This is the first posting of a blog I am keeping as an assignment for my MA in Public Relations. The title is a work in progress...
I am currently trying to answer the question 'What are the most important factors that need addressing in order for public relations to obtain legitimacy as a profession?'
Public relations is the discipline which looks after reputation, however as the occupation has been practiced in the UK without proper codes of conduct in place and unethical practitioners, public relations has not generated the best reputation for its self as a profession.
In trying to answer this question it seems to me that Public relations now has almost everything in place to be properly established as a profession, the educational institution, the local and national associations, and codes of conduct.
After trying to answer this question, I have reached a few conclusions; One of which is rather ironic; It seems that a contributing factor effecting public relations ability for formalise as a profession is the stigma attached to its reputation.
Anyone know a good publicist?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well, Public Relation is beginning to fight back and it would seem the tide is changing. The industry is stil grwoing despite the economic recession, and is worth billions in the UK. Clearly if people had a negative perception of the profession it would not be continuing to grow. The issue of 'ethics and professionalisation' still remains the main bone of contention between PR and its critics. I would suggest that the CIPR would most certainly need to strive to make sure all practitioners obey and follow the ethical guidelines set by the CIPR. This is imperative in order for the practive to be viewed as a viable profession and to silence its critics on the debate concerning ethical practice. Furthermore, this is would more likley reduce the negative stereotype which occupies the press, and would stop journalists from throwing around the term PR so loosely.
ReplyDeleteLorenzo.. If reputation ensures that an organisation can achieve objectives (e.g. sell products) and if reputation enhances the value of the organisation and its exchangable inventory ( e.g. products) at a better margin to make added returns/profits then the CIPR has to look at the effectiveness of members.
ReplyDeleteImagine what would happen if a member was responsible for advising a board when the company suddenly could not trade with its historic partners because the partners did not trust the products. Imagine if that brought a meltdown in world trade. What should the Institute do?
This is an ethical dilemma. If we thought that PR was about sustaining relationships or was about developing reputation (trust) then there would not be a single member of the CIPR (or PRSA member etc) working in a bank.
It may be a viable profession but are its institutions viable?