Circles of Trust

H.L. Mencken once said, "For it is mutual trust, even more than mutual interest, that holds human associations together. Our friends seldom profit us but they make us feel safe." Mencken was right. The small group of people we trust to help us are the most powerful among us.

In Applebee's America, a book I cowrote with Ron Fournier (now National Journal Group's editor-in-chief) and political strategist Doug Sosnik, a chapter is devoted to a group of people in this country we called "navigators." These navigators make up 10 to 15 percent of the population and help influence the choices of their family members, neighbors, and colleagues on everything from consumer products to politics to pop culture. The group is diverse: It includes young and old, male and female, every ethnicity, college-educated and not, rich and poor, and all manner of partisanship. Navigators are extremely powerful, and companies and political campaigns continue to underutilize them.

In 2003, when I was getting ready to organize the reelection campaign of George W. Bush in my role as his chief strategist, I recommended to campaign manager Ken Mehlman that he read a book called The Influentials by Ed Keller and Jon Berry. Its subtitle is One American in Ten Tells the Other Nine How to Vote, Where to Eat, and What to Buy.

This analysis informed much of the discussion of navigators in Applebee's America. It was this group that Mehlman and I made a concerted effort to reach in the run-up to the November 2004 election. We designed television messages and ad buys with them in mind and asked our operatives in the field to try to identify and contact people with influence in their neighborhoods and communities. This was just one part of the reelection strategy, of course, but we believed it was a crucial part of the winning effort. Oddly, it is not one of the lessons that other campaigns (or companies) have picked up and tried to replicate.

As Americans have more instant access to volumes of information and become more siloed in their seeking of it -- anyone with a computer or laptop can log on in the privacy of their home or at a coffee shop -- they feel more of a need to have someone help them wade through all of this data and then let them know who or what they can trust.

Ironically, the widespread availability of multiple cable or satellite channels, cell phones, handheld devices, computers, and the Internet has taken America back more than 100 years to a time when navigators, or "influentials," ruled. Back when my Irish ancestors Patrick and Mary Dowd got off the boat, someone met them and helped them find a place to live, to work, to shop, and then to decide which political party best represented them. We are moving megabyte-by-megabyte back to an age where such neighbors and good friends matter and "precinct captains" have power again.

Many discussed this use of technology as the cutting-edge way to approach organization and communications in 2008, especially by the Obama campaign. But the campaigns and the media focused little on navigators. In the 2012 election cycle, I believe this group will be absolutely key. And not just in determining Americans' political choices, but in all the choices they make every day, from those about schools for their kids to churches to movies. I told someone once in explaining this to think about a Hollywood movie that cost $100 million to produce and $50 million to market. But if you asked your neighbor if the movie was any good and she said, "It stunk," you probably wouldn't go see it, no matter how slick the sales techniques.

So as you keep an eye on which candidate is likely to emerge in the Republican nomination process or who may win the general-election fight, look for the one who best connects with and motivates these navigators. This select segment of society will likely determine who leads America.

These navigators can also help us in our own lives and the choices we make, perhaps keeping us from going down a wrong path or ending up in a destructive relationship. We all need trusted confidantes who can help us make these decisions. But recall the signature phrase often used by President Ronald Reagan in discussing relations with the Soviet Union, "trust but verify." This is as true in our personal lives as it is in politics. We should trust, but we should also take it upon our­-selves to verify.

This post originally appeared in National Journal.

 

Comments

[halhobbs]

10:06 PM on 05/30/2011

Interesting that none of these navigators have written about the effects of bringing all the military people home at once. How about 13% unemployment overnight with the government certainly having to continue payments to them till they're all gainfully employed. Not politically correct to discuss at this point. I guess that's why Obama is taking the conservative steps he's been taking lately.

[mjwca]

11:36 PM on 05/27/2011

People would be far wiser to find out for themselves rather than taking someone else's word for it. Even your closest friends and family have their own agenda and points of view which may or may not be right for you on a given issue. And trusting a political campaign organizer or marketing person to tell you the truth about ANYTHING is just plain stupid. They make a living manipulating and spinning truth away from anything honest or meaningful and towards what they want you to believe, no matter how far removed that may be from the actual truth. Also, personality-wise, they are the people who get off on manipulating and controlling the situation rather than having an honest given and take discussion. Its why they do what they do. So "navigators" as Mr. Dowd defines them (and himself) are absolutely the LAST people you should be listening to. It like taking the word of a used car salesman about what a steal that piece of junk with the wheels falling off is.

[GAYF]

05:16 PM on 05/27/2011

I am not a fan of Mencken or Dowd. Dowd's use of the opening quote affirms, for me,as always, the absolutely vital role of interpretation in thought, emotion, word and action. As one commentator said, the validity of the quote is valuable for observers on all points of the continuum of perspective and perception. The P

[TEPK]

05:05 PM on 05/27/2011

As the electronic- and internet-revolutions over the last 15 years have filled cyberspace with more and more and more information ... the quality, dependability and usefulness of that information has declined ... precipitously. And, it truly has been a "garbage-in, garbage-out" experience for those of us who have been around the block a few times.

