Pursuit of the Humane Solution
TROYONLINE-COM6699XTIA-20T2
Troy University
Christopher Wallace
Strategic Communication Capstone
Table of Contents
Abstract.................................................................... 3
A Common Goal...................................................... 4
A Preface to War ....................... 5
Aristotle’s Rhetoric................................................. 8
Controversial Image................................................ 10
Why There is a Controversy................................... 13
Present Day Ideology............................................... 16
A Common Ground of Solution.............................. 19
In a State of Image Crisis........................................ 21
What Effective Communication Looks Like......... 24
I would like to preface this research by saying thank you for your time of reading and consideration for the case arguments represented and analyzed below. In this research paper we will analyze the political and social events in America in the year 2020. To be more specific, this will cover the communication strategies and effects of the organization called Black Lives Matter during an era of civil unrest caused multiple parties and events in America during this time.
It can be concluded, as we near the end of the year 2020 that many organizations have risen against each other and have declared themselves correct in their thinking and upbringing. I have become fascinated with this idea of “I am right because this is what is morally correct”. I have become even more fascinated with the use of this mindset against other people groups and how religion has even played a role in dictating what is right or wrong.
The goal of this paper is to analyze why people think this way. This includes the organization, Black Lives Matter. In my personal opinion, I do not claim one side or the other in any argument stated within this paper, but I hope that through careful research and representation, solutions can be sought out. I believe that understanding and unity are the answers to social dilemmas but only through effective communication.
Black Lives Matter has been labeled man things including a “terrorist organization” or “organization of justice”. Groups that are labeled similar things that oppose Black Lives Matter will also be analyzed and their effect on the country to better understand why groups that claim progression have differing views on solutions and ideals. From that point, I will research where a common ground can be attained.
A Common Goal
We live in a world where the goal of a society is to move forward in a way that builds upon current knowledge and resources. Many argue the history of human population and where all organisms originated. While many tend to go back and forth on theories and hypothesis pertaining to this subject, one thing is for certain; that is that even while there may be differing opinions and supporting cases as to the origin of life, society has continued to build upon itself. This includes aspects that are physical, mental, and spiritual in one’s nature.
Within these subjects of building, society has interpreted what that means in many different ways. This is because everyone has their own idea of what “progress” is and what is considered “justice” in the world. You may ask, “what determines the differences in each person’s thinking in reference to these three subjects?” Well, a numerous factor contributes roles in this. Some of the most prominent factors are environment, religion, identity, finances, resources, history, and culture. With these factors in play, one’s entire character can be determined.
These ideals are what shape people into who they are. Because of differing settings of life across the globe, we have people who differ in lifestyles in every aspect. This is not something that is wrong but is a fact of life. Because of differing circumstances of life around the world, all people groups are not totally the same. This means that there are differing ways of thinking as well. What happens when the ideas of thinking change? The actions of those people change as well.
Though these people groups around the world differ from one another, there is one similarity. Each feels as though they are right in their nature. These groups can be communities, states, regions, countries, territories, etc. But since each group has a unique way of upbringing that is separate from the rest of the world, these groups will feel as though their way of thinking is absolute. This case study will analyze why the communication strategies of Black Lives Matter were not received by majority of the American people. I will examine this study through a series of main points: Aristotle’s Rhetoric, why there is controversy, the common goal of society, organization image, the present-day social ideology, how to be an effective leader, and what effective communication is. My Analysis will include multiple theories for communication such as Social Norms Theory, Veil of Ignorance, Social Identity Theory, Mass Society Theory, Communication Accommodation Theory, Diffusion of Innovation Theory, and references to Immanuel Kant’s theory.
A Preface to War
Since the beginning of civilization, people groups have felt that their idea of thinking has always been backed by their ideals. They have felt that because they grew up with a fixed cultural mindset, that their views were validated, and that society should accept that. We see this a lot in some religions. I would like to give an example with mine.
Growing up, I was immersed in a predominantly white, conservative church. Because of this upbringing, I was subject to a lot of views that coincide with the Republican Party. The fascinating thing about these views were that they were not completely reflective of the party itself but modified to fit a religious goal.
Of course, because I was young, I did not question the teaching that was brought to me but embraced it. Often times, I was instilled with a fear that made me believe my life would be in danger if I did not practice what was taught to me both politically and spiritually. It was almost as if I would lose the correct sense of morality. But who can say what the true definition of “morality” is?
These were the thoughts that plagued my mind for years and as such, caused me to research deeper into why there is such an opposition between groups of people when it comes to subjects of conflict such as abortion, immigration, social justice, and the regulation of currency. I was more so intrigued with the subject of social justice though. In a religious setting, this was a subject that I noticed was not talked about or referenced much until the year 2020. It was during this year, that the American nation would transition in a climate of social turmoil and political unrest.
The main conflict of America during this time was racism. Of course, America has struggled with this topic for years. But it would seem as though, this year, it again has emerged as a topic. Now let us examine what life was like before the year 2020 in terms of this subject matter and why it is such a significant topic in terms of significance to the wellbeing of the country and what it has caused to emerge in reference to social justice groups.
