Defining Public Relations

Sop

hie

Bo

nn

ewij

n

20

11

De

fin

ing

Pu

bli

c R

ela

tio

ns

Essay: What is Public Relations? Sunderland University Philip Young MACM 27 CW1

119050134

Sophie Bonnewijn Defining Public Relations MACM27CW1 2011

1

‘What's in a name? That which we call a rose

By any other name would smell as sweet.’ Romeo and Juliet (II, ii, 1-2)

‘Experience is the teacher of all things.’ Julius Caesar (the Bello Civili)

Image credits: AWIRTHLIN PR

http://www.enotes.com/romeo-text/act-ii-scene-ii#rom-2-2-45


2

Table of Content 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3

2. Academics ........................................................................................................................................ 5

3. Practitioners .................................................................................................................................. 12

4. Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 17

5. Bibliography ................................................................................................................................... 19


3

1. Introduction

The topic of defining and determining what Public Relations is and what it consist of,

has puzzled many scholars and professionals, even before the name Public

Relations came in to being. Even the history of Public Relations in itself is a

questionable one, and one that has fueled a many debate. The contested origin of

the term and linked definition of Public Relations has been well phrased by James

Hutton in the following paragraph:

“In terms of both theory and practice, Public Relations has failed to arrive at a broadly

accepted definition of itself in terms of its fundamental purpose, its dominant

metaphor, its scope, or its underlying dimensions.” (Baker S., 1982, p. 191)

However, if one were to trace back the origins of Public Relations, it would seem that

the following recurrent questions reappear throughout the debated history: ‘What is

Public Relations, How does it works and What is its beneficial function for

organizations, the public and society?’ The answers to these conundrums are

dependent on the industry in which they are being wielded. There is a remarkable

difference between the terms and explanations used by practitioners, the media,

clients, academics and theorists. Even though Public Relations can be seen as a

scientific discipline, every researcher has his or hers own well-founded background,

which offers different perspectives on the profession of Public Relations.


4

Consequently, it is the background of the researcher itself which influences their

intake on the questions of ‘What Public Relations is, How it works and How it needs

to be researched?’ (Ihlen O., van Ruler B., 2007, p. 243). This is illustrated by Botan

C.H. and Taylor M. (2004, p. 645) who state that:

“Public Relations is in an ongoing state of change…branching out from a single

applied focus driven by the knowledge needs of practitioners into two major

branches… the applied branch and a new theory-based research and scholarship

branch .” (Ledingham J.A., Bruning S.D., 2000, p. 107)

Subsequently, in this paper, the different types of definitions will be analyzed in

different sections, making a distinction between the practitioners’ and the academic’s

intakes, while referring to views wielded by the media and publics.


5

2. Academics

While debate continues over whether Public Relations is a profession or not, and

while there continues to be discussions about whether Public Relations fits within

marketing or management, Kent and Taylor (2007, p. 33) argue that Public Relations

is about communicating through dialogue, where the exchange of ideas and opinions

is the central focus. Willis states that Public Relations has, in today’s society, the

tools to communicate with it consumers, in a way that other (marketing) disciplines

cannot…(Tench R., Yeomans L., 2009, p. 412). Professors Lawrence Long and

Vincent Hazelton describe Public Relations as:

“A communication function of management through which organizations adapt to,

alter, or maintain their environment for the purpose of achieving organizational goals,

or simply put, that Public Relations is more than just persuasion.” (Cameron G.T.,

Wilcox D.L., 2006, p. 5)

Clearly, Public Relations has become more that just “communicating, delivering, and

exchanging offerings”. Already in 1984, James Grunig and Todd Hunt indentified four

models of communication with publics that highlight the core functions of Public

Relations: the Press agentry/ Publicity model, the Public Information model, the Two-

way Asymmetric model and the Two-way Symmetric model (Theaker A., 2004, p.

12). Even though Public Relations was originally used to persuade the public, that is

not the goal of every model mentioned above.


