1

Miller
Jane Miller

Dr. Susan Dimock

PLSC 398

8 December 2019

Think tanks as policy messengers in the 21st century

In an October 2015 opinion piece in The Washington Post, columnist Amanda Bennett

posed the question “Are think tanks obsolete?” In it, she calls readers to liken the think tanks of

today to Detroit of the 1990s, a business model facing an “existential threat” in the face of a

rapidly innovating industry. Through this comparison, Bennett paints a picture of the changing

think tank landscape marked by new challenges such as competition from advocacy groups, the

new communications norms created by social media, and increasing “ideological gridlock”

across the country.1 While Bennett’s narrative is plausible, it is unlikely think tanks, century-old

monoliths of the public policy world, will go away anytime soon. However, these institutions

will be tasked with overcoming new challenges to ensure their voice is still heard by lawmakers

and Americans alike. 2 Bennett’s presumptions about the think tank industry are also far too

narrow. Today, think tanks range from being purely nonpartisan and fact-based like Pew

Research Center, nonpartisan with a slight ideological bend like the Brookings Institution, or

sharply partisan, such as the Heritage Foundation or the Center for American Progress. 3 Because

of these wide-ranging differences in content, funding, and agenda, each subset of the think tank

industry has unique trials in the context of today’s political environment. Research,

conversations with field professionals, and on-the-ground experience reveal think thanks who

1
Bennett, Amanda, “Are think tanks obsolete?” The Washington Post, October 5, 2015.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-theory/wp/2015/10/05/are-think-tanks-obsolete/
2
James G. McGann, 2018 Global Go To Think tank Index Report, (University of Pennsylvania, 2019), 15-16
3
Badger, Emily, “Think thanks are nonpartisan? Thank again,” Pacific Standard, May 3, 2017.
https://psmag.com/news/think-tanks-are-nonpartisan-think-again-39850
2
Miller
focus on independent, largely nonpartisan research find themselves confronted with the potential

make an impact in the American political and media world. Despite facing new challenges,

nonpartisan think tanks can break through the noise and provide a neutral voice in a hyper-

polarized media environment.

To understand the significance of nonpartisan think tanks in the 21st century, it is

necessary to examine the origin of think tanks and how the industry has changed over time.

According to James McGann, a noted think tank scholar who releases an annual, global audit of

the industry, think tanks are:

Public-policy research analysis and engagement organizations that generate policy-

oriented research, analysis, and advice on domestic and international issues, thereby
enabling policy makers and the public to make informed decisions about public policy.4

Though most outside the Beltway may only be able to name a few think tanks, the United States

boasts one of the most robust think tank industries in the world. The U.S. was home to 1,871

think tanks in 2018, with 408 in Washington, D.C. alone.5 Think tanks have been part of the

American policy conversation for just over a century, with the first two think tanks, Carnegie

Endowment for International Peace and the Brookings Institution founded in 1901 and 1916

respectively.6,7 Scholar Thomas Medvetz characterizes the rise of think tanks by placing them

into three different generational groups. The first, those established from 1910 to 1920, were

founded during the progressive era and were funded by philanthropies. The second, those from

1945-1970, were government-contracted organizations born out of the Cold War and the welfare

state.8 Andrew Rich characterizes these early think tanks as having “embodied the promise of

4
McGann, Think Tank Index, 12
5
McGann, Think Tank Index, 39-40
6
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, “Carnegie at 100: A Century of Impact,” accessed December 7,
2019. https://carnegieendowment.org/about/centennial
7
The Brookings Institution, “About Us,” accessed December 7, 2019. https://www.brookings.edu/about-us/
8
Thomas Matthew Medvetz, Think Tanks and the Production of Policy-Knowledge in America, (University of
California, Berkeley, 2007) 282-283
3
Miller
neutral expertise” because they were influential at the government level and well respected by

lawmakers. Rich writes:

The influence of these think tanks was significant, and their research served important
political purposes. But the policy process did not compel experts to become directly
involved in partisan battles. Experts were mobilized by policy makers to prescribe
possibilities for change.8

Lastly, “advocacy think tanks,” those formed during a time of growing social movements and

distaste for American politics, are the third generation (1970s-1990s).9 By the 1970s, in the wake

of an expanding government, growing opposition to communism and increased support for a

government role in national defense, a new wave of conservative think tanks emerged which led

to the prominence of advocacy think tanks on both sides of the aisle.9 As described by Kent

