survival and reputation of any LE department
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
survival and reputation of any LE department
EMPA 311: Micro Lecture – Session 6:
BY: Adjunct Professor Carlos Sanchez, Golden Gate University
Engaging the media is critical for the survival and reputation of any LE department. The lack of it fails to produce trust in their community and fails to communicate what the LE does or represents. This often happens when nothing transpires and then a critical incident occurs that spotlights an agency negatively in the public’s eye. Unfortunately, depending on the story, it can shed a very damaging image of the department that takes years to recover. Thus, it is vital for LE executives to utilize the media to promote their department’s image, create public relations and conduct public outreach.
Jones describes great guidelines that should be observed when dealing with the media, and as a smart and consciences administrator in LE, one must deal with the media. Jones’ tactics are useful to follow, but not everyone can speak to the media, thus a well-spoken and trained person, such as a Public Information Officer (PIO), can help produce the proper image the department wants to present. It is also very important that whoever speaks to the media, whether it is the PIO, commander at the scene or executive of the department, to have a command of the story. Too often the facts are not in or distorted which cause for misinformation to be disseminated to the public. This then causes mistrust once the story is corrected because of the fear of a cover-up or lack of transparency. As Jones noted, be as prepared and informed as possible. Gather good reliable information and watch what quotes you intend to use. Show empathy and be human – as Jones quotes General Schwarzkopf saying “I don’t think I would like a man who was incapable of enough emotion to get tears in his eyes…[t]hat’s not a human being (P.188).” Nonetheless, an important fact for anyone speaking to the media is that the audience, the people you are addressing, NEVER receive the full story [interview or press release], but only the sound bites or sections that the media wants to play, but that can be taken out of context. When information is taken out of context it can have a totally different perspective to the listening audience who will make their own conclusions, many times unfairly. If this is the case, a LE agency must correct the record as soon as possible with the media. A LE leader must demand that the media correct the information in the same matter as it was produced and not in the back section of the newspaper.
Recently, New York Police Department was criticized for their lack of responding to use of force incidents: “NYPD issued a report criticizing the department’s handling of excessive-force complaints, saying the agency has a culture in which officers aren’t always held accountable for aggressive arrest tactics” [please read article – http://www.wsj.com/articles/nypd-rolls-out-new-use-of-force-rules-1443715564 ]. The article in the Wall Street Journal and other media outlets like CNN, the New York Times and others paint a dim picture for the NYPD as negligent of their duties and that they are covering up mishaps by their officers. The report was done by New York’s watchdog civilian oversight agency, the N.Y. Civilian Complaint Review Board, in which they studied cases of excessive force between 2010 and 2014. The number brought to the board for a four year period was only 207 allegations for which the board found in 179 cases 92 as substantiated claims of excessive force. The point of the report was that the NYPD gave minimal discipline or none at all to officers in 67% of them. Now, excessive force is something a LE leader must stay in front of and show to the public their concern, as well as educate them as to what is excessive force. However, the story is a bit distorted because it fails to point out that the NYPD has almost 35,000 sworn police officers and another 4,000 enforcement officers, which cases reviewed over the four year period accounts for less than .05% of the force. Police Commissioner Bratton, who is an exceptional LE Leader, did get in front of the story and conducted a news conference pointing out new procedures to take place, but he failed to provide a positive image of the other over 99.5% of NYPD officers. This could have been a strategic move by the commissioner to implore to the public that he is serious about any type of force allegations and to create trust that they will be handling such abuses if substantiated. In Oakland PD as a result of their consent decree, every type of allegation of abuse, whether the cuffs are too tight, a person got hit during an arrest where there was resistance or spoken to in a foul language, an investigation must be launch that takes valuable time from investigators who have a time limit to conduct and conclude their investigation. In NYPD, Commissioner Bratton announced that he was creating a 54 person team to deal with all types of complaints such as in Oakland.
One cannot undermine the importance of LE executives utilizing the media to promote trust and communicate to their community programs, safety tips, current crime trends, guidance, reasons for actions (or inaction) and information regarding critical incidents. It is also important to display positive stories that involve their officers and the public. As Jones points out, “Many experts speak in strange tongues (P.199).” LE executives need to speak in plain English, not police jargon or legal ‘mumbo jumbo.’ As noted earlier, the press does not always print or show the entire story, thus it is important to be as concise and succinct as possible. Jones refers to this as “elevator speech (P.202);” say what you know in the time it takes to take an elevator one floor. I will add that for press conferences, a LE leader must control the environment, the time and the rules. This is especially true during critical incidents when many news agencies are clamoring for information. The media must be told when and where they will receive more information and at the time of the delivery, the PIO or LE executive must set the ground rules to the media before speaking. Common rules can be as simple as telling them [media] that only a few questions will be answered after you finish your announcement. Then it is easier for the person facing the press to exit gracefully and not be criticized by the press. Notwithstanding critical incidents, LE executives must utilize the media to work together effectively and understand each other roles. Please read article “How Effective Leaders Work Well with the Media” in finding common ground and interview guidelines: http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=1762&issue_id=32009
Finally, the use of media must be examined prudently by any LE Leader to evaluate whether or not the information to be disseminated can hurt an agency or promote positive relations. As discussed before, body worn cameras are a very controversial issue that is being examined by all LE departments nationally. Not only is the question of whether to wear the cameras are being disputed, but how to use its information, whether to provide it to the public upon request or utilize it to write police reports. As noted in the article posted as a PDF file this week, “Public Disclosure of Police Body Camera Footage,” Seattle Police Departments is evaluating how and if they will upload video from officers on “YouTube” for the public to see. They are examining how to redact victim, witness and subject faces and names, and the time it will take to do it. In addition, they are evaluating whether the information will be useful to the public to create trust and transparency. This outreach to the public may have downfalls that can negatively affect the department if not done in a systematic fashion that has procedures in place and a high standard of integrity integrated to the process. Without such relied upon applications, the public may feel that the LE agency is only uploading videos they want the public to see and also may cause legal complications if a case is criminally charged. There is always a balancing act that must be observed by the LE agency and its public.
NEXT WEEK STUDENT PRESENTATIONS:
For week 7 you will be producing a presentation on a key issue or concern regarding a LE agency or LE in general. Your presentation must be directed to the community, the media, government officials (i.e., mayor, city council, board of supervisors, department head, or controller), NGO’s or the private sector (i.e., tech companies, business communities, banking institutions, etc.). You may assume your role as a LE executive, a government official, an advocate for change, or a concerned citizen. Your presentation must be scholarly and include topics we have discussed in the course from the readings and lectures. Provide key points and possible solutions.
The presentation must be a minimum of 1000 words, which may include power point slides. Be creative and make your point! The idea behind the assignment is for you to make your argument regarding an issue. Show the value of how you can corroborate with your intended audience, its importance to communicate your needs, and how it affects others and your own agency.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!