54095 Government and Political Communication

Assignment 2 Tips

Read in conjunction with the Subject Outline.

1. CRITIQUE

The key to this assignment is CRITIQUE. This critique needs to be informed by your reading of the academic literature. Go beyond the readings for the subject. Note the three sources to be used as per the Subject Outline:

• the literature and contemporary issue case study material from Asst 1 (unless your lecturer has approved another),
• the academic literature on government and political communication; and
• further examples of government and political communication to illustrate issues raised in the literature and in the contemporary issue.

2. RESEARCH OF THE LITERATURE

The significance of your research of the academic literature is evident in the criteria for assessment of this assignment. You analyze your stakeholder’s campaign using concepts from the literature and thus you also illustrate these concepts. Here are

the criteria:

• Insightfulness of critique of the ‘client’s’ communication campaign, its objectives and appropriateness given the political and social context.
• Depth of analysis of the role played by the client’s communication strategy, including whether the client was engaged in government or political communication,
• Clarity of explanation of the organization’s contribution to the public sphere in terms of public interest and democracy
• Relevance of concepts and theories from the academic literature used to
• support analysis
• Conciseness and engaging style
• Accuracy of UTS Harvard referencing and adherence to the word limit.

So you need to integrate theory and critique of practice in your assignment.

In the Subject Outline it is clear that you need to make reference to the context of the public sphere as well as the differences between government and political communication as explained in the literature. Do not rely on your readings alone for this. They are not adequate for what you are asked to do for this assignment. Depending on your choice of stakeholder, you should explore literature about this type of organisation/group (for example, there are many chapters in textbooks about communication issues for different sectors – govt, NFP, FP).

3. STRUCTURE

As with any essay, you need an introduction, body and conclusion. Use specific subheadings to organise your writing and you can leave those in for us – makes it easier to mark. For example (and you use what suits you) in terms of headings:

Introduction:

The introduction needs to be short – but it sets expectations about what you are going to cover in your assignment. Make it explicit – which issue you are dealing with, the stakeholder whose communication campaign you are going to critique and whether you are going to include some suggestions for ways in which this stakeholder group might communicate more effectively. Locate this in a point about the public sphere as well as what sector your stakeholder group/organisation is coming from and how this relates to government or political communication.

Background to the issue:

When you are writing your essay, remember that you have to write as if the marker is totally unaware of any of the background to the issue. So your background should start with an explanation of the issue and an overview of stakeholders – but with a detailed explanation of the stakeholder group you are going to critique. You should provide some background on government policy and perhaps some history about what groups have formed and what they are striving to achieve. Are there some key people in the organisation? Here you might be able to explain about the difference between government and political communication (or earlier). In the background you need to be providing the context for your stakeholder’s communication campaign. This would no doubt include further reference to the public sphere.

The issue and the stakeholder:

Here you should be describing your stakeholder’s communication strategy and tactics ie what they did to communicate their objectives. For example, an activist stakeholder group might have a website, use facebook, conduct demonstrations, stunts etc. What is its whole approach to public communication on the issue? This section includes your findings and is largely descriptive.

Discussion/Analysis:

In your analysis, you critique their campaign using the concepts from your readings. What contribution did the organization make to the public sphere in terms of public interest and democracy? What can you use (concepts) as a framework for your analysis? You make judgements about the effectiveness of their approach citing evidence to support your position from the literature and from the campaign. For example – did many people turn up to events they organised? What kind of media coverage did they get? Were there prominent Australians coming out in support? Is the issue a hotly debated issue – or is it a non-issue for the Australian public? Has government policy been changed in any way in response? Is there any evidence the government is listening? For example, in relation to the issue of asylum seekers arriving to Australia, the government’s prohibition of journalists visiting Manus and Nauru might be a sign of their defensiveness on the issue. You can go on to suggest ways in which they might have been more effective. That is, what might they have done to improve on their outcomes? What evidence (perhaps public opinion polls?) might you cite in support?

Conclusion and Recommendations (if you propose to make any)

Here you restate your conclusion from your analysis, not just

about this stakeholder, but also about government and political communication in

the public sphere. Here you can include your recommendations if you feel the ‘client’ might have been more effective had they done something different.