Hi all,
I just wanted to add to the discussion about press statements and why
we are so interested in using the media. At the conference last year
we had an excellent workshop on working with the media (many thanks to
Moira Scobbie from the Scottish Government and her colleague from the
see me campaign). Ironically, given the interest in press statements
it was not well attended!! But a key message that was put across was
the need to be very clear about what is the key message and what is it
you want to achieve in working with the press.
In some ways, as a discussion list the idea about finding a key
message is contrary to the purpose of a forum like this - which might
be described as generating a diversity of views in a supportive and
challenging environment. I do support the view that we could release
press statements as a network, but think that using a discussion list
to drive a process of seeking the consensus needed is really
challenging! I also agree with Grant that a named and opt in approach
is a reasonable one. An opt out approach requiring a 50% list
membership objection means something like 100 people taking the time
to read, digest and reply to someone (and who that would be is even
unclear). That seems a troubled process to me!
I also think there are issues about what it is we want to achieve.
Just to be clear, I do not have an opposing view to the content of
what is being suggested, but I get the sense that our interest in
releasing press statements (in general) serves the purpose of making
it feel like WE (whoever that is) undertook an action. Does that then
mean that the goal we achieve in releasing press statements is that of
making us feel better, or like we cared enough to act? I'm not
suggesting that is an unworthy aspiration, rather that it might not be
taken as press-worthy (so then does a press statement fit the need?).
What was blatantly clear from the workshop was that there are loads of
ways to work with the media (including raising awareness, working with
many different formats and providing information), but we are a little
short on know how in this area. I think if we were serious about
taking forward working with the press we could form a sub-group of
interested folk who might think about how we need to get the know how
to be effective. Although you might assume that leads back to the
point of being clear about who ‘we’ are, what our message is, and what
we want to achieve … but that, of course is a whole different issue,
and again, I agree with Grant’s point that perhaps we need to commit
to other ways to organise which could be complimentary to something
like this list. Maybe the BPS Section process might help expand on
some of these issues?
Anyway… that’s a bit more on my reservations!
Rebekah
--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
___________________________________
COMMUNITYPSYCHUK - The discussion list for community psychology in the UK.
To unsubscribe or to change your details visit the website:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK
For any problems or queries, contact the list moderators: Rebekah Pratt ([log in to unmask]) or Grant Jeffrey ([log in to unmask])
|