THEORY OF POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENT

COMMUNICATION
Oct 26th, 2022
POLITICAL COMMUNICATION

BACKGROUND
Citizens in present-day society deep into the government and political communication;
this ranges from how campaigns are done, how activists communicate about anti-
smoking initiatives and promotions for road safety. This concern discovers the
assumptions, ethics, and practices supporting political and government communication
while establishing the differences between the two concepts. This subject examines the
role of communication in independent citizenship and involvement; this involves looking
at the emergence of alternative public domains, especially those existing online.
Students investigate these contemporary issues, ow they are understood and
characterized by different stakeholders. A communication product is then produced
depending on their investigations. Stakeholders should be chosen and evaluated based
on their communication campaign’s effectiveness regarding their objectives and political
context.
This paper will be examining the Australian government as a stakeholder in Jared’s Labor
Refugee Policy and then evaluate their communication campaign’s effectiveness. This
means that there will be reflections on their ways of expressing their political nature.
Political communication refers to the methods and motives of those sending messages to
impact the political atmosphere. This involves making public discussions that reflect on
who has the power to allocate public resources, give approvals and make decisions
(Macnamara, 2017).
The critical factor considered in making communications political is the content and goal
of the message. Government communication refers to all activities done by public
institutions and firms to convey and share information that explains what the government
is up to. This paper will explain the plans of the government to address the issue of
indigenous Australians who have suggested amendments in the taxation system and coal
seam gas mining.
EFFECTIVENESS
The Australian government used government communication and noted that the content
matters a lot and requires attention for delivering a successful and impactful message.
The Australian government applied government communication to address the issue of
changing tax systems and coal seam mining. Careful attention has to be taken during the
process of creating content. It is essential to understand that effective communication
and leadership are the keys to addressing the issue. Proofs of the communication
strategies employed back the empirical evidence from how Australia responded to the
proposal.
When the people raise a concern, the governments have a role in mobilizing cooperation
and public trust; these two have to be included as part of the solutions. Preferably, the
process of developing a message should be transparent and contain pieces of evidence.
Their culture and social identity greatly influence the way people engage and respond to
health information. These two factors influenced the ideal methods of communication of
the people, what they consider as a trustworthy authority, and their magnitude to act and
respond to the message.
The Australian government applied identity leadership that promotes a shared sense of
belonging and the drive behind a mission. Thus, the shared goal for the people of
Australia became to find out how the proposal for change can be addressed. The
Australian government had an understanding that for addressing the concern to be
successful, they had to consider the mode of delivery of that message.
They understood that delivering and formulating critical information has to be sensitive
and modified to suit the social groups in the country. For example, when dealing with
refugee issues, the Australian government realized that it was vital for them to first
understand community viewpoints and requirements. The government then had to put
this strategy in place; they then worked with people who had influenced in the refugees
and used the advice relevant to the culture of the people. This communication strategy
helped the government manage risks in homes; the government used increased
interaction and shared identity as vital communication tools.
The Australian government has also been considering societal factors as a
communication strategy. They became sensitive to the troubles and values of the asylum
seekers; they used different modes to convey information, which served as a strategy in
earning maximum support and involvement from the people. The current spread of
information available online provides an extra layer of difficulties (Shah et al., 2017). Print
media and television that were an important channel to circulate information are now
forced to compete with various online news sources and social media. Since social media
has become an influential source and the public actively participates there, the
Australian government decided to use it.
Even though social media is prone to misinformation that can increase anxiety among
people, it also gives openings for effective communication (Howard, 2010). It allows
critical messages to be spread quickly and be correctly customized to different
audiences. Social media also provides the community with an opportunity to share
