The Role of Rhetoric in Public Relations Practice - Essay Example

The role of rhetoric in public relations practice and its relation to the management of an organisation’s reputation Introduction There are many definitions that have evolved over the years with regard to the concept of public relations. One common thread that runs through them is maintaining, protecting, or enhancing the reputation of the organization that is engaged in a public relations exercise. To a layman, public relations are probably associated with politics and government. But every organization big and small is in effect engaged in some form of public relations activities during its normal course of business and also in handling the consequence of a disaster or an emergency. This is because any organization will need to protect its reputation in order to survive and grow, especially in the long run. Some have separate departments or staff to manage this function while other employees usually engage in other day to day activities like marketing. Thus, the process of public relations does happen in some form or the other in all organizations as well as in the case of individuals especially if he or she is frequently seen in the public eye. There are many ways and methods by which public relations activity is conducted. Press conferences, meetings, press releases, individual meetings, mass distribution of material and information are some of the most common ways. Organizations and individuals also innovate in bringing out new ways to keep good relations with the public. But all this requires good communication which should be noticed by the intended audience. Rhetoric, the art of using language is commonly used in communication, and hence is a powerful tool used in public relations exercise also. This paper connects three essential concepts in the running of organizations namely public relations, rhetoric, and management of reputation. In the process, the paper examines the role of rhetoric in public relations and how it can be employed as a powerful tool in managing the reputation of an organization. In the process, the paper will examine each of these three concepts individually after which it will be brought together to arrive at a conclusion. Public relations As the name suggests, public relations commonly refers to maintaining good relations with the public. The size and scope of PR will vary widely and will depend on the size and nature of the organization (or individual). For a government, the audience (or public) will be the whole citizenry of the country. It can also be certain groups, classes or race with whom good relationship needs to be maintained. For a corporation, the public comprises of all its stakeholders and the general population that it comes into contact during its day to day activities. PhilipJ Kitchen in his book ‘Public Relation’ provides a generic definition of public relations as “communications with various publics” (Kitchen, 1997, p. 2). According to this definition PR could be a formal or informal activity requiring no particular form of expertise or skill. But he adds that PR is evolving and is undergoing continuous change. PR is now a recognized function that requires training and skill and is now seen as a professionally managed activity. The Chartered Institute of Public Relations in the UK defines the concept as “the discipline which looks after reputation, with the aim of earning understanding and support and influencing opinion and behaviour. It is the planned and sustained effort to establish and maintain goodwill and mutual understanding between an organisation and its publics” (Chartered Institute of Public Relations: What is PR?). Three key concepts are evident from this definition namely, reputation, goodwill, and understanding with regard to an organization and the public with which interacts. History of public relations: As an informal activity public relations go a long way back in the recorded history. In fact there is no formal date or period which can be credited with the founding of public relations. It started off as a part of human interaction within the society. Heath, in his Encyclopaedia of Public Relations’ says that the first recorded activity occurred in 1800 B.C. in Sumeria: “In Sumeria, a farm bulletin telling farmers how to grow crops is one of the earliest examples of mass distribution of educational material” (Heath, 2004, P. 915). It was considered that improving the lives of farmers is good for the reputation of the governing body of a nation and also helps to have a good relationship with the public. The book then provides a timeline on its development and goes on to say that the first business PR exercise was done by the American company Westinghouse in its attempt to garner support for alternating current against direct current. For the record, Westinghouse succeeded in its effort in making alternating current to preferred choice to provide electricity. In the UK (as elsewhere also), the development of public relations is associated mainly with politics: “The political domain was of crucial importance in stimulating the growth of public relations during a turbulent period of European history” (LEtang, 2004, p. 223). The turbulent period mentioned here is the early half of the twentieth century in which the two World Wars occurred. For example, the British government had undertaken massive campaigns to counter the Nazi propaganda unleashed by Hitler’s Germany during the Second World War. Literature indicates that public relations is used mainly to counter a threat or to strike home a particular point rather than as an ongoing exercise. A company may resort to heavy PR activities when confronted with a scandal or any other problem. Rhetoric Aristotle’s name is synonymous with the word rhetoric and the great philosopher and thinker has even written many books on the topic. His definition of rhetoric is as follows. “Rhetoric is an art, or faculty, upon which every subject, considers the capability of persuasion” (Aristotle 1812). According to this definition, rhetoric involves the art of using words to persuade another and can be used practically in every area and subject of knowledge. This gives the word a broad connotation indicating that rhetoric can be used in communication by public relations personnel in order to persuade people to believe about the good reputation of organizations. Rhetoric and public relations The power of rhetoric to persuade as mentioned by Aristotle has been endorsed by many experts on public relations