The Four Models of Public Relations Devised by Grunig and Hunt - Book Report/Review Example

THE FOUR MODELS OF PUBLIC RELATIONS DEVISED BY GRUNIG AND HUNT INTRODUCTION Jim Grunig and Todd Hunt are very famous for their book titled ‘Managing Public Relations’. They came up with the four models that continue to define and inform the sphere of public relations. The four models are essentially very important since they implore upon organizations not only to focus on marketing and publicity but also to incorporate the elements of ethics in guiding the organization attain their objectives and goals. These models are Press Agentry/publicity, public information, two way asymmetric and finally two way symmetric (Grunig, 2009). Press Agentry or what is referred to as P.T.Barnum essentially incorporates at its very core the element of propaganda in dissemination of the information. Grunig and Hunt estimate that about fifteen percent of the word organizations practice the Press Agentry (Phillips and young, 2009). It involves a one way passing of the information. It was quite rampant during the early and mid nineteenth Century where information was disseminated through the mass media. Often the one way form of information that was passed used to be incomplete, exaggerated and even overly distorted in marketing a particular good or service. Through such kind of model the main objective is to persuade the audience based solely upon the information given. Moreover the truth is not often the main priority of the model (Kent and Taylor, 2001). It may be hard to pinpoint particular organizations that solely depend on the press Agentry as a publicist tool of public relations. Press Agentry however remains very alive in the current real world just as ink of public relations. Press Agentry is very important and seen essentially among the campaigns and sports. A good example is the politics and the sports (Bates, 2002). An example is the current politics in the US where techniques such as publicity stunts and fake manufactured events are used to attract the corporate. Organizations often get into the bandwagon of this press Agentry example being the Enron Company during the Bush campaign’s (Dholakia et al, 2003). Currently the London Olympics 2012 would portray a very succinct picture of the Press Agentry as an avenue of public relations. Public information on the other hand is a model that according to Hunt and Grunig became clear during the early twenty century. This came about when the organizations and most corporate both private and public realized that they needed more than propaganda to penetrate the press. Often they opt to recruit their own private journalists who are responsible for marketing their agendas, services and products (Black, 2001). Both the press Agentry and public information are one way passage of information however as opposed to the press Agentry the latter is not persuasive in nature. There is an element of fact finding though not extensive however feedback from the public is not embraced by this model (Bates, 2002). Public information is very important in the current world. As opposed to hype and misrepresentation that cloud press Agentry, much effort is dedicated to accuracy. An example of a corporate in this era is KPMG and Price Water Coopers (PWC) which takes into account a lot of accuracy and truthfulness in their information. Trust and accuracy is an important component of any successful company without which the company would crumble in debts (Breakenridge, 2008). Lack of accuracy has led to the falling of big companies such as Arthur Anderson and Enron. Most nongovernment organizations and governments also take into account of public information as an important element of public relations. Grunig and Hunt estimate that 50 percent of the world organizations embrace public information. Arthur Page identifies the key elements that encompass public information to include telling the truth, embracing calmness and patience and accompanying any information with the right actions (Wilcox and Cameron, 2006). Two way asymmetric model now incorporates a very important element of getting the feedback from the consumers. The main objective of getting the feedback has a scientific element of persuading the very audience from which the feedback is sourced. In most current corporate organizations they have continually used this model as a base and foundation of increasing their profits and customer base (Newson et al, 2004). The model uses an evaluative research whose main objective is to alter and tailor the activities and products of the company to that of their endeared and esteemed audience. Edward Bernays is attributed to be a main premier of advocating the two way asymmetric model (Davis, 2007). A relevant case scenario in this would be illustrated by Pepsi-Cola where in the Mid 90’s got entangled in a negative publicity dilemma. An elderly couple had accused the company of using one of their products the diet Pepsi which had a syringe. Over a period of time the company mounted an extensive campaign to reclaim and advertise a good name for the company. The company used the members of the public in the advertisement showing that the company was liable in any way (Esrock and Leichty, 2008). This is a characteristic element among the multinationals and big companies. An example is the case of KFC in Australia where the company was found liable for poisoning. The company has mounted extensive campaign to show that their products are of the right quality. Recently the Coca-Cola Company has been accused of using a cancer causing ingredient in the Coke Soda of most developing countries. To counter this, the company has mounted a positive campaign strategy to counter the accusations. Two way symmetric is in many ways related to the two way asymmetric models. The only point of departure emanates from the mutual understanding that often stands out so distinctly in the model (Grunig, 2009). As opposed to persuasion as the main aim of scientific and evaluative research, the main aim of the research is often aimed in ensuring that the corporate get the perspectives of the general public. The main component is geared towards establishing the consequences of the laid down policies and actions of the organizations. The main objective of carrying out such an informative step is to enhance relationship building (Guth and Mash, 2005). Mutual respect is a key component in this model, the organizations are willing to adjust their operations to adjust and reach the expectations of the public (Dholakia et al, 2003). Trust and accuracy becomes an important thread of the implementation. An example of the organization that has embraced this kind of model is Dell and Apple. These companies are significantly conversant that the tastes and preferences of the people towards the Information technology vary with time. An example of this is the Ideastorm a website that was set up by the Dell Company so as to get the feedback and comments from the general public (Kent and Taylor, 2001). Getting the views of the public has resulted in significant adjustments on how the company comes up with new products. CONCLUSION Retrospectively though public relations was embraced by very few companies, today it continue to be a main force that inform the companies and governments (Phillips and Young, 2009). A public relations based on the four models is an important foundation on any organization that wish to strategize on its future. Public relations should not only be entirely geared towards gaining the profits but also assisting the company gets vital information that assists the management in policy formulation and manufacture of products. It’s thus important that the PR department should get enough funds to achieve these objectives. REFERENCES Bates, D. (2002). “Mini-Me” History: Public Relations from the Dawn of Civilization. Published by the Institute for Public Relations. Black, C. (2001). The PR Practitioner’s Desktop Guide. Thorogood. London. Breakenridge, D. (2008) PR 2.0, New Media, New Tools, New Audiences. New Jersey: FT Press. Davis, A. (2007). Mastering Public Relations. London: Wiley Blackwell. Dholakia, U.M.; Bagozzi, R.P. and Klein Pearo, L. (2003). A social influence model of consumer participation in network- and small-group-based virtual communities. In The International Journal for Marketing Research, 21 (2004). P241-263. Esrock, S., & Leichty, G. (2008). Social responsibility and corporate web pages: Self- presentation or agenda-setting? Public Relations Review, 24(3), 305–319. Grunig, J. E. ( 2009). Paradigms of global public relations in an age of digitalisation. Prism Journal 6(2). Guth, D.W. Marsh, C. (2005). Adventures in Public Relations. Case Studies and Critical Thinking. Pearson. New York. Kent, M., & Taylor, M. (2001). Building dialogic relationships through the world wide web. Public Relations Review, 24(3), 321–334. Newson, D. Turk, J. Kruckeberg, D. (2004). This is PR: The Realities of Public Relations. 8th Ed. Thomson. United States. Phillips, D. Young, P. (2009). Online Public Relations: A Practical Guide to Developing an Online Strategy in the World of Social Media. Kogan Page Press. London. Wilcox, D.L. Cameron, G.T. (2006). Public Relations. Strategies and Tactics. Eighth Edition. Pearson. Read More