Comments on: When Institutions communicate: difference between a Voice and a Face

By: Julien Frisch

Julien Frisch — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:40:55 +0000

You want close your eyes and start seeing faces… The EU is supposed to appear in your dreams, then.

By: lino

lino — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 12:38:36 +0000

I think that MEPs are one FACE of the institution, but they are split between being the face of their constituency (remember the people that voted for you back home?) and representing the EP, whereas civil servants should fully take on the challenge… Moreover, there is the eternal cautiousness of people re politicians which could get in the way…Not sure if anyone is cautious about a eurocrat (know quite a few bored though )

By: mathew

mathew — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 12:33:08 +0000

Nice post, pointing right at the heart of what social media offers EU comms.

But not just EU communications, but also actual EU activity – policy development, programme management, etc. With positive feedback loops between activity and comms.

But there’s an interesting question regarding the Who, explored more recently last month on Writing for EU. In brief – should functionnaires be the face, when there are MEPs? Who are … where?

By: lino

lino — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 11:49:40 +0000

I think the faces will mostly not be the headline names. It’s the assistant that wants to share why he/she likes the job they do (or don’t like it), its the civil servant that tries every day to make a difference if only to the person sitting next ti him/her, it’s so many individuals that give humanity to the glass and metal buildings…and that should be given the opportunity and empowerment to give the institution a face. You can’t create a face but you should be smart enough to recognise those that could.

By: Jon Worth

Jon Worth — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 11:18:05 +0000

I agree 100%! But where do you find those faces?

Hennis (and indeed a number of Dutch MEPs) are interesting examples – the open list system means interesting characters seem to do rather well. Elsewhere where lists are closed it’s not so. It’s easier to be an anonymous face behind an institutional name, an institutional voice. Same for the Commission – which of them wants to really stand up and communicate, and who benefits when they do?

You get occasional exceptions, but the incentives to be a face in EU politics are just too weak.