Tower of Babel…
While I wish the government/military would find different ways to practice public relations, I’m having a difficult time working up much ire over the placement of soldier’s articles in Iraqi news media. But I do find something fascinating in this situation. Here’s a snippet from The New York Times:
Under the program, the Lincoln Group, a Washington-based public relations firm working in Iraq, was hired to translate articles written by American troops into Arabic and then, in many cases, give them to advertising agencies for placement in the Iraqi news media.
What I find fascinating is that anyone would think such a project would work (rhetorically). It’s about culture and its representation (and creation) in language. Who would think that articles written by Americans and then translated into Arabic by an American PR firm would be culturally persuasive? Well, perhaps someone who knows very little about the intersections of culture, linguistics, and rhetoric. [I'm assuming a continuous network of Americans working on this project, which is not a safe assumption. But I would argue that even having native Arabic speakers do the translating of Americans' copy would still present cultural challenges.]
What I find fascinating is that anyone would think such a project would work (rhetorically).
You’re assuming the aim of the project was to persuade. More likely it was an opportunity to award a $100 million contract to well-connected political operatives.
Thank you, Sven, for demonstrating the cynicism and ignorance that pervades bad journalism.
Strategic Communication
Institutionalizing Stability Operations Within DoD
Sven… From my theoretical perspective, all messages have persuasive intentions. And we should be especially wary of those that claim not to be (e.g. journalism).
Sys, can you point to one piece of evidence (outside of the company’s own marketing balderdash) that shows Lincoln Group was remotely qualified for this kind of work?
Why do you think Lincoln was chosen over other companies like SAIC or SYColeman which have decades of experience and a proven track record in this area? (And no, it wasn’t about price - scroll down to “Risky Affairs”).
The logical conclusion is that the administration was interested in ladling out political patronage, not in effective communication. The same phenomenon put a horse show “judges and stewards commissioner” in charge of federal emergency response.
Lincoln Group
US: SAIC Rejoins Pentagon’s Media Blitz
Remember Carville, Shrum, Greenville and Barak?
That’s it? That’s your proof? I bet that’s the kind of due dilligence that was performed before Lincoln got the nod. And yes, I’m aware SAIC and SYColeman have contracts in Iraq. But they didn’t have this contract, did they?
My, my, Sven. I gave you what you asked for, “point to one piece of evidence … that shows Lincoln Group was remotely qualified for this kind of work”. I met your low bar.
Perhaps you can provide “proof” through “due diligence” that Lincoln Group was not remotely qualified in order justify your knee-jerk cynicism?
Remember, that was your starting point.
“But they didn’t have this contract, did they?”
OK, explain to me how SAIC, SYColeman and Lincoln operate under the JPSE? In Iraq?
You must already know, and can therefore further justify your cynicism. Or, are you out to prove Andy’s structural biases are in force?