Objectives
The objectives of the policy are to ensure that:
- Government of Canada communications are non-partisan, effectively managed, well coordinated, clear and responsive to the diverse information needs of the public.
- The Government of Canada considers the views and interests of the public when developing policies, programs, services and initiatives.
- The Government of Canada is visible and recognizable to the public in Canada and abroad, and is projected equally in both official languages.
- Government of Canada communications and the administration of its corporate identity are cost-effective and achieve savings through standardization.
Expected results
The expected results of this policy are as follows:
- Communications within and across departments are well coordinated and integrated into all government operations.
- Government communications products and activities are timely, accurate, clear, objective, non-partisan, cost-effective, in both official languages, and meet the diverse information needs of the public.
- Government engages with Canadians and uses innovative methods when developing policies, programs, services and initiatives.
- Communications, programs, services, activities, initiatives and assets are clearly identified in Canada and abroad.
- The Government of Canada’s identity is applied consistently, projected equally in both official languages, has primacy over the identity of individual departments, and is not overshadowed by other logos.
Requirements
Deputy heads are responsible for the following:
- Providing impartial advice and support to their minister, who is the principal spokesperson for the department, in communicating government policies, programs, priorities and decisions to the public;
- Designating a senior official as head of communications to manage communications and corporate identity.
- Enabling communications with the public about policies, programs, services and initiatives by ensuring that their department:
- Provides timely, clear, objective, factual and non-partisan information;
- Provides information in both official languages in accordance with the relevant sections of the Official Languages Act;
- Considers the needs of official language minority communities in Canada;
- Uses a variety of media and platforms to maximize reach, including seeking innovative ways to use technology;
- Meets the requirements of the Standard on Web Accessibility and provides published information on request that is substantially equal for people with disabilities;
- Considers the views and interests of the public when developing policies, programs, services and initiatives; and
- Responds to information requests or inquiries from the public promptly without undue recourse to the Access to Information Act.
- Integrating communications into their department’s emergency preparedness and crisis management planning;
- Collaborating with other departments on government-wide communications activities and initiatives;
- Ensuring that all their department’s communications activities support the Government of Canada’s principles of open government and its practices;
- Approving annual advertising and public opinion research plans;
- Approving advertising during general federal elections: that is required by statute or regulation for legal purposes; to inform the public of a danger to health, safety or the environment; to post an employment or staffing notice; or to undertake specific advertising that is deemed urgent; and
- Championing open, transparent and collaborative communications within their departments to foster employee knowledge and awareness of departmental and government-wide priorities.
Reminder cards
Intent
We communicate with intentions: Describe, Explain, Convince, Please, Encourage, Persuade, Denounce, Advise, Mobilize .
Efficient thinking
If one of these steps is missing, the result of the action is very likely to be invalidated.
-
-
- Activism :
Observe > ___ > Act
- Activism :
-
-
-
- Technocraty :
___ > Understand > Act - Contemplation :
Observe > Understand > ___
- Technocraty :
-
The rhetoric
Art of expressing oneself well; Alternately decried and celebrated for more than 2,500 years, this pragmatics of speech is based on the observation of the facts of language and their influence on the relationship between a speaker and an audience.
It remains an incomparable educational tool at the service of anyone who has to perform professional communication services oriented towards specific objectives.
The rhetorical approach can be summed up as follows:
-
- Inventio: finding what to say.
- Dispositio: Putting in order what we have found.
- Elocutio: Find the words, the images, the arguments, the style of the subject you want to express.
Action: Present; animate the speech by voice and body.
Rhetoric is neither good nor bad in itself, it obeys no morality. It is simply a tool at the service of an intention.
The explanation
According to a study carried out by the Harris Institute, the average age of knowledge of the inhabitants of the Western world would be 12/13 years. At this age, we are very intelligent but our knowledge is superficial. therefore, ff you are an expert in a particular field, it is important to explain in a simple and concrete language.
Any information, however correct it may be from a technical point of view, is worthless information if it is not immediately usable by the person who receives it.
“Thank you to this scientist who speaks to me like a brother” (and not like a colleague).
Active Listening
Active listening is a difficult communication technique to integrate because it goes against our daily habits. Active listening is essential in interview situations and in any group or team management activity. It implies a real availability to the word of the other.
The tools of active listening are the art of questioning, reformulation and synthesis.
Rosine – Do you know that it is very bad to listen?
Figaro – Yet it is all this the best to hear well.
Beaumarchais. The Barber of Seville.
The Argument
The argument develops in the direction of a given audience that recognizes itself in values, interests or feelings.
The argument aims to show by proving it, what in your opinion should be considered the best, or on the contrary, what which should be considered undesirable.
To convince, you must attach value to the adhesion of your audience.
One never argues for oneself, but always based on the "receiving context" of the other.< /p>
The Expression
“An established form of expression is also a form of oppression. » Eugene Ionesco.
Ready-to-think and ready-to-talk constitute a real obstacle to the expression of knowledge and ideas.
The fear of talking nonsense leads us to utter platitudes. We use catchphrases and often remain unaware of the true richness of our self-expression. Its a question of confidence. Beware of role models and stereotypes.
“Whatever we want to say, there is only one word to express it, only one verb to animate it, only one adjective to qualify it. Guy de Maupassant
Behaviour
"I don't know what to do with my hands" said a young actor to his master, Louis Jouvet. "Well, leave them at arm's length, my young friend," replied the latter.
Gesture accompanies speech, naturally. There is no particular gesture to perform. It's a matter of trust and active availability.
“What to do with my hands? is a bad question.
Speaking, in public or in an interview, requires commitment; tensioning that engages the whole body.
Nothing to do with the tension, however. But nothing to do with relaxation either.
Diction
As with the voice, people who have real difficulties in diction are rare. On the other hand, those who have bad habits are quite numerous.
Diction work involves restoring correct articulatory behavior by gradually erasing bad habits. It's simple gymnastics, but the gain is considerable.
Support consonants; vowels will always follow.
Vocal Amplitude
It is amazing to see how the use of the voice is altered in daily habits: monotony, atony, congestion... and it is marvelous to see how much its development enlightens the thoughts of those who agree to use it fully.
Without forcing, without shouting, learn to place your voice and work on its amplitude.
“The voice is a second face. » Gerard Bauer
The gaze
“When the mouth says yes, the gaze says maybe. Victor Hugo. Ruy Blas.
The gaze, but also the whole body can hold a discourse very different from that which is expressed by speech. Such, who claims to express a deep conviction, casts a dull look on his audience, while his whole body expresses only one thing: "I don't want to be here!"
We speak with our body, with our gestures, as much as with our words. This is why it is so important to gain access to this mastery which consists of putting the whole body at the service of the spoken word.
Frightening
Aristotle said that a speaker who was not afraid should be considered irresponsible, and as such forbidden to speak.
What seems so easy in everyday life suddenly becomes a trying act when it comes to speaking in front of an audience, during an interview or during a meeting. This is understandable because in this case, speech is an act determined by a necessity or by an objective.
Fright is a natural phenomenon: We face our responsibility like an animal faces a danger:
- I attack?
- I defend myself?
- I run away?
Remedies for stage fright: preparation, relaxation and the engagement of your whole being, physical and mental, in the action of communicating.</ p>
Pleasure
“Our real pleasures consist in the free use of ourselves. » Buffon.
If there is a beautiful moment among all, it is this moment when, after having worked a lot and sometimes suffered, a speaker suddenly discovers the ineffable pleasure of speaking and of feeling received and fully welcomed by those who listen to him.
Moment where body, voice and words are in full harmony.
It is so impressive this audience or this interlocutor to whom you must speak. If you only knew how much this listener is your main support, your best ally. He will always be grateful to you if he sees that you treat him as a partner and not as an opponent.
“We are more often fooled by mistrust than by confidence. » Cardinal of Retz.
Rhetoric - Argumentation - Debate
"The proper function of rhetoric is not to persuade, but to see the means of persuading that each subject involves" Aristotle.
Aristotle considers that rhetoric teaches the means of persuasion without however prejudging success.
Unlike a consensus, an agreement concluded demagogically on the weak points of opposition, the controversy obliges to negotiate on the strong points and to consider the contrary arguments.
Gilles Declercq, Rhetoric and its method, Human Sciences n° 38, April 1994.
The tools of argumentation
The metaphor: "That we make the world a home, a station serving that home, a proving ground, a workshop of potential instruments, a quarry exploitable by human labor, a foreign land , an enemy camp, a prison... and our way of life will be fundamentally transformed. »
Helmut Kuhn, Encounter with Nothingness, London, Melthuen, 1951.
The analogy allows to transfer the agreement obtained on the reframed situation to a term or an opinion in the name of a resemblance. The example given by Aristotle in his Rhetoric is very clear. It depicts a philosopher who wants to convince the assembly that the magistrates of the city should be chosen according to their skills and not drawn by lot. The speaker recalls that the players of the sports teams who represent the city are chosen according to their skills and not drawn by lot among its inhabitants (preliminary framing). Then (analog argument), he is surprised that it is not the same for magistrates.
Philippe Breton, Argumentation between information and manipulation, Human Sciences Special Issue No. 16, March-April 1997 .
Relying on public representations is the question of anchoring, a notion that is due to Grize. When you want to make a theory understood, you need to be anchored in things that people understand, and if you want to get people to adhere, you have to be anchored in beliefs that are already in the public. .
Anchoring in different dimensions
- A cognitive dimension: it is necessary to rely on notions that are understood.
- An epistemic dimension that concerns what the individual believes in.
- A linguistic dimension: notions may be present, beliefs too, but the language I use may not be accessible.
You can only succeed in making something understood by an audience that does not yet know it by breaking with certain representations of common sense, but by relying on d other prior representations. The pedagogical value of examples is precisely to start from things that are known and to build a reasoning from there.
Argument from authority is relying on the reputation of another to support one's own argument. We cannot do without the argument of authority, but everything depends on the use we make of it. It is legitimate, and even welcome, to refer to previous work, for example at the beginning of a thesis. It is also a way to capture the goodwill of the audience. On the other hand, the argument of authority cannot replace a logically valid argument.
The pitfalls
Composition paralogism. It is a fault of reasoning which consists in believing that what is true of a part of a whole is true of the whole itself. The paralogism of division consists in believing that what is true of the whole is true of each of its parts. Why do we often make this error in reasoning? Because sometimes - even quite often - one can validly conclude from whole to parts and from parts to whole. If I am told that every part of a machine is green, I can say that the machine as a whole is green. Conversely, if I am told that the machine is completely green, I can deduce that every part is green. But it doesn't work if you change the predicate and instead of the color you take the weight. If I say: "every part of the machine is light", I cannot conclude that the machine is light. This type of reasoning is extremely common when dealing with the relationship between individuals and society. What is true at the level of each individual will not necessarily be true at the level of the whole, and vice versa. If we consider that a country is rich, that does not mean that each of its inhabitants is.
According to Alban Bouvier, Conférence sur les theories de l'argumentation, Lyon, 1996
Generalization paralogism. A general proposition is supported by a number of particular cases. The more we have, the more the general proposition is supported. But a generalization proves nothing. The example of the swans is well known. At the thousandth white swan I encounter, my general proposition that all swans are white is well supported. However, there is no evidence that the thousand and first swan is white. If we cite this example, it is because it happened that way, historically. In the 19th century, we noticed with surprise that there were black swans in Australia, when we had long believed that there were only white swans.
The main thing is to identify its validity in time and space, the conditions of its existence, and avoid generalizing.
Hence the importance of seeking counter-examples.
Starting point of induction
Checking the law, the general rule
Illustration of the arguments of the deduction.
Checking consistency.
| Induce | Infer | |
| Approach | Start from the facts, then generalize to identify a law, a rule. | Starting from exact facts to establish a proposition, a new fact which is the consequence. |
| Traps |
Overgeneralization Poor wording |
The new proposition is only the addition, the juxtaposition of the initial propositions or facts. Poor wording |
| To flesh out the argument |
Look for other examples that reinforce the generalization Apply the general rule to a few specific cases to show its relevance Search for counterexamples. Are they just exceptions? If so, present them as such, otherwise repeat the whole reasoning. |
Search at each stage of the deduction, at each implication, possible faults, counter-examples or elements going in the direction of the reasoning, or complementing it. |
| CDDP of Valence, Learning basic skills in Economics and Social Sciences, 1993. | ||
Distinguishing argument from demonstration
|
Demonstration |
Arguments |
|
Written exercise |
Oral exercise |
|
Solitaire |
Interaction with an audience |
|
Based on evidence |
Rely on arguments |
This distinction is, in part, artificial. The scientific demonstration is also accompanied by reasoned debates in scientific circles, as we can currently see around GMOs. What is important here is to note that the argued debate is based on social interaction between the participants.
Arguing means understanding and getting people to adhere
-
Do not assert without advancing arguments.
-
Distinguish facts, opinions, value judgments.
-
Working on sources: desecrating print. Contrary to the commonplace, "If it's in the paper, it's true", one must take a critical look at the printed thing and at the media, in general.
-
Work on the sources, their reliability and their relevance, by crossing the sources and prioritizing them.
