Credibility Gap

Whenever an agency is allowed to investigate their own business e.g. criminal violations of state or federal laws, staff misconduct, administrative flaws, mission failures or catastrophes, the effects of public affairs plays heavily into the disposition of every case to ensure no culpability is found on the agency but rather pushing the blame either to a mechanical system, a person or in some cases, a technology. Whenever an agency fails to follow their own doctrine and regulations in dealing with the nature of their business, they must be prepared to deal with the media to demonstrate fulfillment to the best of their ability and control.

In the meantime, during the investigations conducted, policies are changed and revised verbally with the written follow up as the public affairs person fabricates or organizes a written response to the matter at hand to show on going progress. This diversion is merely a stall tactic to cleanse the wounds or hands of those involved in the matter under investigation. Access to the media is controlled and official statements add up to no substance for a pre-determined amount of time giving the agency ample time to correct their in-house problems.

Policy changes are implemented as data is accumulative over short periods of time. Changes in policy were often accompanied by the realization within the administration that issues could have been handled in a more effective manner and adjustments are made to show improvements as if acting in good faith to manage the issues with high credibility and trust. Persons are sequestered and interviewed to make sure the language spoken and understood is one of the same. Drafts are written and reviewed and re-written if found to be deficient of the information requested or the manner it was talked about and taken into account to reflect consistency in all statements submitted. All personnel assigned are personally selected and approached with curt or abrupt conversations that give directions to a desired political outcome that sometimes includes verbal expressions of anger and frustration. This method occurs as employees still acquiesced to the pressures of higher authorities and proposed or pending enacted policy changes.

This process, a dichotomy in design if you will, between the need to convey honest and candid information to the media and their obvious unconditional loyalty to those they serve up above produces a much desired outcome that invariably fail to be effective as nothing was accomplished within this entire process except to openly express their findings as they are written. When the media loses faith in the production of the materials submitted by state agencies that refuse to operate under a policy of transparency, they in turn will begin to print their views based on their ability to relay important information to the public. Until such time their credibility gap is exposed, the media will accept their version of the incident without hesitation and report it accordingly on their evening news or newspapers.