Weaver, this new wave of think tanks harbored “a strong policy, partisan, or ideological bent

with aggressive salesmanship and an effort to influence current policy debates.”10 Today,

Medvetz’s generational grouping of think tanks, including both the century-old nonpartisan

institutions and 1970s partisan think tanks, dominate an increasingly crowded media and

political environment.11

For nonpartisan think tanks, the rise of advocacy think tanks has posed additional

competition. This is one of the challenges non-partisan think tanks must overcome to maintain

their status as the preeminent policy communicators. These newer think thanks are able to play

into partisan interest by spinning their research to fit a particular ideology. In a time marked by

the highest polarization between parties in decades,12 this makes think tanks with a political

9
Medvetz, Think Tanks and the Production of Policy-Knowledge in America, 282-283
10
Kent Weaver, The Changing World of Think Tanks, (P.S. Political Science and Politics, 1989), quoted in Andrew
Rich, Think tanks and policy analysis, (Bristol University Press, Policy Press, 2018) 282-283
11
Herr, Susan, “As Social Media Landscape Gets More Crowded, Strategy Matters More Than Ever.” The
Communications Network, Accessed December 7, 2019. https://www.comnetwork.org/insights/as-social-media-
landscape-gets-more-crowded-strategy-matters-more-than-ever-video/
12
Pew Research Center, “Political Polarization, 1994-2017.” Last modified October 20, 2017.
https://www.people-press.org/interactives/political-polarization-1994-2017/
4
Miller
agenda and the research to back it up a valuable resource for lawmakers. In his book Think

Tanks: The New Knowledge and Policy Brokers in Asia, McGann notes the perspective of one

scholar on this topic:

Robert Landers (1986) believes the influence of politics on the think tank domain has
caused the ‘more overtly ideological’ to rise to prominence at the expense of the more
centrist institutions that have served to mediate public discussion and attain compromise
and consensus.13

This contention between partisan and nonpartisan think tanks is revealed though a study

conducted by E.J. Fagan through the congressional reform project, LegBranch. It shows that

Congress has begun to utilize partisan think tanks more extensively since cutting the budget of

its in-house think tanks — the Congressional Research Service and Congressional Budget

Office.14 Fagan’s findings show that from the 95th to 115th Congresses, the institution’s own think

tanks’ previously high rate of congressional testimony has plummeted and that of partisan think

tanks has skyrocketed along with the rise in political polarization.14 According to a piece on the

relationship between think tanks and Congress, Anthony Bertelli and Jeffrey Wenger discuss the

role of think tank work in congressional debate. They argue that the rise in policy advocacy

through think tanks is happening due in part to the “demand-side factors” of the industry.15 They

write:

In particular, think tanks since the 1980s have operated in an era of much stronger
partisan polarization in the US Congress than their predecessors in the post-war era. Our
claim is that partisan polarization in Congress and the think tanks’ emergent role as
policy evaluators combined to create a demand for these organizations responsible for
their proliferation.15

13
James G. McGann, Think Tanks: The New Knowledge and Policy Brokers in Asia, (Brookings Institution Press,
2019) 43-
14
Fagan, E.J., “A polarized Congress relies more on party-aligned think tanks, LegBranch, May 15, 2019.
http://www.legbranch.org/a-polarized-congress-relies-more-on-party-aligned-think-tanks/
15
Anthony M. Bertelli and Jeffrey B. Wenger, Demanding Information: Think Tanks and the US Congress
(Cambridge University Press, 2008), 231-233
5
Miller
It is clear that if the American population continues to become even more polarized, it may

become even more difficult for nonpartisan institutions to access lawmakers and average

consumers.

The implications of this gravitation toward partisanship are also seen in the way

Americans interact with media. This trend reinforces why nonpartisan think tanks could become

valuable to informing Americans but struggle now to do so. As Americans have become more

polarized in their politics, so too have they gravitated more toward fewer, more biased news

sources. As part of an effort to understand polarization in America, Pew Research Center

conducted a study on political polarization and media habits in the United States.16 The study

revealed “consistent liberals” said they utilize several news sources, most commonly CNN,

