دانلود رایگان مقاله لاتین استدلال نظری روابط عمومی از سایت الزویر


عنوان فارسی مقاله:

استدلال نظری تاریخچه روابط عمومی: نقش اهداف استراتژیک و عامل انسانی


عنوان انگلیسی مقاله:

Theorizing public relations history: The roles of strategic intent and human agency


سال انتشار : 2016



برای دانلود رایگان مقاله استدلال نظری روابط عمومی اینجا کلیک نمایید.





بخشی از مقاله انگلیسی:


3. Results 

A fundamental problem for public relations historians is the lack of a clear definition of the field. “The difficulty in defining public relations has led to differences among historians in identifying the historical arrival of public relations as a social institution,” Vos (2011, p. 121) has written. Some think current approaches are too broad; while others think they are too narrow. For instance, Brown (2015) described current definitions of the field as creating “a suit much too small for the realities of PR” (p. xvi, emphasis in original). Are there standards that can be applied across time and place to determine whether a past initiative is part of public relations history before it is analyzed by historians, regardless of their approach? How do we know what public relations is and, to borrow from Lee (1925), what it is not? Building on Lamme and Russell’s (2010) monograph that reviewed secondary literature about public relations history, in this essay we propose an answer to these questions. One of the stumbling blocks to defining public relations has been an almost constantly changing series of names for the field, imposed as much by the historical actors as by scholars seeking to categorize and explain the work and ideas of those actors and of the modern field of public relations. For example, press agentry, publicity, propaganda, advertising, and press bureau are terms that arise among historical actors to label similar initiatives while more recently terms such as public affairs, public diplomacy, strategic communication, and public information have entered the field’s professional jargon. “A key issue is that of nomenclature,” L’Etang (2008, p. 329) noted, asking: “is it appropriate to describe an activity as ‘public relations’ prior to the existence of the term?” Perhaps not, but we do not know enough yet as a global field of inquiry to understand what common terms might have emerged over time to assist historians in identifying public relations in the past. Moreover, even if we use terms that emerge from the historical evidence, we are bound to then employ the definitions of those terms from that time, within historical context, rather than impose modern definitions. The conundrum of public relations history is that without labels that can apply across time, we cannot be sure of common understanding; however, attempts to impose labels via periodization have had the effect of limiting historical inquiry rather than explaining and expanding it (Lamme & Russell, 2010). This dilemma is further compounded by the fact that any definitions or standards developed today in thinking about public relations historiography also need to be relevantto today’s public relations practice because today’s initiatives will roll into the landscape of inquiry for future public relations historians. Perhaps, then, the term—the label—should not be the defining factor. Myers (2014) has demonstrated that at least in the United States, the term “public relations” was already being used in the press as early as the 18th century; by the 1830s it was being used in the same context as today’s meaning, building reputation and relationships. These findings support Lamme and Russell’s (2010) contention that public relations did not emerge whole cloth in US corporations around the turn of the 20th century (and even then it should be pointed out that Ivy Lee, the US “father of public relations,” called his work corporate publicity, not public relations; see Russell & Bishop, 2009). Instead, they found, public relations existed across time in deliberate approaches to influencing public sentiment toward an intended result in non-corporate sectors. People who employed such efforts before the 20th century had not, as Bernays concluded, “unconsciously practiced the principles of public relations” (1927, p. 286). Therefore, to exclude them from consideration in public relations history is both inaccurate and unfair. As Coombs and Holladay (2012) argue, “Agencies and corporations named public relations in the US, therefore, they get to control the field by dominating its history” (p. 350), and, they add, “Public relations strategies and tactics developed by activists are co-opted by corporate interests and attributed to corporations. Activists become marginalized actors. . . rather than driving forces.”



برای دانلود رایگان مقاله استدلال نظری روابط عمومی اینجا کلیک نمایید.






کلمات کلیدی:

The Routledge Handbook of Critical Public Relations https://books.google.com/books?isbn=131791886X Jacquie L'Etang, ‎David McKie, ‎Nancy Snow - 2015 - ‎Business & Economics Theorizing the role of public relations in dominant structures of knowledge production draws attention to the interpenetrating relationship between ... The Role of Public Relations in Deliberative Systems - Edwards - 2015 ... onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcom.12199/abstract by L Edwards - ‎2016 - ‎Cited by 5 - ‎Related articles Dec 29, 2015 - I suggest that deliberative systems provide a more robust basis for theorizing public relations' role in deliberation and propose an analytical ... Positioning Public Relations in Theorizing ... - Wiley Online Library onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/comt.12049/pdf by A Yang - ‎2015 - ‎Cited by 17 - ‎Related articles theory and theorize that public relations strategies and tactics provide the discourse that allows .... This definition focuses on the relationship impacts of OPRs. Histories of public relations | Comparing the historiography of British ... www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/13632541111151014?mobileUi=0 Further, the theorized approach enables the scholar to compare historic events, ... Even more critical is Olasky's (1987) portrayal of public relations history. Eclectic Theorizing in the Study and Practice of International Relations ... www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/...001.../oxfordhb-9780199219322-e-6 by P Katzenstein - ‎Cited by 157 - ‎Related articles It then considers a small sample of scholarship in international relations that illustrates the meaning and value of analytical eclecticism with specific ... Public History .... Eclectic Theorizing in the Study and Practice of International Relations ...