relevant messages actively.
The government of Australia applied effective government communication by facilitating
the refugees’ participation in processes and burdens. This helped them as
communicators to avoid tension, and so they controlled the outcome of the
communication. Research reveals that the Australian government has been playing the
role of effective communication by developing strategies to overcome the public’s
negative perception (Van et al., 2017). The government has employed qualitative
approaches to help them understand the people, and they have applied the idea of soft
governance to facilitate participation and learning from the community. This has enabled
them to earn better public relations with the community.
The government of Australia understood that public trust is a crucial resource in winning
cooperation from the public and controlling how people behave. Effective communication
relies upon high levels of trust based on the shared values between the government and
the people and requires confidence that future developments will happen as expected.
The government also applied the strategy of transparent information as this is a tool that
makes people act. The government prioritized transparency in its communication, and
this enabled them to succeed in handling health emergencies (Mills, 2015). This
transparency helped them earn public trust; they disclosed all the pieces of evidence
they used in making recommendations to the public.
The Australian government also used the civic engagement strategy; this is essential in
identifying shared values and empowering the community to participate in decision
making. Even though this strategy can be challenging, especially during an emergency,
since fast lifesaving decisions are needed from the government, the Australian
government employed the technique. They assumed that this strategy could be life-
changing as well, so they went forward and engaged the immigrants. These practical
ways of communication have enabled the government to address the issue of concern.
DIFFERENCES AND SIMILARITIES
There are differences between government communication and political communication
as applied by different governments globally. Government communication operates in an
environment with many layers and in one that is organizationally diverse. It can be
defined from a functional and theoretical level depending on what it does and the reason
for its existence. Government communication seeks to impact the opinions of the public.
Government communication may seek to influence public opinion but always for the
better. In contrast, political communication aims to impact public opinion through
descriptions and consistency in the party’s interest. Government communication is
viewed as neutral, realistic. It is in the public’s interest, whereas political communication
is biased and works for the welfare of the party and everything connected to the party,
including the members and associated organizations.
Professionals in government communication are experts employed by the public service
and are assigned to communicate messages that are neutral and factual with no bias
whatsoever for the people’s interest (Sengul, 2019). Their communication is intended to
show a sense of equality with no intention of prejudice and favoritism; the professionals
are devoted to serving the citizens. On the other hand, professionals from political
communication may be officially employed by the public service only if they work as
members of parliament. They are expected to be biased, so they aim to serve their
interests and that of their parties; it does not matter whether they are in government or
opposition; in this case, the general public does not benefit from their work.
The intents of political communication are manipulative as they tend to use different
techniques, including the media, to understand how people behave and what motivates
them. They then use this information to develop communication strategies that will be
used to manipulate the public.
They get enlightened on what communication can influence public opinion and use it to
formulate calculated alliances. On the other hand, government communication studies
how people behave in the community and use this information to engage them in serving
the interests of society (DePaula et al., 2018). Government communication is not
manipulative, and so the public opinion gained is genuine. The public opinion earned
helps the government collaborate with the community to achieve different goals; it is
mainly made after delivering messages transparently.
There is a similarity between political and government communication; the target
audience is the general public. Both aim at public opinion; they strive to use different
mechanisms to ensure that the public develops a sense of trust in what they
communicate. The end goal of both public and government communication is to convey a
message to the public. The public sector employs the officials in both forms of
communication; they cannot employ themselves, and they both serve a specific set of
people (Figenschou and Thorbjørnsrud, 2018). Both public and government
communication strive to convey messages to their target audience in an effective manner.