MSNBC, NPR and The New York Times. “Consistent conservatives,” on the other hand, tended to

gravitate toward Fox News exclusively with 47 percent of respondents citing the outlet as their

primary source of news. Moreover, the study showed each party-identifying respondent to have

high levels of distrust in the opposing party’s most-read or watched sources.20 Most media

sources are objective in their reporting and storytelling but the instability of the current

journalism industry places the future of unbiased journalism at risk. While national newspapers

like The New York Times and The Washington Post maintain a profitable following by readers,

local outlets are becoming underfunded, understaffed or folding altogether due to a decline in ad

revenue, low circulation and competition from online news aggregators like Facebook. This is

according to Clara Hendrickson, a research analyst at the Brookings Institution, who wrote a

2019 report on the crisis of local journalism.17 In it, she describes how communities who lose

16
Gottfriend, Jeffery, Kiley, Jocelyn, Matsa, Katerina Eva, Mitchell, Amy, “Political Polarization & Media Habits,”
Pew Research, October 21, 2014. https://www.journalism.org/2014/10/21/political-polarization-media-habits/
17
Clara Hendrickson, Local Journalism in Crisis: Why America must revive its local newsrooms. (The Brookings
Institution, 2019), 6
6
Miller
their local newspapers are more likely to vote for the same party for president and senator

compared to those with a local source of news. This is because these communities without a

local source move to national news for information which in turn informs them on partisan

conflict and less about what social and political issues are going on locally. Hendrickson writes:

This type of national coverage may influence the voting decisions of Americans who live
in news deserts by making them more likely to rely on partisan heuristics in national
elections. In this way, news deserts, by dislocating the audience for local outlets to
national substitutes, contribute to national political polarization.17

Among this growing polarization in what Americans believe and how they consume information,

nonpartisan think tanks can utilize their unique perspective and resources to give Americans

objective, well-research information. With high-level experts at their fingertips and independent,

unbiased research, think tanks could hold to key to giving Americans a free source of topical

information relevant to their lives.

When it comes to serving as an information source, some non-partisan think tanks are

already working to break through the noise and engage with average consumers in new ways.

While think tanks are, as previously noted, primarily intended to inform policy, they have a

unique relationship to the media world where they serve both as a media organization themselves

— researching and creating content — and a source for the media. Think tanks’ first role within

the media is their identity, like a news organization, as a content creator. Like newspapers, think

tanks focus on written work but also share their scholars’ work through multimedia platforms

like video, podcasts and social media in an attempt to engage and sustain a new audience. Co-

chairs of the Brookings Institution, Glenn Hutchins and Suzanne Nora Johnson, noted the role of

think tanks as information sources in their letter within the Brookings 2019 annual report:

In an increasingly polarized environment of political partisanship, rigid ideologies,

turbocharged disinformation, and personal enmities—Brookings provides an alternative.
7
Miller
We believe it is vital to offer a forum for people of good faith and differing views to
come together to analyze a common set of facts and problem-solve the issues.18

On-the-ground observation through the lens of Brookings’s Office of Central Communications

revealed Brookings scholars publish content that ranges from short blog posts providing a

snapshot on a particular topic or fact-based commentary on a current event, to long, detailed

reports on niche topics. However, with the rise of social media and digital communication,

Brookings has developed a portfolio of digital mediums. For example, Brookings uses its

podcast network as a way to engage with scholars’ ideas and grab a different audience.

Brookings also utilizes video to highlight scholars and runs a robust social media operation

spanning Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook. According to a source working in communications

at Brookings, these efforts are aimed at making research more easy-to-consume. “A lot of the

things that we have been doing are trying to break down our research and our expertise in ways

that other people can understand,” the source said, who referenced Brookings’s recent Policy

2020 initiative as an example.19 Policy 2020, a new website launched by Brookings, features

nonpartisan, fact-based looks at some of the most talked-about policy issues ahead of the 2020

presidential election.20 One of the main sections on the site is devoted to “Voter Vitals,” which

are short explainers from scholars aimed at educating the average consumer. According to the

Brookings employee, “That’s not traditional think tank work, that’s not traditional Brookings

work, that’s trying … to reach out to the public which is something that we are able to do now

because of the rise of social media and technology.”21 Brookings is not the only think tank that

focuses on content creation consumable by the average American. According to Alex Kisling,

director of media relations at the nonpartisan think tank Atlantic Council, platforms like social

