AI in Public Affairs: Why Faster Tools Demand Better Human Judgment

AI in Public Affairs: Why Faster Tools Demand Better Human Judgment [00:00:00] Welcome to Public Affairs Trends. What happens when the cost of creating content falls towards zero? When a small campaign can use tools that not so long ago were available only to presidential campaigns? And when public affairs teams can research an issue, analyze an audience, draft a response, and distribute a message faster than ever before, the obvious answer is that work changes. But after four conversations about AI here on the Public Affairs Trends podcast, I think there's another answer, too. And that is technology may be changing at incredible speed, but the qualities that make public affairs effective, from trust and judgment, authenticity, persuasion, [00:01:00] and human relationships, these are becoming much more important, not less. So today there is no guest. Instead, I wanna step back and connect some of the ideas we've heard from Jordan Lieberman of Powers Interactive, Matt Kenney of Echo Canyon Consulting, Curt Mercadante of Pipeline Media Agency, and Jonathan Greller of JAG Public Affairs Because we've had four professionals with very different backgrounds, but a remarkably consistent message about where this industry is heading out. The first theme is simple. AI works best as an assistant, not an architect. Curt Mercadante, for example, brought that idea to life with a brilliant analogy because in the Marvel films, Tony Stark has Jarvis, an incredibly capable AI. [00:02:00] But Tony remained the strategist. He decided what needs to be built and why. Jarvis helps him build it. And I think this distinction matters because AI can now complete tasks that once consumed hours. It can also monitor issues, build targeted lists, organize research, draft content, and even help people who have no coding experience and allow them to create their own software. But it cannot take responsibility for the outcome. So if we ask a vague question and just accept the first answer, and then send it straight out to the world without checking it, that is not transformation. That is simply outsourcing our judgment. So the better approach is to begin with the problem. Where is your team losing time? What repetitive [00:03:00] work is keeping people away from clients, stakeholders, and strategy? And what would a better outcome actually look like? And then from there, work backwards and only use AI to help construct the route from here to there. And that turns AI from a novelty into a useful colleague, and importantly, it keeps a human accountable for the brief, the facts, and that final decision. Now, the second theme is that cheaper technology is widening access. Jordan Lieberman described how the price of technology keeps moving down, giving smaller campaigns access to capabilities that recently belonged to only the biggest operations And Matt Kenny, he made a similar point when he discussed hyper-targeting grassroots engagement and the role that AI is playing in helping [00:04:00] teams turn creative ideas into real campaign assets. And this is a significant shift. A smaller organization can now analyze more information, create more variations of the message, and reach a more precise audience, and do it without building a, an enormous technical team. But access to more data does not automatically produce better decisions. Jordan spoke about working across billions of data points, but the value is not possessing all that information. It's actually knowing which signal matters, understanding its context, and turning it into real action. And he also made the case for starting early. Campaigns that establish their digital presence before the final rush, they're the ones that can learn, re-target, and build familiarity over a period of [00:05:00] time Ultimately, technology rewards speed. But strategy, that's what still rewards preparation. And as digital teams become more accessible, trust becomes a real competitive advantage here. And Jordan's advice was clear: if a client is about to waste money, tell them that that short-term transaction is never worth more than the long-term relationship. And the third theme is that more content does not necessarily mean more influence. Curt argued that the content creation becomes dramatically cheaper, and distribution and ownership become more valuable. But that should make every public affairs team ask a slightly uncomfortable question , and that is, are we building an audience or are we merely borrowing one? Social platforms, they remain useful, of [00:06:00] course, but their algorithms, their rules, and reach can all change overnight. An organization that depends entirely on somebody else's platform, they're building it on rented ground. So that makes owned email lists, opt-in communities, direct relationships, podcasts, local media, and a diverse mix of channels, it makes all these things strategically important again. And it also changes how organizations think about search. People are increasingly asking AI systems for answers rather than scrolling through a page of links. So once again, useful, credible, solutions-based content, these are the things that could matter more than a polished website on its own But the ability to publish constantly also creates another risk. You're just adding to the noise. [00:07:00] And Jonathan Grello reminded us that sometimes less is more. AI can help a communicator produce 10 pages, but the audience will only remember 10 words. So the objective is not to fill every channel, it's to communicate something that is worth remembering. And that takes us to the fourth theme. Speed must be paired with restraint. In a crisis, organizations can now respond within minutes, and Jonathan is a strong believer in rapid response, especially when reputations are being unfairly attacked. But sometimes responding quickly does not mean saying everything. In fact, that temptation to explain every detail can actually make a situation worse. The better question here is, what are the one or two points that people genuinely [00:08:00] need to understand? And how do we make the takeaway clear, deliberate, and impossible to misread? This is where experience, listening, and judgment come in. Sometimes a client asking, "Should I respond on social media?" is really saying, "I feel like nobody is defending me." And the words on the surface are not always the real brief. Good advisors will listen for both. And Matt Kenny made the same human case from another direction. Campaigning may now involve AI, streaming platforms, mobile targeting, and proprietary software, yet politics remains a people business and a relationship business. Voters, they still respond to authenticity. Stakeholders, they still need to feel heard. And persuasion still depends on understanding [00:09:00] what people care about. And that is perhaps the most important conclusion from all four conversations. And that is AI is not removing the human layer from public affairs. It's removing some of the mechanical work around it, and that can give professionals more time to think, listen, build relationships, test assumptions, and have conversations that only people can have. But this is also raising the standard. When everyone can create more, speed up, and target more precisely, volume is no longer the advantage. Instead, the advantage is knowing what to say, when to say it, and who needs to hear it, and al- most importantly, when restraint will be more persuasive than yet another piece of content So here are three questions that [00:10:00] I want you to take back to your team this week. First, which repetitive task could AI remove without surrendering human accountability? Second, which audiences and distribution channels do you genuinely own? And third, if you only had two sentences to persuade your most important stakeholder, what would they be? And those questions should feel more useful than asking whether AI will replace public affairs professionals. Time to think different. And maybe the better question is what public affairs professionals can become when tools get faster and the human judgment gets sharper. So my thanks once again to Jordan Lieberman, Matt Kenny, and Curt Mercadante, and Jonathan Grella. Big thank you to them for sharing their experiences and their ideas. You can [00:11:00] hear their full conversations in the recent episode feed. But I'd love to know what themes you would like us to explore in a future monthly roundup. Thanks for listening to the Public Affairs Trends podcast. I'm Neil Hughes, and I'll speak to you all again very soon. Bye for now.