Theoretical Perspectives in PR (Week 2)

With the public relations field continuing to mature as a discipline, theory applications and development necessarily grow in value. How such theories were being applied to public relations understanding and practices in contemporary are essential for daily PR activities.

I think the key points to remember from this week’s readings were why studying and having theories in public relations are important, Grunig’s emphasis on the four models of public relation theories and also how public relations work as relationship management.

Theories are important to the extent in public relations field, as it targets to provide analysis through framework. Frameworks are used in the shaping of views and discussions through selective choice of facts, themes and words. Pubic relations have a huge influence in making plans through frameworks of how the media will discuss a product, person, development or ideology.

Grunig’s symmetrical theories approach had been regarded as part of excellence theories of public relations. The four models were namely press agentry (model 1), public information (model 2), two-way asymmetric (model 3) and two-way symmetric (model 4). However, after much reading through the text, some online resources and two journals provided in BlackBoard, I felt there was more emphasis at the two-way symmetric, model 4. Public relations practitioners seem to think that symmetrical public relations programs are the most effective. Symmetrical public relations programs are those that try to make sure the targeted publics benefit as much as the programs’ sponsors or originators.

With my personal opinions, I guessed symmetrical communication was regarded as the best way to achieve ethical decisions because there is collaboration and working jointly with others, for example the public. The conversation process with different people allows for both listening and arguing. I felt that although not everyone will get what they want, but a two-way symmetric theory will lead to the most ethical outcome. As a result, two-way symmetrical communication may produce better long-term relationships with publics than do the other models of PR. Symmetrical practitioners can be consider for loyalty to both their employers and to the publics of their organizations. Just like a pair of chopsticks, or I can say it takes two hands to clap. However, other models do have its benefit and I thought that all the four models can actually be interlink and help in good PR planning.

The readings made me think more about public relations theory or practice in that the ‘co-creational’ perspective of PR, publics are a self-standing and often self-directing force in public relations, and communication makes it possible to agree to shared meanings, interpretations, and goals. Like the article from “A crisis of epidemic proportions: What communication lessons can practitioners learn from the Singapore SARS crisis?” reflects that issues of social trust are important components of the social amplification of risk. In the article, it stated that through research, trust has an asymmetrical quality. Seen this way, the authorities decided to akin to the model of two-way symmetrical public relations as it could be added as another trust-relevant dimension. The authorities hope to involve negotiating and strategies to bring about mutual changes in ideas and behaviours, especially with the public during the SARS crisis period.

Lastly, I think that relationship management in public relation theories has its importance also. It is a movement away from traditional impact measurements, such as the quantity of communication messages produced, or number of stories placed in the mass media. It represents a primary change in the direction and function of PR. I think that through this process, it encourages PR initiatives to base on their impact on the quality of the relationship between an organization and the public during evaluation. The quality of relationships results more from the behavior of the organization than from the messages that communicators disseminate.

Communication seems not the focus, but rather a tool in the nurturing, maintenance and initiation of organization and public relationships in PR.

So let’s say in future, you will become a boss and have an office to handle. Which Grunig model or other theories of public relations would you like to implement to have an excellent PR department?

Let's ponder for a moment... :)