How should NPMs communicate?

NPMs have a number of different communication channels available to them. 

The NPM website is the first and most important tool for NPM communication. This will be either a standalone website or, for NHRIs as NPMs, a subsection of the institutional website. For multiple body NPMs it may be useful to have a single website to present their collective work. NPM websites should include information about the structure, mandate and powers of the institution, NPM staff and leadership, and the NPM’s public reports and recommendations. For NPMs that have been in operation for a long period of time, it is particularly important to ensure that visitors can quickly find reports and recommendations that relate to specific themes or institutions.   

Social media, including Twitter, Facebook and video sharing websites, can help NPMs reach a wider audience, although it can be challenging to communicate complex issues and ideas effectively. Some NPMs that are active on social media found it to be very useful – including for direct interaction with detainees and detainee families, something that enabled some NPMs to conduct a sort of “remote monitoring” during the COVID-19 pandemic. NPMs should think carefully about their objectives and the time and resources required before engaging on different platforms. 

Mailing lists are another communications tool that allow NPMs to keep a large number of interested people up-to-date on their work with minimal effort, via regular electronic bulletins or emails that share project updates and findings from key reports or activities. 

When publicising a specific thematic report, for example, NPMs may consider additional communication initiatives, such as a conference, workshop or roundtable that brings together key stakeholders to discuss and consider the main findings. 

NPMs may also communicate directly with the media, through press releases, interviews or by providing “background information” to trusted journalists. As previously mentioned, it is important that NPMs are clear about their objectives when engaging with the media and are equally aware that these are likely to be different from a journalist’s objectives. Dealing with this challenge requires a clear strategy and, potentially, creating alliances with particular media outlets or journalists who are supportive of the NPM’s work and preventive approach. 

While there is no one-size-fits-all answer to who should talk on behalf of the NPM, the important point is that this should be set out clearly in the NPM’s internal rules and understood by everyone involved. In particular, it is important to clarify who, and at what level, is authorised to talk to the media on behalf of the NPM. 

It may also be important to develop clear rules around personal social media,  including what from visits can be shared. 

NPMs should be mindful of issues around access and accessibility of their communication. This includes ensuring that their materials are in a form that can be accessed and understood by different audiences, including groups in situations of vulnerability. This might mean: 

• Publishing translations in minority or indigenous languages 
• Providing video or audio resources with key information 
• Publishing reports in Microsoft Word format, so that they can be “read” by text to speech and translation software, and 
• Making time to meet and talk with those who might not have access to the NPM’s website and other communication channels, including detainees.