Public Relations
(PR) can be defined in several different ways. Rex Harlow explored 472
definitions of PR. ‘Building a Public Relations Definition’ (1976) outlines how
environmental factors have affected the meaning of the word and the industry
throughout the years. One thing we can be sure about is that Mr Harlow’s
definition count would have certainly doubled over the last three decades.
The Chartered Institute of Public
Relations (CIPR) explains that “public relations
is about reputation - the result of what you do, what you say and what others
say about you.” The Public Relations Society of American (PRSA) challenged
this definition earlier in the year, suggesting the internet, in particular
social media has influenced the way in which PR is practiced. The PRSA’s
definition leans towards the importance of relationships and communication
rather than focusing on the issue of respect. Keith Butterick believes this
inconsistency “is used by critics to
demonstrate its fundamental weakness”.
The simplest way
to describe the primary function of PR is to ‘deliver a message’. It is the
legitimacy of the message in question that has led to much debate on the
credibility of PR and fronted its association with propaganda and spin.
Paul Holmes,
founder of the ‘Holmes Group’ disagrees with the PRSA’s proposal in his blog stating “public relation is not communications”.
Without communication there is no way in which your publics can respond. Taking
into consideration Grunig and Hunt’s (1984) ‘four models of public relations’ could
this be seen in the modern day as propaganda? In any industry
communication is important – us modern day folk want to be informed and we want
our opinion to be heard.
In times before
both crossed so much there was little difference in meaning between propaganda
and PR. The word ‘propaganda’ came to light before the term ‘public relations’.
Before the days of the world wide web, the only flow of information was through
influential figures thought to be respected. The origin of the word came about
in the 17th Century within the Roman Catholic Church. Within this
period the Congregation of the Propaganda was formed, whose mission it was to turn
unbelievers into converts. Although in 1914, during World War I the word
claimed its fame, it was during World War II that wartime propaganda became
most recognisable. Governments throughout Britain, America and Germany used
media outlets such as newspapers and broadcasts as a form of controlling
information and emphasising the necessity of war.
Today the truth
is easily uncovered and lies and scandals are easily released to the general
public. In 2011, despite footballer Ryan Giggs being granted a super-injunction
to ban media reports on his affair with Imogen Thomas, social media took
precedence and ultimately the truth was revealed on Twitter.
Now PR is used
in both the public and private sectors and information is provided on a global
scale. Despite this there are still those who choose to practice propaganda as a
tool to influence opinion for personal gain through manipulation and lies, a trait
unseen in a credible PR practitioner. A PR practitioner will seek to influence
only through information of a truthful nature. Whether you believe this is
right or wrong, PR is a highly adaptable profession. It can be exactly what it
needs to be, when it needs to be and for who it needs to be, however this all
depends on whether the practitioner or organisation uses this for the greater
good.
I am inclined to
agree with Butterick’s quote, that an inconsistency in definitions has
ultimately led to uncertainty among publics. Respect? Communication? Building a
Relationship? – In my opinion, these are all important tools that should be
acquired and utilised by a PR practitioner.
Why is it then that
not one organisation or practitioner can agree on a single definition for
Public Relations? Would it be fair to say that is because the definition of PR
is in the eyes of the beholder?
This is where
ethics comes into play.
Tweet, review, discuss.
Over and Out
Rhi
[@Rhiannon_Lucy91]

Organisations use PR to make them selves look better than they really are. Is that ethical:no is that good business:yes
ReplyDeleteWhy would any Business or organisation ever consider giving any negative PR, look at the case of Gerald Irving Ratner. He was formerly chief executive of the major British jewellery company Ratners Group. Who said all our jewellery is crap. It caused a storm in the media, share prices fell and he has never lived it down. He is now known as Mr Crapner. A good example that all PR should be positive never negative
DeleteDue to the fact that PR can be used in a number of different contexts in order to sway public opinion, it could be argued that propaganda is a simply a negative, untruthful form of PR.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting point Tony - certainly a topic within my next blog. What makes you believe this to be true?
ReplyDeleteJames, I completely agree propaganda is the baby and PR is the 40 year older, more mature adult. This is something I will certainly explore deeper within Part Four.
You've made some really interesting points, particularly bringing in current cases such as super injunctions. I read a blog earlier on a similar topic and could you consider that, given that the code of ethics are an optional guideline this gives people the power to manipulate the truth?
ReplyDeleteThis is certainly an interesting point. One I look to cover in my next blog.
DeleteMay believe the code of ethics is simple. We make a choice, if you choose not follow the codes you can't really claim to be practicing true PR.
But as you and I both know, it's never that black and white!
Public Relations is a rather sinister and cynical medium because it only flows with positives, be they about a corporation or person they are never going to relate the negatives. I particularly find this hard to absorb when about a politician because it is not just PR about the man but his politics and position. However, PR definitely has its place in all our lives, for example, when we attend a job interview we all become our own PR practitioner!
ReplyDelete"when we attend a job interview we all become our own PR practitioner!" - this is an extremely creative and fair point.
DeleteI agree with you about inconsistency in PR definitions may lead people to be cynical. You mention about PR is the public and probate sector do you think there are any differences between the way it is used within sectors?
ReplyDelete