also. Jacquie LEtang and Magda Pieczka say that “Especially important for an analysis of which focuses on the rhetorical aspects of public relations is the persuasive element; for Aristotle in particular, rhetoric was a technical skill which could be acquired to achieve persuasive effects” (LEtang & Pieczka , 2006, p. 360). But pure rhetoric without substance is not seen as advisable or advocated even as early as the times of Plato. This is primarily the reason why the term empty rhetoric is often used for words devoid of any substance and quality. Plato also advocated the concept of the ‘ethics of persuasion’. This has been the viewpoint of many others in later years and even now. The viewpoint of such thinkers and theorists is that rhetoric is indeed an art that focuses on structure of the language used and its practical use is persuasion. But they add that any act should take into consideration the consequences it can have on the public. In that sense rhetoric should be combined with ethics to bring about social, political or corporate responsibility. Chapter eight of Kitchen’s book Public Relations mentions about corporate and social responsibility when engaging in PR activities. He stresses the importance of organizations (especially in business) to beyond their own profitability and responsibility towards their employees and shareholders. The chapter is primarily concerned with “corporate social responsibility and the objectives of many businesses to link corporate behaviour with reputation and image” (Kitchen, 1997, p.3). Kitchens stresses that management of reputation which is the primary motive behind public relations is dependent on two factors namely how companies behave and how the public expects the company to behave. In other words, if the company acts in a manner harmful to all or some sections of the public, the expected and actual behaviour varies. In such instances, public relations activities with a view to hide the problem are unethical. Companies should not act irresponsibly in the first place. Responsible behaviour can definitely be used to enhance reputation through PR and rhetoric. This is primarily one reason why the field of corporate social responsibility is gaining much importance in corporate circles. Any company nowadays highlight their CSR activities in their press releases. A separate section is provided for this in their annual reports usually in the form of the CEO’s report to shareholders: “Generally written as a signed personal letter, the document has enormous rhetorical importance in building credibility and imparting confidence, convincing investors that the company is pursuing sound and effective strategies” (Exploring corporate rhetoric: metadiscourse in the CEOs letter 2009). The same goes for another area of concern namely environmental protection. Companies try to highlight the fact that they are being responsible consumers of energy and other resources and do all they can in protecting or at least reducing harm to the environment. This also has an effect in enhancing the reputation of such organizations. Theories of public relations PR as a subject of study is similar to other concepts like human relations, marketing or advertising in the sense that many theories on the topic have emerged over the years. Some of them have evolved directly in relation to it while some others, already existing are relevant to it or have been borrowed from other areas. For example, agenda setting is taken from the communications field. Other borrowed theories include systems theory, semiotics, and Haberman’s critical theories (Johnston et al., 2004, p.44). Due to shortage of space only those two theories directly connected with public relations will be discussed here namely Grunig’s models and Heath’s rhetorical theory. Grunig’s four models of PR: The four models developed by James E Grunig during the early 1980s are press agentry, public information, two-way asymmetrical and two-way symmetrical (Grunig & Dozier, 2002, P. 307). These models are based on the type of activity and the way in which public relations is implemented by organizations. The press agentry model is a way to enhance reputation of an organization through the media. Any methods by which all or selected media will provide a favourable picture of an organization can be practiced. For example, an organization can call a press conference or briefing and provide information on its CSR activities. The press in turn will report the event to the public depending on its relevance and its personal rapport with the organization. Here there is only one way communication between the public and the organization. It is only after the event has been publicized will the organization get some feedback from the public. Public information is similar to agentry in this respect. This model follows a system where information is fed to the public by any means other than the media: “this model has frequently been linked with the concept of public relations as propaganda” (Lane 2003). The two-way asymmetric model allows the public to provide feedback about its practices frequently, but there is no real interaction (by way of dialogues) between the two. The best form of public relations is to use the two-symmetric approach where by there is constant feedback and interaction between the organization and the public. The organization will also take into consideration suggestions, recommendations, and criticism and act accordingly to cater to the perception of the public. Grunig and Hunt in their book ‘Excellent public relations and effective organizations’ admit that the last model has come in for criticism from many quarters because of its lack of presence in real life situations. But they argue that it is not so. They have “reviewed a large number of studies of the models and concluded that all four models – including the two-way symmetrical model – are positive models that describe the actual practice of public relations”(Grunig & Dozier, 2002, p. 310). Positive models are representative of the actual situation that exists in the real world while normative models are those which describe the best way. In other words, they explain the way it ought to be done rather than the actual way it is done. Many practical difficulties may prevent a particular model form becoming positive and hence remain normative (i.e. only on paper). Even Kitchens’ view of corporate social responsibility may not be practical in many settings. Many corporations while actually CSR activities will also harm it during as a part of