Will you book June 5, 2014 in your agenda now?
Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2025 6:06 am
As for the distinction between skill and profession, it might help if everyone who communicates professionally with and via the media in their profession would simply call themselves a communication specialist. After all, demand is increasing. Supply is plentiful!
Or am I now making a caricature of 'the' communications specialist?
Anyone who looks up CommunicatieNu from last year will learn that the 'specialisms' in communication actually came about in this way. Every man/woman with a certain professional expertise and communication skills is given the label 'communication specialist' for the latter. The counter is at about 22. The communication sector is teeming with communication specialists with a professional education outside the media domain. The reverse is quite exceptional…
Are you looking for a communications specialist? Feel free to hire a lawyer, sociologist or business expert with communication skills. Then you will at least have someone in-house who understands more than just media and media contacts. Talk about a crisis in 'the' Communications profession.
Media without and media with
A whole series of old values and beliefs in media communication are currently being discussed. But a serious professional discourse and path of change are not happening within the communication domain. Although, there are also specialists who have long and successfully been following a different communication path, around media, sending and messages. But 'the' positioned profession has been in the same position for years.
The topic of conversation is (therefore) still predominantly media without and media with 'social'. They also focus mainly on their own positioning and the associated signs on the door. Criticism of 'the' profession is very sensitive; it quickly bounces back as 'fouling one's own nest'. You shouldn't do that. Maybe that's why you always see the same participants in the professional discussion. Because communication has to remain 'fun' of course.
Photo courtesy of Fotolia
Photo courtesy of Fotolia
Linguistic booby traps
In addition, there have been two linguistic booby traps for about 25 years under every substantive discourse on 'the' communication profession. These are the terms 'it' and 'communication'. As soon as you want to name the communication things concretely, you fall into a conceptually painful hole. A consistent and connecting vocabulary is lacking in the field. This vocabulary should express the knowledge base under the communication profession. But that base of knowledge is also lacking.
It is actually a miracle that 'the' profession got away with this a few decades ago. But what could perhaps be communicated away as a minor flaw in the early nineties, in the then prevailing belief that with some persuasive twisting and pushing you can eventually sell everything , has now become an ugly and rapidly unraveling crack, which all the changes around us are constantly pulling at.
The communication dress of today is undoubtedly sexy, but sooner or later you will catch a cold in it.
In order to repair the tear, the professional discussion must now focus on substantive matters. Instead of on newer labels, other (or no) communication plans and hipper methods; matters that up to now (aim to) hide the fraying content of 'the' communication profession from view.
Politics
In 2013, political The Hague got wind of what was fermenting and festering in the HBO communication programs – and in the professional field in which these programs are embedded. Last year, various publications appeared in the media that painted a bleak picture of HBO communication programs and for students of these programs . Before The Hague intervenes, it is up to the professional field itself to intervene.
For a year and a half now, a plan has been on the table to have independent scientific research done into the history of 'the' profession, its definitions, the professional practice and the way in which that practice is taught at universities of applied sciences and universities. Because in order to be able to conduct the substantive discussion in a real and reasoned manner, and on that basis to be able to shift the course where necessary, an analysis of that profession is a starting point. And here the initiative also stalled immediately. Because who wants to pay for such a study?
Integrated research
An integral study does not seem to be in the interest of the professional association or national body for communication education. Of course, something is done for the image formation. The available budgets here and there are used for their own local studies, an online survey here and an internal evaluation there. Everyone does this themselves and for their own positioning, instead of together with each other, in the service of the general interest.
There is hardly any support within the sector for the use of an independent belize mobile phone number list scientific institute. After all, the persuasive arm of the sector has no control over independence. And that is scary. After all, objective facts should not be at the expense of the persuasive image of 'the' profession. Independent scientific research into 'the' communication profession will therefore have to wait for the time being. If it ever gets off the ground. And now that things are going well again with one communication agency, there is of course no problem at all. One swallow in the communication framework means a summer communication framework!
Sense of urgency
This also gives rise to the image that the communication domain still pays little attention to the radical changes in communication since the turn of the century. And indeed, the aspiring student is already taught in one of the above online recruitment texts to, above all, lag behind the facts – by only thinking about journalists one day before the publication of a government report…
Well, a sense of urgency to get things in order is hard to find among the creators and guardians of 'the' communication profession. That's a shame. And it doesn't bode well for innovation and change in the sector. Finally, the conclusions of the respective private studies can of course be guessed. The profession is doing very well! Long live communication and communication science! There's an event in that.
Or am I now making a caricature of 'the' communications specialist?
Anyone who looks up CommunicatieNu from last year will learn that the 'specialisms' in communication actually came about in this way. Every man/woman with a certain professional expertise and communication skills is given the label 'communication specialist' for the latter. The counter is at about 22. The communication sector is teeming with communication specialists with a professional education outside the media domain. The reverse is quite exceptional…
Are you looking for a communications specialist? Feel free to hire a lawyer, sociologist or business expert with communication skills. Then you will at least have someone in-house who understands more than just media and media contacts. Talk about a crisis in 'the' Communications profession.
Media without and media with
A whole series of old values and beliefs in media communication are currently being discussed. But a serious professional discourse and path of change are not happening within the communication domain. Although, there are also specialists who have long and successfully been following a different communication path, around media, sending and messages. But 'the' positioned profession has been in the same position for years.
The topic of conversation is (therefore) still predominantly media without and media with 'social'. They also focus mainly on their own positioning and the associated signs on the door. Criticism of 'the' profession is very sensitive; it quickly bounces back as 'fouling one's own nest'. You shouldn't do that. Maybe that's why you always see the same participants in the professional discussion. Because communication has to remain 'fun' of course.
Photo courtesy of Fotolia
Photo courtesy of Fotolia
Linguistic booby traps
In addition, there have been two linguistic booby traps for about 25 years under every substantive discourse on 'the' communication profession. These are the terms 'it' and 'communication'. As soon as you want to name the communication things concretely, you fall into a conceptually painful hole. A consistent and connecting vocabulary is lacking in the field. This vocabulary should express the knowledge base under the communication profession. But that base of knowledge is also lacking.
It is actually a miracle that 'the' profession got away with this a few decades ago. But what could perhaps be communicated away as a minor flaw in the early nineties, in the then prevailing belief that with some persuasive twisting and pushing you can eventually sell everything , has now become an ugly and rapidly unraveling crack, which all the changes around us are constantly pulling at.
The communication dress of today is undoubtedly sexy, but sooner or later you will catch a cold in it.
In order to repair the tear, the professional discussion must now focus on substantive matters. Instead of on newer labels, other (or no) communication plans and hipper methods; matters that up to now (aim to) hide the fraying content of 'the' communication profession from view.
Politics
In 2013, political The Hague got wind of what was fermenting and festering in the HBO communication programs – and in the professional field in which these programs are embedded. Last year, various publications appeared in the media that painted a bleak picture of HBO communication programs and for students of these programs . Before The Hague intervenes, it is up to the professional field itself to intervene.
For a year and a half now, a plan has been on the table to have independent scientific research done into the history of 'the' profession, its definitions, the professional practice and the way in which that practice is taught at universities of applied sciences and universities. Because in order to be able to conduct the substantive discussion in a real and reasoned manner, and on that basis to be able to shift the course where necessary, an analysis of that profession is a starting point. And here the initiative also stalled immediately. Because who wants to pay for such a study?
Integrated research
An integral study does not seem to be in the interest of the professional association or national body for communication education. Of course, something is done for the image formation. The available budgets here and there are used for their own local studies, an online survey here and an internal evaluation there. Everyone does this themselves and for their own positioning, instead of together with each other, in the service of the general interest.
There is hardly any support within the sector for the use of an independent belize mobile phone number list scientific institute. After all, the persuasive arm of the sector has no control over independence. And that is scary. After all, objective facts should not be at the expense of the persuasive image of 'the' profession. Independent scientific research into 'the' communication profession will therefore have to wait for the time being. If it ever gets off the ground. And now that things are going well again with one communication agency, there is of course no problem at all. One swallow in the communication framework means a summer communication framework!
Sense of urgency
This also gives rise to the image that the communication domain still pays little attention to the radical changes in communication since the turn of the century. And indeed, the aspiring student is already taught in one of the above online recruitment texts to, above all, lag behind the facts – by only thinking about journalists one day before the publication of a government report…
Well, a sense of urgency to get things in order is hard to find among the creators and guardians of 'the' communication profession. That's a shame. And it doesn't bode well for innovation and change in the sector. Finally, the conclusions of the respective private studies can of course be guessed. The profession is doing very well! Long live communication and communication science! There's an event in that.