Tweet
Public relations vs performance
Wednesday, July 06, 2011
EVALUATING the performance of persons serving in public office can prove difficult if the effort relies solely on published information or word of mouth.
Personal knowledge, such as actually engaging the official in a substantive discussion or reading a report, is ideal, except that the vast majority of us never have the opportunity for this type of engagement.
Many people get their information from the print and electronic media, while some form their impressions from what they hear from other people.
But word of mouth can be a very unreliable source, especially when the original information has been repeated several times. In fact, the veracity attributed to that source of information depends on the status of the source, and even then, the information can be a fabrication.
One of the mistakes that some people make in evaluating the performance of public officials is to arrive at an opinion based on the frequency of such officials' appearance in the media.
There is, however, a need for more people — not just journalists, columnists, analysts and other commentators — to critically evaluate what is published in order to avoid confusing frequency and prominence in the media with performance.
If a minister, civil servant or other official announces that something will be done or is in the process of being done, does that mean it is a fact?
Does a photo of a government representative with a prominent official of a foreign government or international organisation mean that it was anything other than a photo opportunity?
Should photo opportunities be taken as a sign that work is being accomplished?
Too often, we find, there is an assumption that a policy announcement is a policy accomplishment. The same obtains for projects, a favourite activity of politicians, especially when elections are near and they develop a need to boost their political stocks.
The upshot of all this is that public relations gets mistaken for performance, and while this does not obtain in all instances, it simply happens too often.
The Jamaican public, we believe, has the capacity for critical evaluation of information in the media, as was proven by their responses to the Commission of Enquiry into the the Government's handling of the United States's extradition request for Christopher 'Dudus' Coke and the hiring of the US law firm Manatt, Phelps & Phillips in relation to the extradition request.
It is incumbent on all of us to exercise our critical faculties.
We can and must differentiate between words and deeds, photos and facts, and public relations and performance.
Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/edito...#ixzz1RKgz4Iv6
Wednesday, July 06, 2011
EVALUATING the performance of persons serving in public office can prove difficult if the effort relies solely on published information or word of mouth.
Personal knowledge, such as actually engaging the official in a substantive discussion or reading a report, is ideal, except that the vast majority of us never have the opportunity for this type of engagement.
Many people get their information from the print and electronic media, while some form their impressions from what they hear from other people.
But word of mouth can be a very unreliable source, especially when the original information has been repeated several times. In fact, the veracity attributed to that source of information depends on the status of the source, and even then, the information can be a fabrication.
One of the mistakes that some people make in evaluating the performance of public officials is to arrive at an opinion based on the frequency of such officials' appearance in the media.
There is, however, a need for more people — not just journalists, columnists, analysts and other commentators — to critically evaluate what is published in order to avoid confusing frequency and prominence in the media with performance.
If a minister, civil servant or other official announces that something will be done or is in the process of being done, does that mean it is a fact?
Does a photo of a government representative with a prominent official of a foreign government or international organisation mean that it was anything other than a photo opportunity?
Should photo opportunities be taken as a sign that work is being accomplished?
Too often, we find, there is an assumption that a policy announcement is a policy accomplishment. The same obtains for projects, a favourite activity of politicians, especially when elections are near and they develop a need to boost their political stocks.
The upshot of all this is that public relations gets mistaken for performance, and while this does not obtain in all instances, it simply happens too often.
The Jamaican public, we believe, has the capacity for critical evaluation of information in the media, as was proven by their responses to the Commission of Enquiry into the the Government's handling of the United States's extradition request for Christopher 'Dudus' Coke and the hiring of the US law firm Manatt, Phelps & Phillips in relation to the extradition request.
It is incumbent on all of us to exercise our critical faculties.
We can and must differentiate between words and deeds, photos and facts, and public relations and performance.
Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/edito...#ixzz1RKgz4Iv6
Comment