18
The Brookings Institution, 2019 Annual Report, Accessed December 8, 2019, 2
19
Anonymous. (2019, Nov. 21). Personal interview.
20
The Brookings Institution, “About Policy 2020,” Accessed December 8, 2019
21
Anonymous. (2019, Nov. 21). Personal interview.
8
Miller
media and content like op-eds are just some online ways they engage with the public, in addition

to hosting events and trips overseas.22 Medvetz notes that this shift to a more palatable

communications strategy occurred across the board for most older think tanks, in part to keep up

with partisan institutions. According to Medvetz, these “incumbent” think tanks “adjust[ed] their

organizational structures and strategies, the form and content of their research, and the style of its

dissemination.”23

Just as important, think tanks engage with the media industry as a source. In addition to

being their own multimedia news organization, this too is where nonpartisan think tanks will be

able to cut through disinformation with success. The extent of think tank’s influence in the media

can be seen through Brooking’s 2018 report which stated Brookings’s annual media mentions to

be at approximately 679,541 — or around 1,861 media mentions per day. According to one

communications professional in the industry, the institution where he works considers media as

the mouthpiece that helps them reach the general public. “They are taking our stories and they

are translating them in ways that maybe we haven’t even ourselves and they are synthesizing.

They are a key medium for getting our information out there,” he said.24 He added part of his

institution’s relationship as a source for the media is setting clear boundaries about their role as a

nonpartisan institution. Kisling also noted he feels nonpartisan think tanks have an edge when it

comes to working with the media for this very reason:

I think that we and others like us in the non-partisan space, you have the advantage of
being seen by reporters, editors, others in the media as a voice that is not going to come
to any particular issue with a political bias or with a particular ideology.

22
Kisling, Alexander. (2019, Nov. 22). Phone interview.
23
Medvetz, Think Tanks and Policy Knowledge, 110
24
Anonymous, (2019, Dec. 2). Phone interview.
9
Miller
He noted that while Atlantic Council houses experts from across the political spectrum, including

veteran Republican or Democratic government figures, his team asks scholars to “leave the

politics at the doorstep” before they engage with the media.25

However, while it may seem non-partisan think tanks are set up to reach an

unprecedented population of consumers and turn back the dial on news polarization in America,

funding strategy has put public trust in think tanks on the rocks. Think tanks must address this

perceived lack trust and transparency, actively mitigate future incidents and double down on

their fact-based messaging to overcome this roadblock. Over the past few decades, several

political and societal changes have bestowed think tanks with a set of challenges they seemed to

be wholly unprepared for. In his writing “American Think Tanks and the 21st Century,” Daniel

Drezner provides reasoning for why he believes two particular historical events in the 21st

century led to these new challenges. The first, Drezner writes, is the September 11th terrorist

attacks which he argues sparked unprecedented interest among everyday Americans in topics

surrounding foreign policy.26 “Think tanks soon found themselves pushed into a new role of

public outreach,” Drezner writes, where they onboarded new resources such as websites,

strategic communications staff, and public relations resources.12 However, this phase of affluence

for think tanks ended abruptly with the 2008 financial crisis where endowments shrunk and think

tanks, having just built up staff and resources, were prompted to look toward corporations,

foreign governments, and wealthy donors for funding.12 According to Medvetz, who categorized

think tanks based on their primary funding sources, 20 out of the 25 think tanks he studied fell

into a “donor-dependent” category, while only a few were primarily government-funded and two

were able to generate most of their income from endowments.27 Since this turning point in 2008,

25
Kisling, Alexander. (2019, Nov. 22). Phone interview.
26
Daniel W. Drezner, American think tanks in the twenty-first century, (International Journal, 2015) 639
27
Medvetz, Think Tanks and Policy Knowledge, 242-
10
Miller
think tanks have entered a new era of criticism and mistrust as some believe these new funding

sources undermine think tanks’ ability and desire to conduct independent research.28 Numerous

pieces have come out criticizing American think tanks for manipulating research to please

corporate donors.29,30 Lawmakers, such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) have openly

denounced think tanks. In 2015, Sen. Warren criticized Brookings scholar Robert Litan for

allegedly writing a paper to benefit his funder, the Capitol Group, in a letter to both Brookings

and the Obama administration.31 This question of research independence and loss of trust has not

just permeated lawmakers but Americans too. While there is no decisive data on American trust

of think tanks, a 2019 report by the Pew Research Center revealed Americans have very low

trust in institutions and people who work within the same circles as think thanks: college and

university professors, journalists and elected officials.32

Professionals in the think tank field acknowledge that funding provides a barrier to public

trust. One communications expert in the industry noted a suspicion of elites common among

