In light of the recent debates and the upcoming presidential election, we’ve seen across the board the support and backlash our first African-American president has received since being elected. I read a story that inspired this post on Clutch Magazine titled, “The Separation of Race and State: Will Black America Stay Engaged in Politics Post-Obama?” and it made me wonder simply, ‘Will they?” It is estimated, two million more African-Americans voted from the 2004 to the 2008 presidential election and the black voter turnout rate increased 4.9 percentage points.

Actress, Stacey Dash recently endorsed Republican candidate Mitt Romney, supporting her decision with the following statement, “I chose him not by the color of his skin, but by the content of his character.” Sound familiar? She once again drew upon inspiration from Dr. Martin Luther King when asked about her support for President Obama in 2008, “I don’t vote because of race or skin color…. at that time he was the best candidate, It’s different this time.” She’s received incessant backlash from many individuals of color in regards to her decision, but the strongest argument yet has come from those not upset about her political affiliation, but her support of a man opposed to women and specifically the caucasian candidate.

I wrote this post not to criticize but to acknowledge, President Obama is not an automatic endorser of the black agenda and neither should his supporters be. His presidency has improved political astuteness amongst minorities, disparities that directly affect the lower-class and work equality for individuals of color. But it is the sole responsibility of those citizens to maintain this wealth of knowledge and fervor regardless of whose in office. Don’t just Barack the Vote, VOTE period!

On Thursday afternoon I had the pleasure of attending the Syracuse University Public Diplomacy symposium with Under Secretary of the State, Tara Sonenshine guest speaking. As an expert in Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, I was interested to hear of her impact on international relations, explanation of the relationship between communications and technology as the 21st century progresses and so on. But she commanded the room immediately, telling students, “You cannot address the challenges of the 21st century solely through the lens of policy.” She understood that communication is about the people not the industry or specialization. As it relates to public relations however, her 3-lens setting analogy hit home for me as a PR practitioner.

1) Short-term lens: Examines the situations immediately to figure out what or if something is happening.
2) Mid-term lens: Thinks in the context of the short-term, but doesn’t expect to get things done at the moment.
3) Long-term lens: The strongest of the three, the long-term lens is focused on the future, a future you can’t quite see yet.

As PR professionals, we utilize these lens in our everyday responsibilities, choosing which fits each situation whether it be to diffuse unsubstantiated rumors or dispel facts. We can no longer afford to be unambitious because our profession revolves around creating fluid relationships and reassuring our publics concerns and funds are resounding through.

Lastly, she proposed two questions that Hilary Clinton analyzed and answered when she developed the quadrennial diplomacy and development review (QDDR). They can easily be applied to public relations and should be at the forefront of all agency objectives: 1) How do you adapt your structure’s to today’s world? and How are we going to produce results?

As your implementing objectives, conducting research and achieving goals, continually ask yourself these questions to ensure your approach is integrated and for the better.