School

For our final grade in my Public Relations class, we had to create and present a “realistic” strategic communications plan for a hypothetical client. I chose Google, and put together a plan to help strengthen their response to Public Relations crises.

Assignment: Strengthening Google’s Response to Crises
Full Communications Plan | Presentation

Another episode of “On the Media” for my Hopkins symposium. It’s possible that this going to be even less useful academically than the lectures. This week’s episode addressed the use of anonymus sources (subject of my statement) and the censorship of airport television (my question).

In addition to the usual class responsibilities, Johns Hopkins requires participation in a symposium. At first, they were lectures that we had to show up and write a 500 word response to some related question … something that I have ridiculed to some extent in past postings.

This year, however, the format switched to listening to a segment of “On the Media” and proving we paid attention in a discussion room forum. From the requirements:

“Comments for a grade must refer directly to the program for that week and when appropriate previous posts or questions. To receive credit for a comment, it must be at least four sentences long and demonstrate both knowledge of the show and fresh thinking. Questions should demonstrate knowledge of the program or be directed to a specific previous post.”

It’s possible that this going to be even less useful academically than the lectures. This week’s “On the Media” addressed a recent FCC Indecency Ruling (subject of my statement) and the Media’s coverage of process stories (my question).

Still a great class, but another puzzling assignment. We are supposed to describe our view of the “public character” of four notable people … but we don’t have any real background on what character is, or what elements make up someone’s public character. Interesting exercise, though I kind of wish it was coming *after* a class discussion, as opposed to in preparation for it.

Assignment: Examples of Public Character
20060202_Character.pdf

Taking an Introduction to Public Relations class this semester. Seems to be a very good, well thought out curriculumn … though that might be because I have no background in Public Relations what-so-ever.

First assignment was to outline good and bad public relations campaigns, although I am not sure I am far enough along to tell the difference between a Public Relations campaign, a marketing campaign, and advertising campaign and a communications campaign.

Oh well. Details, details, details …

Good and Bad Public Relations Campaigns
20060126_GoodAndBadCampaigns.pdf

The final assignment was much more along the lines of what I had imagined we would be doing the whole semester. We had to do a top to bottom internet strategy memo for a company or organization. I chose the Friends Committee on Nation Legislation.

Assignment: Strategic Memo:
20050503_FCNL.pdf

Much better symposium this time through, though I still have reservations about the presentation’s applicablility to the program. Regardless, Ivo Spalatan was an interesting speaker, and was certainly well educated about the topic of his presentation.

Here is the final symposium assignment of the semester:
20050413_MarketingForiegnPolicy.pdf

This week the assignment at least made more sense on paper… Joe Trippi is widely revered as an internet campaign deity (although it begs questions about Al Gore’s role in the creation of the internet) this book would be much more appropriate for a Government class than a Communications course on internet strategies. Without a doubt, the book is an good read from cover to cover, and Trippi has some good anecdotes about the changing face of society. That being said, what I saw as Trippi’s two main themes — television is evil and be authentic — didn’t really apply well to the coursework.

Book Review: The Revolution Will Not Be Televised:
20050412_Trippi.pdf

I used to think that these symposiums were merely a misquided inconvenience. The Professor running the program snips as the class as if we were a bunch of grade schoolers, and the topics often don’t seem particularly appropriate for audience.

After tonight’s guest, however, I have decided the symposiums are counterproductive and truly a waste of time. The speaker was a Republican operative who spoke about the perils of Campaign Finance Reform. She took a position that was different from that of a majority of the people attending, and she was obviously not used to people asking questions which countered her own views. Her arguments had a series of great sound bites, but no cohesive argument and no foundation of facts.

One of the fundamental problems with the political polarization of our society is that politicians, activists and lobbyists have gotten used to speaking towards uniformly friendly crowds. This “preaching to the choir” syndrome has reduced our ability as a whole to speak intelligently to opposing view points and inhibited our abilities to speak in front of unsympathetic audiences.

In a political setting, this is sad but expected. In an educational setting, however, it is simply unexceptable for people to take positions and then be unable (or unwilling) to put together a scholarly argument based on facts.

Here is the required 500 word assignment about the presentation:
20050330_ThePitfallsOfCampaignReform.pdf

I have no clue how VOIP relates to an Internet Strategies class (well, one based on marketing communications at least) but here is more than I ever wanted to know about the subject. Oddly enough, that appears to be about 2 1/2 pages.

Voice Over Internet Protocol:
20050308_VOIP.pdf