Journal Review

Journal review by Annisa Arifiana - 135120207121009

This writing is my review from two journal. That are “International Public Relations: Critique and Reformoluation” by Carl Botan and “A Postmodern Critique of Public Relations Theory and Practice” by Derina Holtzhausen.

The journal written by Botan talks about international public relations that is also intercultural public relations which is means naturally approach from ethnocentric models. Botan in his paper try to compare public relations from around the world and reported in the article journal.

In this journal, mentioned that there are two most common models for public relations management in MNC’S, that are ethnocentric and polycentric. Ethnocentric model is about home country assumptions about public relations and how it works is central. Ilman (1980) suggest this view is exemplified in business, assumed that there is no major difference between motivating and persuading people at home and in other countries. While the polycentric model is in which host country PR practitioners exercise a high degree of autonomy. The practice of public relations is often controlled and directed from the home country based on assumptions inherent to the home country, which resulting that it may not really be international public relations but might better be called trans-border public relations. Then the journal talk about role of assumptions and public relations matrix.

The role of asuumptions in public relations theory called by Grunig as presuppositions. Grunig said that presuppositions are consist of assumptions about the world and values attached to those assumption. The key to effective and ethical international public relations is by understanding the role of the unconscious assumptions of both clients and practitioners. The function of religion has been used differently by different types of organizations, including government, religion, and the company, so that the function of public relations became called by various names, including education, outreach, community service, public information, liaison, issues management, public affairs, public communication, strategic communication, and a variety of other.

It’s necessary descriptive schema for systematicaly categorizing the differences between cultures and nations. A similar schema called the public relations matrix, that can be used to critique the common ethnocentric perspective on public relations for its failure to recognize important differences bertween nations and cultures.

The conclusion of this articel journal is international public relations also always intercultural public relations because the process is characterized in different nations by different mixtures of national development, primary client, legal/political, and historical contexts. The demands which international economic and political events place on public relations practitioners and scholars are escalating rapidly. This will increase the risk of unintentionally imposing cultural and business assumptions on other cultures, thereby diminishing the effectiveness of international public relations.

Actually, I don’t really understand. It’s because I think the journal quite difficult to understand, there are many terms that I do not understand. And also maybe because the journal just arrived yesterday night. So I can’t read and understand it deeply because of the less of time to read repeatedly and get the poin. But I try to.

The second journal by Holtzhausen talks about postmodernism critique. At first, it’s needed to make differences between modern and the postmodern, particularly as it pertains to the organizational environment in which public relations practitioners operate. The journal also eximens that hard or difficult to make sharp distinctions between critical and postmodern theory.

A postmodern approach argues for the use of the most appropriate theory to view a particular situation, be it critical, postmodern or a combination of these. However, viewing public relations theory and practice through another lens is imperative if researchers and practitioners want to keep it relevant to today's society. Furthermore, this article also answers the question whether there is a role for critical theory in public relations and whether the focus should only be on the practitioner. A postmodern perspective would argue for bringing as many different perspectives to the field as possible. It should also not only be to the benefit of the practitioner. Public relations is much more that the technical role of an organizational player. It is a major societal force and should be studied.

References

Botan, C. (1992). International public relations: Critique and reformoluation. International Public Relations, 18 (2), 149-159.

Holtzhausen, D. (2002). A postmodern critique of public relations theory and practice. Communication, 28 (1), 29-38. DOI: 10.1080/02500160208537955