My first thought upon reading the title of chapter three-‘theoretical perspectives’ from this weeks readings was that I thought PR was a pretty self explanatory occupation and that it didn’t need any theoretical mumbo-jumbo to get the job done. However upon reading this chapter I was enlightened to say the least. Previously, I did not even know there was a theory relating to public relations let alone many of them. The first sentence links theoretical perspectives to “road maps” which got me thinking that possibly one could adopt such perspectives from a theory one relates to and use it to mould their own personal style of PR.
The readings made me think more about public relations theory and practice in that I could see that there is more than one way to conduct PR. I could see how the relationship management approach would greatly aid an organization in finding out where they stand with their publics, which I can see is vital to its survival and success. Also, the generalists systems theory allowed me to visualise more clearly the links between organizations, their publics and PR practitioners.
I think the key points to remember from this week’s readings related to Grunig’s two-way symmetrical model, also known as the ‘excellent model’ within public relations. J.E. Grunig noted that the values within this model are negotiation, collaboration and compromise, which I think clearly articulates the values of a successful practitioner. When I look at a powerful organization like McDonalds I can see that they have comprised to keep up with social values. For example, Australians’ standards for nutritional information are growing and hence McDonalds have started to list their products’ nutritional value on each packet. I believe that these values must form part of a practitioner’s professional values to ensure that their work is ethical and effective.
I commented Emma Murphy's blog for this week.
The readings made me think more about public relations theory and practice in that I could see that there is more than one way to conduct PR. I could see how the relationship management approach would greatly aid an organization in finding out where they stand with their publics, which I can see is vital to its survival and success. Also, the generalists systems theory allowed me to visualise more clearly the links between organizations, their publics and PR practitioners.
I think the key points to remember from this week’s readings related to Grunig’s two-way symmetrical model, also known as the ‘excellent model’ within public relations. J.E. Grunig noted that the values within this model are negotiation, collaboration and compromise, which I think clearly articulates the values of a successful practitioner. When I look at a powerful organization like McDonalds I can see that they have comprised to keep up with social values. For example, Australians’ standards for nutritional information are growing and hence McDonalds have started to list their products’ nutritional value on each packet. I believe that these values must form part of a practitioner’s professional values to ensure that their work is ethical and effective.
I commented Emma Murphy's blog for this week.
References
1)Chapter 3 of Public relations: theory and practice / edited by Jane Johnston and Clara Zawawi. Crows Nest, N.S.W. Allen & Unwin, 2004. 2nd ed.
2)Gower, K (2006) Public Relations Research at the Crossroads in Journal of Public Relations Research. 18 (2), 177-190.
3 comments:
Hello again.
Your blog for this week was also great!
You seemed to be interested by the same points as I was, such as the relationship management approach. I had never considered that organisations would need to discover where they stood with their publics before they launched a campaign in order for it to be successful, I always thought they just expressed the facts. (naive hey).
I particularly liked your example of how Mcdonalds has carried out these considerations and as a result, has changed it's menus to comply with social values.(ie) the healthy choices menu). It was great that you linked this example to the reading this week.
Well done!
Hi Alex
I thought your example of McDonalds being "compromising" was very valid. I too have thought about the same issue recently. People in society, especially children, are being constantly targeted on the issue of obesity. Realising they could possibly be contributing to the problem, McDonalds branched out to create their salads/healthy option meals. I thought this PR approach was extremely well thought out by Maccas.
Not only do kids now have a pasta option in their Happy Meals, parents/adults can enjoy the low fat, low calorie salad/healthy roll options.
In my opinion, this was a compromise that will no doubt be very beneficial to McDoanlds.
In your comment to me you stated that you agree that the way PR practitioners place emphasis on or omit certain information can shed a bad light on the profession because the public may feel like they are just being 'played' or lied to. I agree and a specific example of this was when I was watching America’s Next Top Model. I viewed a bad case of product placement, as there was a woman dressing the models who was clearly endorsing a product with her comments and it drove me crazy because it was so obvious she was not being genuine, but simply promoting the product. Thanks for the comment.
Post a Comment