What does the word community mean for your profession and will its meaning change in a decade?

The creation of the Internet changed the traditional idea of a community forever. Rather than be bound by geographical lines, people moved into a virtual environment where they were joined by peers with similar interests and ideas, sharing common ground and uniting with people they may never meet face to face. These virtual communities have shaped many different industries and public relations has been changed so drastically its even been given a different name – PR 2.0. This blog will discuss the meaning of the word ‘community’ and how that has been changed, the way public relations has adapted to these news communities, the concept of public relations 2.0 and what this means for the future of public relations.

The word community comes from the latin word communis, meaning ‘common, public, shared by all or many’. (Etymology Dictionary, 2010). Traditionally, communities were based around geographic restrictions. However, as the communication networks have evolved (in particular, the Internet), communities have formed based around common interests, regardless of location. In public relations, these communities are key for practitioners to identify their key publics and reach their target market.

These changes to traditional community structures have revolutionised public relations in two very different ways. The first way is how public relations practitioners communicate with their publics (otherwise known as their target market). This is where the concept of interactive public relations comes into play, transforming conventional public relations into the virtual world of social media (Twitter, Facebook, Myspace, blogs etc), mobile communication devices and online gaming.

Using these already formed online ideological communities; public relations practitioners can identify their target publics with much more ease and therefore individually tailor the message they are sending to different communities. Interactive public relations also creates a two way communication model between the publics community and the organisation the practitioner is working for, generating better feedback for the organisation and better service for the publics. West Chester University’s Associate Professor of Communication Edward Lordan states that public relations professionals should embrace the idea of interactivity as it gives the illusion of giving control to the consumer, without losing any control themselves. “In the end, if public relations practitioners truly believe that their profession is based on a reciprocal relationship where the goal is mutually beneficial relationships between clients and audiences, we should embrace this increasing movement toward interactivity.” (2006, p. 29).  

The concept of PR 2.0 links in with the idea of interactive public relations because, essentially, that is what it is. Brian Solis states that PR 2.0 is a hybrid of communications, inspired by the traditional form of public relations and Web 1.0. “It changed everything. It forced traditional media to evolve. It created an entirely new set of influencers with a completely different mechanism for collecting and sharing information while also reforming the daily routines of how people searched for news.” (2008, p.1.). PR 2.0 incorporates elements from traditional public relations but opens up more doors than previously thought for public relations practitioners. “It is a chance to not only work with traditional journalists, but also to engage directly with a new set of accidental influencers, and, it is also our ability to talk with customers directly (through online forums, groups, communities, BBS, etc).” (Solis, 2008, p.1.).

The second way communities have changed public relations is the way practitioners communicate with other practitioners working within the industry. Therefore, there are multitudes of communities of public relations practitioners communicating with one another, sharing contacts and other information through virtual communities. This type of communication can exist on professional social networking websites such as LinkedIn, or on more lax and socially focused websites like Twitter or Facebook.

So what does this mean for the future of public relations? PR has become a necessity for communication channels, and therefore, it must continually adapt to the way people are communicating. Without speculating on the way people may be communicating ten years from now, it is likely that public relations practitioners will be following these trends, using new channels to convey the messages to their publics.

In 2005, the New York Times quoted Brenda Wrigley, associate professor of Public Relations at Syracuse University, as saying “PR has a PR problem.” (O’Brien, 2005, p.1). This was in response to questions regarding the way PR is seen by the general public. However, public relations practitioners have since moved into the Internet communities and are engaging in two-way communication with the new online communities that have formed, perhaps this reputation can change. But how will these communities change in the ten years to come?  Futurists may hypothesis, but only time will tell.

References

Lordan, E. J. (2006). Interactivity: The latest trend in effective communications. Public Relations Quarterly, 51(3), 27-29.

O’Brien, T. (2005). Spinning Frenzy: P.R.’s Bad Press. Retrieved 11/23, 2010. From: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/13/business/yourmoney/13flak.html

Online Etymology Dictionary (2010). Retrieved 11/23, 2010. From: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=community

Solis, B. (2010). PR 2.0: Putting the Public Back in Public Relations. Retrieved 11/23, 2010. From: http://www.briansolis.com/2008/04/pr-20-putting-public-back-in-public/

In what ways has the growth of participatory culture and interactivity changed your profession in recent years?

To quote the movie ‘The Social Network’ – “The Internet isn’t written in pencil … it’s written in ink.” This must be remembered by people participating in the culture that is the Internet, but also by those who’s reputations can be destroyed by the Internet – this is where public relations comes into play. The partakers within this culture are creating, contributing and connecting with one another, sharing their views on everything from political standpoints to a preferred brand of microwave popcorn. This blog will define this participatory culture and discuss the implications for public relations, in relation to ethics and the court of public opinion.

Henry Jenkins states that a participatory culture is one:

“1. With relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civic engagement
2. With strong support for creating and sharing one’s creation with others
3. With some type of informal mentorship whereby what is known by the most experienced is passed along to novices
4. Where members believe that their contributions matter
5. Where members feel some degree of social connection with one another (at the least they care what other people think about what they have created).” (Jenkins, 2006, p.1)

So what does a participatory culture mean for public relations? The area of ‘citizen journalism’ is a key concern for public relations practitioners, as liaising with the media has always been a main aspect of the profession. But when the public becomes the media, and the consumer becomes the journalist – with whom do we communicate? How to we stop the leaks from companies that, thanks to citizen journalism, are comparable to kitchen sieves? And who is held accountable for defamatory, damaging and negative comments on the Internet, masquerading as news? Two key concerns presented by this participatory culture are ethics and the court of public opinion.

Ethics

Jenkins states that a major concern for this emerging industry is the lack of established ethics. “In professional contexts, professional organizations are the watchdog of ethical norms. Yet in more casual settings, there is seldom a watchdog. No established set of ethical guidelines shapes the actions of bloggers and podcasters, for example.”

In Australia, journalists must abide by the MEAA Code of Ethics, which states that “members engaged in journalism commit themselves to honesty, fairness, independence and respect for the rights of others.” (2010). Without this established set of ethics, training within correct journalistic practices and experience with ethical journalists, citizen journalism becomes the wild west of journalism – which spells bad news for public relations practitioners, trying to show their clients in the best light.

The Court of Public Opinion

Although the legislation is catching up to the Internet age, public relations does not take place in a court of law. While in the court of law restitution can be made, and public apologies offered, public relations takes place in the court of public opinion. It is the job of public relations practitioners to shape how people perceive and view an organisation, and if proper journalistic ethics are not followed then companies can be defamed on the Internet. While the battle may be won against the defamers in the court of law, the court of public opinion is not so easily swayed – rather than relying on facts, emotions are brought into play and can manipulate the public’s view of a company.

In public relations, making your client appear in the best light possible is one of your main priorities. As people who regularly liaise with the media (and often are the first point of contact for any media relations), it is important to understand who you are dealing with and the best way to handle them. However, as the participatory culture of the Internet grows, it is imperative that practitioners find a way to deal with and anticipate the movements of this culture – as to not do so could cause irreparable damage to a clients reputation, and in turn, the practitioners.

References

Jenkins, H. (2006). Confessions of an ACA-fan: Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21^st Century (Part Two). Retrieved 02/11, 2010 from: http://www.henryjenkins.org/2006/10/confronting_the_challenges_of.html

MEAA Code of Ethics (2010). Retrieved 02/11, 2010 from: http://www.alliance.org.au/media_alliance_code_of_ethics/