Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-11-16-Speech-4-146"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20061116.17.4-146"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
While I agree in essence with the positions and concerns of the Commission regarding communication policy, particularly on the need to be transparent and to engage with the people, I still feel that it should be quite clear that a communication policy is not an end in itself, but a means. That is how it should be understood. The illusion that everything is communication and that communication is everything may lead us to a society devoid of meaning, in which all that matters is the existence of the message and little is invested in its content.
What that means, in my view, is that the key to a successful EU communication policy lies in the Union’s ability to be seen to be useful to the citizens of the Member States. I stress useful, and seen to be useful. That is where the two issues – substance and communication – come into play. The EU has to promote political reform that stimulates economic development, security, international order and hope. That is the substance. As for communication, if the substance is good, it is an art, but it is only part of the story, and not the most important part at that. In addition, right now, it must not be confused with propaganda. I agree with the former, but not the latter."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples