Public Relations Democracy: Public Relations, Politics and the Mass Media in Britain
Public Relations Democracy: Public Relations, Politics and the Mass Media in Britain
复制标题
公共关系民主：英国的公共关系、政治和大众媒体
DOI：
10.1108/ccij.2002.7.3.192.2
复制
发表时间：
2002
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
S. Oliver
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Oliver
在本书中，我们再次看到公共关系在后现代英国政治进程中的重要作用。这本书告诉我们，在过去的二十年里，公共关系行业已经扩大了11倍以上，并提出了一个问题，“谁将在公共关系民主的新时代受益最多？”。记者和企业部门、伦敦金融城、压力集团和工会运动的决策者在很大程度上取决于公共关系研究和信息供应的质量和内容。作者，Aeron戴维斯，是一个社会学家谁是看企业传播和企业公关从外到内和大众传播水平。他对97人进行了133次采访，包括记录和非记录。他们来自工会，其他工会，企业公关顾问和内部专家，记者和其他人，如政府部门和研究机构。结果是，戴维斯认为，公共关系和媒体在政策制定过程中的作用变得更加复杂，并通过这些访谈和案例研究提供了批判性的分析。这是一个相当跨学科的文本，但是，尽管标题，它不是专门为公共关系从业者编写的，因此不是该主题的指南，也不是“真正与许多专业人士的主要关注点”（p. x）。他认为，“结果可能最好被描述为媒体的政治社会学......政治社会学家的重大兴趣”。再次，当这去印刷，英国政府宣布计划再次私有化邮局，1994年未能这样做，部分原因是前两年通信工人联盟成功地开展了公关活动，年在阅读所有案例研究中变得清晰的是公共关系研究和评估技术（如内容分析和受众研究）的方法论局限性。如米勒（1997）和迪肯等人（1998）所述，（1999）认为，研究人员还需要确定信息到达记者手中的过程以及运动的最终结果”（第170页）。正如伦敦经济学院（London School of Economics）媒体与传播学讲师玛格丽特·斯卡梅尔（Margaret Scammell）在对该书的评论中所说，“在这个舆论主导的时代，埃隆·戴维斯（Aeron Davis）对公共关系对新闻制作的影响......及其影响政治和财经记者的力量进行了令人信服的、严谨的阐述”。
In this book, we see yet again the significance of the role of public relations on the political processes in post‐modern Britain. The public relations industry has expanded more than 11‐fold over the last two decades, this book tells us, and asks the question,“Who stands to benefit most in the new era of public relations democracy?”. Journalists and decision makers in the corporate sector, the City, pressure groups and the trades union movement depend considerably on the quality and substance of public relations research and supply of information. The author, Aeron Davis, is a sociologist who is looking at corporate communication and corporate PR from the outside in and at the mass communication level. He conducted 133 interviews with 97 individuals, both on and off the record. They come from trade unions, other unions, corporate PR consultants and in‐house specialists, journalists and others such as government departments and research organisations. The outcome has been that Davis believes that the role of public relations and the media in the policy making process has become more complicated and offers a critical analysis through these interviews and case studies. It is a fairly inter‐disciplinary text but, despite the title, it was not written specifically with public relations practitioners in mind and is thus not a guide to the subject, nor does it “really engage with the principal concerns of many in the profession”(p. x). He thinks that “the results are probably best described as a political sociology of the media… of significant interest to political sociologists”.Again, as this went to press, the British government announced its plans to privatise the Post Office once again, having failed to do so in 1994 partly as a consequence of the successful public relations campaign run by the Union of Communication Workers in the previous two years. What becomes clear in reading all the case studies is the methodological limitations of public relations research and evaluation techniques such as content analysis and audience research. There is “as Miller (1997) and Deacon et al.(1999) have argued, an additional need for researchers to identify both the processes by which information comes to journalists and what the final outcomes of campaigns are”(p. 170). As Margaret Scammell, a lecturer in media and communication at the London School of Economics, says in her review of the book,“in these spin dominated times, Aeron Davis has produced a compelling, rigorous account of the impact of public relations on the production of news… and its power to influence political and financial journalists”.