their daily business. For example, many textile companies in UK are accused of using slave labour in Asia for manufacturing their outsourced processes. No amount of rhetoric will be beneficial in case such matters come to light. The only redeeming feature for such organizations is the apathy for such unethical practices by an uncaring public. Grunig argues that the rhetoric in most cases is used to further an organization’s personal and selfish interests. It implies that rhetoric is used to further selfishness in terms of own goals of an organization without really being sincere about public interests. He and his co-author Dozier say that the two-way symmetrical model is the best way to balance public and organizational interests. “Many, but not all, scholars of persuasion and rhetoric seem to feel that their approach to public relations, which we understand as pure advocacy of an organization’s interests, is challenged by our suggestion that the symmetrical model is the most ethical and effective of the four models” (Grunig & Dozier, 2002, p. 310).This indicates the effectiveness of rhetoric in convincing the public of a certain matter whether it is true or not. Even though there is no mention of rhetoric in these models it would be worthwhile to analyse its effectiveness in each case. Effective rhetoric can be included in the public information model and to a certain extent the press agentry model. This is because it basically involves planned one-way communication. Time can be taken and proper people employed to make up the language to be used. But in case of the two-way models, there are more practical difficulties especially in the asymmetric one. This is because communication is two-way and in real time in many cases. It is difficult to make up proper rhetoric in such situations. Heath’s rhetorical theory: Robert Lawrence Heath insists that rhetoric is essential in public relations. He argues that the essence of public relations is effective communication, and using rhetoric is the best way of achieving this. According to him, “A rhetorical approach to public relations justifies the proposition that organizations build effective relationships when they adhere to the best values – those most admired by the community of interest – as a first step toward being effective communicators” (Heath & Vasquez 2004). In other words, rhetoric is essential or at least helps in effective communication. But Heath stresses on one point which is endorsed by both Kitchens and Grunig, that of ethics. Each of them has used different words like CSR, ethics, and values which in effect it is the same thing. Personal opinions, observations, and conclusion Literature and studies have shown that the role of rhetoric in public relations does indeed have the power to persuade the public to believe in a company’s reputation. But this writer has to agree with what has been said by people with honest intentions. Plato during the ancient times and Kitchens among many others have stressed the aspects of ethics and responsible behaviour by organizations. These two aspects are relevant in the case of public relations also. Freely used an irresponsible rhetoric is unethical in the first place. Another aspect is that it will not work in the long run. The public will sooner or later see through the public relations smoke screen put up by such companies. The adage that ‘you can fool some people all the time, and all the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time’ holds well here. Critics of Grunig’s model may be correct because even though interaction and dialogue may take place between the public and the organization, the extent to which an organization may yield to public wishes is limited. Moreover, the public may not be really interested to spend time and resource with an organization because they do not receive any direct benefit from it. A customer or a creditor may be interested, but a person who lives in the locality, without any relationship with the company may not be interested. These are personal conjectures and a real study will prove the reality of the situation as to the reasons given above. In effect, all theorists stress on one point which is honesty or ethics. Rhetoric can be effective in any situation in the short term. But in the long term, ethical and responsible behaviour is important. Hence the personal opinion of this writer is given in brief here. Rhetoric is a powerful tool in communication. Communication is an essential element of public relations. In the short term, strong rhetoric can effectively cover up any faults and wrong doings of organizations by using it in public relations activities. But in the long run sincerity towards the society (public) is paramount for long term survival and growth. If organizations have this in mind, the best way to communicate this sincerity which in turn will enhance reputation is through public relations using well thought-out and well written rhetoric. References Aristotle 1812, A Dissertation on Rhetoric, Trans. Daniel Michael Crimmin, J.J. Stockdale. Chartered Institute of Public Relations, What is PR? , CIPR, viewed 29 April 2009, < http://www.cipr.co.uk/direct/careers.asp?v1=whatis> “Exploring corporate rhetoric: metadiscourse in the CEOs letter” 2009, The Journal of Business Communications, April 1998, Entrepreneur Media, Inc, viewed 29 April 2009, < http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/20873012.html> Grunig, J.E & Dozier, D.M 2002, Excellent public relations and effective organizations: a study of communication management in three countries, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Heath, RL 2004, Encyclopedia of public relations, Illustrated Edition, SAGE. Heath, RL & Vasquez, G.M 2004, Handbook of public relations, Illustrated Edition, SAGE. Johnston, J, Zawawi, C, Allen & Unwin 2004, Public relations: theory and practice, 2nd edn, Allen & Unwin. Kitchen, P. J 1997, Public relations: principles and practice, Illustrated Edition, Cengage Learning EMEA. Lane, A 2003, Working at the Interface: The Descriptive Relevance of Grunig and Hunt’s theories of public relations practices in south east Queensland schools, viewed 29 April 2009, < http://praxis.massey.ac.nz/fileadmin/Praxis/Files/Journal_Files/issue1/refereed_articles_paper1.pdf> LEtang, Jacquie 2004, Public relations in Britain: a history of professional practice in the twentieth century, Routledge. LEtang, J & Pieczka, M 2006, Public relations: critical debates and contemporary practice, Illustrated Edition, Routledge. Read More