6

The main function of the publicity model is propaganda, while the goal for Public

Relations in the Public Information model is to inform and spread public information

(not necessarily to persuade). The Two-way Asymmetric model on the other hand,

starts from a scientific persuasion, in which scientific research professionals contact

different stakeholders, so that these stakeholders may act beneficiary to the

organizations. The main objective of the last model is to create mutual understanding

between organizations and their stakeholders, in which Public Relations

professionals function as mediators. Furthermore, Grunig and Hunt formulated the

following definition of Public Relations:

“Public Relations is the management of communication between an organizations

and its publics … or an organization’s managed communications behavior.”

In conclusion, the four models identified by Grunig and Hunt provide a broad

understanding of the functions of Public Relations and its evolution throughout history

while the proposed definition views Public Relations mainly as a management

function for organizations on one side, and the public on the other side. However,

since the rise of social media in recent years, the emphasis should not solely be put

on linear communications, but also on conversations surrounding an organization

(Young P., 2001: online). Furthermore, the Grunig and Hunt model conceptualizes

the idea of Public Relations from an idealistic viewpoint, not really considering social

segregation and targeted audiences.


7

In 1976, Rex Harlow researched 472 definitions of Public Relations, to finally

combine them in the following phrase:

“Public Relations is a distinctive management function which helps establish and

maintain mutual lines of communication, understanding, acceptance and cooperation

between an organization and its publics, it involves the management of problems or

issues; helps management to keep informed on and responsive to public opinion;

defines and emphasizes the responsibility of management to serve the public

interest; helps management keep abreast of and effectively utilize change, serving as

an early warning system to help anticipate trends, and uses research and ethical

communication techniques as its principal tools” (Wilcox D.L., Cameron G.T., 2006,

p. 7).

This definition tries to sum up all the different effects and tools in Public Relations,

with an emphasis on its controllable management function. However, it focuses on

what Public Relations does, rather then what it is. Furthermore, it is viewed through a

closed system approach, which does not make a distinction between the different

functions of Public Relations, whereas the models of Grunig and Hunt do. The

definition provided by Harlow also doesn’t take in account the more flexible intake

that is wielded by practitioners (Grunig J.E., Hunt T., 1984, p. 89-93).


8

Another management definition is that of Cutlip, Center and Broom, who define

Public Relations as:

“The management function that establishes and maintains mutually beneficial

relationships between an organization and the publics on whom its success or failure

depends, it is the planned effort to influence opinion through good character and

responsible performance, based upon mutually satisfactory two-way communication.”

(Cutlip S.M., Center A.H., Broom G.M., 1994, p. 6-7)

A frequently quoted management orientated definition is the one proposed by the

newsletter Public Relations News that states:

“Public Relations is the management function which evaluates public attitudes,

identifies the policies and procedures of an individual or an organization with the

public interest, and plans and executes a program of action to earn public

understanding and acceptance.” (Grunig J.E., Hunt T., 1984, p. 8)

The Public Relations Society of America defines Public Relations as following:

“Public Relations is a management function that involves counseling at the highest

level and being involved in strategic planning for the organization.” (Newson D., Turk

J.V., Kruckeberg D., 2004, p. 2)


9

Though the definitions mentioned on the previous page approach Public Relations

through a management view, the one proposed by Cutlip focuses and highlights the

establishment and the maintaining of relationships with publics, which in turn requires

two-way communication and assumes some form of trust and ethics. The second and

third definitions focus more on the managing aspect, rather than the human

relationship bond. However, the management definitions fail to emphases the long-

term aspect of Public Relations, though Cutlip mentions ‘maintaining relationships’.

The definitions focus primarily on measuring the similarity between the views of the

participating publics’ perceptions in regard to the views of the organization, and

consequently consider these views as adequate research indicators (Ledingham J.A,

Bruning S.D., 2000, p. 4- 5). They fail to highlight the diverse social and surrounding

contextual aspects that are required in the understanding of Public Relations.

