Government Communication Mediums

The communication mediums for government have changed significantly over time. Presently, the communications media available for the government are; internet, media and social media which is an extension of the internet and the good old written communications. The advantages of the internet and social media is that the information on them is far reaching. The information on the internet has a permanence of a kind. Thus, the information will be there for future reference when required. The disadvantage is that the target audience cannot be limited. The media has been in use by the government. It is favored because it reaches a wide target audience. It is the method most applicable when the target audience is the mature crowd. The disadvantage is that some sections of people may never get to access the information because they do not watch television or do not have them. Thus, public address speeches should be read by the president and published on the internet.

The use of social media especially Facebook, by the government may be unconventional but effective. The government only needs to have an effective communications team and the whole process of communication through social media is effective except twitter whose popularity is relatively low due to the limit in the size of message to be shared (Newport, 2014). There are many ways in which social media is effective. It allows people to engage and dialogue with the source of information. The people who use social media are a majority at present which means that the information shared on this medium will reach a very wide audience.

The threat level system was effective when it was first introduced to the public. It was new and efficient because there was significant activity on the scale. However, at present, the color code is losing significance due to the prolonged yellow state on the threat level system (Terror Alert Systems Fast Facts, 2016). It is important for the department to reassure the public so that cooperation is easier to solicit when needed (Kravets, 2009). As it is, people would be reluctant in preparing for an attack while the state of yellow is still present yet it has been there for such a long time, people think the system no longer works. The threat level system will only be effective when it is accompanied by regular statements confirming the state of the nation in as far as susceptibility to terrorist attacks is concerned.

The continuous state of yellow has led the public to loose trust in the system in their information about the threat of terrorism. The state of yellow has been there for too long that the public is now convinced that the Department of Homeland Security has not re-evaluated the susceptibility of the state to terrorist attacks. Such a prolonged state on the same level can make people forget that terrorism can never be expected. The public is justified in loosing trust in the system because obviously, no improvements are being done (Kravets, 2009). If there was an improvement, the state of yellow should have shifted to the blue state where there is only a general risk of attacks.

The system should change the color code. The code colors should have different shades so that even when it is at yellow, a lighter shade of yellow will indicate that the state is closer to blue and when it is a stronger shade of yellow, people know the situation is escalating towards the orange state. The system is quite easy to change and it will effectively restore the confidence of the public in the methods being applied to communicate terror threats.

Works Cited

Kravets, D. (2009, Spetember 9). Color-Coded Threat Level Advisory Under Attack. Retrieved from Security: www.wired.com/2009/09/threatleveladvisory/

Newport, F. (2014, November 10). The New Era of Communication Among Americans. Retrieved from Economy: www.gallup.com/poll/179288/new-era-communication-americans.aspx

Terror Alert Systems Fast Facts. (2016, September 10). Retrieved from CNN Library: edition.cnn.com/2013/08/30/us/terro-alert-systems-fast-fact