The schoolhouse murders in Newtown, Connecticut, have renewed the debate on gun control in America. But that debate is happening without the main protagonist. The National Rifle Association, so persuasive and powerful in private, has been silent in public. It has been their strategy in the past, and it has worked. Will this time be different?
If you look for an official statement by the NRA following the Newtown killings you’ll find only one line from a spokesman: “Until the facts are thoroughly known, NRA will not have any comment.”
The group’s Facebook page has been disabled, and its Twitter feed has gone quiet. None of its officials are giving media interviews. In today’s always-on, media-saturated world, the group’s ability to keep silent is remarkable.
Doesn’t this say-nothing approach contradict every rule of crisis communications? Perhaps, but the strategy has been consistent and successful.
That’s because the aim of the NRA is not to win an open, public debate on guns. It is to defeat legislation on Capitol Hill and in state legislatures around the country that would impose restrictions on firearms. A public debate is the last thing they want. They’d prefer to wield their influence quietly in corridors and committee rooms – a strategy that has worked well for years. There hasn’t been any significant gun-control legislation since the assault-weapons ban ended in 2004. In fact, gun restrictions have eased in recent years, especially at the state level.
So while I strong
ly disagree with its stand on gun regulation, I am forced to acknowledge the effectiveness of the NRA’s communication strategy.
The NRA has been very effective in having others carry its message, another hallmark of a strong communication strategy. Whether Charlton Heston or Ted Nugent, a recognized public figure could be relied upon to offer a quote – and give a popular face to the NRA’s mission.
It’s difficult to have the discipline to remain quiet in the midst of the media frenzy; it’s the mark of a very well organized group. But being silent lets the NRA prepare a well-considered response as part of a detailed communication strategy. It also lets the group highlight any extreme proposals by their opponents and exploit issues that fall in a grey area and lack clear popular support. The best way to look reasonable is to portray your adversaries as unreasonable.
The silent strategy also allows the NRA to wait out the storm of media attention until another issue comes along. But Newtown might be different; that remains to be seen. Presidential leadership and grassroots pressure could lead to legislative action. There’s news today that President Obama will support a reinstatement of the assault weapons ban.
When the bill comes up, it likely will take a subpoena to get an NRA official to appear in a public hearing. But if reporters apply the same aggressiveness to confronting NRA executives that they used when covering presidential candidates, then the NRA’s silence might be broken. It would be interesting to hear what they say, especially in an unscripted setting.