Americans as one reason why distrust is so high:

Whether you are a Republican or a Democrat there is an all-out view these days that
people are suspicious of elites and, by their very definition, you could say think tanks
either position themselves as elites or are elites in terms of education, in terms of what
they are covering, in terms of the kind of people that read their content.33

28
Hamburger, Tom, “How Elizabeth Warren picked a fight with Brookings – and won,” The Washington Post,
September 29, 2015. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-elizabeth-warren-picked-a-fight-with-
brookings--and-won/2015/09/29/bfe45276-66c7-11e5-9ef3-fde182507eac_story.html
29
Lipton, Eric, Williams, Brooke, “How Think Tanks Amplify Corporate America’s Influence,” The New York Times,
August 7, 2016. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/us/politics/think-tanks-research-and-corporate-
lobbying.html
30
Confessore, Nicholas, Lipton, Eric, Williams, Brooke, “Think Tank Scholar or Corporate Consultant? It Depends on
the Day,” The New York Times, August 8, 2019
31
Hamburger, Warren and Brookings, (The Washington Post, 2015)
32
Pew Research Center, “Trust and Distrust in America.” Last modified July 22, 2019. https://www.people-
press.org/2019/07/22/trust-and-distrust-in-america/
33
Anonymous, (2019, Dec. 2). Phone interview.
11
Miller
The professional added it is critical think tanks move forward with a focus on transparency about

the methodology in which they do things. He said he sees transparency as an “antidote” for what

many see as a “post-facts and post-truth” world rife with disinformation.34 According to

Medvetz’s 2007 piece, think tanks are not required to disclose their contributors.35 This makes

transparency up to the think tank’s discretion. However, some think tanks are finding ways to

secure the funding they need while taking a step in the direction of independence and

transparency. Kisling at Atlantic Council described how his institution takes funding from a wide

range of different sources to support its twelve programs. He said the institution always makes it

clear to funders before signing an agreement that all research will be completed in line with its

intellectual independence policies. He said this means Atlantic Council has complete control

over what gets published, what kinds of events it hosts, and who speaks at them:

The good think tanks are ones that say, ‘We appreciate your support of our work and we
appreciate you being a partner but anything that we do is going to be geared towards
meeting our goal and our intellectual independence cannot be jeopardized by your
funding’ and a good funder will accept that right away. If there is a funder that pushes
back against that, you probably shouldn’t be taking their funding.36

He added think tanks need to move forward by being very wary of the way they engage with

funders and must not find themselves in a situation where they have to do a funder’s bidding.37

While these new funding sources can also become messy when the source becomes implicated in

a scandal, these moments can also be used as symbols of improvement and transparency by think

tanks. For example, in the wake of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s disappearance in 2018,

the Middle East Institute and the Brookings Institution, who had both been funded by the

country, announced they would end their partnerships.38 Though it will likely be an uphill battle,
34
Anonymous, (2019, Dec. 2). Phone interview.
35
Medvetz, Think Tanks and Policy Knowledge, 249
36
Kisling, Alexander. (2019, Nov. 22). Phone interview.
37
Kisling, Alexander. (2019, Nov. 22). Phone interview.
38
Dennett, “How Much Saudi Arabia Spends to Influence Public Opinion In The U.S.,” NPR. October 17, 2019.
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/17/658253810/how-much-saudi-arabia-spends-to-influence-public-opinion-in-the-
12
Miller
through transparency and openness think tanks may be able to move forward with a future where

they are well-regarded by a wider population Americans while receiving the funding they need.

As shown, think tanks have gone through many different eras and iterations throughout

their 100-year history in response to changes in U.S. politics and society. This moment, in 2019,

is no different. With increased competition among partisan and nonpartisan think tanks, and as

polarization of politics and media consumption grows among Americans, nonpartisan think tanks

find themselves at a crossroads. Through research, field observation and conversations with

industry professionals, it is clear nonpartisan think tanks have the brainpower and the

communications foundation from which to cut through disinformation and partisan antics and

educate Americans in ways that some of today’s news sources cannot. In doing so, confronting

their reputation as elites, providing greater transparency in funding efforts and leaning into their

multimedia identities will be key in reaching the average consumer and entering a new role in the

American media industry.

u-s