Ihlen and van Ruler state that the instrumental approach should therefore be

changed into a society based approach. Jacquie L’Etang agrees with this, and

mentions that definitions of Public Relations should ‘pay more attention to the social

and political costs and benefits of Public Relations’ (L’Etang J., 1996, p. 2). She

states that Public Relations can be described as:

“The practice of presenting the public face of an organisation (be it a company,

educational institution, hospital, or government) or individual, the articulation of its

aims and objectives, and the official organizational view on issues of relevance to it.”


10

In the US there is generally a closer focus on the social side of the Public Relations

domain, as is illustrated by the following definitions, adopted by the Public Relations

Society of America:

“Public Relations helps our complex, pluralistic society to reach decisions and

function more effectively by contributing to mutual understanding among groups and

institutions. It serves to bring the public and public policies into harmony.” (Guth

D.W., Marsh C., 2007, p. 6)

Another socially orientated definition was introduced by the International Public

Relations Association in Mexico in 1987:

“Public Relations practice is the art and science of analyzing trends, predicting their

consequences, counseling organization leaders and implementing planned programs

of action which will serve both the organization’s and the public’s interest.” (Grunig

J.E., Hunt T., 1984, p. 7)

The definitions mentioned above are incomplete since they do not stress the global

diversity that involves Public Relations, which, especially with the use of social

media, is something that has to be taken in account. There have not been many

international comprehensive studies, and the efficacy of international PR has to be

improved (Theaker A. 2004, p. 340). Another flaw in the definitions is that, however

you spin it, Public Relations is biased in favor of organizations (L’Etang J., 1996, p.

2). However, this should not be tried to be hidden, but rather be accepted and dealt

with through ethical rules and goodwill towards publics.


11

A final definition worth mentioning is the one used by the Institute of Public Relations

in the UK, that defines Public Relations as:

“The planned and sustained effort to establish and maintain goodwill and

understanding between an organisation and its publics. It is the discipline concerned

with the reputation of organisations (or products, service or individuals) with the aim

of earning understanding and support.” (CIPR, s.d.: online and Theaker A. 2004, p.

5-6)

This definition has a strong focus on establishing and maintaining goodwill, which

does not necessarily imply honestly towards the public (Seaman P., 2009: online).

This slight bending of the truth is in contrast with the rest of the definition, which aims

to serve the public interest, a somewhat broad term. Another critical note was

reported by Bill Huey, who states that Public Relations is ‘defined by its practice’

(Huey, B., 2009: online). However, the Public Relations Consultants Association in

the UK uses the same definition as the CIPR, even though some practitioners feel

that reputation is not the main objective in Public Relations (Tench R., Yeomans L.,

2009, p. 7).


12

3. Practitioners

Practitioners, in comparison to theorists, have a very different view when it comes to

defining Public Relations. Their explanatory definitions tend to be more based on

their experiences within the field and often refer to persuasion and influence (Hutton

J., 1999, p. 209). As mentioned above, not all practitioners agree that reputation is

the main objective in Public Relations, and their definitions are more focused on what

Public relations does, rather then what it is. Furthermore, as can be seen in the

following definitions, some practitioners consider the notion of public interest

somewhat loose.

The International Public Relations Association defines Public Relations as:

“Public Relations is the systematic promotion of mutual understanding between an

organisation and its public.” (IPRA, s.d.: online)

In this first definition, there is no mention of reputation management and a strong

focus on communication. Another definition that portrays similar views, but also

mentions the measurable aspect of public relations, is composed by Bergman

Communications:

“Public Relations is communicating your organization’s messages at the right time

and in the right place to the right audience...


13

...With the proliferation of tools and technologies, we can measure the value of those

efforts and how they align with a business’ overall mission.” (Bergman

Communication, s.d.: online)

Dan Gersten, public relation practitioner, defines Public Relations as:

“The creation, distribution and dissemination of messaging and communications for

the purpose of promoting and fostering positive awareness, associations, imagery,

perception of a person, place or thing among a particular target audience to effect a

desired behavior.” (Gersten D, 2011: online)

Ochman B.L. in turn, defines Public relation on his ‘What’s Next’ blog as:

“Public Relations is the art and science of influencing public opinion through

communications. These days, it’s often a ham-handed attempt at message control.

The problem is that message control is (and always was) an illusion. The best PR

people understand integrated communications and know that if your product sucks,

nothing else matters.”(Ochman B.L., 2011: online)

These definitions explain Public relations with a strong focus on controlled

communication, but definitely mention ‘changing behaviours’, ‘influencing people’ or

‘persuading publics’. In the eye of the general public, Public Relations is often still

perceived as means by which people can be persuaded, or deceived (Tench R.,

Yeomans L., 2009, p. 6).


14

It is for the same reason that Public Relations has often been linked to words as spin

or propaganda in favor of companies (Gregory A., 2004, p. 28). Journalist

Christopher Spicer (1993) concluded in an article in the Journal of Public Relations

Research that Public Relations was consistently equated with manipulation of the

truth to a dubious end (Cameron G.T., Wilcox D.L., 2006, p. 13). It is probably for the

same reason that the word persuasion is often not mentioned in academic definitions.

Even though persuasion has a bitter connotation to it, in reality, Public Relations is

still about changing people behaviors and influencing them in favor of business

interests.

On the other hand, a similarity between practitioners and theorists definitions is the

remaining focus on the relationship between Public Relations and the Media. Lisa

Buyer from the Buyer Group and Deborah Weinstein from Strategic Objections both

stress this important part of Public Relations:

“Public Relations communicates the news, influences the news, receives the news,

and responds to the news for a brand via the media. It’s the art and science of talking

to the right audience in the right voice. PR is the communication hub of an

organization. It influences and shapes a company’s image, reputation, brand

perception and culture. PR connects a brand and its public via direct messages or

editorial media including print, broadcast, radio, digital, video or social media. ...


15

...Before social media, a company had one voice; now social media encompasses an

orchestra of voices that contribute to a company’s image, reputation, brand

perception and its public community.”(Buyer L, s.d.: online.)

“Public Relations is the art and science of sharing genuine, credible, relevant news

and information to grow, maintain and protect brand acceptance, awareness,

reputation and sales, when appropriate. Public Relations creates measurable, fact-

based conversations, events and activities conceived to generate positive, third party

endorsements and target audience buy-in.” (Weinstein D., 2011: online)

However, it is seems that there are less practitioners then theorists who define Public

Relations mainly as a management function. It is argued by Grunig that this might be

because the creative artistic practitioners mistrust management’s ability to

understand Public Relations. He also argues that there are other types of

practitioners who practice Public Relations through an ethical view, and who see

management as creative in itself, planned and proactive. Nancy Tamosaitis from

Thompson Vorticom Inc. for example states that :

“Public Relations has evolved with technological advances and its role in

management has increased. Public Relations is defining and communicating a

company’s narrative to provide clarity and insight to the market it seeks to reach.”’

(Tamosaitis N., s.d.: online)


16

An other definition offered is the one by Paul Holmes, who argues that Public

Relations:

“is all about building relationships with key publics.” (Holmes P., 2003: online)

He argues that by differentiating public relations from marketing, ‘public relations

practitioners will become more heavily in the strategic decision making of the

organisation’.

