A (3:14)

That was really helpful, thank you. I'm gonna stick with, I think is correct with stories. You'll tell me in a minute. Over the years, I've seen how nonprof, you know, really try to work on how they talk to grant makers. But oftentimes I see them using passive voice, using a lot of jargon, using long sentences. And they're so used to talking to grant makers that way that they often bring it into their day to day communications with their wider community. I don't know if you see that too, but I'm curious if you do see that and then more. So how do we train our movement leaders to tell simpler stories and use plain language so we can activate more people?

C (3:53)

Yeah. Oh, gosh. So I have been a part of a couple different forms of fundraising and nonprofit work. So this one in particular is really close to my heart. This idea of how do we tell stories that are simple and understood and not get caught up in the jargon. Philanthropy at times can be very academic, right? Like it's lots of jargon, lots of SWOT analysis and things like that. And often nonprofits, in an attempt to sort of appeal to donors, will kind of just lean really heavily in and they get really comfy in that space. What I will say is, you know, I grew up in organizing. The first part of my career sat really at the blend between direct intervention and advocacy. So really like community work and grass top sort of directive work. So what ended up kind of happening is that I understood really quickly language can either build a bridge or a barrier. Like I just said, grass tops directive work. So if you don't know that I'm talking about elected officials and state legislators, like, then that kind of can feel a little isolating. So what I would say is the first step in the sort of plain language journey is proximity. And not the performative kind where we say that we're close to an issue in an effort to kind of buy a street cred, but one where you truly are grounded in what's like, real for your community, the language gets simpler and more direct and more human. Because when you're not trying to impress anyone, and if that's not the purpose of how you draft something, and if your initial drafting is for connection, then you are already more proximate to closer language that's plainer. So I think we also need to kind of do some unlearning, right. Like complexity doesn't equal credibility. If your message only makes sense to a handful of insiders, then it's actually not very. It's not necessarily the full robust strategy that you need to build that belonging. And sometimes that language can then actually operate as a gatekeeping mechanism. So I believe that plain language is actually quite radical because given the current academic deep levels of acronyms that we have in the nonprofit sector, that to make an idea accessible to everyone is beautiful and is actually quite hard. But what I like to say is that if Your grandma, your 10 year old, your funder can all understand your mission in the same sentence, then you're doing it right. So try to test with different groups before you put something out publicly and prioritize that you are looking to develop language and narratives that are serving to connect, not necessarily to impress. And that will also really help, I think. Also, you know, a lot of this is cultural. We have our own sort of culture in the nonprofit ecosystem. Many of us, especially communications folks, we're trained to think that professionalism really means polishing out our humanity. Right. Like to really think about how formal language and formal communication strategies sound. Do we sound good? Then that will kind of elicit more respect. But belonging, when we think about true belonging, that move people and make them connect to your mission, that really lives in the places where people can recognize themselves in what you're saying. So when I work with movement leaders, I tell them, you know, when you're editing, edit for meaning, what did you actually mean here? Not just like fancy words like what did you really mean? And if you can say it simply, then you can bring more people with you. And that's really the goal of narrative work.

A (7:49)

I love that. So instead of impress, try to include is my big takeaway from that.

C (7:54)

Absolutely.

A (7:55)

Well, let's stick more with this idea. And I just want to sort of go down a level into the idea of belonging itself. What comes to mind for you when we talk about belonging?

C (8:06)

When I think about belonging, I think about the moment when someone doesn't have to shrink or translate either to be understood or to understand someone else. When we can have transparent conversations where someone understands our purpose, our intent, that is really the building block for belonging. We can't really move people with us or build anything together if it doesn't feel like we kind of fit with each other. So what belonging does is it asks us for kind of openness and vulnerability in our storytelling really like a willingness to be seen honestly and to also see others quite fully. And that for some folks, I'm really, I guess I'm talking to, like my nonprofit development comms, folks like that. Those folks really. That really doesn't mean that we're performing poverty or exposing trauma as the only legitimate way to move people. I find that we often fall into that pattern, especially in the nonprofit sector when urgency sets in and we're trying to prove the worthiness of our work. But really, belonging isn't about proving pain. It's about revealing connection. We often confuse inclusion with belonging. Inclusion is being invited into a room that's already been built. But belonging is when you help to build the room. So that level isn't just like emotional. There's a level of structural work that's needed. When we think about the process of. When we bring in community into some say, like early campaigns, language. If you are working in a direct service organization and you have youth and families that you're working with, how many of them were a part of the initial concept for your campaigns? How many of them were a part of even how we name and brand something? When you think about it again, like building those levels, those bridges of belongings, it has to be embedded in every choice that we make. The language that we use, who gets to tell the story, who appears in it, how we plan our editorial calendars, how we brief our designers, what stories get elevated, all of that. Those are all of the sort of decisions that are the architecture of belonging. So, yeah, I would say when we treat belonging as infrastructure, we then create the conditions for people to recognize themselves and each other in a story. And that's what gets us towards the progress.