It's a sad commentary that people need more-and-more "navigators" to help them through the increasing garbage and the more-and-more dangerous minefields. Instead of "navigators" ... maybe we need more "gatekeepers"?

[GAYF]

05:29 PM on 05/27/2011

Once the equivalence of "gatekeepers" was an attitude, and information process that entertained respect for thoughtful scholarship, people who used time, energy and effort searching-researching, seeking, comparing, discussing with words and media--initially print. Today, there is no respect, no place for thoughtful accumulation and sharing of information--and least of all the possibility of wisdom. This medium gas possibilities, but the probabilities for enhanced learning are limited.The "instant" society that gives equal validity to the village idiot, the gorgeous face, and the open checkbook denigrates anything of the intellect, negates the experience and intellect (an obscene word) beyond propaganda and appearance.

[Ozarks]

04:56 PM on 05/27/2011

navigators baloney! He really means Gatekeepers like MSM editors, Publishers and lying republicans

[MsLiz]

03:42 PM on 05/27/2011

I am a family navigator.

[1johnf]

03:39 PM on 05/27/2011

I've just scrolled through the comments and the majority of them are partisan. this article is articulate and accurately describes one of the forces that influence how people (conservative OR progressive) make decisions. He then adds the true wisdon, trust but verify. It's consistent with what thinking people have always said...your opinion sounds good, but the the facts support your assertions. Always question the premise. Mr. Dowd has presented us with one of the social phenomenons that are truely at work in or day to day lives. He as presented it in a non-partisan manner and that should be recognized.

[susanlno]

03:12 PM on 05/27/2011

And we're supposed to trust Dowd's word after he admitted running a re-election campaign for a man who was never elected?

[quovadiszero]

02:54 PM on 05/27/2011

The "navigators" sound like good old Russian "comrades".

[bayman]

02:23 PM on 05/27/2011

The internet age has unleashed millions more navigators. Props to Dowd for admitting to being a strategist for the Worst President Ever, but it does smack down his credibility.

[lambdin1]

02:14 PM on 05/27/2011

Now we know where Bush got the attitude that " Father knows best"! We already have too many people thinking they know it all. Thanks for the dirvel!!!!

[Bombadillo22]

01:46 PM on 05/27/2011

'These navigators can also help us in our own lives and the choices we make, perhaps keeping us from going down a wrong path or ending up in a destructive relationship.'

This premise is well taken, but stunningly contrary to the result it presumes for America.

The author and his 'circle of friends' helped elect George W Bush, a second time (trust, but verify?), who promptly impaired our SCOTUS with fellow ideologues (no doubt members of this ‘circle’) and went on to ruin America's name around the world with torture, deception or appalling indifference to the planet's health. It was a destructive relationship, leading down many wrong paths, birthing the revolting tea-party.

So beware of ‘navigators’ that seek to take our country 'back a hundred years, in terms of essential regulation, protection of consumers and civil rights. The scientific community—now that’s a group of navigator’s we can all trust. I wonder if the author believes in climate change?

[Willowset]

01:33 PM on 05/27/2011

H. L. Mencken, not a warm and fuzzy guy, was cynical about friends. Yet in his time people actually knew their friends and might well "profit" from face-to-face encounters. Dowd seems to suggest that we need our virtual friends to help us with our decisions, as well as to provide us with relevant information. I'd much rather deal with my flesh and blood precinct captain than with an outside operator who has studied me thoroughly as a statistic nestled among other statistics.

[gypsy508]

01:11 PM on 05/27/2011

Interesting viewpoint and I don't doubt it's effectiveness to a small degree but it is a viewpoint in part that justifies his job. It's still looking top down and not bottom up although he is trying to do the opposite. People are influenced by a variety of media, etc...but the undecideds who decide elections generally aren't as often.

[drumplanet]

12:30 PM on 05/27/2011

liberalism in our country is dead,no one wants it anymore, i found the article interesting, and also i can't [make believe] that a majority of america wants an agenda that frankly only a minority supports, thanks 4 great reading though

[antaeus]

12:58 PM on 05/27/2011

LOL. That sounds like a slogan from the 1970s, as the New Deal reached the end of its cycle.

In 2011 we're coming off 30 years of rule by the "moral majority," trickle-down economic disasters, and the inescapable conclusion that wishful-thinking conservatism is escapist fantasy.

[bayman]

02:20 PM on 05/27/2011

The majority supports Social Security. Conservatives don't.
The majority supports Medicare. Conservatives don't.
The majority supports worker's rights. Conservatives don't.
The majority supports a minimum wage. Conservatives don't.
The majority supports tax increases for the wealthy. Conservatives don't.
The majority supports an end to subsidies for oil companies. Conservatives don't.
The majority supports financial reforms. Conservatives don't.
The majority supports gay rights. Conservatives don't.
Etc., etc., etc.