Promoting Openness

Perhaps it is not surprising that as we have become much more technologically proficient, a debate over what is private and what is subject to public record has increased. Further, probably it is even less surprising that the activities of private citizens as well as government officials have become part of this issue, particularly as it relates to their use of social media and the telephone. It was not that long ago when such a focus revolved around whether someone was reading our mail, listening to our conversations, or what meetings are open or closed to the public. These, of course, are still a matter of discussion but now technology has broadened the conversation.


Privacy versus what is public is a broad topic that contains several layers all of which entail communication. One is the privacy of ordinary citizens. Another, and the focus of this entry, is safeguarding the transparency of our government. Citizens have a right to expect their elected officials to conduct their business - the business of the people - in an open and transparent way. Government officials defend this, of course, but sometimes they do not always seem to practice it. What is at stake is how true our nation is staying to what is supposed to be one of its core values: openness.


It cannot be taken for granted that this value is rock-solid and will never be compromised. Communicators can and should play a key role in ensuring any kind of watering down of who we are as active citizens and what we are as a nation that believes in free and open debate never happens. As representatives of officials who work on behalf of maintain the public trust, communicators should see themselves as advocates on behalf of the public their "boss" has been elected to represent. Yes, they want to be loyal to their employer but at the same their employer has a boss, too, and that "person" is the public.