Reconfiguring Public Relations: Ecology, Equity, and Enterprise

Citation

Jahansoozi, J. (2009), "Reconfiguring Public Relations: Ecology, Equity, and Enterprise", Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 378-381. https://doi.org/10.1108/13632540911004632

Do not let the appearance of this small volume deceive you. The 145 pages (excluding the extensive bibliography) are not a quick or light read. Instead these pages are packed with thought‐provoking ideas, ironic critique and passion for improving the public relations discipline. These authors do not hold back and clearly say what they think – it is as if they are having a rather deep and feisty conversation with the aim of rallying support in order to challenge and over throw the Grunigian[1] dominant paradigm that has had a stranglehold on public relations theory development.

According to McKie and Munshi the dominant US paradigm has reached its sell by date, so be prepared for strong arguments for abandoning the old (or at least recognising there are other paradigms out there) and taking part in a whirlwind journey covering ideas that are complex and will require much further reading. It should not be a surprise that McKie and Munshi make this appeal from the edge of the world, New Zealand, where in 2004 they issued a call for papers to explore “edge happenings” at peripheral points, signally a paradigm shift (McKie and Munshi, 2004, p. 243). This call built upon a previous special issue of the Australian Journal of Communication in 1997 “Public relations on the edge”, which included contributions from Leitch and Walker (1997). Petelin's (2005) later article “Editing from the edge: de‐territorializing public relations” continues this theme and which is again picked up in this book. If you are familiar with McKie and Munshi then you will have an idea of what to expect from this book. It is well researched, captivating, and stirs the blood. If you are not familiar with McKie and Munshi then you are in for a treat that at times is frustrating, as you will want more. More explanation, more expansion, and something more tangible, such as a few concrete examples that illustrate some of the abstract ideas discussed. However, this is a postmodernist book after all!

McKie and Munshi do not provide a “how to” manual. Be warned – you will not find a painless solution to saving the environment, creating an egalitarian world, and having sustainable enterprise. Instead the authors try to expand conversations about public relations that go beyond academia and the Grunigian paradigm and in doing so attempt to readdress a US‐centric dominance that is prevalent in the literature and textbooks. This book is for academics who are interested in other perspectives, interdisciplinary approaches, and texts which for the most part have been ignored within the public relations realm but whose ideas have much to offer us. What this book does well is include a broad range of authors from an even broader range of disciplines whose ideas, if internalised and properly digested, could significantly change the way public relations is understood, practised, and researched. With this book McKie and Munshi hint at the potential of the discipline.

The book is structured into ten chapters which start with an initial overview of what is published within public relations and why, before moving on to look at the current situation within the global context. McKie and Munshi then review and assess current public relations theory covering the dominant US perspective and the more recent centres for theory development in Europe and Australasia, as well theory development emerging from Brazil, China and South East Asia. An overview of key textbooks that offer alternative and radical perspectives (in relation to the Grunigian outlook) by L'Etang and Pieczka (2006), Moloney (2006), and Hobsbawn (2006) provides evidence that there are indeed other ways of thinking that don't involve Grunig and Hunt's (1984) four models. Recent US texts such as Tilson and Alozie's (2004) Toward the Common Good: Perspectives in International PR are also reviewed with perhaps a more critical eye with the major flaw being that many of the regions covered tend to be authored by American academics instead of local ones, who might perhaps understand their own situations better.

The middle chapters reflect on decolonising PR, empowering differences, and striving for equity in management. McKie and Munshi criticise public relations for its slow response in engaging with diversity with a detailed critique of the concept of “requisite variety” and of the efforts made within the dominant paradigm to incorporate other ethnic perspectives. They argue that the western approach in controlling diversity has limited the development of multiculturalism. We are reminded that public relations should not be solely viewed as an organisational activity but also as a public one where we can see the complexities of diversity (race, culture and ethnicity) and develop public relationships that are meaningful. The dominance of the western organisational/managerial frame has controlled how public relations is understood and practiced, reinforcing the “us” and the “others” outlook, where the “others” are activists or ethnic minorities that require managing (shutting down).

In order to gain alternative views on democracy and freedom Beck's (1994) and Giddens' (1994) ideas have been translated into the public relations arena. The advice is to abandon the “one size fits all” approach for a focus on developing solutions that culturally resonate with different regions. This is not a new approach but one that has been talked about a lot with regard to globalisation and the importance of understanding “the local”. However, evidence of its implementation remains lacking. Other authors such as Ilhen et al. (2009)[2] have picked up on the importance of social theory for public relations and made headway in this area.

McKie and Munshi rightly chastise public relations academics for not engaging with Edward Said's (1978) book Orientalism. It is exciting to find authors such as Edward Said and Vandana Shiva discussed and recognized for the value their work could bring to public relations perspectives – I have not come across such references in other public relations books before. All too often we limit ourselves by reading only within public relations literature or that of its allied disciplines, ignoring great works that have shifted thinking in other areas. McKie and Munshi critique the lack of engagement with Said's contribution, which other disciplines have evaluated and discussed. By considering the debates raised by Said's work public relations would have a better idea of postcolonial perspectives that are shaping how globalisation is understood.

The later chapters tackle the professionalization of public relations as well as the historical development which along with the limited (US) histories help to explain why the Grunigian dominant paradigm is reinforced and taught in regions and cultures where it simply does not apply. Discussion of L'Etang's (2005) public relations history in the UK and Toledano's (2005) public relations history in Israel demonstrates that there is a plurality of histories that are relevant and that not all PR follows Grunig and Hunt's (1984) US model. In fact, a more recent article by L'Etang (2008) puts forward some examples of British “models” that have been derived from a UK perspective but could have equal validity with the US ones.

The final chapter looks to the future and discusses the merits of futurology and scenario planning, especially when trying to prepare people emotionally for complex outcomes. Overall this book exposes the reader to a range of potential strategies for reform that are emerging on the periphery and makes it clear that public relations academics operating on the margins and outside of the dominant paradigm have a role to play as well as a duty to push these reforms forward. By reflecting on the role and responsibility public relations has toward society, ethical approaches towards ecology, equity and enterprise should follow.

Notes

I believe Kevin Moloney was the first to use the term “Grunigian” which has been adopted by McKie and Munshi.

Ilhen et al. (2009) is to be reviewed in the next issue of JCOM (Books ed.).