The recently launched book Public Relations and Social Theory, edited by Oyvind Ihlen, Betteke van Ruler and Magnus Fredrikkson, is a breath of fresh air for the scholars and practitioners in public relations.
The contributors brought together by the three editors tried to use some of the work of key social theorists like Bourdieu, Habermas, Giddens, Goffman, and apply their theories and concepts into the practice of public relations. The main reason was to understand how public relations influence the society, thus being a social activity.
It can be said that this book is also an alternative to the dominant paradigm of Grunig, therefore can be included in the critiques of public relations and in the attempt to develop a new paradigm. Key concepts as legitimacy, power, democracy, community are being analyzed in relation to PR activity.
For instance, the chapter ‘On Bourdieu’ analyzes how his main interests in the concepts on language and power can help to develop one of the many perspectives on PR. Here, Ihlen described Bourdieu’s most important theory, the theory of practice. Its main concepts are habitus (a system of durable dispositions; an internalized mental or cognitive structure that functions and constrains what people should or should not do), field (a social space or network of relationships between the positions occupied by actors) and capital (cultural, economic, social; it is considered to bee accumulated by labor). The theory suggests that in these fields actors are positioned in relation to each other, taking into consideration their amount of capital or power and the conflicts in trying to accumulate or conserve it. For public relations, this approach can be useful because one can look at the organization as an actor trying to gain capital in the social space.
Other examples of approaches are social constructionist perspective on crisis communication, risk society an subpolitics and many others. I recommend this book as being a breath of fresh air, as I said before, and possibly a resource for further research and improvement in the field.
It can be said that this book is also an alternative to the dominant paradigm of Grunig, therefore can be included in the critiques of public relations and in the attempt to develop a new paradigm. Key concepts as legitimacy, power, democracy, community are being analyzed in relation to PR activity.
For instance, the chapter ‘On Bourdieu’ analyzes how his main interests in the concepts on language and power can help to develop one of the many perspectives on PR. Here, Ihlen described Bourdieu’s most important theory, the theory of practice. Its main concepts are habitus (a system of durable dispositions; an internalized mental or cognitive structure that functions and constrains what people should or should not do), field (a social space or network of relationships between the positions occupied by actors) and capital (cultural, economic, social; it is considered to bee accumulated by labor). The theory suggests that in these fields actors are positioned in relation to each other, taking into consideration their amount of capital or power and the conflicts in trying to accumulate or conserve it. For public relations, this approach can be useful because one can look at the organization as an actor trying to gain capital in the social space.
Other examples of approaches are social constructionist perspective on crisis communication, risk society an subpolitics and many others. I recommend this book as being a breath of fresh air, as I said before, and possibly a resource for further research and improvement in the field.
Nice piece, but is social theory an alternative to the dominant paradigm or just a theory that helps PR practitioners understand public relations practice in the social context.
ReplyDeleteAnd, does critiquing the dominant paradigm classifies any theory as an alternative paradigm?
thank you...as i said in the first paragraph. this book's aim is primarily to understand pr practice in the social context. i also took into consideration the book as being an alternative ('it can be said'), because it analyzes some of the concepts discused by the critics. for example, the dominant paradigm puts in the first place the organization, therefore how the social context can affect the organization. but this book also looks on how the society is influenced by PR activity, thus a different point of view.
ReplyDeleteand critiquing the dominant paradigm does not classifie the theory as an alternative paradigm ('the attempt to develop a new paradigm')
Thank you for the recommendation of this book. I tried another one which is Planning and managing public relations campaigns by Anne Gregory, in the 2nd edition in 2000.
ReplyDeleteThis book is very well structured and helps PR beginners to achieve establishing good PR campaigns. It is written in a more familiar style and leads the reader step by step to plan a campaign in beginning with the hierarchy of a company and the first rational beginnings in organisation over different methods to distribute briefings among staff until final measurable objectives after the campaign itself.
It is a book for practitioner is very worth reading, especially as it is affordable!