Government Communication Machinery Requires Overhaul

If there is one project that defines the era of the Revolutionary Democrats, it is image building. They labour so much to dissociate themselves from the negative pictures of starvation, injustice, inequality, volatility, human rights abuses and migration that have been typical of Ethiopia and the Ethiopian state.

Thanks to the artful policy approach of the late Meles Zenawi, considered to the chief architect of the policy lines of the EPDRF dominated government, there had been a shift from the long overdue policy rhetoric. Meles’ approach, unlike the policy gurus of the Imperial and the Dergue regimes, was to invert the policy prism from its traditional outside-in position to a more fitting inside-out arrangement. Using such an approach, problems are analysed with the centre of gravity being the local scenario.

It is not only the policy approach that changed, however. With the policy change came the change in public messaging and delivery of the message. As a result of this change,developmental propaganda appeared as the new mantra within the club of the Revolutionary Democrats.

Over 12 years of double digit economic growth, notwithstanding the bountiful praise for this performance from international institutions, means that this messaging and delivery system has much to leverage in the public space. And the ruling elite know this very well. They therefore try to seize every opportunity, both local and international, to brag about their developmentalism.

The risk with linear messaging is that it could be oversold. In addition, it would overshadow the importance of continual adjustment and adaptation. This is the very risk with which the developmental rhetoric of the Revolutionary Democrats is faced. Not only is it oversold, to an extent that developmentalism is confused with multiple concepts, but the machinery meant to sell the message is failing to adapt to the changing reality beneath it.

The government’s communication machinery, often called the public relations superstructure, is certainly getting out of touch with the age. It works like an old gramophone with a stuck record that spends its entire life repeating one line again and again.

One can find evidence just by witnessing how the communications machinery acts during crises, including the ongoing drought and the recent controversy surrounding milk quality. Even more glaring evidence can be found in the aftermath of the beheading of Ethiopians by the terrorist group the Islamic State (IS) and the mass deportation of Ethiopians from Saudi Arabia. In all these cases, the government’s communications machinery remained passive, sluggish, inefficient and apologetic.

Let alone selling the developmental agenda in a proactive way, as envisioned by Meles and his comrades, the machinery could not stand strong in the face of opposing narratives. Often, the whole machinery is seen spending its time rebutting popular rumours, stories and narratives. Even if the world has changed through the power of social media, the state’s public relations system seems to resist to adaptation. And when it does, it fails to live up to the expectations of the time and the platform.

Of course, this is not to discount the change the ruling EPRDFites have brought to the public relations superstructure. Structural changes made to the system include decentralization of the superstructure to local levels, establishment of the Government Communications Affairs Office (GCAO) as a federal point agency, linking local level structures with regional and federal ones, and the formation of knowledge sharing platforms.

Thanks to this restructuring, public agencies, at local and federal levels, have dedicated personnel working on communication and messaging. These structures are also supported with budgetary allocations, be it recurrent or capital. In addition, whenever the need arises, such as on special events, there is an inbuilt culture of projected financing of messaging tasks.

There also is a tendency to professionalise the system. One such thing is to recruit professionals trained in communications, in the different tiers. Efforts at enabling the public relation system with necessary equipment and facilities are also prevalent.

Even then, the machinery is disappointingly sluggish, often playing catch-up with the rumour wheel. Its messages lack essential creativity. Instead of playing the very strong cards it possess, such as numerical evidence and success stories, it seems to be living up to the standards created for it by various interest groups.

In light of modern governance, which essentially entails democratic systems, public relations is needed because an elected government owes its mandate to voters. By virtue of the social contract and legal requirements, affirmed by the Constitution, voters have the right to know what their elected representatives are doing with the mandates entrusted to them. Hence, government have the responsibility to inform the public on their plans, actions, decisions and intentions. Therein lies the importance of a professional, proactive, responsive and adaptive communication machinery.

This is even more important in a country that aspires to push its economy forward. Reliable public mobilisation, which is considered key to sustaining economic growth, could only happen under effective communication system. No doubt this was what Meles envisioned and sought to realise.

Unfortunately, what happened is contrary to both the plan of Meles and the needs of the public. A system meant to serve the public by delivering upbeat information about the work of the state, ended up as a boring propaganda machine deafening the public with linear messages.

At the centre of the spoilage lies the overpoliticization of the system. Coupled with centralization of messaging, a paradoxical contrast to the structural decentralization, politicization has disempowered the overall system. Instead of being independent units of messaging, public relations units at local and regional levels have ended up to mere extensions of the federal superstructure. Worsening the case is the constant meddling of the federal superstructure in the operational activities of local units.

Instead of facts on the ground and smart politics, the public relations machinery under the Revolutionary Democrats is driven by politicized narratives imposed from the centre. There is no effort to customize messages. Neither is the system conducive to journalists wishing to bring facts to lights. They often suffer from rejection, abuse and even jailing.

If one is to evaluate the outcomes of the system against the intent of informing the public, then, the predominant finding will be failure. The system is neither informing the public nor serving its developmental purpose.

It, therefore, is time for the Revolutionary Democrats to overhaul the government’s communication system in light of the needs of the public. They ought to target the creation of a proactive, creative, professional and empowered public relations system. And they have to let it live up to its name.

Unless the reactionary government communication system stops crawling after rumours and narratives, there is no way that the right of the public to be informed, can be served. Surely, there cannot be developmentalism without serving the public.


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.