Play guess the country with APCO's democracy manipulation
s...@ihug.co.nz
communications) company, in relation to her post from NEWSPEAK.
APCO (http://www.apcoassoc.com/) kindly provide a large range of case
studies that give a clear indication of the manipulation of public and
government opinion, whilst taking out references to the particular
campaign, organisation or country which funded them.
Have a look at more at their site - go to "clients and services"
I selected 4 examples for this game.
The first one is an easy guess (1 point), the second a bit more tricky (3
points) and the third is a funder of disease research, the hardest (10
points), the fourth (6 points) could refer to any number of organisation
and "hotly debated issues (maybe even the MAI :-) )
But first a message from our sponsor:
The serious bit: How are we different from corporate lobbiests?
While we are all lobbiests in our own right (we write to MP's, talk to
individuals, lobby local council, all in the name of informing and altering
the course of our various governments decisions) there is an obvious tilt
of (that awful phrase) the level playing field. It makes it incredibly
difficult for real people to counter something important enough for an
organisation to pay for democracy manipulation services.
It raises some interesting points though. If we use similar techniques as
APCO (albeit on a vastly different scale) do we have the right to criticise
them. For instance, at a certain stage in many campaigns we have to deal
with our ability to attract the media, and start working out strategies to
do it better. Or we find it necessary to "build" a group or coalition to
fight a cause. How different is that from APCO "building" a coalition of
business groups which have interests in an area?
Is it just that our vested interests don't relate to financial gain? or
often not to personal wellbeing? Or that they're big and we're small? Or
that we work voluntarily? (but then what about Amnesty; Greenpeace; who
raise large amounts of money and have paid lobbiests?)
If there is a distinction, then how would we go about evening up the power
of various lobbiests?
I don't know the answers, but I know an uncomfortable feeling sometimes
when writing stuff on an issue, when I think "hang on; I'm trying to feed
information to people to change their mind. What if I've got it wrong' I'm
captured by an ideology that won't let me see a larger picture? Sometimes
you find a choice piece of information that, worded slightly differently,
or with specific things left out, makes your case so much better. know the
temptation of that, but generally try to reject it, even if it means the
argument is not as clean, cos that's when I would feel like an APCO.
Now back to the game:
1) Government Policy Manipulation
Which Country?
APCO developed and implemented a strategy to encourage the passage of U.S.
legislation granting permanent Most Favored Nation (MFN) status for an
Eastern European country.
The strategy involved generating support for the legislation by building a
business coalition, arranging high-level meetings for ambassadors and
visiting dignitaries with top officials in the Administration and Congress,
directly contacting Members of Congress and mobilizing the country's
American constituents.
In seeking to convince the Administration and Congress to support and enact
legislation, APCO built a broad-based coalition of U.S. business, academic,
diplomatic, ethnic and political interests to encourage decisionmakers that
it would be in the best interest of the U.S. to extend MFN status for this
country. To support ongoing legislative-focused activities, APCO conducted
a media relations campaign, including the development of extensive written
materials, such as newsletters, press releases, and media alerts.
APCO was able to build a business coalition of over 70 companies, including
some of America's largest corporations. All members of the coalition
contacted their legislators on this issue. More than 50 meetings were
arranged for the Ambassador with top U.S. officials and the domestic ethnic
community was mobilized to unite and publicly support the legislation.
Several Senatorial objections to the legislation were removed by APCO
through direct contact with key Senate offices.
After eight months of effort, Congress passed the bill granting this
country permanent MFN status and President Clinton signed it into law.
http://www.apcoassoc.com/html/clients_and_services/client_types/gov_cs1.html
Note: APCO "built" a business coalition, and "removed" Senatorial
objections through "direct contact with senate offices".
Remember the amount of time which was spent on this issue in numerous areas
- US govt, human rights groups, and the media. That's a hell of a lot of
time wasted because of a heel of a lot of money paid to APCO.
2)Media and Political Manipulation
who's the foreign PM?
APCO was hired to develop and implement a schedule and the resulting media
surrounding a foreign President's first official visit to the United States.
Through high-level contacts, APCO secured meetings with top officials in
the Administration, the U.S. Congress and the United Nations. American
business hubs of the country's top industry sectors were also identified
and events involving leaders from those businesses were arranged.
APCO developed media materials in concert with the Embassy, and faxed out
daily releases throughout the President's visit. The President engaged in
several exclusive top-tier, one-on-one interviews, and an extremely
well-attended press conference also garnered widespread media attention.
http://www.apcoassoc.com/html/clients_and_services/client_types/gov_cs3.html
3) Media Manipulation
Guess the organisation
An organization that serves as the primary funder of research dedicated to
finding a cure for a debilitating disease hired APCO to generate national
media attention to promote their mission, and establish themselves as a
resource.
To garner national coverage, APCO's strategy stressed three elements --
identification, training and placement of key researchers; promotion of
this organization's funded research findings; and development of feature
stories advancing "people on the street" afflicted with the disease.
APCO secured media placements in a number of media outlets, including The
Today Show, Associated Press, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal,
The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Better Homes and Gardens, Modern
Maturity. Radio spots included CBS, NPR and many syndicated health programs.
http://www.apcoassoc.com/html/clients_and_services/client_types/not_cs1.html
This is a nice one in the "not for profit" section - a touchy feely. But
with APCO securing so much media coverage, what other stories missed out?
4) Climate altering
Which Organisation?
Since 1992, APCO has served as the grassroots/coalition-building
consultants to a major Washington-based organization that works to promote
reform policy on a hotly-debated issue, primarily at the state level. This
group's mission is to raise the noise level in support of reform in target
states, and alter the climate in favor of change.
APCO changed the nature of the debate from a technical intangible concept
to a concept more easily understood by the general public. APCO also helped
re-define and seize control of the public policy debate by organizing
self-perpetuating locally-based and independently run coalitions.
APCO developed effective communications tools, including turnkey action
kits and broadcast advertisements, developed in-house by APCO's broadcast
services staff. The independent coalitions, having raised their own money
to deliver the reform message, were trained on how to use the
communications tools.
As a result, reform legislation has been passed both federally and in many
key states. The media has adopted the cause as a direct result of APCO's
efforts. Opponents of the issues are divided and on the defensive and
momentum has shifted towards our client's point of view.
http://www.apcoassoc.com/html/clients_and_services/client_types/coal_cs1.html
NOTE: APCO set up "independent coalitions" with a life of their own. The
opponents in the issue are "divided and on the defensive" - is this the way
to deal with an argument in an ethical way?
PS if APCO are as good as they make out, they'll be tracking all mentions
of their name and will get to read this. Hi There!
--
For MAI-not (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other MAI sites please see http://mai.flora.org/