Today I commented Luke Bryan's blog
http://cmns1290lukejbryan.blogspot.com/
I have also previosuly commented on Jessie Brown's week 2 blog
http://cmns1290jessiebrown.blogspot.com/
Sunday, August 5, 2007
Week 4
The readings from this week (only Chapter 11 pages 287-297 of Public relations: theory and practice, as they were the only readings I had access to) focussed on the role of public relations practitioners within organizations.
The readings made me think more about public relations theory/practice in that it is more than forging communicative relationships with the media and the public. I had never realised that public relations has a place inside an organization as well as outside. The employees of a company are also technically a ‘public’, whose opinions and loyalty are as important as customers or clients.
I found some of the “Tools and channels of communication” a bit trite eg. Birthday greetings on a noticeboard, employee of the month awards, office ‘Wear a Silly Hat’ Day etc. They would personally irritate me more than create a sense of community. And, for instance, if I had been unfairly treated or I did not have a positive relationship with my co-workers, a framed certificate or an office memo would not make me any more of an “ambassador of goodwill”. However, some of these tools do provide a practical means of communication and would positively affect the flow of internal information.
I think the key point to remember from this week's readings is that internal communication is extremely important for maintaining the positive reputation of an organization.
The readings made me think more about public relations theory/practice in that it is more than forging communicative relationships with the media and the public. I had never realised that public relations has a place inside an organization as well as outside. The employees of a company are also technically a ‘public’, whose opinions and loyalty are as important as customers or clients.
I found some of the “Tools and channels of communication” a bit trite eg. Birthday greetings on a noticeboard, employee of the month awards, office ‘Wear a Silly Hat’ Day etc. They would personally irritate me more than create a sense of community. And, for instance, if I had been unfairly treated or I did not have a positive relationship with my co-workers, a framed certificate or an office memo would not make me any more of an “ambassador of goodwill”. However, some of these tools do provide a practical means of communication and would positively affect the flow of internal information.
I think the key point to remember from this week's readings is that internal communication is extremely important for maintaining the positive reputation of an organization.
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Week 3
The reading from “Public Relations: Theory And Practice” this week focused on theories and models relating to public relations practice. Some of these theories are exactly the same as general theories of communication I learnt in Intro to Communications e.g. Agenda setting, semiotics, and the theories of Habermas.
A theory I found informative was General Systems theory. When I first thought of public relations, I only had an understanding of the ‘open’ system. Though I feel this theory is a little simplistic, it allows for all areas and disciplines within public relations and explains the communication processes involved.
Grunig’s models and the ‘symmetrical debate’ was interesting, and I feel that the criticism of two-way symmetrical model is valid in a practical sense. The model is valid as an ideal and as a goal for public relations practitioners to achieve ‘excellence’, but I believe that the model does not work realistically, or at least not very often. Leitch and Neilson (1997) on page 55 make an example of the unlikelihood of symmetrical interaction between a large company and the unskilled public of a developing country, which I think is a just criticism.
The second reading further explores the two-way symmetrical model. Gower affirms that the model has “underlying assumptions that are under criticism” and that we should embrace new theories, using the existing theories as points to work from.
I think that the key points from these readings were:
- PR theories are different and controversial, and can be combined in practice.
- Theories are effective as ideals
- The two-way symmetrical model is the most ethically sound, but is still contested because PR is such a complex discipline.
The readings made me think more about public relations theory/practice in that:
- It is a far more complex process that I originally thought, with many different levels of communication occurring simultaneously
- The relationship between theory and practice will not always fit, as in most areas.
A theory I found informative was General Systems theory. When I first thought of public relations, I only had an understanding of the ‘open’ system. Though I feel this theory is a little simplistic, it allows for all areas and disciplines within public relations and explains the communication processes involved.
Grunig’s models and the ‘symmetrical debate’ was interesting, and I feel that the criticism of two-way symmetrical model is valid in a practical sense. The model is valid as an ideal and as a goal for public relations practitioners to achieve ‘excellence’, but I believe that the model does not work realistically, or at least not very often. Leitch and Neilson (1997) on page 55 make an example of the unlikelihood of symmetrical interaction between a large company and the unskilled public of a developing country, which I think is a just criticism.
The second reading further explores the two-way symmetrical model. Gower affirms that the model has “underlying assumptions that are under criticism” and that we should embrace new theories, using the existing theories as points to work from.
I think that the key points from these readings were:
- PR theories are different and controversial, and can be combined in practice.
- Theories are effective as ideals
- The two-way symmetrical model is the most ethically sound, but is still contested because PR is such a complex discipline.
The readings made me think more about public relations theory/practice in that:
- It is a far more complex process that I originally thought, with many different levels of communication occurring simultaneously
- The relationship between theory and practice will not always fit, as in most areas.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Week 2
During the first PR tutorial, I have come to realise how broad PR is and the many different career paths it can lead to. The many different responses from students about why they are doing the course led me to think about what I hope to gain from it. I am interested in combining my skills in design with PR - designing brouchures, posters etc.
The readings back up the idea that PR has a lot of variety. In 'Public Relations: Theory and Practice', the definition of PR is hazy with many different opinions on what it really is. It does outline the two main roles of public relations practitioners - technicians and problem solvers. The role of technician interests me more, though they hold "lower positions within organisations".
I think the key points to remember from this weeks readings are that
The readings back up the idea that PR has a lot of variety. In 'Public Relations: Theory and Practice', the definition of PR is hazy with many different opinions on what it really is. It does outline the two main roles of public relations practitioners - technicians and problem solvers. The role of technician interests me more, though they hold "lower positions within organisations".
I think the key points to remember from this weeks readings are that
- PR is not about what you may first think
- Communication is an essential skill for PR practitioners.
- Public Relations has a wide range of areas to work within
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)