Talk:Development communication

Risk communicating in a familiar tongue: the Roxas City AIDS/HIV Council experience
Deleted the last part; RISK COMMUNICATING IN A FAMILIAR TONGUE:The Roxas City AIDS/HIV Council Experience, which was actually a copy+paste article or blog post :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.85.21.251 (talk) 01:31, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

The writer placed back the section. I deleted it again because it is written in the first person, which is not in line with encyclopedia standards. Additionally, the references were not written using the Wikipedia style. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.5.65.7 (talk) 10:24, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

The deleted part may now be added to the new subsection "Examples". However, I request the contributor to recast the content to make it encyclopedic and please use the appropriate reference citation style. 125.5.65.7 (talk) 05:34, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Class project
This article apparently is or was the focus of a class project ('COMM 330'). Please add documentation on this page regarding the class, instructor, etc., using the template provided at the top of this talk page. And before adding new material to the article, please develop first & wikify in your sandbox... Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 16:57, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Unreliable and confusing
The opening paragraph is almost complete nonsense. This article does not accord with standard textbooks such as Colin Sparks, Globalization, Development and the Media (SAGE, 2007). There seem to have been major rewrites from the Phillipines with conflict of interest issues. As it exists this article is confusing and almost useless. User beware! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.197.152.149 (talk) 15:29, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Copyedit ++
Copyedited this. Feedback encouraged. Comments:
 * Broad claims such as "The general spirit of the time " doesn't belong in WP without supporting detail. Consider:
 * Despite the Cold War climate,[what climate?] the spirit of democracy [what spirit is that?] and the wish for international solidarity [whose wish?] were able to influence media policy. Neither the lessons [what lessons?] of the misuse of mass media for propaganda nor the dangers of monopoly control of the mass press were forgotten [by policymakers?]. Even the once sacred print media [it was sacred?] could legitimately [how legitimate?] be brought within the scope of policy. The general spirit of the time [!!??%^&] was favourably disposed to progressive change and to social planning in all spheres of life.[what does that have to do with comm policy?]

Cheers. Lfstevens (talk) 00:21, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * This article would benefit from greater use of secondary sources instead of what appear to be biased primary sources.
 * Switched most inline refs to "real" refs.
 * Moved to conistently talk about development communication policy instead of communication policy development, etc. The article needs to decide whether it wants to discuss DCP CDP CPD or something else, and stick to that decision. They are related but discipline is necessary to avoid befuddling ordinary readers.
 * A significant part of the article is dedicated to advancing an unvarnished forom of the "UN" view of communications, which is however true, hardly uncontested. It also wanders far from the topic of develeopment communications. It is not enough to claim that all commuications issues affect development communications and that therefore everything is germane. Instead, specific connections have to be drawn and focus maintained. I killed most of it. Perhaps another home for it can be found, but this is clearly not it.
 * So-called debates present only one view
 * Merged the two definition sections
 * In definitions, "Development support communication (DSC) is development planning and implementation..." reduces to communication is planning, which is obviously wrong, and also uncited
 * Including items such as the telegraph makes the subject so broad it becomes incomprehensible. In what meaningful sense does it belong here?
 * The schools are named, but not characterized. How did they differ in their communications approaches? The piece does not say. E,g, in India, NGOs did this and government did that. What did the "school" do?
 * Many of the sources are just a name and a date, which is insufficient.
 * Restated many universal claims to claims by their authors.

Five years later
Well it's five years on. Somebody (righteously) tagged this for another ce. The article quintupled in size while I was gone. The bloat and bloviation I'm finding are truly appalling. The organization is nonexistent. E.g., definitions of DC are scattered throughout, with no attempt to reconcile them. Off-topic stuff shows up everywhere, presumably to namecheck some author. I have edited many thousands of articles. This is undoubtedly the worst of any of the non-trivial ones. Are any SMEs watching over this? If so, you are grotesquely derelict. Perhaps you have another purpose than writing WP-compliant pieces. If so, please take your benighted project elsewhere.

