Posted by: blackvector | February 14, 2009

Public Diplomacy

To me, this is true of PA, just change context to domestic audience, although in the deployed environment, this definition directly applies.

From: http://mountainrunner.us/public_diplomacy.html

Defining Public Diplomacy

Public diplomacy is the direct and indirect engagement of global audiences to further America’s national interest. Public diplomacy is about marshaling the resources of the Government to engage through communications and exchanges and other activities foreign publics, including current and future foreign public opinion leaders.

Public diplomacy is based on building trust and credibility to establish relationships with ideas and people over the long term through consistent activities. Public diplomacy is only be effective when acting in support a foreign policy that is, on its own, agreeable by relevant target audiences. Public diplomacy is conducted both directly by Americans and by, with, and through foreign populations.

Public diplomacy does not operate in a vacuum. It must proactively, as well as reactively, engage global audiences in a struggle for minds and wills. It is how we combat misinformation and distortion so that our smart foreign policies can be seen for what they are: beneficial for the affected population(s). Public diplomacy is also about exposing the real world to local audiences to empower them into making informed local decisions. Public diplomacy is about bolstering morale and extending hope in depressed areas in support of a variety of efforts from education to capacity building.

Properly funded and conducted, public diplomacy provides the “feel for the street” and connections to current and future public opinion leaders. The failure to provide this today, as a result of budgetary constraints and other pressures, has allowed, even required, the intelligence community to step in, in other words, American public diplomacy wears combat boots and a cloak. Public diplomacy is about more than countering violent extremism just as America’s national security is dependent on more the use of arms.

In rethinking public diplomacy in the global “now media” information environment, it is time to reconsider the label public diplomacy and consider the term “global engagement.” This is what public diplomacy is about and effective public diplomacy requires a global approach and not a separation between so-called domestic communication offices of public affairs that “informs without influence.”

Posted by: blackvector | February 11, 2009

Interesting Thought on Copyright

Great thought I found online, copyright is an interesting thing, especially digital copyright. Here’s a different take on things:

“ I look at my photography like this. When I make an image it belongs to me. It belongs to me while I take the photo. It belongs to me while it sits in my camera. It belongs to me while I process it on my Mac. It belongs to me while I let it sit in an archive folder waiting to be uploaded to the Internet. Then I upload it to the Internet and it’s like I’m taking a bird and opening my window and letting it go. Off she goes. Her song to be enjoyed by the entire world — certainly no longer mine.
— Thomas Hawk On Copyright Infringement | Thomas Hawk Digital

Posted by: blackvector | February 4, 2009

Citizen Engagement in Government

Interesting read from Brian Drake:
He highlights some issues with Gov 2.0. I do not agree with his statement about the Bush administration classifying more info than since Nixon, it is out of context here.  There are volumes of information available now to classify than there ever was during the 1970s, due in large part to technology.
However, his questions do strike at the heart of this so-called transparency in govt movement, which places transparency above OPSEC. Also, opens discourse between the masses and the policy makers. Feedback is good, but an over abundance of it gets you nowhere. I agree with transparency, and these are all issues that will need to be addressed.

Problem 3: Citizen Engagement with Policy

We are exiting an administration that classified more information than Nixon. We have an opportunity to expose methods for deeper citizen engagement in government. We should be tackling issues like:

Should the rules for government data disclosure be revised? (FOIA)

Should policy decisions permit citizen comments and edits?

Should government employees work in a single, common technical environment? (.govipedia)

What can this White House do to advance the cause of a more citizen-driven government?

These issues are salient and will scope the future of our government. Not leveraging the opportunities presented by the Government 2.0 BarCamp would be a mistake.

« Newer Posts

Categories