Debate
Two Types of Debate: Media Debate and Scientific Debate
Educating through debate does not necessarily mean creating face-to-face meetings inspired by television shows. Rather than all the time aping the forms of the most mediatic opinion debate, it is good to rediscover the scientific debate, which deals with reality and gives itself a method. Of course, democracy also involves the free confrontation of opinions, in a pleasant disorder that leaves everyone the freedom to find their way and build their thoughts, without having to constantly show rigor and self-criticism. This form of conversation, essential to the evolution of social representations, should not hide the importance of another form, that which leads to the relative consensus which allows democratic and reasoned decisions.
Inspiration: Ph. Perrenoud, "The Debate and Reason", The Educational Notebooks, Supplement No. 4, Oct-Nov. 1998
Difference between the two:
|
Scientific Debate |
Media Debate |
|
Confront theses |
Confront opinions |
|
Based on assumptions |
Based on value judgments |
|
Supported by arguments |
Reinforced by social experiences, intuitions |
|
Is prepared by documentary work |
Is spontaneous |
|
Organized |
Participating in random listening |
|
Open to the other's point of view |
Reinforce everyone's point of view |
|
Results in synthesis |
Has no direct sequel |
|
Helps clarify issues |
Allows the evolution of social representations |
Source
Jane Méjias, Université d’automne sur l 'ECJS, Paris, 04-05 novembre 1999
Bibliographie indicative :
- Bautier Elisabeth et Rochaix Jean-Yves, L'expérience scolaire des nouveaux lycéens, Armand Colin, 1998
- Boudon Raymond, Le sens des valeurs, PUF, 1999
- Bouvier Alban, Conférence sur les théories de l'argumentation, Lyon, 1996
- Breton Philippe, L'argumentation entre information et manipulation, Sciences Humaines Hors Série n° 16, mars-avril 1997.
- CDDP de Valence, Apprentissage des savoir-faire fondamentaux en Sciences économiques et sociales, 1993
- CRDP de Franche-Comté, Argumenter au lycée, 1994
- Perrenoud Philippe, " Le débat et la raison ", Les cahiers pédagogiques, supplément n° 4, oct-nov. 1998
- Schnapper Dominique, La relation à l'autre, Gallimard, Coll. Essais, 1998
- Sciences Humaines n°38, avril 1994, dossier " L'art de convaincre "
- Taylor Charles, Multiculturalisme. Différence et démocratie, 1992, trad. F. Aubier, 1994
- Thomas J.P., " Pas de formation sans réflexion de fond ", Les cahiers pédagogiques, supplément n°4, Octobre-Novembre 1998
- Be functional early, that is to say:
- Be ready to answer radio or tv for the 6 AM morning news, or similar:
- Have read the morning press (the summaries), determined the possible issues, and seen if it is imperative to have any information published or broadcast (Websites included) corrected.
- If necessary, do a search to verify certain information, contact the right people, confirm the right information, and contact the journalists and website editors (you have to be very diplomatic!).
- It is very important to correct inaccuracies published on media websites as soon as possible because some media rely on what they find online. Avoid spreading inaccuracies.
- Some inaccuracies (especially from national media) should be officially clarified by a Letter to the Editor. Discuss it with your team. A letter to the editor is brief, three paragraphs. It does not accuse, it does not underline the error (simple reference to the article in question), it exposes the verified facts.
- If necessary, do a search to verify certain information, contact the right people, confirm the right information, and contact the journalists and website editors (you have to be very diplomatic!).
- Have contacted their communications team to be aware of other potential issues.
- Having in mind the key messages of the day and even of the moment.
Note: a journalist who "covers" an event in constant evolution and who must intervene regularly on a continuous news channel, adjusts constantly the "lead" of his next intervention - built around the newest he learned. The spokesperson must do the same and at all times set their own communication objective according to the moment with the appropriate key message(s) in mind.
- Have read the morning press (the summaries), determined the possible issues, and seen if it is imperative to have any information published or broadcast (Websites included) corrected.
- Have set the priorities for your day, i.e.:
- Answer calls from journalists who come in, they have tight deadlines.
- Follow up on previous calls by gathering information (if necessary) to get answers.
- Prepare for scheduled interviews.
- During calmer times, browse online (regional) media and social media.
- Prepare for team meetings in order to share information, in a concise way (because time becomes precious)
- At the end of the day:
- See if it would be appropriate to contact the evening bulletins to send a message.
- Take stock of your day, calls (keep a log: media, journalist, contact details, subject, type of interaction, result, etc.).
- Be ready to answer radio or tv for the 6 AM morning news, or similar: