internet- one cleansed of "rogue websites" that hawk pirated song and movies as well as counterfeit goods. For the U.S. Congress, the legislation's goals amounted to upholding justice, protecting legitimate businesses (and jobs), and making the Web safer for law-abiding consumers. Who could be against that?

Towards the end of 2011, however, an anti-SOPA coalition abruptly burst on the scene catching the SOPA backers by surprise. It included companies such as Google, Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo with the means to invest heavily in lobbying. Opposition to the bill quickly caught fire among the broader public. It was expresed in emails, text messages, voicemails, Twitter comments, Internet petitions and outspoken attacks at town hall meetings- none of which activities have to be reported as lobbying related.

Backers of SOPA began to jump the ship with several House members withdrawing sponsorhip and Senators followed suit. The lawmakers declared that "they had heard legitimate concerns about the impact the bill could have on access to the Internet and about a potentially unreasonable expansion of the federal government's power to impact the Internet and that Congress should listen and avoid rushing through a bill that could have many unintended consequences".

Lesson learned

The emergence of a powerful public force outside traditional avenues of influence put fear of elective defeat into the hearts of members of Congress and has forced the lobbying community to strengthen its own non-traditional tactics. Now, in the lexicon of Washington insiders, the acronym SOPA has become a verb as in the warning to overconfident legislators: "Don't get SOPAed".

The public dialogue has become more important in influencing the climate in which decisions are made. The universe of gatekeepers deciding what the public will know about the legislative process is no longer limited to a very narrow group of people. Instead, the new media "can shine a light on" Congressional negotiations, so that a company or association pushing an issue can no longer depend on the effectiveness of an old-guard lobbyist with good connections with Congress.

The moszt explosive growth in the field of lobbying is taking place in the use of digital technology to mobilize and direct public and elite opinion.  The growing network of "strategic communications", digital practitioners and the newly created PR subsidiaries of old-line lobbying firms is in effect, supplanting special pleaders' traditional tactics, while simultaneosuly enhancing their ability to operate out of the limelight. Indeed, many of the activities most people would call lobbying now fall outside of its legal definition. They have become a large but almost invisible part of special interest influence on public policy.

There is a great need everywhere to expand the definition of lobbying to include attempts to influence through grassroots campaigns, manipulation of public opinion, advertising and the use of social media as so-called strategic communication firms increase their lobbying roles. Today professionals conducting such activities need not register. At least minimum transparency requirements and disclosure should apply as they do for traditional lobbyists.

In In the end, if the public, journalists and academics know who lobbies, who they target, and how much money they spend on what, lobbyists and government officials can be held more accountable.

.