It can be said that critique plays a role in any
vocation as the processes in which that vocation functions on are
commonsensical ideas that have become normalized and naturalized as a result of
society organizing and structuring the world in a particular way. By comparing
what is traditionally thought of and expected of public relations (PR) to how
these expectations have come about and been formed by ideas of critique, this
would assist in better understanding this vocation and in turn help to ask new
critical questions which may be useful in advancing the field of PR.
PR is defined by Grunig and Hunt (1984) as ‘the
management of communication between an organization and its publics’, with its
primary roles being an adviser and a problem solver. These roles are provided
with the idea of improving the organization, which if successful will also
benefit the public and as a result this reflects and ties in on the purpose of
critique, which also aims at improving ourselves, our social institutions and
professional practices. By building
relationships using communication, PR helps to avoid possible conflicts, as
communication, a synonym for language is the central medium used for
constructing meaning and understanding as we learn about the world primarily
through language. Conflicts often occur because the interests of each group
differ and collide occasionally, usually because we refuse to acknowledge
anything else but the naturalized ways of thinking for the reason that we often
tend to forget that reality is constructed and that it can be organized in
different ways; these different ways are the variant thoughts and ideas that
other individuals possess. By being the mediators and finding a common ground
that satisfies the interests of all parties, this is the primary challenge of PR
and also what makes it so important in society, as the words we speak and the
particular structures that we use can influence and or determine prospective
outcomes.
In learning about critique, we also learn about
the importance of representation, as it is one of the key factors that
influence the way we think. In contemporary society, the boundaries that divide
the real world and media have been blurred though the increase of portable
technologies and most importantly, social media. Consequently, society today
sees the real world through a filter of media images and has produced a new way
of seeing the world. Additionally, the easy access to the tools of media
production has created a society that is made up of active consumers who
respond to traditional media by remediating and producing their own content. It
is crucial to understand that communication in media has no natural meaning, as
the meanings being presented are always socially orientated so as to align with
class, gender, race and other human interests; as a result, this has made
viewers constantly question the validity of media content that is being put
across to them, more so now since there is an increase in information sources.
According to Johnston and Zawawi (2009) approximately 65% of front news
sections and up to 90% of stories from business sections of prominent
newspapers in Australia come from PR sources, professionals and practitioners
of this field have the responsibility and obligation to provide the truth to
the public. “The press has a first duty to the public” by Johnston and Zawawi
proves this point. However, when studying critique, it is also understood that
society is divided into two spheres: private and public, where private refers
to the boundaries of family and private concerns. Therefore, it is also in the
role of PR to make public institutional practices known to readers and viewers
within the private sphere of family and home and this is done through mediums
of media, such as television or the Internet.
Consequently, to effectively disseminate
information, another crucial element of this field is media relations. This can
be through: campaigns, conferences or even corporate events that require media
management. Evidently prior to any event, a considerable amount of planning has
to take place in order for the event to be executed smoothly and this is
another responsibility of PR practitioners. No one will notice the things that
go right but will certainly remember the things that go wrong; in the case that
an event has even the slightest mishap, the blame would most likely fall on the
PR individuals as they are responsible for managing the event and its outcomes.
Furthermore, because recognition is rarely received if an event is carried out
successfully, there often can be an impression that the work that has been done
is taken for granted and this relates to the notion of transparency, another
concept of critique. Therefore the challenge here lies in accepting the success
of an event as a personal achievement and taking pride that although
recognition may not be received, through the work of PR, it has aided or in
some way improved the functioning society, as it is what critique and this
field is all about.
Thus to conclude, critique indeed plays a role in
the professional area of PR as they both strive and aim for the same purpose:
improving institutions, our professional practices and ourselves. Through its
actions as an adviser and a problem solver, using communication as its primary
tool to find common ground between its parties and establish balance, critique
helps practitioners of the field to achieve and be successful in their role as
it contributes to the understanding of the thought processes behind individuals
and the choices they make. In return, by being familiar with this
understanding, practitioners can help influence and determine prospective
outcomes. Moreover, by consistently trying to seek out new ways in achieving
such roles and perhaps by thinking out of the box using the critical concepts
of critique, in hopes of receiving recognition and avoiding transparency, this
could provide for a better understanding of this field and more future
opportunities.
