Deconstructing Public Relations

Public Relations Criticism

Thomas J. Mickey

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2003
• ISBN:
  9781135652203
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Public Relations
• Index: Business

This volume provides a critical look at public relations practice, utilizing case studies from public relations, advertising, and marketing to illustrate the deconstruction and analysis of public relations campaigns. Author Thomas J. Mickey uses a cultural studies approach and demonstrates how it can be used as a critical theory for public relations practice, offering real-world examples to support his argument. Through the interpretive act of deconstruction, this book serves to challenge the myth of public relations as an objective "science, " allowing the social importance of public relations to be redefined and encouraging public relations to take a fuller place in the interdisciplinary study of text and knowledge. Intended for public relations scholars and students in public relations cases/campaigns, public relations criticism, and media studies courses, Deconstructing Public Relations: Public Relations Criticism demystifies the act of deconstruction and shows how it can give insight into the theory and practice of public relations.

CHAPTER ONE

Why Deconstruct?

The term deconstruction denotes reading a text in a particular kind of way that challenges its assumed meaning. Johnson (1988) noted:

Deconstruction is not synonymous with “destruction,” however. It is in fact much closer to the original meaning of the word “analysis” itself, which etymologically means “to undo”—a virtual synonym for “to de-construct.”… If anything is destroyed in a deconstructive reading, it is not the text, but the claim to unequivocal domination of one mode of signifying over another.

Even though public relations may be an important part of contemporary culture, we need to deconstruct it. Deconstructing means to see ideas that rest under the surface of the material we have produced—to peel away the layers that are in front of us but often hidden until we look. This is especially important for public relations, because its reason for being is to promote a client, an organization, a product, or a service. The question of ‘why’ may not enter the arena of discussion when planning public relations activities, The public relations professional does the job because he/she assumes the value of public relations; but precisely because we assume its benefit to society is reason enough for raising questions about the material practice of public relations.

Norris (1991) wrote that deconstruction starts out by rigorously suspending the assumed correspondence among mind, meaning, and the concept of method that claims to unite them. Concepts need to be perpetually shaken and dislodged. We deconstruct something to improve it, make it more effective, and enable people to be freer by the process. Therefore, deconstruction neither denies nor really affects the commonsense view that language exists to communicate meaning. It suspends that view for its own specific purpose of seeing what happens when the writs of convention no long run (Morris, 1991).

Material practice means that what is done is constructed in the light of a particular theory. Williams said that all praxis is based on some idea or theory (1976). Public relations as a material practice means that the campaign includes empirical data that can be examined. The material may be a video, a speech, a press release, or a brochure. All of it, however, is colored by some kind of theory about values like society, self, gender, power, and race.

Deconstructing raises questions about public relations. It seeks to know why, for whose welfare, or in what other sense might we understand the material. One could deconstruct public relations in various ways. You could interview the people who produced the campaign. You could examine the material from a campaign. You could ask people for whom the campaign is developed what the campaign means to them.

In this book, we concentrate on looking at the material text of a campaign. The text becomes the focus of deconstructing. Thus, to deconstruct public relations here is to raise questions about the text.

This book seeks to reflect the work of French philosopher Jacques Derrida, who proposed that one deconstruct a text as a way of examining the ideas proposed in the text. It is completely rational to look at ideas presented to us in materials produced under the term public relations. Caputo (1997) maintained that every deconstructive analysis is undertaken in the name of something, something affirmatively undeconstructible. What is undeconstructible—for example, justice or democracy—is neither real nor ideal, neither present nor future-present, neither existent nor idealizable This is how and why it incites our “desire” while driving and impassioning deconstruction.

For example, Derrida stated that the law is deconstructible, because it is constructed in the first place. Such deconstructibility is not bad news; it is a way to “improve the law” (Caputo, 1997, p. 130). We can therefore never have enough of deconstruction. Every time the law tends to fold in on itself and become legalistic, or when it is concerned more with formal legality or legitimization and rectitude than with justice, deconstruction is needed.

The work of deconstruction thus can become a critical reflection on public relations work. We question the purpose of a particular public relations project, whether employee communications, government lobbying, community relations, crisis communication, or product promotion. We look at the point of view in the campaign. We examine the data or evidence for that point of view as well as the assumptions of that view.

The reader may draw several conclusions. One might argue that deconstructing public relations means to look at public relations critically; that is, to pose questions of value for whom or for what, with whose political benefit, or with what economic pressure to bear. Paul (1993), who discussed critical thinking, pointed us in the right direction to deconstruct public relations material when he wrote that we question the ideas and assumptions in the material. By deconstructing, we apply critical thinking to public relations practice.

The concept of representation enters into deconstructing. Public relations materials have a particular view that is constructed with selfinterest at heart. Any representation, however, is limited, and frequently limiting in a democratic environment. Soon, however, it often becomes part of the culture’s thinking and being: We think this is the way it is when it is really one person’s or one organization’s view.

L’Etang and Pieczka (1996) noted that public relations practice often lacks a reflection from critical theory, Marxism, or postmodernism. Their conclusion is that public relations is usually searching for problem-solving views, and does not seem interested in a self-reflective approach that might criticize it. The approach of this book assumes a critical view through deconstruction.

A critical approach to public relations practice can stand on its own. The purpose is not necessarily to learn how to do a better campaign, although that may result. In a rational society, a critical theory—like deconstructing—is valuable in itself so that we continue to use reason and dialogue as the basis of a democratic society.

There are many examples of writers who suggest a critical look at what we assume to be accepted and unquestioned ways of func-tioning in the society. For example, Scott (1994) suggested the need for a theory of visual rhetoric as a way to look at examples of visual communication. Poster (1982) proposed a link between semiotics and critical theory. He asserted that one needs to look at the text, composed of signs and symbols, from a more critical theory and not simply accept signs and symbols as given.

We are less conscious, perhaps, of the degree to which we take for granted a set of public relations values that in reality are not absolute, but instead are culturally structured. To ask questions of public relations material is to deconstruct it. Therefore, a critique of certain fundamental preconceptions of the public relations view is implied in the chapters that follow.

REFERENCES

Caputo, J. (1997). (Editor). Deconstruction in a nutshell: A conversation with Jacques Derrida. New York: Fordham University Press.

Johnson, B. (1988). The critical difference: Essays in the contemporary rhetoric of reading. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.

L’Etang, J., & Pieczka, M. (1996). Critical perspectives in public relations, London: International Thomson Business Press.

Norris, C. (1991). Deconstruction: Theory and practice. London: Routledge.

Paul, R. (1993). Critical thinking: What every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world. Cotati, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Poster, M. (1982). Semiology and critical theory: From Marx to Baudrilard. In W.V.Soparos et al. (Eds.), The questions of textuality (pp. 275–287). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Scott, L.M. (1994). Images in advertising: The need for a theory of visual rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 252–273.

Williams, R. (1976). Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

CHAPTER TWO

Cultural Studies Approach

One July afternoon, actor Danny Glover spoke to a group of African American children in Boston. His message focused on the dangers of smoking, but he also mentioned the need to stay in school in order to achieve one’s goals (Kong & Vaillancourt, 1994). The ideas seemed like something the youngsters needed to hear. Glover provided the perfect role model.

The Glover event was sponsored by the R.J.Reynolds Tobacco Company as a public relations strategy. All of the Boston media covered the event. The fact that Glover was there received media attention for RJR, which needed positive public opinion.

A critical question one needs to ask is what this media event was saying about the practice of public relations. The event did not just happen, but was orchestrated by public relations counsel Every practice in the culture, defined here as social action, needs to be open to critical inquiry, because it is a construction by actors who stand to gain something from the practice. Public relations “practice” is no exception.

The Glover appearance provided a forum for the value system of R.J.Reynolds (RJR) to receive public support. RJR is a company involved in producing a product that has long been responsible for smoke-related diseases.

Glover’s talk was not just slick public relations or a good example of “spin”; rather, these questions need to be asked: What kind of political and economic environment provides the setting for such practice? Why was this strategy used? And, finally, why do some members of the audience accept a positive meaning from this personal appearance by an African American movie star? All of these questions hinge on the importance of using critical theory to examine public relations practice.

The objective of this chapter is to propose cultural studies as an approach to critical theory for public relations. Public relations exists only in practice, in what social actors do, in what has become a way to do public relations. All practices in the culture are constructions of language and symbol, and thus are representations of power.

Cultural studies—which began in Birmingham, England, during the 1950s with such writers as Raymond Williams—seeks to look at any text as a production of class, power, and oppression. It is an appropriate vehicle to examine public relations from the perspective of deconstruction.

Toth and Heath (1992) noted that critical theory in public relations ought to be confrontational. From the beginning, cultural studies writers have walked that path. Their approach is not simply to examine popular culture, as some researchers do, but also to highlight the oppression through cultural forms and even propose policy change to address that inequity.

Harms and Kellner (1991) asserted that a critical theory operates via a standpoint of human emancipation from unnecessary and unjust forms of domination. To study public relations from a critical theory perspective is to raise the social consciousness of forms of oppression, At first glance, such a task might seem difficult for a field so practical as public relations, but today it is more important and necessary than ever as the media become more and more dependent on public relations sources for news and entertainment.