So far I have removed about 20%. I expect to remove much more, although whether I can get it back to 5k or so is daunting. My goal is to let the salient points survive, hopefully more understandably. The virtue signalling, aspirations, and reifications of individuals will go. I was initially willing to consider the notion of splitting this in two. But no. Jabba the Hut cannot be split. He must be slain. Editors: who are your leaders? How can they let you vomit up this garbage? Is this a contest to see who can say the least in the most number of words? This reminds of those fake pieces that people write and submit to journals to show how broken the peer review system is. Did somebody write a bot to produce this stuff? I have no specific comments to offer at this juncture. Once this thing starts looking like an article I will offer more concrete comments. Lfstevens (talk) 04:42, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Here is one section, prior to editing:

In the context of communication policy development, the policy sciences are necessary to make more purposeful, responsive, and effective communication policies. Profoundly influenced by Freud and Marx, Lasswell emphasized the importance of the contextual orientation of policy analysts, both individually and collectively (Lasswell, 1965). When he first articulated this principle of contextuality, Lasswell indeed referred explicitly to the "exposition of the dialectical method" (1965) in Lukacs's History and Class Consciousness, adding that the insights of psychoanalysis provided a complement to the Marxian dialectic which would aid in understanding "the symbolic aspects of historical development" (Laswell, 1965, p. 19). Here Lasswell proposed a mode of contextual-configurative analysis whereby, through "an act of creative orientation" (Lasswell, 1965, p. 13), the inquirer could locate himself in an 'all-encompassing totality" (Lasswell, 1965, p. 12).

I pick this bit not because it's the worst, but because it shows so many of the problems with the piece. To wit: In closing, I strongly urge editors to stick with WP guidelines. We owe that to our readers, who are neither academics nor experts. No article needs to be a fraction of the 27k words this one use to encompass. Even now, the remnant should probably be split. Feedback again encouraged. Cheers. Lfstevens (talk) 23:10, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The article is full of uninterpretable, undefined jargon. Many ordinary words/terms are doublequoted, for no obvious purpose and/or are used in ways that suggest the same. In other spots there are terms that simply mystify an ordinary reader: "contextual orientation", "exposition of the dialectical method", "insights of psychonalysis provided a complement to the Marxian dialectic", "symbolic aspects of historical development", ""contextual-configurative analysis", "creative orientation", "all-encompassing totality". Some of these are quotes, which should explained if they are actually necessary.
 * Much of the article is meta, not about, e.g., DC, but about the study of DC.
 * The article is full of exhortations about how DC or whatever must be this, is required to be that, etc. WP is supposed to be about facts, not opinion*.
 * The article is focused on the people it cites rather than on the facts they offer. One clue is that many of the cites are next to the source author's name rather than following the point(s) they make.
 * Many dup refs and many without links. Others list a name and a year but are not elsewhere expanded into a full cite.
 * Despite many reference to empiricism, the piece has little empirical content. It is/was full of proposals and recommendations, but where is the section that starts with "A systematic review of x00 development communication projects shows that those that used xyz forms (e.g., participatory) did x% better according to metric y (e.g., polling, income changes, education changes, ...) If such is not available, how is the claim to empiricism to be understood?
 * Reliance on primary sources. The closes it gets to a secondary source is one source citing another.
 * The article would be improved by a section specifically focused on the differences between 1-way and 2-way comms.
 * Some sfns have nothing to link to.

Development communication in multilingual societies
Article needs attention to communication issues in multilingual contexts. See also: Talk:Health communication.--A12n (talk) 13:31, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Development Communication Policy Science
Section needs major revisions as to structure and content to qualify as a WP/encyclopedia article section, that is, it should provide only a comprehensive summary of information on development communication policy science and should focus only on factual and verifiable information concerning the said subject. As such, redoing the framework/outline of the section would be a good start. There is also a need to reconcile this section with WP main articles "Development Communication Policy Science" and "Development Communication and Policy Sciences". Just my thoughts!

Gajorod (talk) 05:31, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

development communciation and ancient culture of Asia
103.232.155.171 (talk) 02:25, 28 October 2016 (UTC) Iam developing the hypothesis that Nepal development communication is not effective because it neglects to focus on its cultural aspect

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Development communication. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120928182928/http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_xxiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_j-xxiii_enc_11041963_pacem_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_xxiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_j-xxiii_enc_11041963_pacem_en.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121017073250/http://www.vatican.va:80/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:47, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Development communication. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101130022559/http://upou.edu.ph/papers/flibrero_2009/DevcomLB_history.pdf to http://www.upou.edu.ph/papers/flibrero_2009/DevcomLB_history.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101206152325/http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-1-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html to http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-1-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:03, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Knowledge Management for Development (KM4D)
The purpose of KM4D, more than being an economic tool, is to the further the development of the society. It considers the synergy of knowledge being a free commodity to be shared openly. It rests its thrust on the external use of knowledge that is beyond the organization. Its content is used to supply the needs of the stakeholders. Its utilization can be applied in project, agency, sectoral or thematic level. Its users can group in communities of practice, communities of interests, and communities of champions. Finally, its system functionality and application involves not only messaging and collaboration, file sharing, document/content management, or search but also more importantly, online learning. Flor (2018) explained that since SDGs are categorized as sectors (agriculture, health, education, environment, natural resources and other) or themes (governance, gender, poverty, sustainability, climate change), KM4D is undoubtedly useful among international development assistance communities in achieving their goals by leveraging on knowledge. This knowledge came from the processed data that produced information. This claim is supported by Hilbert (2015) who said that Big Data are useful to “make the world a better place.” Yet, Big Data only provides a picture of the past or how the society used to be but not necessarily the future as it only locks the behavior captured in the past. He stressed that for change to happen, whether real change or change in the paradigm, there must be something that is qualitatively different from the data of the past. There must be Big Visions that would eventually bring Big Change. Visions are theories that model the future that have never been. Thus, planning for development goals must be vision-based where extreme scenarios are considered and where the assumption that the world tomorrow will be essentially the same as today is avoided (MacNulty, 1997). Undoubtedly, KM can help in Identifying these extreme scenarios and in rationalizing the differences of the past and the present world for a better vision of the future. A vision can predict and define the future. However, visioning cannot be done alone by the presence of data. This is equally important when taken as a paradigm in using knowledge management for development. The past cannot predict the future of a society especially when significant circumstances happen in between such as terrorist attacks, climate change, and political and social unrests which are all common in developing countries. However, using knowledge management can rightfully deliver an assumption that development goals are truly achievable.

References:

Flor, A. G. (2001). eDevelopment and Knowledge Management: ICT Applications for Sustainable Development. Los Baños, Laguna: SEAMEO Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture. file:///C:/Users/DELASA~1/AppData/Local/Temp/KM4D1_Manuscript.pdf Flor, A. G. (2018). Knowledge Management for Development (KM4D). Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, Fourth Edition. USA: Mehdi Khosrow-Pour Information Resources Management Association. file:///C:/Users/DELASA~1/AppData/Local/Temp/2018%20AGFlor_Knowledge-Management-for-Development-(KM4D).pdf Flor. A. G. (2009). Developing Societies in the Information Age: A Critical Perspective. University of the Philippines Open University. file:///C:/Users/DELASA~1/AppData/Local/Temp/DevelopingSocieties.pdf Heeks, R. (2014). ICT4D 2016: New Priorities for ICT4D Policy, Practice and WSIS in a Post-2015 World. Centre for Development Informatics. http://www.seed.manchester.ac.uk/subjects/idpm/research/publications/wp/di/ Hilbert, M. (2015). Big data requires big visions for big change. TEDx Talks. Youtube.com. https://www.who.int/topics/millennium_development_goals/about/en/ https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/topics/sustainabledevelopmentgoals MacNulty, C. A. R. (1997). Vision-based Planning: Theory & Practice. Effective Scenario Planning. Strategic Leadership Forum. http://www.exploit-the-future.com/paper3/paper3.htm

Is there a single passage in this article that is a well-formed coherent well cited text?
I struggle to find a single section of merit in this article. This doesn't seem like a coherent field of knowledge worthy of an article. Rarely is there a coherent meaningful idea in this article. Can we just delete the whole thing and start over? QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 22:34, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

This information was very vast, resources pulled from various areas. The information aligned with what I have learned in my communications coursework so far. I enjoyed reading the detailed information on policy and development communication as not only a business level but also globally. Awymer (talk) 18:35, 6 September 2021 (UTC)