Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘International’ Category

The question today is: How has the new media revolution changed what you do?

This week I have been in London with my TCU honors college students, and a college administrator. We have visited the American Embassy, an organization that publishes a web-based newsletter about higher education in the Middle East, and the Executive Editor of the Economist.  In addition, I visited with a Pro-Vice-Master in the University of London system. The consistency of their responses has been a bit surprising.

All emphatically made the point that social media is here to stay. But they all also remain uncertain about longterm effects, and they all see new media usage patterns going through almost daily changes.

U.S. Embassy diplomats admitted they are not using social media yet to maximum capacity, and point out that their most effective work remains face-to-face dialogues in some of London’s most difficult and volatile neighborhoods. Social media they see as a tool to mobilize participation in events, but don’t yet see it as solving international relationship problems.

The Middle East higher education newsletter uses social media to drive people to its’ website, and sees Twitter as more effective for that purpose than Facebook. They emphasize that success is still all about content. Stories must be more concise these days, but it is content that determines readership. Significant numbers of Middle East populations are illiterate, and so while social media reaches the educated people, mass responses are still face-to-face generated in the streets. The people we talked with were very anxious to make the point that in Cairo, for example, life as a whole goes on rather normally, and thousands are enrolled in and still attend universities.

The Economist remains primarily a weekly print publication, but it also features a substantial website that carries fast breaking stories, an e-newsletter , several Apps, an audio version, and many associated live events and seminars. The executive editor confessed that it challenges them to determine how and when daily new media use changes require adjustments in what they are doing.  So far, however, they remain one of the most important news publications in the world.

The University of London Pro-Vice Master’s big concern is that in her world of professional university advancement she sees young people coming into the work so focused on tactics and social media that they are not paying enough attention to strategic thinking, planning, face-to-face events, and content. Social media have permanent roles to play, she agrees, but all of the other media tools are still in the mix, and actual onsite experiences are what truly define an institution.

This has truly been an enlightening experience. Next week it’s the BBC, the British Film Institute, and the CBS London Bureau.  Stay tuned, there will be more to come.   

Read Full Post »

Recently I met with several members of an association called Young Professionals in Foreign Policy (YPFP). I was surprised to learn there are thousands of them in several cities around the world… and they are not all in government positions. Many work for professional associations, embassies, international banks, consulting firms, and countless NGO’s.

NGO’s (non-governmental organizations) range from disaster relief, to healthcare, to conservation and cause-promoting organizations. Most are non-profit and international in their outlook.

If “strategic communication” is defined as planning and implementing communication initiatives to achieve specific outcomes, and “public diplomacy” is defined as people communicating directly with people in other cultures the basic elements of their beliefs and values, then NGO’s are clearly using strategic communication tactics to carry out basic public diplomacy.

There are many varieties of public diplomacy carried out each day by thousands of governments and NGO’s. One would think we would be making much greater progress toward world peace. And while many of these organizations also have education programs, we might just have to call upon education institutions to complete the job.

Higher education potentially is the purest form of public diplomacy. People gather to learn about each other’s way of life, the elements of global leadership, and how to use research and knowledge skills to solve world problems.  Maybe as this industry becomes even more international, we will finally have the groundwork in place to achieve a true community of nations.

Read Full Post »

Culture is often defined as “how we do things around here!”  It influences what we purchase, how we think, and virtually everything that makes us feel safe and secure. It is the sum total of the beliefs we are taught as we grow up, the values that are embedded in us by our families and peers, as well as the traditions we celebrate with those who live around us.

For many, the teachings of their religious institutions also combine with these other cultural forces to become powerful drivers of attitudes and behavior. And when they build up over long periods of history and become associated with the land they live on, outspoken criticisms and disruptions are perceived as threatening. These can range from political changes in governments to individuals and groups attacking those things that are held dear. And when someone outside claims that their history and culture give them claim to the same land, hostilities inevitably arise, and can rapidly escalate into outright war.

Understanding culture provides needed context for analyzing the hostilities in the middle east, the break-up of the former Yugoslavia, the recent violent actions in London immigrant neighborhoods, as well as the polarized ideologies producing anger in various parts of the United States.

We all experience cultural tugs from the organizations and institutions in which we find ourselves studying or working, and the cities, regions, and nations from which we gain inspiration and pride. There is little doubt that culture shapes the context that defines what we choose to hear when others speak, and what we take into serious account when attempting persuade them.

To underestimate the influence of culture when trying to communicate is simply to insure failure. The more complicated and foreign the culture, the more difficult the challenge. In fact, not only will entire messages be lost, but the exact opposite of the intended response is likely to result.

This is why understanding and accommodating the culture of each audience or individual is a prerequisite to building working relationships. This takes time, as well as opportunities for experiences to overlap. Diplomats must experience the cultures where they work; journalists must spend time with those they seek to explain; and educators must answer the call to bring diverse cultures together and explore their unique opportunities to enable world peace.

 

Read Full Post »

Detailed strategic communication plans tend to sit unimplemented on shelves primarily because of their complexity. Daily events divert staff attention. Crises become priorities. Conditions quickly make many of the details irrelevant, or they are just too complicated. Textbook formats are good to know, but in practice they very rarely are carried out.

Hard lessons like this led me to a much simplified approach with institutions. At the executive level, I decided to set only simple communication goals, with the collaboration of key colleagues. Then, I asked each department to use its’ most talented staff to select the best tactics for each target audience. And finally, I made sure that the institution’s brand identity was deeply embedded in the goals.

I have been wondering lately if any of these institutional lessons would apply to government and foreign policy communication? Is it possible, for example, to improve the clarity of White House communication simply by focusing more on clear, simple goals?  Experienced communication experts in each country and city could then be empowered to make informed judgements about tactics selection and to take into account the many different cultures, values, and preconceived ideas involved. These experts would also be in a position to establish important steps in the process: interactive social media dialogues leading to face-to-face events aimed to stimulate old-fashioned word-of-mouth.

Foreign policy communication is complicated and too often ends in mass confusion. If the basic problem is the overwhelming complexity of events, issues and plans, maybe we should first try more simplicity.

Read Full Post »

If you try to change a Democrat’s mind with a strong Republican presentation you are likely to produce a more determined Democrat. Direct persuasive messages, no matter how carefully crafted, usually cause the other side to dig in even deeper. In fact, this is also true in communicating anything, but most especially foreign policy.

Changing minds requires finding facts and situations that make adversaries uncomfortable with their position. Eventually this unsettled state can lead them to seek a new point of view. But even in this state, people must hear potential mind-changing new ideas from people around them they trust. And what’s more, they must also have sufficient time to work those ideas into their personal thinking on their own.

Interestingly enough  I learned the power of “third-party advocates” from fund-raisers. They learn early on that they usually are not the best person to ask a donor for money. Rather the best person is someone close to the donor who has better credibility, and their trust. This same dynamic applies to changing people’s minds.

The credibility of the source of new ideas is absolutely essential. In the case of foreign policy, the US government will never have that credibility with adversaries. So opening people up to considering new ideas must be the first step in changing their minds. Then, engaging the guidance and help of sympathetic local third-parties with credibility is the best way to proceed.

Joseph Nye, Harvard Professor and Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) Trustee, is credited with coining the term “soft power.”  His thinking is spelled out in his 2004 book, Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. “Hard power” uses force and money to influence.  Soft power uses all the communication tools in the toolbox, along with cultural exchanges, economic development assistance, town halls, and other indirect initiatives using third parties. The concept is to “demonstrate’ the idea of America in foreign settings, rather than argue it.

New media tools are especially suited to soft power strategies. With sufficient numbers of skilled experts in target countries, website chat rooms can be monitored, Twitter can promote gatherings, Facebook  can serve as a hub of ideas and comments, and on-going dialogues can be facilitated. So when priority audiences are targeted, their preferred media platforms utilized, and all of Nye’s other initiatives employed, some success might be possible over time. And that just might be the best we can do.

Read Full Post »

Creating conditions for communication success can be discouraging. First, you must have your audience’s attention, and convince them you understand their needs. They must also be willing to receive your information. Then, you must have a simple message with no more than 3 to 5 points. Next, you must offer examples with which your audience can relate. Now, you must send your message using your audience’s media of choice… and then obtain their feedback. The most direct and interactive media are best because you must reply by responding to what has been misunderstood. And then an ongoing dialogue must begin to establish a receptive relationship.

So is it even possible to achieve foreign policy understanding with countless audiences inside many nations, especially when each has its’ own agenda? In such a world, is it necessary to have separate messages for each nation, and audience? Is it possible to know individual media preferences in remote places? And how can brand identity be maintained while responding daily to 24/7 “breaking news?”

And finally, with so many departments of government, NGO’s, think-tanks, and associations sending messages around the world every day, is coordination even possible?

Sharing a uniform “idea of America” statement and format for releasing daily news statements with all these entities, might be a place to start. And having enough interactive media specialists around the world to communicate with each priority audience is another critical step. And even then, maybe only a small measure of understanding may be achievable.

But some clarity is better than none. is it not? Otherwise, all we do is continue to contribute to clutter and confusion.

Read Full Post »

When television was clearly the dominant medium, a revolutionary group generally declared victory by taking over the main television station. In this age of 24/7 cable and social media, however, the situation is far more complex.

For example, in the Middle East there still are literally hundreds of newspapers, magazines and journals. Foreign newspapers also maintain bureaus. So print clearly is still an influencing factor, especially locally. Adding satellite communication and digital media to the mix is changing the game, but the change is not yet complete. How you receive news in Cairo is therefore likely to be quite different from how you receive it in the U.S. It’s content and tone are going to be different as well.

In addition to many news publications, in “Arab spring” countries there are also government-owned and privately owned television organizations. There are countless foreign networks and press services, including  CNN, BBC, Associated Press (AP), Independent Television News (ITN), Reuters, Agence France, Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya, and more. Freelancers also cover these hot spots and sell reports to local and foreign outlets, many of which are in the U.S. Most western-based media organizations are facing budget cuts and have fewer reporters in the field. Therefore, the landscape, and the nature and quality of coverage, is constantly changing.

For example, the major U.S. television networks and newspapers have reduced the number of their news bureau locations around the world, and so their coverage is mostly provided by a very few constantly traveling correspondents, independent news services, or freelancers. Thus, the remaining  correspondents all tend to rush to the current hot spot (often referred to as “herding”), leaving many cities and entire regions of the world largely unreported.

Internet access varies, although we sometimes think everyone has it. For example, I am told that in Egypt only 21 percent of the population has access and that the actual literacy level of the population at large is quite low. So the reach and impact of websites, bloggers, and social media still remains a bit unclear. It therefore is assumed that Twitter and Facebook are used by smaller groups to stimulate on-the-street word-of-mouth, which in turn brings about demonstrations. In the final analysis, it seems word-of-mouth still remains the most effective medium, no matter how it is generated.

Fundamental questions become those of the “chicken and egg” variety: Does unrest due to unemployment, poverty, or government corruption inform media reporting, or does overly aggressive reporting bring about unrest? And once demonstrations begin, does television coverage primarily  inform, or primarily over-dramatize? My analysis suggests that each unrest situation is different.  Sometimes unrest comes first. Other times, it is media reporting.

Remaining questions for the news consumer: Do media organizations exercise adequate social responsiblity? Does competition for audience too often cause them to over dramatize? Can media become inappropriate participants in complex situations? What is the consumer’s role and responsibility?

Read Full Post »

Cutting through information clutter is the communication challenge of the new media age. In our  thoroughly saturated world, the more we see reports about changing and escalating events, the more confused we can become. Just when we thought we were beginning to understand, we get overwhelmed  and confused all over again.

A case in point is the 24/7 coverage of major conflicts. With non-stop reporting, new developments are always followed with rapid-fire, and often premature, efforts to interpret them. Relentless  determination to hold attention produces constant declarations of “breaking news!” Anchors end up over-dramatizing everything just to keep viewers from tuning away.

What’s even more troubling is that a breaking news-driven media can actually become a complicating factor in the event itself. They can become more of a player than observer. For example, when does a constant  presence of cameras draw diplomats and policy-makers into even deeper conflict? Can incessant stirrings of emotions make television drama out of serious situations that should require more thoughtful problem-solving and compromise? Would the public’s need to know be better served by reporting developments at appropriate intervals, and by providing more background and context?

This week’s focus on Ukraine is a good example. What do we really know from minute-by-minute 24/7 cable news that we would not know from periodic updates?  Has all the drama contributed to solving the problem, or is it just adding needless emotion to an already hostile situation? Does airing the rants of polarized politicians in the middle of such complex events serve any useful purpose?

How, then, do we more thoughtfully go about cutting through all this information clutter? When it’s all said and done, will it necessarily fall to educators and schools to explain the extent to which the digital media revolution is changing everything?

Read Full Post »

My interests have evolved over the years.  As a young radio and television producer, and soon-to-become professor, I focused my thinking on understanding media. Soon, however, I shifted to helping organizations communicate more effectively, and eventually found myself focusing on universities. This challenge led me to bringing the subject matters of marketing and group process into the strategic communication field… and eventually writing about it as one of the early pioneers of “integrated marketing.”

Currently I am intrigued with rethinking the psychic and social consequences of media, and the implications for advancing institutions. I am also especially interested in how communication technology and the globalization of higher education are coming together with compelling new future problem-solving possibilities.  These range from developing truly international leaders and citizens, to addressing cross cultural conflicts, to using research and topic experts to help solve serious global problems, to responding to concerns about higher education’s continuing relevance as it currently is configured.

Beginning today I will focus more of my posts on the future of higher education as it evolves into a truly global industry. Delivery formats, international communication, digital technology, and even foreign policy, will not escape examination. For all of these will have to converge and change if we are to shape a better world  for tomorrow.

Read Full Post »

Key Washington legislators are currently collecting the hiring and salary information of recent graduates in various fields of study. Their thinking is that those fields that produce early jobs and strong salaries are worthy of more government support. Other fields are fine, but students interested in them should basically be paying their own way.

Such thinking demonstrates that as a country we are becoming more interested in “how to” training than in educating people to solve complex social problems, create new initiatives, manage complicated projects, or lead cutting-edge enterprises.

Don’t get me wrong, training for new high-tech jobs is especially critical. The declining job market is not a matter of political ideology as much as it is a matter of technology eliminating jobs. Even many small businesses are able to hire fewer people these days as a consequence of technology innovations. Community colleges can deliver that job training, and must. And, of course, many university fields can as well.

But as a nation we also must not lose sight of the fact that a broad comprehensive education that includes the humanities, social sciences, arts, and more, not only prepares people for much-needed  leadership, it also prepares them for their second, third, and fourth jobs. It provides historical context. It teaches past successes and failures. It enhances personal creativity, and thus increases capacity for innovation.  Broad comprehensive education is what builds and maintains competitive superiority in individuals, businesses, institutions, and nations.

A recent article in the UK’s Times Higher Education (THE) writer David Matthews points out that in the past educators in Singapore focused mostly on science and technology research as the pathway to international superiority. But more recently they have added broader programs in humanities and the arts in order to produce graduates with greater capacity for innovation and creativity.

The US is still the unquestioned higher education leader in the world. But current domestic political trends could quickly change all that. Diversity of institutional type, well supported research, and a full array of professional and liberal arts fields of study, have together been the US hallmark.  Just when others around the world are beginning to copy our success, it seems we are now about to dismantle what we have achieved.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »