The Politics of Communication

 The Hill Times is running a story on their website on how the Harper government has changed communication protocols and strategy within the federal bureaucracy. The story is about how the government introduced strict communication control over federal bureaucrats through Message Event Proposals, or MEPs. The Hill Times describes MEPs as,

...a three-page document. An exhaustive document, the Message Event Proposal amounts to a sort of media shadow play that attempts to predict how information will play out in the press. It asks for a "desired headline" and "desired sound bite," "web highlight caption," "desired picture," "key questions and answers," and "official talking points." It also asks for details on event backdrops, props, speech length and tone, and attire of the speaker.

Many front line communications bureaucrats say they fill out multiple MEPs on a busy workday, and that this paperwork process has become an essential part of their work.

The story quotes one anonymous source who complained, "You say 'MEP' and the bureaucracy just cringes, because they can't stand these things called message event proposals," said one former communications official. "Basically what it is is micromanaging the message right down to the ground."

While the Hill Times does question the "micromanaging" interpretation, quoting former PMO staffer Kory Teneycke who said that ALL governments tightly manage the message and communication, it's buried at the bottom of the story, literally in the last two paragraphs. For the Hill Times, the story is about Tory micromanagement and how the government is suffocating bureaucrats, a pseudo-fact that converts nicely into political theater.

However, there is a serious disconnect between what the anonymous sources said, how the MEP is described and other facts quoted in the story.

First, is a three-page document of anything "exhaustive" or "intensive"? My resume is three pages of information in 12 point Times Roman but it's hardly an exhaustive or intensive document. The T1 Basic Tax form is four pages and involves the government and my money and it's neither exhausting nor exhaustive. So is the Hill Times description of the MEP valid?

Second, the use of anonymous sources taints the entire story. This isn't Watergate so tell us who the sources are and if they are unwilling to be quoted publicly then their information cannot be validated.. Far too many anonymous sources seem to have specific axes to grind to be reliable and their complaints dovetail too neatly with the politics of the story. Further, those sources that are used to provided balance are almost always used much later int he story to reduce their effect.

Third, if  many communication bureaucrats fill out an MEP three times a day and it has become an essential, even routine, part of their work then it is hardly a draconian measure is it?

Fourth, this is old news. The last paragraphs state that bureaucrats admit that "political control"  has "started to relax" in the past 18 months. In other words, the story isn't about the Conservatives  micromanaging  the bureaucracy at all, it's about events that occurred three years ago. The story - at least from the perspective of the time line involved - is that the government has since relaxed or is in the process of relaxing control over communications. The author never asks the obvious question whether this is good or bad.

Fifth, this is a classic change-management story: a new  boss introduces new methods and new paper work and while the staff get upset and revolt initially, they soon learn to accept the changes. The timing confirms it - changes introduced in 2007 but are staff learn to live with it in 2009. But that story has no sex appeal and doesn't fit with the common view of the Harper government as control freaks.

Sixth, branding and communication require discipline and usually that comes from a centralized source. I recently worked for a media company where every detail of the company's marketing and communication was controlled, right down to the amount of kerning between letters in the company's logo and the type of expressions used to describe the company. In other words, welcome to the real world.