CONTRIBUTION OF THE AUSTRALIAN

GOVERNMENT’S COMMUNICATION TO THE PUBLIC
SPHERE
The effectiveness of the communication of the government of Australia influenced the
public interest of the people. It enabled the refugees to understand that the government
cares about their interests and is committed to serving them (Laenens et al., 2018).
This made the people develop a positive attitude towards any communications made by
the public since they understood that the end goal of that communication was for their
good. The government took into consideration the cultural needs of the society and other
requirements, which made the public always heed the instructions offered by the
government. In the long run, the people cooperated with the government, adhered to laid
down strategies, and waited for the government to act (Cameron, 2010). They also
understood that their well-being meant a lot to the government and that the government
was willing to offer help and support without any form of discrimination.
Government communication in Australia proved the reality of democracy to the public.
Many nations worldwide consider themselves democratic country yet they do not engage
the public in making important decisions. The government in Australia decided to use a
communication strategy that reminded the immigrants of their democratic rights (Guo
and Wei, 2019). They communicated what the government needs to achieve and left them
to voice their opinions concerning the matter. It was their opinions that were then used in
making final decisions concerning different affairs; this issue was considered to be life-
changing (McKnight, 2015).
The public sphere was made to understand the importance of their opinions to the public,
which made the people cooperative. They changed their perceptions about government
officials and had to perceive them as democratic and that they have respect for the
opinion of others.
Governments should employ effective means of communication so that their messages
may cause an influence the public. They should understand that culture means a lot to
individuals, and respecting one’s cultural needs that will avert resentment. Engaging the
public in decision-making is an essential tool in gaining cooperation from the public since
collaboration leads to achieving goals. Governments should realize that social media is a
crucial tool that can be used to convey important information to the people in the
contemporary world. Therefore, they should use it to reach a large number of people
within a short time.
Governments also need to understand the role transparency plays in winning public trust.
Finally, governments should always keep in mind that it is the effectiveness of their
communication that will cause an impact on the public. The reflections of students in this
matter have enabled people to gain an understanding of the concepts of government and
public communication and then the differences and the similarities that exist between
them.

REFERENCE LIST
Cameron, D. (2010). Big society speech. London, UK: UK Government. Web.
DePaula, N., Dincelli, E. and Harrison, T.M. (2018). Toward a typology of government social
media communication: Democratic goals, symbolic acts and self-presentation.
Government Information Quarterly, 35(1), pp.98-108.
Figenschou, T.U. and Thorbjørnsrud, K. (2018). Mediated agency, blame avoidance and
institutional responsibility: Government communication in a personalised media
landscape. Scandinavian Political Studies, 41(2), pp.210-232.
Guo, Y. and Wei, Y. (2019). Government communication effectiveness on local acceptance
of nuclear power: Evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 218, pp.38-50.
Howard, J (2010). ‘Seizing the Day on Guns’, in Lazarus Rising: A personal and political
autobiography, (chapter 22, pp. 247-254), Harper Collins, Pymble, NSW. Web.
Laenens, W., Mariën, I. and Broeck, W.V.D. (2018). Channel choice determinants of (digital)
government communication: A case study of spatial planning in Flanders. Media and
Communication, 6(4), pp.140-152.
Macnamara, J. (2017). Creating a ‘Democracy for everyone’: Strategies for increasing
listening and engagement by government, University of Technology Sydney and London
School of Economics and Political Science. Web.
McKnight, D. (2015). ‘Shaping the news: Media Advisers under Howard and Rudd
Governments’, Australian Journalism Review, vol 37, no. 1, pp. 21-31. Web.
Mills, S. (2015). ‘What Julia Gillard couldn’t give us. Inside Story. Web.
Sengul, K. (2019). Critical discourse analysis in political communication research: A case
study of right-wing populist discourse in Australia. Communication Research and
Practice, 5(4), pp.376-392.
Shah, D.V., McLeod, D.M., Rojas, H., Cho, J., Wagner, M.W. and Friedland, L.A. (2017).
Revising the communication mediation model for a new political communication ecology.
Human Communication Research, 43(4), pp. 491-504.
Van Aelst, P., Strömbäck, J., Aalberg, T., Esser, F., De Vreese, C., Matthes, J., Hopmann, D.,
Salgado, S., Hubé, N., Stępińska, A. and Papathanassopoulos, S. (2017). Political
communication in a high-choice media environment: a challenge for democracy?. Annals
of the International Communication Association, 41(1), pp. 3-27.