Public+Relations


 * Definition **

Public relations (PR) can be difficult to define; it has a “know-it-when-I-see-it” quality to it (Simon, 1976, p. 1). Yet, some claim that “The best PR is never noticed” (Dowie, 1995). This creates a contradiction as to the content and nature of PR. Rather than identifying PR by its covert or overt nature, PR should be identified by its duration and purpose. Raymond Simon cites the definition from //Cutlip and Center’s Effective Public Relations//, which states it is “the planned effort to influence opinion through socially responsible and acceptable performance, based on mutually satisfactory two-way communication” (1976, p. 3, emphasis added). Edward Bernays, considered the father of public relations, identifies PR as “modern propaganda” and similarly defines it as “a consistent, enduring effort to create or shape events to influence the relations of the public to an enterprise, idea or group” (2005, p. 52). Thus, PR is defined by its continuous nature, which distinguishes it from marketing and advertising, and its “two-way approach” to “influence…the public” (Simon, 1976, p. 3; Bernays, 2005, p. 52). Although practitioners today have attempted to shift the concept away from the label “propaganda,” PR today is viewed as an activity necessary for democracy because it provides information to the public that can help people make informed decisions, much like Bernays described in //Propaganda// (Theaker, 2008).


 * History **

The history of PR can be divided into multiple histories: the term, the practice, and the profession. According to the //Oxford English Dictionary// (OED), the term was first used in 1645 and referred to “the relations a person has with people outside his or her immediate circle; (also) the relations between persons, bodies, or nations at a public or political level” (“public relations, n.,” 2015). According to the //OED//, the modern use of the term, meaning “the relationship between an organization or an important person and the general public; the occupation…,” was first used in //Political Science Quarterly// in 1898 (“public relations, n.,” 2015).

Despite the more recent development of a term to describe the practice of PR, the practice has been around for centuries. As Scott M. Cutlip describes in //Public Relations History: From the 17th to the 20th Century//, the Greeks had a concept called “public will” that was similar to public opinion. Likewise, the Romans had a saying, “vox populi vox dei,” which means, “the voice of the people is the voice of God” (1995, xiv). Indeed, historians have posited that Caesar’s //Commentaries// were intended as PR for his campaign in Gaul. There was not only an awareness of the power and value of public opinion, but also of the possibility that it could be manipulated for one’s purposes. The term propaganda originated with the Catholic Church’s Congregatio de Propaganda that was intended to combat Protestantism. The term was largely associated with the Church for much of its history (Cutlip, 1995). Like Propaganda, PR can be used for good or for ill. In //Public Relations History: From the 17th to the 20th Century//, Cutlip highlights how PR was used in the American context. In particular, PR was essential for persuading the colonies to declare independence from Britain; Sam Adams and others, such as the Sons of Liberty, used symbols (the Liberty Tree), slogans (Taxation without representation), staged events (the Boston Tea Party), and media relations (stories in newspapers and pamphlets) to persuade the colonists that independence was the best course of action. Like Bernays, Cutlip views PR as “essential and honorable” today even if “not all practitioners work in an honorable manner” (1995, p. xii). PR as a practice in some form originated before democracy, but is viewed as integral part of democracy today.

A third history of PR is the history of the profession. While the term originated in the 17th century and the practice well before that, PR as a profession began at the start of the 20th century. Bernays identifies four periods of PR activities that define the profession: 1900-1914, 1914-1918, 1919-1929, and 1929 onward (1945). In 1900, the first PR agency, the Publicity Bureau, was founded in Boston. In 1905, Parker & Lee was founded (Cutlip, 1994). These agencies were characterized by the use of defensive PR to defend corporations against accusations from muckrakers. From 1914-1918, the use of PR forever changed because of World War I. The Committee on Public Information, or the Creel Committee, created propaganda about Germany to spur the U.S. into war; many PR practitioners worked with the Committee. Mass persuasion through the media and newspaper coverage of the war encouraged Walter Lippmann to write books on public opinion after the war ended. Lippmann’s work on public opinion heavily influenced Edward Bernays, who is viewed as the father of PR along with Ivy L. Lee of Parker & Lee (Bernays, 1945). World War I provided the viability of offensive PR, creating a sea change in the world of corporate PR. Large scale industrial organizations sprang up to do PR for whole industries, rather than just individual firms. In 1929, tactics changed again. In response to growing public disapproval of corporations, they shift to PR that promotes the connection between private interest and public responsibility. Simon adds a fourth era from 1945 onward characterized by the use of statistical methods and different media (Simon, 1976).


