Write a 1,500 – 1,750 word paper on Topic 5 (“How does communication between national governments demonstrate our inability to achieve perfect communication? Provide two clear examples. Potential theories include Peters’ view that problems in communication are “fundamentally intractable” and discourse analysis.”) from the guidelines pdf. Follow the outline below for the structure of the essay but use the examples of 1. communication breakdowns/relations between the U.S. and China and 2. communication challenges in peace talks between Israel and Palestine. MAKE SURE you formulate a specific thesis that addresses the topic and construct an argument to support that thesis. Use ACTUAL REAL quotes etc. from the textbook (Media & Communications in Canada / Gasher, M., Skinner, D., & Coulter, N. (2020). Media & Communication in Canada: Networks, Culture, Technology, Audiences: Oxford University Press. 9th edition. – which is attached as a pdf) and the THREE SCHOLARLY SECONDARY SOURCES (please find the 3 sources yourself that align with the essay and examples and make sure they’re peer reviewed). Format/cite in MLA 9 format.
I. Introduction
- Background: Briefly introduce the concept of communication difficulties between nations.
- Purpose: Explain why analyzing communication breakdowns between governments reveals deeper issues in human communication.
- Thesis Statement (argument)
II. Argument 1: Language Barriers
- Explanation: Discuss how literal language translation issues cause misunderstandings in international diplomacy.
- Example: Use a real-life example where translation errors led to diplomatic tension or a breakdown in communication.
- Supporting Theory: Reference Peters’ theory to explain why translation issues are unavoidable and often distort the intended message.
III. Argument 2: Cultural Differences
- Explanation: Explore how cultural perspectives and norms influence communication, making perfect understanding difficult.
- Example: Provide a case where cultural misunderstandings led to conflict or diplomatic strain.
- Supporting Theory: Use discourse analysis to explain how cultural contexts shape, and sometimes hinder, international dialogue.
IV. Argument 3: Conflicting National Interests
- Explanation: Describe how differing goals and values between nations prevent clear and transparent communication.
- Example: Present a case where misaligned interests obstructed a peace negotiation or trade agreement.
- Supporting Theory: Connect to Peters’ idea that communication is inherently “intractable” when self-interest is involved, making mutual understanding challenging.
V. Argument 4: Power Dynamics and Trust Issues
- Explanation: Show how power imbalances and lack of trust inhibit open and honest communication between governments.
- Example: Use an example of strained communication due to power struggles.
- Supporting Theory: Reference discourse analysis to show how power influences the way messages are interpreted and received.
VI. Conclusion
- Summary: Recap the key points of each argument.
- Implications: Reflect on what these challenges mean for the future of international diplomacy.
- Closing Thought: Reinforce that perfect communication may be impossible between governments due to these fundamental, intractable issues.