Media and Government

The most successful presidential administrations have always understood how to use the media for public relations to their advantage. Recall from your readings that public relations helps an organization or person look good, while public policy is part of the national debate on what the government should do with its limited resources (time, money and people) to make the country a better, safer place. Recall also that the federal government (both the executive and congressional branches) knows that public opinion must be shaped through the media to frame issues to its advantage. Of course, there are many other players in public policy decisions — unions, associations, competing federal agencies, competing plans in Congress, special interest groups, individuals, state vs. national interests, etc. These many players representing many competing interests are very much in evidence in the continuing debate over federal gun control legislation. I’d like you to take a look at the debate. First, please read pages 758-762 (See Attachment) on Political Communication Theories, and pages 31-33 and 407-409 on the agenda-setting (See Attachment) and framing (See Attachment) theories in the Encyclopedia of Communication Theory. Then review Chapter 18 (http://www.rasaneh.org/Images/News/AtachFile/30-9-1390/FILE634600594129473750.pdf), “Journalism, Public Relations, and Spin,” which begins on page 250 in the Handbook of Journalism Studies. You can broaden your understanding of “the selling of politics” by reading pages 166-181 in Chapter 9 (See Attachment) of Advertising as Culture as well. You also might find it beneficial to review the principles of advertising (See Attachment) and propaganda (See Attachment).To understand what’s happening now, you need to look back at how PR was used to shape the last time gun controls were hotly debated in Congress. It was 2004 and the assault weapons ban was expiring. Many of the same elected politicians and interest groups that tried to use the media to influence public opinion in 2004 are involved again in this new debate. What are the PR tactics that were used then which are reappearing now? For example, how has President Obama used the media to frame the debate? How are his opponents using the media? Please be specific in describing the groups/players and the PR tactics that they’re using! Provide examples of press releases, commercials, interviews, town hall meeting statements, etc.! Are there similarities in the tactics used between the two debates? What are the players trying to accomplish with each of the specific tactics that you’ve discovered they’re using? How is Web 2.0 changing the way politicians, particularly the president, and advocacy groups are seeking to influence the American public?You’ll need to do some research to identify some of the many different competing interest groups and individuals that were engaged in the debate and who are engaged in the emerging debate. You will also need to think deeply on how the different groups and individuals are interacting with the media and how that may be affecting politics and policy. You can take this discussion in many directions! I hope that delving into these questions will help you to understand a bit more the complex relationship between the media and public policy/government operations — and how political communication (See Attachment) works. Dig in! Just keep in mind: I am not interested in you discussing who is “right” or “wrong” in this debate. You are supposed to apply your media literacy skills to understanding the media forces behind our semiotic democracy (http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/tfisher/music/Semiotic.html).