 * Public Relations Research and Practice Today **

Many of the PR practices used today, such as industrial groups, front groups (or astroturf groups), and “news” distributed by companies, were developed in the early 20th century (Ewen, 1996). Of these approaches, front groups, which PR practitioners refer to as “grassroots” has been criticized by critical and rhetorical scholars. One Supreme Court ruling concerning front groups, //Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference et al. v. Noerr//, concerned a group trucking companies and their trade association that alleged that railroad companies and their association used public relations to smear the reputation of the trucking companies. The Court deemed the front groups’ behavior “unethical,” but not a violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act (Fitzpatrick & Palenchar, 2006). Indeed, although the front groups or “astroturf” campaign has been included in the Public Relations Society of America Code since 1959, the Code and other documents only state that practitioners must “avoid” the use of front groups and “the PRSA code has been broadly interpreted by some to mean that practitioners must reveal the identity of organizations served //only if asked//” (Palenchar & Fitzpatrick, 2009, emphasis added). The myriad interpretations of the PRSA Code of ethics align with longstanding concerns about ethics in the profession. The practice of PR is perceived as unethical by students entering the field, who often rank “ethics” at or near the bottom of qualities a PR professional should have (Parsons, 2004); this perspective is also represented by criticism of PR that has focused on PR as “manipulation” of the public (Schiller, 1973).

Although there have been some publications and articles dedicated to rhetorical and critical studies of PR, such as //Rhetorical and Critical Approaches to Public Relations I & II//. Most publications focus on PR practice, effects research, and education. PR is a growing subdiscipline that is often housed within Departments of Communication, but may also be found in Business or Media. The emphasis in public relations education is on technical skills, such as surveys and statistics (Botan & Hazelton, 1989). The social science approach dominates in the United States and describes the approach to PR as “two-way symmetrical,” meaning that PR practitioners are having a conversation with the public by figuring out what the public is misinformed or uninformed about through surveys and informing them through a public relations campaign (Theaker, 2008). In addition to handbook-style publications, such as the //SAGE Handbook// and //Public Relations Handbook//, PR journal articles often examine practices and effects through case studies, based on context, like business, government, or social media (Solis & Breakenridge, 2009; Greenberg, Knight, & Westerund, 2011).

include component="comments" page="page:Public Relations" limit="10"


 * References **

Bernays, E. L. (2005). //Propaganda//. Brooklyn: Ig Publishing. Bernays, E. L. (1945). //Public Relations//. Boston: Bellman. Botan, C. H., and Hazelton, V. (1989). //Public Relations Theory.// Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum Associates. Cutlip, S. (1994). //The Unseen Power: Public Relations, A History//. Hillsdale, JJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cutlip, S. (1995). //Public Relations History: From the 17th to the 20th Century//. Hillsday, JJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Dowie, M. (1995). Introduction in //Toxic Sludge is Good for You//, Stauber, J. C., and Rampton, S. Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press. <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Ewen, S. (1996). //PR!: A Social History of Spin//. New York: Basic Books. <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Fitzpatrick, K. R., & Palenchar, M. J. (2006). Disclosing Special Interests: Constitutional Restrictions on Front Groups. //Journal of Public Relations Research 18//(3). <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Greenberg, J., Knight, G., and Westersund, E. (2011). Spinning climate change: Corporate and NGO public relations strategies in Canada and the United States. //The International Communication Gazette// //73//(1-2): 65-82. <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Palenchar, Michael J., and Kathy R. Fitzpatrick, “Secret Persuaders: Ethical and Rhetorical perspectives on the Use of Public Relations Front Groups” in //Rhetorical and Critical Approaches to Public Relations II.// London: Routledge, 2009: 272-289. <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Parsons, P. J. (2004). Ethics in Public Relations: A Guide to Best Practice. London: Kogan Page. <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">"public relations, n." //OED Online//. Oxford University Press, June 2015. Web. 6 August 2015. <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Schiller, H. I. (1973). //The Mind Managers.// Boston: Beacon Press. <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Simon, R. (1976). //Public Relations: Concept and Practice//. Columbus, OH: Grid. <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Solis, B., & Breakenridge, D. (2009). //Putting the public back in public relations//. Upper Saddle River, N. J.: FT Press. <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Theaker, A. (2008). //The Public Relations Handbook//. London: Routledge. <span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;">Toth, E. L., & Heath, R. L. (1992). //Rhetorical and Critical Approaches to Public Relations//. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.