Since members of the public would wish that the various departments hear their concerns, it is important to sit together with concerned departments, air their views and discuss with them in order to reach a mutual understanding. Logically, people would not be satisfied with the rules that are imposed on them without their consent, however, if they are consulted on the same issues that they oppose, there are chances that they would accept them as they are since they would feel they are included in the way they are governed.
This metaphor dialogic civility offers common ground for engaging difference in public life since all the public members have their interests generally considered and discussed. It considers the diversity in public life and seeks to ensure that every unique aspect of the public life is considered and their particular problems resolved to cater for their differences and diversity (George, Steve & Debashish 2010). Unlike in cases where the public are not involved in any decision-making processes, this model offers the implementers of the law to do their work smoothly since they would be working on universally accepted phenomenon. Dialogic civility brings about new ideas for the solution of certain problems since different members of the public come together to share their feeling about public issues.
References:
Ronald C. A. & Arneson P. (1999). Dialogic Civility in a Cynical Age: Community, Hope, and Interpersonal Relationships: Suny Series in Communication Studies. Albany, New York: SUNY Press.
George C, Steve M, & Debashish M. (2010). Handbook of Communication Ethics: ICA Handbook Series: International Communication Association (ICA) handbook series. London: Routledge