To begin this analysis, we will be using John Rawls theory of the “Veil of Ignorance”. This theory was aimed to identify how people can analyze an issue by removing their own thought processes and judgment from a situation. This theory helps the user better gauge a situation by analyzing it from all points possible by not coming from a place off reaction. The user is now observing a situation from the viewpoints of all parties.
This is important when observing the history of social issues in America. Whenever I have spoken with people who may agree or disagree with me on social issues, I’ve always wondered what the situation would seem like from an outside view where both parties felt that they were validated.
Before the significant political unrest in America in 2020, there were multiple instances of racial profiling and prejudice within the country. Some of these instances sparked the emergence radical groups that would later be spearheads in the political atmosphere of social reform. One instance in particular that will be discussed, is the incident of Trayvon Martin’s death.
On February 26, 2012, an African American teen was walking home from a convenient store. The teen was later fatally shot by a neighborhood watch volunteered named George Zimmerman in Sanford, Florida. Zimmerman claimed to have shot the young teen out of self-defense during a physical altercation. Zimmerman called the non-emergency line of the police department for that city stating that Martin looked suspicious but would later ignore the instructions of the dispatcher.
This incident prompted civil unrest throughout the country and protests in multiple cities and states. These protests would later spark the creation of an organization called Black Lives Matter. This organization was created by Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi. This organization is now comprised of over 40 chapters and with each incident of social justice (more so those pertaining to police brutality) the organization’s messages grow with more influence and spread. But how are these messages being received?
BLM was not the first instance of a wave against what was deemed as oppression. In the mid 1950s, Dr. Martin Luther King led a charge for equality among minority groups in America. He fought for the economically disadvantaged and was a driving force for the Montgomery Bus Boycott. His actions helped to shape the social justice world in such a way to establish the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act.
Many would argue that how Dr. King presented himself was in a way of aggression toward the country. This can be seen in the opposition that he faced and when he was assassinated. There existed a people group that did agree with his morals and values, so they opposed his beliefs, thinking that their own were moral and just and that Dr. King’s inhibited their way of life in a negative aspect. Although was this what Dr. King was trying to convey in his communicative message to the public when speaking out?
Aristotle was a student of Plato who disagreed on Plato’s policy of public speaking. Aristotle noted that the rhetoric of a person’s communication practices mattered when conveying a subject matter. Rhetoric is the ability to make something persuasive. This can be thought of into five elements that deem the success of communication. These five elements are invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery.
Aristotle’s Rhetoric
Invention can be thought of as the examples and knowledge that are brought forth to support a case. When I place myself under a veil of ignorance and remove myself from any bias whether the opposition toward human rights activism is politically correct, I tend to look at both points of views.
When speaking on Dr. King, he formulated his public addresses in a way that supported his cause while not attacking another people group’s way of life. He more so advocated that there was a systematic problem that needed to be addressed. Of course, protests happened during this time as well. But why was Dr. King’s way of protesting any different from today’s standards?
BLM claims to work every day in order to combat prejudice of any sort. It is “an ideological and political intervention in a world where Black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted for demise. It is an affirmation of Black folks’ humanity, our contributions to this society, and our resilience in the face of deadly oppression.” Seeing this definition of the organization, one can conclude that has pure intentions and only seeks to accomplish what Dr. King worked toward in a similar aspect. But why have people begun to attack this organization’s ideals as well?
At this point, we must look at the arrangement of the messages conveyed by this organization and what makes them different from the social justice messages relayed in the past. To research this, we must compare the social norms of each age to understand why some social activity was accepted and why others were not.
During the 1950s for example, to be an African American meant that you were on a different level of humanity. The black community and other minorities were at a disadvantage systematically and social. This was to the point to where there were separate restaurants or each race, separate schools, and even delegated ways of transportation.
For this time period, it was even socially unacceptable to support communities of minorities in any way that equalized them in any way with the white community. Having this social norm accepted means that there will be minorities who oppose it but in different ways. You will have a group rise up that is keen on overcoming opposition to inadvertently become that opposition through a mindset of “revenge” and then you will have another group that will rise up to demand only equally and not to seek to hurt the other party in any way.
I theorize that this is where the eras differ in terms of social acceptance of activism toward opposition in America. Is a people group opposing an oppressive system to become the oppressor or become equal? This seems to be the biggest argument whether most want to support BLM or not. This comes down to the style of presentation of communication. This was another area of rhetoric that Aristotle addressed. The style of communication determines your tone.
When I think of the Civil Rights Movement, I see a side of Malcom X influence and a side of Dr. King influence. We know that while both sides were in pursuit of the same goal, they went about that goal in different ways or different styles. Dr. King pursued a style of nonviolence and peaceful protests while Malcom disagreed with Dr. and was very abrasive in his efforts for equality before he was assassinated. We can infer Dr. King’s strategies overall; he pursued an ideology similar to Immanuel Kant. Kant's ethics are organized around the notion of a “categorical imperative,” which is a universal ethical principle stating that one should always respect the humanity in others, and that one should only act in accordance with rules that could hold for everyone.
From a communication standpoint, not only does it add an entire new rhetoric to the meaning of the movement, but it can devalue it as well or help to lose its credibility. This is due to mixing ideologies. When there is a stated goal of a people group but within that group, there is a mix of beliefs, the goal of that group begins to lose its value. Communities on the outside can argue what the true purpose of that group or movement really is. When arguing the validity of BLM, I believe that this is what plagued the movement when it came to being effective in all communities vs. receiving opposition from majority conservative parties.
Controversial Image
Now we have those who support BLM and those who do not. Most conservative-minded Americans and even some non-conservative does not support the group as they believe that it has terrorist ideals. This claim comes from the idea that group entices riots, looting, and anarchy around the nation. Conservatives also feel that the group has no respect for the country. This is in Colin Kaepernick’s kneeing for the Pledge of Allegiance during a football game. These are only a facet of issues that brought controverse to the goal and image of BLM, but let’s further look at the situations an understand why these instances.
Let us observe the aspect of kneeling and why that can seem like a disrespectful act against America. American patriotism is a belief that has been long thought to symbolize heroism no matter the actions or image that the country took on. Patriotism is associated with respect towards the American flag, pledge, and depending on your political beliefs, supporting a specific political party.
When Kaepernick kneeled, it was in response to an incident of police brutality in San Francisco, California in 2015. Mario Woods was a suspect in a suspected stabbing attack but was shot 20 times after he allegedly refused to drop his knife per order of the police officer who shot him. His family would later sue the city but would settle for $400,000. The quarterback would later say that his idea of kneeling during the anthem was a silent protest to police brutality as a whole. He noted efforts of other radical social justice groups such as the Black Panthers and whether their efforts for social change have really made a difference in the community.
With these protests of kneeling becoming more frequent around the National Football League, Kaepernick would later find himself released from the organization that he played for- the San Francisco 49ers. During this time, there were already tensions over sexual violence in the workplace, LGBTQ rights and involvement in society, and combatting racial discrimination in colleges and the workplace.
Because of this, tensions in America were high and sensitive to drastic moves of activism such as those from Kaepernick. During 2015, there were many instances in where social justice was referenced to combat oppression that were not correlated to Kaepernick’s actions but supported the communication of asserting that America had an issue of human rights oppression as a whole.
Abortion was another hot topic of this year. Lindsey West and Amelia Bonow were writers who launched a campaign to highlight how one in three women have had an abortion. This would later become a hashtag called #ShoutYourAbortion. This would later go viral as it drew over 150,000 posts on Twitter. This was in response to federal and state legislatures attempting to defund Planned Parenthood- another controversial topic of human rights and social justice. This movement encouraged women to write about their own abortions to encourage others to do the same.
The hashtag called #SayHerName came about as well. This movement would highlight how black women were becoming victims of police brutality. This movement was encouraged due to the police attack on a black teenager in Mckinney, Texas. There was also an incident where a black schoolgirl was assaulted by a white deputy in Columbia South Carolina. This idea of the violation of human rights by targeting and oppression would later help to fuel the efforts and ideologies of BLM.
With the efforts of the organization in mind, it would seem like the goal of it is to change society for the better through reference to these topics addressed. But why has the movement and organization been accepted by all? There is a controversy that surrounds the organizations communicative tactics that impedes on what it stands for. This is due to both individual moral standard and communication tactics employed by the organization.
We see this primarily with political leaders such as Donald Trump, who call out the organization as aggressive and problematic for the American people. Trump claims that the police killings are a growing issue and due to the efforts of the BLM organization and movement. Since he is the president and pollical influencer of America, this caused the organization’s communicative tactics to become controversial as there was now an argument against its motives.
Why There is a Controversy
With Donald Trump pressing against the organization, he serves as leader in devaluing its motives. To do this, he has not only attacked the moral compass of the group but organized ways to devalue groups that give publicity to the organization as well. One way in which he does this is through challenging the credibility of the media.
The protests and coverage of police brutality growing, the BLM organization would see an increase in support due to visual exposure. This in turn alarmed activist who disagreed with the organization such as Trump and caused legislators and news outlets on the opposing viewpoint to enact communication tactics with the American people that supported the political agendas to be put in motion.
One tactic that we will discuss is the Mass Society Theory. This theory states that non-influencers are corrupting the influencers and average people are “defenseless” against these influences. This an explanation for participation in social movements based on the assumption that such movements offer a sense of belonging to people who have weak social ties. Now we can see the idea of this on both Democratic and Republican agendas.
A great example would be with leading brands in media. Let’s examine CNN and Fox news outlets. Both outlets are major influencers in democratic and conservative mindsets with each having a major influence on people groups with those aligned belief systems. Because of their lean to one side or the other, both news organizations have established a sense of influence that will determine how a people group thinks if it shares ideas that align with theirs.
Donald Trump, being aware of this, has taken advantage of Fox news and other news outlets that stand behind his beliefs but uses tat as a fuel for his push against the BLM movement to amass supporters that will believe in challenging its credibility. Topics such as rioting and looting then become heavily addressed but not in a way to ask why it is happening but to state that it is, it is a threat, and the BLM movement is to blame.
As the opposing side of BLM gains momentum in this ideology, so do supporters of the cause. These supporters can range from direct and non-direct. By direct, I am referring to those in legislative powers such as senate leaders or cabinet leaders who represent a certain party. By indirect, I am referring to the individuals or people groups who are taught certain values because it is what is acceptable to their environment. For example, western Christianity sees abortion as an abomination against its belief systems. Opposing the government of the land is also argued to be outlawed in the American Christian culture. When these things are happening within the country but are socially tied to groups such as BLM or the Democratic party, supporters of the western Christian faith will indirectly follow a conservative mindset due to their environmental belief and upbringing. This is a social norm that has become lifestyle law that political powers have used for an advancement in their agenda.
This then forms a Social Identity among people groups. Introduced by Henri Tajfel and John Turner, Social Identity Theory is a theory that proposes a person's identity is shaped by both personal and social characteristics Based on this theory, prejudice and discrimination are a product of one's drive to enhance their own self-esteem, which is done by believing one's own group (the in-group) is attractive while lambasting members of other groups (the out-group).
The controversy then, is derived from believing that one’s own environment is correct in their beliefs and because their guidelines of beliefs may agree with one side of political ideologies or the other, forces people groups to indirectly follow in that nature. The most dangerous idea of this is that controversy can come from following the idea of a movement or agenda and not the purpose of it.
Trump, when condemning BLM, knew who his supporters were, who to condone and condemn, and how to communicate his message in a way that enticed his supporters to a point to where they would follow as a means of their own social identity. Those who opposed BLM would make that sense of opposition their identity through the values that they were taught in their environment.
Trump also employed another tactic to bring about controversy. This was through interaction. Jean Piage suggests that the influence a medium has over its audience is proportional to the amount of effort involved in consuming it. This theory is known as interaction theory and was something that Trump accomplished through rallies and appealing to crowds that had a deep sense and support of the ideologies presented against the BLM organization. This action helped Trump and other political figures row an idea and philosophy that served as an opposition to BLM and cause controversy by validations that supported the mindset of those people groups that were indirectly influenced and by their ideas taught to them in their environments of influence such as churches, schools, and homes.
This was something I noticed in my personal upbring as well in a conservative environment as well. My image to be a “good person” or socially accepted was depended on whether I followed the values and beliefs set forth in my environment. This gave me an image that classified me as a conservative republican for that time and prohibited me from addressing issues that may contradict what I was taught.
Now what are the effects of a situation in which your image is in a state of controlled influence? This forces a people group to follow agendas that may have not been affectively communicated with them but due to their environmentally taught code of ethics, will not lean away from their social teachings. This is what causes controversy among issues of human rights and social justice. Issues such as these can be broken down into moral standpoint and what a people group has been taught to believe in from a young age. At that point, political leaders either let non-influential figures that support them such as supporting media outlets influence their supports or directly do it themselves. The source of controversy is not what a person themselves believe in, but what they have been influenced to believe in and follow.
Present Day Ideology
We have identified what has caused the controversy in the BLM organization and its image but what has the organization done to entice so much of that controversy? Have their efforts in communicating American social issues been of vain in an aspect of hypocrisy? We must analyze this through a viewpoint of what has caused agitation toward the motive of BLM.
To begin identifying the present-day ideology and why it exists as social justice against preconceived ideas of patriotism, we must examine the affects that issues of oppression in society have had on minorities. We can conclude that because organizations such as BLM, Black Panthers, or Antifa exist, that there is systematic issue that has not been addressed that affects a people group.
To start, we will examine the instance of George Floyd. The black community is argued to be targeted by police officers all across America. Floyd was a 46-year -old African American man who died on May 25, 2020 after being handcuffed and pinned down to the ground by a white officer’s knee. He would later die of complications after being under his knee for over eight minutes. This instance would then be recorded and serve as the breaking point for those on the frontlines of pushing for systematic social justice.
This footage would later entice protests in the location of the killing, Minneapolis, and over 150 other cities. This caused an investigation to be done by the F.B.I. and the firing of the officer, Derek Chauvin to happen. There were also three other officers involved that the Minneapolis Police department fired. The officers would later be charged.
At this time, protests around the country began to happen. These protests were in response to the death of George Floyd but carried the same message: Black Lives Matter. What we see in following organizations is that when you adopt a phrase associated with that organization then you also adopt the beliefs from an image standpoint.
Now this simply means that people perceive what is communicated to them both audibly and visually. As humans, we are not trained to see actions from a deeper aspect but judge by what we perceive on a surface level of information. This is basic human nature and could be another cause of most controversial topics. It can be said that this idea of surface level understanding is dependent on the social norms of that era of society.
When it comes to this idea of only understanding topics by surface level understanding, we can infer that conclusions on specific events and situations can be drawn out of context. This then produces a controversial situation due to misunderstanding. Howard Giles constructed a theory called Communication Accommodation Theory. This theory simply states that We change the way we communicate to be like the people we like (convergence). We emphasize the differences in our communication when with people we don't like (divergence). If we're part of a social group, that social identity may change who we decide to converge with.
Let us go back to the controversy of the killing of George Floyd. Many on the side of opposing protests and rioting see this as a linear situation. Those who do not support the BLM movement will combat its motives by bringing up collateral causes such as rioting and looting. On the opposite end of this thinking are those who support BLM. This group of people see their motives as just and needed to make a change in society. Howard Giles says that when it comes to Communication Accommodation, parties of separate social status will come to an equilibrium of understanding. Through this sort of theory, both parties notice their differences in understanding.
What is particularly missing from understanding the communication strategies of BLM is the understanding of their messages that are being sent to the American people. We must look at why the organization chose to respond the way it has to issues such as police brutality or discrimination in minorities as a whole to understand whether it was correct in its efforts or not.
Before George Floyd, the were other instances of police brutality. One infamous one dealt with a young teen named Ahmaud Arbery. In this instance of police brutality, Ahmaud was jogging in his neighborhood when he was confronted by two men (a father and son). Ahmaud was fatally shot during the altercation. The two men were arrested after the altercation two months later along with a neighbor who filmed the incident.
This incident caused an uproar in not just the African American community, but for all those who support social justice as a whole. This prompted the Twitter hashtag #RunwithAhmaud, to be created. It included many people sharing videos of recorded jogs to honor Arbery but through this way of honoring his death, it further pushed the ideology of BLM. Now those who oppose BLM would see this as an issue, but why? At this point in time, protests have still been limited to kneeling or mere spread of awareness on social media.
The next instance that fueled heavier protests was with the case of Breonna Taylor. Breonna Taylor was a black medical worker who was shot by Louisville police officers in March due to a raid on her apartment. The raid appeared to be for another location, but the officers were mistaken in approaching her home. Upon entering the home, Taylor’s boyfriend confronted the officers but during their confrontation, an officer shot Taylor. She would later be pronounced dead. What sparked rage within the community of BLM supporters was the idea that even a black couple, who seemed to be in the safety of their own home, were still targets of hate crime and discrimination. This would further fuel the ideologies of the BLM organization and cement a need for action on its part. With these instances taking such a toll on the social climate of society, we are now at a point where two opposing forces of ideologies (one against BLM and one in support) are pit against one another in thought that each side’s thinking is absolute.
A Common Ground of Solution
We have now arrived at an understanding of what the current social climate is. This climate is one of a social war in which rioting, and looting have become byproducts of the efforts of the communicative strategies of BLM. Does that mean that is the agenda of BLM? No, it does not, but opposers of the organization will not permit the ideologies of the organization to willfully exist if these issues persist. To combat this tension, there must be a common ground of understanding on both sides. To do that, A new idea of understanding must be introduced.
To introduce a new idea of understanding, it must be done in a strategic way that is gradually accepted by society. One way to do this is by Diffusion of Innovation. While this theory is used in reference to products, it can also be used for ideas and ways of understanding. But what is this theory and how is it applied?
this process has three elements that give it importance. The first is what qualities make it spread. The second is identifying the importance of peer-peer conversations and networks. The third is understanding the needs of different segments.
The purpose of this process is to apply an innovation to a population. To do that, you must make the innovation appealing and spread. So, what makes an innovation spread? Some innovations fail and that is due to the lack of understanding the targeted group. to navigate this, it’s important to understand a few terms that give an idea on how to persuade an audience that an innovation is needed.
The first is Relative Advantage. This is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as better than the idea it supersedes by a particular group of users, measured in terms that matter to those users, like economic advantage, social prestige, convenience, or satisfaction. For example, for athletes who generally drink water during games, you could argue an innovation of a sports drink that replenishes electrolytes, which give more energy and better performance to those athletes who expend a lot of energy. This is an innovation to their daily life.
The next is Compatibility with Existing Values and Practices. This is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as being consistent with the values, past experiences, and needs of potential adopters. In this sense, it is important to make sure the innovation is relevant and maintains relevance to the target audience. The innovation must also be simple and easy to use so that consumers will stay interested. It must also be able to experiment with on a consistent basis. this will boost reliability and credibility that can later be observed.
When innovations are applied, you will have those who are early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards. These are the response rates of people as innovations are applied. To be successful in applying the Diffusion of Innovation, you must understand each group and monitor their reactions to the innovation. Who adapts to it and who doesn’t? Who accepts it late and who accepts it early? This helps to predict the success of an innovation and make reinventions to that innovation if need be.
I believe that if both sides could form an idea that was a solution to the issues of social justice throughout the country but did not impede on the well-being of others, there could be some sort of compromise and acceptance of that innovation. But both sides of the argument on the communication strategies of BLM agree to understand why there is protesting and if there is truly a systematic issue, protests and riots may persist if the advocations of BLM are not met.
One can argue that BLM sort of put themselves in a crisis situation through their communication strategies. This is not completely the fault of the organization as there are opportunists who would claim the phrase “Black Lives Matter” but do things that are not supported by the organization. Situations such as this would end up hurting the image of the organization but was BLM ready for a crisis to its image of this magnitude? Mishandling the crisis of their public image may have contributed toward their opposition in communication.
In a State of Image Crisis
To manage a crisis, you must have a plan in place to tackle every area that crisis. How will you handle the public? What will you do with communication with those internally withing your organization combating the crisis? How will you effectively communicate the situation to the public in a way that keeps both sides civil? These are just a few things to consider when managing a crisis. There are more strategies to this though. To conduct this plan, one needs to delegate handling of each area of the plan of influence.
The first area that we will discuss is the spokesperson. Now within a plan, there must be an effective communicator. Your plan will not succeed unless it is communicated in a way that is acceptable to the public. So, to achieve this, you need someone such as a CEO, executive, or even of pastoral leadership to handle speaking on the state of the matter. Why are roles such as this needed to speak? Roles such as these hold a position of power, trust, and influence over the general audience. There is also a bond of trust that makes communication easier since these types of roles have a social credibility with their statuses.
The next area to discuss is to be proactive in damage control. This simply means that you are preparing for a crisis before it even begins. Anticipating the crisis is the first step to crisis management because you are setting boundaries in place to avoid even using a plan. This idea of formulating a plan in anticipation can saves lives depending on the situation. Appointing a specific person to this area is important so that if the plan is against a scenario that is life or death, that person can effectively focus of coming up with ways to deter the crisis in that event.
The next area of appointment is case escalation. This one in important as well. When it comes to social justice, I believe this idea was imperative as well. This basically means that you assess and handle a case of crisis on its lower level. This means that an issue was handled before it had time to grow into a crisis that was difficult to manage. An area like this can be handled by a group or one person. It would depend on the chemistry of the organization or organization’s relations with the public
The next area is pivotal in the image of the organization. That area is social media response. Now within this area of crisis management, one needs to be aware the organizations pre-existing social media presence and how quickly it needs to respond in a given situation of crisis. Social media can make or break your image in the sense that if you take too long to respond to a crisis, your audience can formulate their own realities on what has transpired. This can be detrimental to your organization or current crisis because your audience will no longer be working with you but against you as they will be looking for someone to blame for the current crisis. We see this with the current pandemic in which countries blamed China for the coronavirus or within the US, where the nation’s people blamed the current administration for a slow response time to the crisis. Since both China and the US at the time did not have a credible reputation through social media, they had no way to support their actions of a slow response. It just made things even worse.
The last area of crisis management is customer feedback collection and analysis. This area of crisis management highlights how there may be a crisis that is happening but due to lack of knowledge, is not being addressed. This can happen from customers who are not receiving the quality services they are promised but this issue has not been made aware to managers or other higher management. Because of this, the organization will be suffering in silence and degrade over time. It is important to have parameters in place to always monitor those who you service to get an accurate feedback of events before they have the potential to turn into a crisis.
Taking all these subjects into account, we can conclude that to have an effective response to a crisis, you will need to manage all these areas effectively. This can be accomplished by assembling a team of individuals to supersede these areas of management which will fall under one unique plan of action. What is great about having a team formulating a crisis plan is that you have different ideas being represented. Not only that, but there is increased accountability to offer suggestions on refining and input to your plan.
When I think of current issues within the world right now, I considered these subjects addressed and how they could have been applied to avoid situations such as the current pandemic. Of course, it all comes down to communication, but having qualified individuals in places of leadership to accomplish these areas of crisis management is imperative. It is one thing to have these positions filled but if they are not being accomplished effectively, then a crisis cannot be managed correctly. To manage a crisis, one must appoint people to these areas of influence who are leaders that can make a difference.
I believe that the BLM organization did not plan for its image to the public to develop into a crisis and lost effective communication strategies through its crusade of cultural change.
What Effective Communication Looks Like
Communication is the key tool to engaging in any event or situation. For any goal to succeed, a clear understanding and execution of communication is crucial. Within Introducing Communication Theory: analysis and Application, we will examine types of theories, why they are significant, who introduced and applied these theories to make them relative to communication, and how certain types of communication can affect a person’s everyday life.
Take for example, the three umpires in chapter two of The Idea of Theory. They each have a different idea of knowledge toward how they perceive a situation. The first umpire calls situations with strikes and balls as they are. This umpire is a realist. The second umpire views the scenarios as he sees them and then makes the call. The third and last umpire notices the scenario with calling strikes and balls, but nothing is called until he calls it.
In the reading, it is stated that the third umpire is the wisest for his response to these situations. In terms of my own personal viewpoint, I would have to agree with the passage that the third umpire is the wisest in this situation. When it comes to the discovery of knowledge, it is important to gauge possible scenarios and variables before coming to a conclusion. This idea is also aligned with Constructivism. There are more ideas that represent the other umpires’ responses such as Rationalism (suggests that knowledge arises out of the human mind pursuing the truth) and Social Constructivism (teaches that knowledge is a product of symbolic interaction within social groups. In this case, Constructivism is the wiser route of attaining knowledge because it takes time to gather more information before coming to a conclusion. For example, what if it was a “ball” instead of a “strike” and the call was missed, and the instant replay showed what really happened? For the umpire to use Constructivism to form information before a conclusion would mean that he took time to assess the situation and gather information before giving a clear call, avoiding a potential false call. This is also an example of Practical Theory which, in summary, takes into consideration all available variables in a situation that is normally overlooked or unnoticed in the Nomothetic Theory.
Nomothetic Theory seeks an overall all understanding of general laws. Its goal is to depict how social life works accurately. Theories of this type do not make judgments but simply express ideas. They aim to make lawful statements about situations that are meant to hold true. A good example would be the GRE or any sort of IQ test. Tests such as these are meant to measure a person’s intellect but to my judgement, are not reliable. The definition of reliability is the degree to which the construct is measured accurately. It is estimated by consistency as well.
The reason the GRE or any other tests would not be reliable is because variables are constantly changing. You will receive a different result on any intelligence test because many things affect your performance. These things include your health, knowledge, and quality of tests provided. Because these variables are constantly changing, there is no reliable way to determine a person’s intellect consistently. Scores will constantly change due to setting and preparedness. This is where Practical theory comes into play. An assessment of reality and variables must be taken into account to obtain accurate results of any given situation. How the information is conveyed is also an important variable in this assessment.
How a person is conveying information in modern communication is extremely important in today’s society. Not just with tests but in everyday life. People are constantly using any persuasive means to have their information understood and received. This is referred to as the rhetoric. Rhetoric can be found in communication situation but also branches out into deeper meanings. These meanings are called the canons of rhetoric. The canons of rhetoric are invention, arrangement, style, delivery, and memory. Invention refers to the discovery of the appropriate ideas or content for persuasive messages. Arrangement is the organization of those ideas. Style is how information is presented. Delivery is how effective an idea was presented. Memory is focused on the effectiveness of recalling information. Among these, arrangement seems to be the less important canon in society. While it is important that an idea is organized, what makes the lasting appeal on an argument or subject is how well it was communicated and received. You need a strong delivery to be effective and support the receiver’s memory. Style is also important so that you will appeal to the receiver of information. Invention will always be important as society is constantly seeking knowledge and to improve, especially in these modern days. Information does not have to be organized to be well received, thus making “arrangement” the least important of the canons in today’s society.
Today’s media would be a great example of this. Chaffee and Metzger of the Department of Communication at University of California argue that online information is slowly causing a decline in mass media by how effective it is in the world of communication. I would have to argue with their perception. Mass media includes outlets such as TV news, radio, and newspapers. We see that in present times, the same information that you can obtain through these sources are also available more conveniently and readily through tools such as smart phones and computers. Why wait for a newspaper for the news when you can scroll through your Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram which has the information instantly and at your fingertips? Because of this convenience, many consumers are not relying on mass media sources anymore but their own personal devices for communication.
All these aspects of communication discussed and the behavior of people in the world through communication can be described with many theories from the course. Theories such as Cognitive Dissonance Theory, Expectancy Violations Theory, Spiral of Silence Theory, and Cultivation Theory. Cognitive Dissonance is the feeling people have when caught in an uncomfortable situation. They seek equilibrium or “consonance”. Leon Festinger was the first to label this feeling of imbalance and helped pave the way to recognizing how people react under discomfort. For a strategic communications professional, it’s important to know this theory when trying to accurately convey information or maintain a conversation. You will transfer information more effectively if both parties are comfortable. Expectancy Violations Theory was developed by Judee Burgoon to understand nonverbal communication and its effects on conversations. It suggests that people hold expectations about others’ nonverbal ques. For a strategic communications professional, it is important to have a grasp on this theory to avoid communicating discomfort or hostility within the transfer of communication and also to recognize it in others. Cultivation Theory was developed by George Gerbner and his colleagues to predict and explain the long-term effects of consuming media messages. A good example would be fake news in today’s society. It has caused a distrust of media outlets because that is what consumers and come in contact with for an extended amount of time. For a strategic communications professional, it is important to understand this theory to understand how a consumer arrived at their perception of the world through media. The last theory is, the Spiral of Silence Theory. This refers to the influence of media in regard to whether a person will speak out about an issue. Noelle-Neumann’s Spiral of Silence Theory helps a strategic communication specialist pinpoint behavior of an audience based on the media present.
It is important to understand these concepts to understand how the communications of the BLM movement may have failed to reach all people groups in the way that which it intended. Communication falters are just one possible area of the movement that caused issues. We must look even deeper. While the movement may be an all-inclusive organization, it lacked one thing that Movements in the Civil Rights area had. That is leadership.
Leadership can go beyond to cover so many things in the world of communications. Leadership can encompass anything really but let us focus on how it can become a strategic element ton to positively impacting the lives of stakeholders and people in servant-roles alike. What makes a company, organization, or even a mere job successful is a good leader. When that leader is effective at bring out the best in the ones who serve them, a task can be accomplished with the upmost success. What makes a good leader overall is how they communicate. There are many ways in which a leader should communicate but when it comes to working with others, the most important way is through internal communications.
Internal communications are communications within your organization. This encompasses working with those who serve you, constructing guidelines, memos, and procedures. You also work with supervisors, administrators, and other staff. Internal communications are important to keep an organization running smoothly and efficiently. It keeps information known and able to be utilized to its fullest extent. Internal communication is deeper than what people realize though. To be successful in internal communications, one must know the characteristics of good internal communication.
The first characteristic is to provide people the information that they need to do their jobs efficiently. In this sense, protests would be the way. When it comes to running any organization, it is safe to say that one cannot do it alone. Every Leader must rely on people or parties under them to accomplish tasks in their favor. When these people cannot accomplish these tasks, the goal of the organization will fail. Sometimes, this can be due to lack of communication of how to do their job. As a leader, it is important to accurately inform each party of what is expected of them to achieve your goal as an organization.
The next is to make sure they know about anything that concerns them. In the workplace, it is easy to assume that everyone knows what is going on. This not always true. Every person is not perfect and because of that, is subject to failure at any point in a job. As a leader, it is important to inform every worker of anything that may involve them. This helps each worker to know their expectations and preform to the best of their ability within the confines of their job.
This next one is important and that is to give feedback on the job of those under you. This is how you expand as an organization. To progress in any endeavor, there needs to be correction. Giving feedback on anything you see as an issue is crucial to the success of your goal. This gives you the opportunity to make adjustments that will push your company or organization forward in its given goal. This also gives people serving under you an idea of what is expected and conditions them to not make the same mistake twice as well as work to achieve better results in the future.
As a leader, you must also provide people with clear standards and expectations for their work. As an employee, it would be easy for you to assume what work is required of you if nobody had outlined what it is that you are supposed to do or work towards. Even if it was documented somewhere, you may still need a reminder of what is going on or what to do just to be safe. This is what a real leader has to look for. Constantly remind those under you of your expectations. This gets the mission of the organization fresh on the people under you minds.
The next is to provide your workers with emotional support and comfort. This is where moral comes in. People produce the greatest results when they have a high moral or comfort to do it. As a leader, it is your job to internally communicate that. Workers must know that you care and are actively seeking to protect the, in all you do. This in turn, creates an atmosphere of safety and trust between you and those that work under you. When you do this, you will see consistency and growth within your organization.
Next, you should suggest new ideas about their work and lives. To an extent, you should not get too personal with an employee, but you should do so to an extent at which that employee knows that you care for them. It shows that you want to see them progress in their work and endeavors at home. You could recommend things to accelerate their work or do it more efficiently in a way that alleviates stress or anxiety. Suggest things that build that person up and makes their job easier.
The next is to allow them to take the pulse of the organization and understand its overall situation. As a leader, you do not want to treat your employees as people that you have to walk through everything with. As a leader, it is your job to raise up more leaders internally to eventually take over your job or be able to handle a high-level job somewhere else. You should work with them to maintain a shared vision for what the organization stands for and to help them achieve that alongside you.
When communicating, remember that it is not one-sided. You are there as a leader to understand, and work with those under you. You must be respectful and constantly in communication with people to maintain good relationship and moral with them. Having good internal communication starts with the leader.
You must be someone that a people group can look up to and respect. To do this, you must practice what you preach, be sensitive to other people’s needs, and treat everyone fairly. Be clear about information that you present and always be transparent with those under you. You want to produce a climate of security, so it is important to be truthful and loving in all you do as a leader in any organization or company setting. This is what I feel the organization Lacked but could have given it credibility equal to that of when the Civil Rights era had Dr. King.
After identifying the reasons for the misconceptions of the communication efforts of BLM, can conclude from this that while the strategies may have been just, the message of the organization must be presented in a way that is coherent to a people group with opposing ideals through examples, effective leadership, representation, and accountability.
References
1. https://blacklivesmatter.com/herstory/
2. https://www.nytimes.com/article/george-floyd.html
3. https://www.pnas.org/content/116/48/23989
4. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/25/trump-attacks-black-lives-matter-racial-justice-movement.html
5. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/social-sciences/mass-society
6. https://www.communicationtheory.org/communication-accommodation-theory/
7. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52623151
8. https://www.nytimes.com/article/breonna-taylor-police.html