In cultural studies, texts are considered a form of oppression. They represent a reality that codifies the power of a few over others in the culture. Cultural studies seeks to examine the making of meaning and the coding of value for a society. Therefore, the focus is often on what the practice or text “means” to the receiver: What scene, words, actor, and so on are in the communication form. The question is the choice of symbol or language within a certain structure or coding system.

The questions to be investigated here are: How can we critically evaluate the meaning of public relations practice for the cul-ture? What do public relations strategies mean for the audience? What do they mean for a democratic society?

Fiske (1989) noted that culture is a struggle for meanings, just as society is a struggle for power. Therefore, to understand public relations practice is to understand the distribution of power in the culture: who has it and who doesn’t.

The method here is first a literature review of critical theory in public relations. Then, we take a look at the definition and history of cultural studies as both a theory and method. Finally, the chapter concludes with a discussion of the value of the cultural studies approach as a model for public relations critical theory.

A number of articles have addressed the issue of critical theory in public relations:

• Olasky (1985) conducted a qualitative analysis of 40 years of articles appearing in the Public Relations Journal, but found mostly public relations for public relations when it came to questions of criticism of public relations practice from an ethical basis. Although public relations leaders may point to a number of journal articles on ethics as a sign that criticism is being taken seriously, Olasky showed the superficiality of all but a few articles on criticism of public relations.
• Pearson (1986) linked the themes in public relations literature with the critical theory of Habermas to develop criteria for evaluating public relations programming.
• Feldman (1988) examined the public relations program of the electrical industry in the 1920s. His was a critical study that employed both historical and economic data to support the argument. He made extensive use of various kinds of public relations material.
• Peterson (1988) took a critical look at the public relations materials of the Grand Teton National Park. Her work was mainly rhetorical theory used to examine organizational myth.
• Toth (1989) examined the ideology around gender in the practice of public relations. She recommended similar public relations critical research in the future. Since then, there have been several studies, including that of Creedon (1991), who dealt with gender and public relations practice by examining salary and task inequities in the workplace.
• Badaracco (1990) took a critical stand in her view of public relations practice as a culture industry. She examined the rise of modern publicity at the turn of the century. Publicity as a business has matured since then, from a trade to a managerial activity that has become something we export more of than any tangible good but without tariff or protective barriers.
• Sriramesh (1992) looked critically at public relations practice in India. Public relations there is linked to the culture insofar as its values and ideology are both produced and supported by the kind of public relations in practice.
• Moffitt (1992) borrowed a term from cultural studies, articulation theory. Her critical mission here was an interpretive look at public relations, in which she argued that the “public” in public relations practice must be given a voice.
• Coffin (1994) discussed promotional material to sell sewing machines in late nineteenth-century France. Her critical look at both the public relations and the advertising as text highlighted the promotion of ideology and values like credit, consumption, and a certain image of women.
• Toth and Heath (1994) maintained that the reason for critical theory in public relations should be to disrupt our beliefs about organizations. Critical scholars of public relations often use organizational values as well as written messages as the unit of analysis when looking at the practice of public relations. Toth and Heath developed three predominant paradigms of research in public relations: social science, rhetorical, and critical. The amount of research in each area illustrates how little is devoted to critical theory: social science (70%), rhetorical (20%), and critical (10%).
• German (1995) deconstructed public relations practice. She examined the ideology and value system implicit in the public relations text.
• Millar (1995) surveyed articles in the Journal of Public Relations Research from 1987 to 1995. He concluded that more critical research is needed.
• McDonald (1995) did a review of the kinds of public relations articles in Journalism Quarterly. She concluded that public relations research is becoming diverse, but critical research is practically nonexistent. She called this an area that needed to be addressed.
• Kruckeberg (1995) pointed out the ideological basis of public relations practice that makes it culture bound. He suggested that ethics is critically important to police the inherently unethical, asymmetrical models of public relations, because such ethics establish boundaries beyond which the practice of these models should not transcend.
• Hirston-Shea and Benoit (1996) examined the public relations text of the Tobacco Institute as a response to a series of “Doonesbury” carto...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Preface
• Chapter One Why Deconstruct?
• Chapter Two Cultural Studies Approach
• Chapter Three Alcohol as Medicine
• Chapter Four Representation of Woman
• Chapter Five Selling the Internet
• Chapter Six Garden According to Martha Stewart
• Chapter Seven A Community Relations Campaign
• Chapter Eight The Language of Mental Illness
• Chapter Nine The Ideology of an AIDS Prevention Campaign
• Chapter Ten The Monet Exhibit
• Chapter Eleven Olympic Gold
• About the Author