Finally, there are the practitioners who view Public relations as an applied social

science, as do some theorists and those practitioners who see public relations as a

community practice. Blodgett, Baus and Young state that:

“Public Relations in its true sense is about human connections and the art of

mastering human connections at a deep level. In the early days of PR, it was about

relationships with not just the press but communities in various forms – the difference

was that these audiences were not online. When played from a place of passion and

purpose, Public Relations in the new world will not only take social media, branding

and marketing to the next level, but will elevate the people and products that are

changing the world.” (Blodgett R., 2011: online)

“Public Relations is a combination of philosophy, sociology, economics, language,

psychology, journalism, communication and other knowledge into a system of human

understanding." (Baus H.M., 2007: online)


17

“Using traditional and digital media (free of charge) to educate and inform public

masses about relevant issues and stories that are worthy of sharing and that have an

impact on people. Public Relations requires a creative, compelling, and concise

approach, with a deep sense of the art of story-telling through our emotions and

humanity. We have the power to move and influence people through the news and

media.” (Young S., s.d.: online)

These definitions mention the importance interaction with other disciplines, a long

term relationship and an ethical way of executing Public Relations. They also refer to

the massive increase of social media, and the two-way process which has a major

influence on Public Relations. They stress the importance of communication, instead

of management in Public Relations.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion it can be seen that Public Relations is certainly more than a support for

marketing or publicity. Public Relations embodies some core aspects as: strategic

planning; ethics; two-way communications including surrounding aspects; storytelling;

influencing behaviour; persuasion; long term relationship building and maintaining

this relationship with a targeted audience; relationship management; creating mutual

understanding between publics and organization; targeted media relations;

measurable social science that uses certain tools; community building; influence of

social media in a global society; playing an advocacy role; interacting with other

disciplines.


18

Even though there is somewhat of a difference between the opinions formed by

practitioners en those formed by academics, they both make some valid points and

have some overlapping concepts. It is for this reason that a praxis is in order, a

mixture of theory and practice, if one is to deduce a definition of Public Relations that

suits all. However, this has not yet been accomplished, and therefore it is hard to

choose the definition that is most suited to a personal sentiment of what Public

Relations is.

Considering the personal background, there is a slight preference to the definitions

that link Public Relations to society, image building and surroundings, especially

considering the rise of social media. The following definition is therefore considered

as an adequate one, if some key words as ‘long-term/sustained’, ‘targeted audience’,

‘global community’ and ‘advocacy role’ would be added:

“Public Relations is about image and reputation- the result of what you say you do,

what you say, and what others say about you. Public Relations is the discipline which

looks after image, with the aim of earning understanding and support and influencing

opinion and behaviour...” (Hunter S., 2007: online, Young P., 2010: online )


19

5. Bibliography

Baker S., 1982. The Theoretical Ground for Public Relations Practice and Ethics: A

Koehnian Analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 35, 3, p. 191-205

Baus H.M., 2007. Public Relations. Web. 20 Nov. 2011. http://pro-active-pro-

active.blogspot.com/2007/08/public-relations.html Baus HM 2007

Bergman, s.d., Bergman Communications. Web. 20 Nov. 2011.

http://www.bergmancomm.com/about.html

Botan C.H., Taylor M., 2004. Public Relations: State of the field. Journal of

Communication, 54, 4, p. 645–661.

Buyer L., s.d. The Buyer Group. Web. 20 Nov. 2011. http://thebuyergroup.com/lisa-

buyer/

Cohen H., s.d. Public Relations Definitions. Web. 20 Nov. 2011.

http://heidicohen.com/public-relations-definition/

Cutlip S.M., Center A.H., Broom G.M., 1994. Effective Public Relations. Engelwood

Cliffs: Prentice-Hall

Gersten D., 2011. Public Relations Definition. Web. 20 Nov. 2011.


http://pro-active-pro-active.blogspot.com/2007/08/public-relations.html%20Baus%20HM%202007

http://pro-active-pro-active.blogspot.com/2007/08/public-relations.html%20Baus%20HM%202007

http://www.bergmancomm.com/about.html

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363811107000550#bbib4




20

Gombita J., 2009. Introducing a new, maple-infused definition of public relations, in

both official languages. Web. 20 Nov. 2011.

http://www.prconversations.com/index.php/2009/06/introducing-a-new-maple-

infused-definition-of-public-relations/#comment-87935eping-it-honest/ 2009

Gregory A. (ed.), 2003. Public Relations in Practice. London: Kogan Page

Gregory A., 2004. The Scope and Structure of Public Relations: a Technology Driven