A (10:33)

I love how you really just brought it down a level and made it concrete for folks. I always try to do that in these conversations. No, that was great. And I'm going to sort of bring us down even another level here. We're taking the elevator down, I guess. I don't know what's happening. I've lost myself in this conversation. But I want to bring it down to the ground floor here. I guess that's where we're going with some real examples of how you've seen organizations or people do this. Well, have you seen times when people have been able to effectively bridge belonging in their narratives? Because I always find that stories I should use, stories of people doing this work helps people really wrap their minds around it and imagine how they can do it themselves. So I think you started to do that in the. Your answer to the last question, but again, just sort of with that prompt, I'm curious if there's any organizations or folks that come to mind that you've seen do this.

C (11:20)

Well, yeah, and you're using stories, right?

A (11:23)

These are, thank God.

C (11:27)

Stories. The examples, the moments, the memories. Think about stories as like the micro and narrative as like the macro, the larger arc.

A (11:34)

Yeah, exactly.

C (11:36)

So this kind of narrative work isn't just about single campaigns or great storytellers. Like it's about the infrastructure underneath. And I define narrative infrastructure as the systems, the networks, the practices, the trusted messengers that actually make this sort of belonging possible. So putting on my Borealis hat for a second, I will say that we see that across a lot of our grantee partners. So there are organizations like Documented, which has a newsroom that produces like multilingual content and it's by and for immigrant communities and trains others to launch similar local information hubs. So like that's the trainer and then like the training, the trainer sort of model. Right. Like that's a really good example of what narrative infrastructure looks like when it's community owned. And then you've got like folks like bold Futures out in New Mexico who think about belonging as a part of like public square through culture. This idea of they have like these Spanish language billboards that read like we celebrate you in all of your decisions. And that's like a narrative affirmation where people can actually see themselves reflected in a public space. So sometimes belonging is about visibility, sometimes belonging is about sharing information. You know, there's also this idea around like belonging as a part of across movements. Right. Like the bridging. So there's storytellers like Translash Media and then Cary Gray Group and they actually do things like connect trans safety, disability, justice, economic equity across sectors which remind us that belonging has to be systemic. Like we have to build bridges unto ourselves as well. So you know, and then beyond Borealis, like there's like all these like incredible narrative hubs that are doing connective work. We've got like Frameworks Institute which grounds like messaging and cognitive research, which again the idea of sharing data and language is really critical as we one form belonging connection with ourselves. But also as we think about how to share tools that help us develop stronger practices. There's also since this international database, the Commons has this narrative change hub and they do a collection of practical tools and case studies for movement communications all around the world. Part of it is also making sure that we are challenging the idea of localized perspectives only and thinking about larger global perspectives. As a part of our belonging strategies as well, through shared data, shared language, shared capacity. Those are the narrative infrastructure hubs that need to be resourced far more robustly than they are because they're the scaffolding that helps all of our stories hold.

A (14:34)

So, yeah, that was really helpful. And we'll link to all of those organizations and resources you mentioned in the transcript of this podcast@bigduck.com insights. We'll also link to you a shout out to Frameworks. We had a great conversation with those folks back on episode 168. How can framing inform your strategy? So people should check that out if they haven't heard that or re listen to it, because I think it's a nice bridge to this as well as several other conversations we've had that will connect in the transcript. So, yeah, thanks for all of that. Absolutely. Well, Sade, before we go, do you have a few tips? 1, 2, however many come to mind for folks who are listening and want to just start today, where, where can they start with putting these ideas into practice or maybe tomorrow, depending on when they're listening to this?

C (15:19)

Yeah, I have, I have so many tips. Let me try to narrow, let me try to narrow it down. The first, I would say start with the language audit, right? Like, how do you know what stories you're telling and how they're building into the narrative arcs? If you don't actually, like, pull up your website, pull up your last email blast, ask yourself, who is this written for? Who might feel left out? If it sounds like it's written for a funder or policy audience, try rewriting it in different voices. Try rewriting it for the people that you are actually serving, the people that those policies are surrounding. Belonging, really, to start with, like words that people can find themselves in. So start with an audit. And then I would really say, you know, belonging is iterative. I think that that's something that we need to accept that you will not get it perfect and you don't have to. But when you communicate honestly about what you're learning, people then feel permission to grow with you. John Powell teaches that through the Othering and Belonging Institute. Belonging isn't passive, it's active. It asks us to expand who we are. Like, who is the we? So part of this work is also stretching your audience. You build trust, you build this sort of like access to insight, and then you kind of gently pull them towards a deeper horizon of understanding while staying focused, rooted in care and the truth. So you start with where you are through that audit. You Stay rooted by centering people that are approximate to the work and making sure that the language invites them into the work. And then you are always going to keep reaching for that wider. We. This idea of, like, we build belonging, kind of like each sentence, each story at a time, and invite more folks in.

A (17:19)

I really like that. I'm thinking with the language audit, you know, go a step further and look at images, too. I think you're right to start with words, and that might be the easier place to start. But I would also look at the images that you're using when you're looking at your website or those email blasts or anything you're examining and also saying who's being depicted here. Did they give consent for all the uses we're using? Do they look like they're coming from a place of dignity and pride? Or as you said earlier, are we depicting folks from a place of negativity and trauma? So that's also part of, I think, what folks can do as they're. As they're taking steps in this place.

C (17:54)

Absolutely. When I think about words, I think about them from, like, clarity, tone, and jargon.

A (18:00)

Right?

C (18:00)

Like clarity, tone, jargon, voice, accessibility. Like, those are kind of the things I think about. And then in visuals, I think about definitely representation. I even think about authorship. Like, who took these photos and for what purpose. Like, were the subjects informed? Were they consenting? Like, those type of things are also really important. And then also the context of the photos. Are your visuals reinforcing stereotypes? Yeah, so I think about those as kind of. Yeah, like the audit and how the words and the images kind of intersect. I appreciate that. Thank you.

A (18:34)

Yeah, yeah, no, we're thinking about it all together here. Well, well, if you've been intrigued by this conversation, as I hope you have, and you'd like to learn more about Sade's work, visit borealisphilanthropy.org you can also follow her on LinkedIn and learn more about the organization she founded at melanate.org Sade. Any last thoughts you'd like to share before we wrap things up?

C (18:55)

Yeah, I mean, definitely follow and engage with me on LinkedIn. It's definitely my little, like, micro ecosystem of narrative work and belonging in. In real life. I laugh because I really want to use the word pedagogy. Like, I strive to model the pedagogy of my practice. Like, but, like, really, I'm saying, like, I live the talk. Like, I say things plainly, and if people don't understand, I say it in four different ways because it's on me to make sure that I'm effectively communicating so that people feel brought into the greater we that I'm building. So, yeah, and I'm around DM me. Like, I believe in shared conversations and open spaces. I believe that we need to carry these conversations into our teams and our campaigns and even our family group chats. Like, we need to really integrate this plain language that builds belonging into a culture where we're having courageous conversations where people can truly engage. So thank you so much.

A (19:55)

You really have lived the talk. And I would say you live the talk. I did connect with you on LinkedIn. I follow your posts. I mean, this is all true. You really do live. And I love that. So thank you for doing that, living by example and giving us so many clear, simple things to think about in this conversation.

C (20:10)

Thank you.

A (20:11)

All right, everyone get out there and make that language and those images and everything more accessible and more connective and center belonging. Take care.

B (20:22)

Are you a fan of this podcast or Big Duck's other resources on nonprofit communications? If you if you are, we'd love to hear from you. Please drop us a line by writing to helloigduck.com to tell us what you're working on and what topics you need help with. We also welcome getting your feedback via reviews. You can review this podcast wherever you listen. We'd love to hear from you.

A (20:45)

This is the Smart Communications podcast, Developing the Voices of Determined Nonprofits, brought to you by Big Duck.

B (20:52)

Big Duck is an agency that puts smart communications in the hands of nonprofits. We help our nonprofit clients develop strong brands, strong campaigns, and strong teams that advance their missions and achieve their goals.

A (21:05)

Connect with us@bigduck.com.