The speaker session referenced in this blog was facilitated by members of Clear Point Communications and took place at ReImagine Appalachia’s 2025 Virtual Strategy Summit.
Advocates for sustainable economic development must win over new allies to continue to grow their missions. But how can they do this when:
- Pro sustainability messaging largely isn’t resonating in rural areas
- Sustainable initiatives are tightly associated with partisan ideologies in a time of tense polarization
- The new administration and congressional leadership largely disparage sustainability efforts
At ReImagine Appalachia’s Fifth Annual Virtual Strategy Summit, John Neurohr from Clear Point Communications facilitated a breakout session in which regional business and organization leaders discussed how to bridge political divides and reach new audiences. Here are three takeaways from this session.
#1 Effective cross-division communication in 2025 will have less to do with broadcasting a message and more to do with two-way exchanges
In 2025, audiences easily dismiss talking points from the opposite side of the national political divide. If you don’t understand the values of the people you hope to convince, you can’t frame your message in a way that appeals to them. Throughout the session, presenters reaffirmed the idea that to grow a community’s receptivity to sustainable practices, you first need to establish strong two-way communication, and this can take time to develop.
Daniel Ross Keen said he plays the long game when making the case for sustainable practices. Daniel is the Executive Director at RiverWise, an organization that supports communities historically disadvantaged by underinvestment and boom and bust economies.
“I envision much of my work sort of as fertilizer, as growing and shifting conditions in our communities that can produce better outcomes over the long term,” said Daniel.
“If I come out swinging with everything that is “contentious and everything that’s gonna divide our community from the get-go I’m dooming the possibility of finding our shared humanity – of finding our shared values.”
Christine Mondor, Principal at Evolve Environment Architecture, outlined the mindset that helps her carry out projects when partnering with people who don’t share her views. Evolve is a design and planning firm in Pittsburgh that has worked extensively with eco-districts (neighborhoods or urban areas that prioritize sustainable design and development as well as social equity).
“It’s never about convincing someone that your position is right, it’s more about finding where your common values are and then developing a pathway to get there,” Christine said.
“It takes time, it takes money, it takes persistence and not all those things are possible within the scope of a project.”
In the second section of the breakout, Ernie Britt, National Narrative Officer at We Make The Future underscored how forming a message is secondary. According to him, the first priority should be to understand the audience’s needs so that your message can be adapted to address those needs.
“We don’t start with a message and try to make it work. We start with who’s our audience. Who do we need to move? Who do we need to persuade? Who in our organizing, in our policy change do we need to activate to actually make a difference in people’s lives,” he said.
#2 Audiences are more interested in people than complex policy explanations
A prevailing theme in this session was that we have to always bring attention back to people. For example, the climate crisis impacts all aspects of global health, but we must spotlight its effects on individuals, families, and key groups. In this vein, audiences are more engaged when an issue or crisis can be linked to a clear villain rather than a complex, multifaceted issue. How are X individuals victimized by the problem? How are Y individuals or groups responsible for causing it?
“When we say villains, we don’t mean like cartoon character, like Count Dracula. We mean like the people, the policies, the organizations that prevent us from getting what we know our communities and our families need,” said Ernie Britt.
According to Ernie, these villains could be giant public utility companies with environmentally destructive practices, state legislators blocking important funding, ethically questionable city council members, etc. When we outline who the villain is, we can better craft a call to action for audiences. Whether the call to action is to sign a petition, write a letter, or join in a boycott, audiences are more likely to respond if they see a clear villain.
“We want to name those people (the villains) as often as we can, because again – another thing our research has shown, is that when people understand that the problems they face are largely caused by other people and not a system, not like an abstract concept, people feel better able to actively address the problem,” said Ernie.
The best way to highlight the human component of an issue is storytelling. In Daniel Ross Keen’s six-pronged approach to persuasive messaging, his first approach was to highlight human stories, instead of riffing on contentious debate subjects. He shared an example of a video project Riverwise made about the growing Hispanic community and the Christmas tradition they brought into Beaver County.
“We didn’t tell a story around the faultlines around immigration policy, we told a story about humans living through Christmas and sharing their cultural diversity in that context” he said.
“The more we can get out of these pre-canned debates and talk about human issues and themes, the more likely we are to find success…”
#3 Step out of pre-framed, hot-button debate topics
The national political climate has created a narrative that all subjects of discourse fall into partisan binaries. So one must be cautious using either terms or lines of argument that have strong associations with one side or the other. For example, a solar installation will bring both cost-savings and environmental benefits. The cost savings prospect will appeal to everyone, but if you start by pitching the environmental benefits, you may needlessly lose the interest of certain groups. Smart communication in 2025, is knowing how to pick up on your audience’s values and avoid using language you know will dissuade them.
In his presentation, Daniel Ross Keen, suggested considering the value of strategic ambiguity, because as he put it “Not every goal needs to be explicit.”
“We’re wind-up dolls, and there are all these pre-canned debates for us to have a script and we get on one side or the other and we fight. And we have to break out of that kind of predictable discourse,” said Daniel.
Learn more strategies for navigating the new political environment with the recap blog of our 2025 Virtual Strategy Summit.
Tying this back to the issue of environmentalism, there are ways to broach the issue without alienating certain groups. In his work on projects in eco-districts, Brian Wolovich has come into contact with many people who didn’t see eye-to-eye with him on climate issues. He has found an entry point with them by connecting over the challenges of natural disasters.
“Some of the things that we’ve done is start with the shared lived experiences. Sometimes the traumas or the challenges that we face together can form an opportunity to […] break us or build us,” said Brian.
“Yes we’re seeing more of that due to climate change, yes we’re dealing with a whole host of issues, but at the end of the day this is about homes, safe homes, safe drinking water, everybody wants a safe and dignified place to live in.”
Conclusion: successful communication must be transformational, not transactional
For many, communications work means public statements, email blasts, and pushing messages out to audiences. However, in this session, speakers continuously asserted that the most effective cross-division communication incorporates education, mentorship, relationship building, a willingness to sideline political postures, and a commitment to maintaining open channels to understand audiences’ values.
As pointed out by Ernie Britt, it is not always difficult to find common ground if you take the right approach.
“[Start] with a shared value, starting with something where 95% of people, when they hear it they’re like’ yes, I agree. I do care about my children’s safety. I do care about having clean air to breathe, and safe water to drink. A vibrant, thriving community where I can raise a family, have a future, pay my bills, and get ahead.’ Those sorts of values-based messages that are really hard to disagree with and it’s an entry point.”