Aazarah Ayu Anggraini | 135120207121007

Journal Review:

A Postmodern Critique of Public Relations Theory and Practice

Derina Holtzhausen

            Journal written by Derina Holtzhausen will discuss about the critique of public relations theory and practice. At the first, the author explain briefly about the perspectives in critique about public relation, modernism and post-modernism perspective. Those perspective have different sight about public relation, their differences views through organizational environment. Modernism perspective/approach to the role of communication ensure that information transfer from the supervisor to the subordinate to gain compliance and to establish networks to ensure the organization’s power in relations with the public. The concepts of this approach are strategic message design, management of culture, and total quality management. And also emphasize the importance of public relations as management function, membership of the dominant coalition and strategic planning of public relation with measureable outcomes, preferably in economic terms. The modernism perspective/approach seeing a thing objectively and can be measure. Post-modern perspective is more diversity and multiplicity, it is applied into two concepts, deconstruction language based on discourse concept and affirmative actions. The author focus on critique public relation through post-modernism perspective because the author said that it might help practitioners to ‘understand the many contradictions in public relation and might explain why their practices don’t always come up with the expected results.

            Also the author tell about the distinction between critical theory and postmodernism perspective because those perspective a little ways to be distinguished. Critical theory strongly focus on capitalism as a mode of production which brings about social control, the current social structure, and new technologies. Critical theory in public relations seek to enhance effectiveness and strive for higher ethical standards. The approach that the author will used in this article is combination of two sub-part of post-modernism approach, epistemological post-modernism and critical post-modernism. The theoretical perspective that will be focused are post-modernism challenge to rationality, concept of hegemony, concept of agency and symbolic capital, concept of hyper reality, and critique of consensus.

            The discussion of this journal is divided into 3 parts, public relations as a strategic management function, public relation practitioners as the agent of power, and public relation and the crisis of representation. The result of establishment public relation which have done by James E. Grunig in 1980s, public relation practitioner now focused on strategic management, strategically manage crises through issues management, strategically manage relationships, strategically manage public relation programs and campaign through management by objective, strategically manage publics and the external environment, and strategically manage the public relation as a whole. The focus on management crisis might brought public relation to crisis of its relatively short academic existence. Postmodernism begin challenge the legitimacy managers setting the goals for the organization and the rationality of management decision, “rationality” is rejected by post-modernism perspective.

            Post-modernism highlights the role public relations plays in maintaining managerialism and corporatism. Post-modernism point out the term of “agents” as a system of relations between strata and agent is convenient location for the through out of discourse. This perspective critique that agency is a dangerous position for public relation practitioners, agents are people acting on behalf of powerful organizational managers. Postmodernism intimate link between power and knowledge enhances the understanding of this role of agents.

            Society organized around simulation codes and models that replace production as the organizing principle of society. Signs take on a life of their own and that constitutes a new social order structured by models, codes, and signs. Public relation practitioners inherently image contest or sign struggles, thus this perspective indirectly focus on media relation function of public relation practitioners. Media relations function, public relations are directly responsible for a crisis of representation which viewed as the ‘replacement of the factual representational’ (Hassard, 1996: 50). Representation involves the presentation of a reality that doesn’t exist.

Journal Review

International Public Relations: Critique and Information

Carl Botan 

            Journal yang ditulis oleh Carl Botan membicarakan mengenai kondisi International Public Relation bahwa terdapat lebih dari 60 both national and regional have been emerged. Public relation terbanyak berada United States of Americ and European Economic Community (EC).  The EC is actively seeking to unify and advance the practice of public relation through CERP (Confederation Europeenen en Relations Publiques) to which both the national public relations associations of all EC member countries and individual practitioners belong. Many major U.S., E.C, and toher corporations conduct business in more than one country, they called multinational corporations (MNC), an actual public relations firm.

            Then, Kinzar and Bohn (1985) identified four possibles model for public relation management in MNC’s, the most two common models are ethnocentric and polycentric. Ethnocentric model seeing people are functionally are the same everywhere, they naturally will respond the same stimuli in the same way. Ilman (1980) assumed that no major difference between motivating and persuading people at home and other countries. Polycentric model is a high degree of autonomy. Host country practitioners are entrusted with carrying out the MNC’s plans and programs based on their own experiences and contacts.

            The author proceed by explaining the role of assumption. International public relation is also intercultural public relation, it has spread around the world under different history context, culture, language, government or political system. Cultural and history context can determine how the roles of public relation. Botan (1992) notify that failure to recognize differences in assumptions about public relation causes two harms in chance of achieving immediate public relations goals. First, it reduces the potential for using public relations as a lens for better understanding how organization in other cultures communication to adapt their relationship with relevant publics. Second, it reduces the potential for using the knowledge and practical experience of other cultures to inform our practice and understanding of public relations.

Bibliography

Carl, B. (1992). international public relation: critique and reformulation. Public Relation Reviews, 18(2), 149-159.

Holtzhausen, D. (2002). a post modern critique of public relations theory and practice. Communicatio, 28(1), 29-38.