Ready to adapt posts for councils, consultants and civic organisations. Every template is written so that
a claim is either evidenced or clearly labelled as a view, because the fastest way to lose civic trust online is to be
caught asserting something you cannot support.
The one rule that governs this pack. Replace every highlighted field with your own verified figure and
name the source in the post itself. Do not publish a number you cannot point to. If a figure is contested or dated,
say so in the post; acknowledging a limitation costs you far less than being corrected in the comments.
1. LinkedIn
1.1 The evidence insight post
Use when you have a finding worth sharing. This is the highest performing civic format because it gives
the reader something they did not know and can verify.
[Surprising finding in one plain sentence.]
We looked at [what you examined, for example: five years of development approvals across our area].
Three things stood out:
1. [Finding with the number.]
2. [Finding with the number.]
3. [The one that changes a decision.]
What it means in practice: [the decision or action this should inform].
Source: [dataset, report name and year]. Happy to share the working with anyone who wants it.
[#LocalGovernment #YourRegion]
1.2 The report or publication launch
Use when releasing a report, review or evidence pack. Lead with the question the report answers, not with
the fact that a report exists.
We kept being asked: [the question the report answers]
So we went and looked properly. [Report title] is out now.
The short answer: [one sentence conclusion].
The longer answer covers [theme one], [theme two] and [theme three], and it is honest about what the evidence cannot yet tell us.
Read it here: [link]
If you work in [sector] and disagree with any of it, I would genuinely like to hear why.
1.3 The comparison post
Use for benchmarking findings. Comparison travels further than a single figure because it gives the
reader a place to stand.
[Your place] is not unusual. That turns out to matter.
Set against [number] comparable councils, our [measure] sits [above, below, in line with] the group at [figure].
Where we genuinely differ is [the real point of difference].
The useful conclusion is not that we are behind or ahead. It is that [what a shared pressure means for what should be done].
Comparison set and method: [source].
1.4 The correction post
Use when you got something wrong. Publishing a correction well builds more trust than never erring,
because it proves the rest of your numbers are watched.
A correction.
On [date] we said [the claim]. That was wrong. The correct figure is [correct figure].
What happened: [brief, non defensive explanation].
What we have changed so it does not happen again: [the control].
Thanks to [who flagged it] for picking it up.
2. Substack and long form
2.1 Article structure
A reliable structure for a civic intelligence piece of roughly 900 to 1,400 words.
Open on the recognisable moment. Describe a scene every reader in local government has lived through, in three or four sentences. No statistics yet.
Name the pattern. Say plainly what that moment is an example of, and give it a name the reader can carry.
Show why it persists. Explain the incentive or constraint that keeps sensible people doing it. Never imply the reader is foolish.
Turn it with evidence. Introduce the data or comparison that reframes the problem, with the source stated.
Give the alternative a shape. Three concrete disciplines the reader could adopt on Monday.
Close on the cost of not changing. One paragraph, no hectoring, ending on a sentence worth quoting.
2.2 Subject lines that get opened
The question form: Why does [familiar thing] keep [undesirable outcome]?
The correction form: [Common belief] is not what the data shows
The specific form: What [number][units] reveal about [topic]
The plain form: [Thing] is not [what everyone treats it as]
3. Facebook and community channels
3.1 Community update
Shorter sentences, no jargon, and always an answer to "what does this mean for me".
[What is happening, in one sentence.]
What it means for you: [the practical effect on a resident]
When: [dates]
Where: [location]
If you have a question or something does not look right, tell us here: [link or contact]. We read everything and we will publish what we hear back.
3.2 Consultation that is not theatre
Use only when the decision is genuinely still open. If it is not, say what has been decided instead.
We have a decision to make about [topic] and we have not made it yet.
Here is what we know: [the evidence, briefly]
Here is what we do not know: [the genuine gap]
Here is what is fixed: [budget, legal or safety constraints that cannot move]
What we are asking you: [the specific question]
Have your say by [date]: [link]
We will publish what we heard, what changed because of it, and what did not change and why.
4. Before you publish
Every figure has a named source, and you could produce it within a minute if challenged.
Nothing implies a decision has been made that has not been made.
No individual resident is identifiable, quoted or characterised without consent.
The post would read as reasonable to someone who disagrees with you.
If the post invites a response, someone is rostered to actually respond.