View. Public Relations Review, 30, p. 245-254

Grunig J.E.(ed.), 1992. Excellence in Public Relations and Communications

management. Hillsdale New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaun Association

Gruning J.E., Hunt T., 1984. Managing Public Relations. Belmont CA:

Wadsworth/Thomson Learning

Guth D.W., Marsh C., 2007. Public Relations: A values-driven approach. Boston:

Pearson Education

Hunter S., 2007. What impact can PR have on society? Web. 20 Nov. 2011.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/405324/what_impact_can_pr_have_on_soci

ety.html

Hutton J., 1999. The Definition, Dimensions and Domain of Public Relations. Public

Relations Review, 25, 2, p. 199–214.

Huey B., 2009. Down the Avenue. Web. 20 Nov. 2011.

http://www.downtheavenue.com/on_journalism/ 2011 Huey B 2009

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/405324/what_impact_can_pr_have_on_society.html

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/405324/what_impact_can_pr_have_on_society.html


21

Ihlen O., van Ruler B., 2007. How Public Relations works: Theoretical roots and

Public Relations perspectives. Public Relations Review, 33, 3, p. 243-248

Kent M.L., Taylor M., 2002. Towards a dialogic theory of Public Relations. Public

Relations Review, 28, p. 21-37

Ledingham J.A., Bruning S.D., 1998. Relationship management and Public

Relations: Dimensions of an organization- public relationship. Public Relations

Review, 24, p. 55-65

Ledingham J.A., Bruning S.D. (ed.), 2000. Public Relations as Relationship

Management: A Relational Approach to the study and Practice of Public Relations.

London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

L’Etang J., 1996. Public Relations and Corporate Social responsibility: Some Issues

Arising. Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 2, P. 111-123. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic

Publishers.

Newson D., Turk J.V., Kruckeberg D., 2004. This is PR: The realities of Public

Relations. Belmont, USA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning

Ochamn B. 2011. What’s next Blog. Web. 2011.

http://www.whatsnextblog.com/kudos/

Seaman P. 2009. Definitions of Public Relations. Web. 20 Nov. 2011.

http://paulseaman.eu/2009/06/definitions-of-pr-ke

http://paulseaman.eu/2009/06/definitions-of-pr-ke


22

Tamosaitis N., 2011. What we do. Web. 20 Nov. 2011.

http://www.vorticom.com/whatwedo.html

Tench R., Yeomans L., 2009. Exploring Public Relations. Harlow: Pearson

Education/Prentice Hall

Theaker A., 2004. The Public Relations Handbook. London: Routledge Taylor&

Francis Group

Weinstein D., 2011. Pr and Social Media. Web. 20 Nov. 2011.

http://socialmediamasters.com/2011/08/04/social-media-masters-session-pr-meets-

social-media-marketing/

Wilcox D.L., Cameron G.T., 2006. Public Relations Strategies and Tactics. Boston:

Pearson Education

Young P., 2001. A chaotic challenge to Grunig. Web. 20 Nov. 2011.

http://publicsphere.typepad.com/ meditations 2011

Young P., 2010. PR is reputation management, isn’t it? Web. 20 Nov. 2011.

http://publicsphere.typepad.com/mediations/2010/11/pr-is-reputation-

management.html

Young S., s.d. Communications. Web. 20 Nov. 2011.

http://www.getinfrontcommunications.com/blogging

http://www.vorticom.com/whatwedo.html

http://socialmediamasters.com/2011/08/04/social-media-masters-session-pr-meets-social-media-marketing/

http://socialmediamasters.com/2011/08/04/social-media-masters-session-pr-meets-social-media-marketing/

http://publicsphere.typepad.com/mediations/2011/06/a-chaotic-challenge-to-grunig.html

http://www.getinfrontcommunications.com/blogging

Defining Public Relations

Documents

define public

public information

defines public

public relations

public relations

defining public

public relations

van ruler