Korean practitioners and journalists: Relational influences in news selection

This study investigates how source–media relationships influence perceptions toward news selection from the public relations practitioners’ viewpoint in Korea. The results show that Korean public relations practitioners who perform formal media relations believed that journalists would select news stories based on journalists’ media routine principles, such as using government sources. In contrast, Korean public relations practitioners who perform informal or monetary media relations believed that journalists would select news stories based on journalists’ extra-media factors, such as personal relationships with public relations practitioners.     

Dutch public relations practitioners and journalists: Antagonists no more

The increasing interdependence of public relations and journalism and the demands they make on each other raise the question how they perceive and evaluate each other. How do they view their roles, methods, relationship, and quality of media reporting on organizations? How do government and business public relations differ in this respect? Our survey of a representative sample of Dutch journalists and public relations practitioners in both government and business (n = 791) showed that while there were differences of opinion between the two professions, these were neither predominantly negative nor fundamental. Our results, therefore, do not confirm the difficult relationship between the press and public relations that was identified in research carried out in the United States between 1970 and 1990. Given the Dutch tradition that the government practitioner be a neutral servant of the public interest rather than a spokesperson for the organization, the general absence of differences between government and business public relations was striking. Our findings indicate that government public relations professionals have adopted the same norms and standards as their colleagues in business organizations.     

Comparing professional identities, attitudes, and views in public communication: A study of Chilean journalists and public relations practitioners

Public relations (PR) practitioners’ and journalists’ professional views and attitudes toward each other have been a subject of academic inquiry during the past decades; however, much of this research has focused on Europe and North America. In other regions of the world, for example in Latin America, historical developments and social understandings have led to slightly different conceptualizations of PR and journalism. Using Chile as a case study, this paper reports the results of an examination of Chilean journalists’ and PR practitioners’ professional conceptions. While both groups tend to have somewhat similar views of media relations and see themselves as part of the same profession, there are also important differences which are most likely based on professional socialization processes rather than educational backgrounds or sociodemographic and work related variables. Implications for contextually grounded approaches to the study of PR and journalism are highlighted.     

What cultural values influence American public relations practitioners?

This paper advances a cultural approach to public relations research and practice through the extension of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions to Grunig’s models of public relations. This study tested a quantitative instrument that links societal culture, corporate culture, and the public relations communication of American practitioners. Two findings emerged from this study. First, American practitioners continue to practice one-way models of public relations even when their organizations may not dictate one-way communication with publics. And second, public relations practitioners who have collectivistic values tend to practice two-way models of public relations.Gabriel Vasquez is an assistant professor in the School of Communication, University of Houston, TX. Maureen Taylor is an assistant professor in the School of Communication, Information, and Library Studies at Rutgers University, NJ.     

Investigating relationships between journalists and public relations practitioners: Working together to set,frame and build the public agenda, 1991–2004

A content analysis of 413 reports of interviews conducted with 418 journalists from 1991 to 2004 grounded in agenda-setting, framing and agenda-building theories found that journalists giving higher estimates of practitioners’ influence on the news reported having better relationships with practitioners. On average, journalists estimated that 44% of the content of news media in the United States is influenced by practitioners. Journalists who were interviewed in 2002–2004 valued public relations more, but expressed love–hate sentiments as much as those interviewed in 1991–1996. Journalists who had worked 18–45 years reported improving relationships with practitioners more often than journalists with 8 or fewer years of experience. Journalists believed good relationships with practitioners are important, but hold practitioners responsible for them.     

Aligning collaborative and culturally responsive evaluation approaches

The authors, three African-American women trained as collaborative evaluators, offer a comparative analysis of collaborative evaluation (O'Sullivan, 2004) and culturally responsive evaluation approaches (Frierson et al., 2002, Kirkhart and Hopson, 2010). Collaborative evaluation techniques immerse evaluators in the cultural milieu of the program, systematically engage stakeholders and integrate their program expertise throughout the evaluation, build evaluation capacity, and facilitate the co-creation of a more complex understanding of programs. However, the authors note that without explicit attention to considerations raised in culturally responsive evaluation approaches (for example, issues of race, power, and privilege), the voices and concerns of marginalized and underserved populations may be acknowledged, but not explicitly or adequately addressed. The intentional application of collaborative evaluation techniques coupled with a culturally responsive stance enhances the responsiveness, validity and utility of evaluations, as well as the cultural competence of evaluators.     

Aligning collaborative and culturally responsive evaluation approaches

The authors, three African-American women trained as collaborative evaluators, offer a comparative analysis of collaborative evaluation (O'Sullivan, 2004) and culturally responsive evaluation approaches (Frierson, Hood, & Hughes, 2002; Kirkhart & Hopson, 2010). Collaborative evaluation techniques immerse evaluators in the cultural milieu of the program, systematically engage stakeholders and integrate their program expertise throughout the evaluation, build evaluation capacity, and facilitate the co-creation of a more complex understanding of programs. However, the authors note that without explicit attention to considerations raised in culturally responsive evaluation approaches (for example, issues of race, power, and privilege), the voices and concerns of marginalized and underserved populations may be acknowledged, but not explicitly or adequately addressed. The intentional application of collaborative evaluation techniques coupled with a culturally responsive stance enhances the responsiveness, validity and utility of evaluations, as well as the cultural competence of evaluators.     

'Sod off and find us a boffin': journalists and the social science conference

Social scientists perform a multi-functional role as researcher, teacher and expert. The academic conference provides an opportunity for all these roles to be engaged and as such is a political and social site where meaning is debated and new research born. The conference is also attractive to journalists as news fodder. This article considers the relationship between journalists and social scientific organizations in the context of a professional conference and seeks to explain the tensions that exist. It concludes that the two cultures of journalist and academic are in conflict where they converge.     

How journalists engage in branding on Twitter: individual,organizational, and institutional levels

In a social media age, branding is an increasingly visible aspect of identity construction online. For media professionals generally and journalists especially, branding on spaces such as Twitter reveals the complicated set of forces confronting such public-facing actors as they navigate tensions between personal disclosure for authenticity and professional decorum for credibility, and between establishing one’s own distinctiveness and promoting one’s employer or other stakeholders. While studies have begun to reveal what journalists say about branding, they have yet to provide a broad profile of what they do. This study takes up that challenge through a content analysis of the Twitter profiles and tweets of a representative sample of 384 U.S. journalists. We focus on the extent of branding practices; the levels at which such branding occurs, whether to promote one’s self (individual), one’s news organization (organizational), or the journalism profession at large (institutional); and how other social media practices may be related to forms of journalistic branding. Results suggest that branding is now widely common among journalists on Twitter; that branding occurs at all three levels but primarily at the individual and organizational levels, with organizational branding taking priority; and that time on Twitter is connected with more personal information being shared.