Some details in the "Clarifications Needed" post distracted some readers, so let me clarify the missed-information about the 2014/2015 bills to remake the BBG
I've read thousands of your words on this topic and with each new entry I'm reminded that while I take pleasure in shaming House and Senate members for their lack of knowledge on foreign affairs and the need for robust public diplomacy, it's really about the lack of leadership at State and the White House. The executive branch when controlled by either party has failed to be a proponent for communications that present and explain our values and actions to the world. Our actions don't "speak for themselves" when others are doing all the interpretation. When the media environment is being so hotly contested, you might think we would care to spend a pittance in that contest. Yes, i was helping to channel $100s of millions (and yes, billions when totaled up) to DoD communications efforts because we all believed it was better than doing nothing but were we undermining BBG at the same time? I hazard to guess.
"At the time of the debates in Congress a year ago as to whether there should be a Government program of foreign information, many people felt that America was being vilified abroad from every angle and that we should make some answer... " If we don't tell our story, someone else will, but too many don't get that. Too many also think any information program is a separate line of effort, as you well know, and its job is to come in after to change the subject, explain what happened, and/or put lipstick on the pig. One old book makes a great point that the information peoople were not involved at all when the atomic bombs were dropped, leaving it to the world to figure out what it meant, etc. Meanwhile, when Russia launched Sputnik I and II, the launches were accompanied by active information programs. We historically believe things are and will be self-evident, apparently. This is remarkable, espcially for a democracy where public opinion matters.
Let me give you this, but don't use it much as I hope to use if for my next (if there is a next) public speaking engagement:
"There is a current story on the perils of communication which runs like this. A man encounters a friend and says: 'I hear your brother has just left Penn State and is living in the Park Central [a fancy NY hotel, at the time, living in a hotel was standard].' The friend replies: 'Well, that isn’t quite the way it is. My brother has just left the State Pen and is living in Central Park.'"
It seems we hope narratives are flipped upside down to be better than reality, like the story above. But, as we know, hope isn't a strategy.
I've read thousands of your words on this topic and with each new entry I'm reminded that while I take pleasure in shaming House and Senate members for their lack of knowledge on foreign affairs and the need for robust public diplomacy, it's really about the lack of leadership at State and the White House. The executive branch when controlled by either party has failed to be a proponent for communications that present and explain our values and actions to the world. Our actions don't "speak for themselves" when others are doing all the interpretation. When the media environment is being so hotly contested, you might think we would care to spend a pittance in that contest. Yes, i was helping to channel $100s of millions (and yes, billions when totaled up) to DoD communications efforts because we all believed it was better than doing nothing but were we undermining BBG at the same time? I hazard to guess.
"At the time of the debates in Congress a year ago as to whether there should be a Government program of foreign information, many people felt that America was being vilified abroad from every angle and that we should make some answer... " If we don't tell our story, someone else will, but too many don't get that. Too many also think any information program is a separate line of effort, as you well know, and its job is to come in after to change the subject, explain what happened, and/or put lipstick on the pig. One old book makes a great point that the information peoople were not involved at all when the atomic bombs were dropped, leaving it to the world to figure out what it meant, etc. Meanwhile, when Russia launched Sputnik I and II, the launches were accompanied by active information programs. We historically believe things are and will be self-evident, apparently. This is remarkable, espcially for a democracy where public opinion matters.
Let me give you this, but don't use it much as I hope to use if for my next (if there is a next) public speaking engagement:
"There is a current story on the perils of communication which runs like this. A man encounters a friend and says: 'I hear your brother has just left Penn State and is living in the Park Central [a fancy NY hotel, at the time, living in a hotel was standard].' The friend replies: 'Well, that isn’t quite the way it is. My brother has just left the State Pen and is living in Central Park.'"
It seems we hope narratives are flipped upside down to be better than reality, like the story above. But, as we know, hope isn't a strategy.