Nordmedia 2007 Helsinki Relations Between Journalists and Public - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Nordmedia 2007 Helsinki

Relations Between Journalists and Public Relations Officers in Estonia: The Application of Bourdieu’s Concept of ‘Field’ to Public Relations Kaja Tampere University of Jyväskylä Kristel Sarapuu University of Tallinn

• The study focuses on relations between public relations

(PR) and journalism.

• Several public relations theorists (Grunig etc) who say that

media relations are loosing importance, although relations with media are still considered very important line of PR work (research in Estonia and Finland).

Research anatomy

• Interviews with journalist:
• For this research project, in-depth interviews were conducted

with 21 Estonian journalists from different media forms, different positions in these media, and different age groups and experience in media, as well as examining differences between nationalities (Estonian and Russian). As the sample of Estonian journalists is representative, the study provides comprehensive and valid picture of the current state of PR in Estonia from journalists’ perspective.

• Generalizations from previous studies – long

term project under my guidance

Theoretical background

• French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu describes the field of

journalism as a microcosm following its own rules and journalists as agents of the journalistic field. Journalists are the ones who shape the discussions on the mass media that is widely viewed as the central institution of the contemporary public sphere.

• Large explanation of Bourdieu's concept

• The public sphere, as Habermas has described it, is now

certainly to an extent influenced, and even produced by public relations. These power lines and relationships between public relations and journalism need to be constantly studied as these two have means to produce messages that may at the end influence the audience.

• Emerging new media is also a growingly more influential

factor that changes today’s public sphere. New media provides opportunities for citizen journalists

• Grunig considers media relations as fading area, as he

states in his article “Theory and Practice of Interactive Media Relations”: “Ironically, the better public relations becomes, the less public relations practitioners will need the media”. He explains: “ If they public relations strategically, they will communicate with key publics about problems and relationships long before they become issues that interest the public”.

• Several PR and communication researchers, as discussed

in this paper, perceive public relations and journalism as actors on the larger information field. Both have their own role but both are members of communication process.

• The latest trends of communication research are to study

the effects of public relations on media?

• Public relations and journalism as public

communication actors

• Intereffication model of public relations – Bentele

representing the understanding that public relations and journalism are equal actors in communication process (inspiration from JL)

• Pressures on journalism
• Media, public relations and news: we live in

‘promotional times’ when states, organizations, different interest groups and social movements all want to make their message heard and pursue their interests ( BUT anonymous and abstract media audience...)

• Relationship between journalists and public relations

practitioners – from history till today

Research problem and questions

• Authors of present study propose that public relations is a field

similar to the journalistic field as described by Bourdieu and relates to the field of journalism and to the public as a field.

• The research questions of current study are:
• Do journalists who work daily with public relations practitioners

feel the existence of a public relations field and how do they describe it?

• What are the main factors in the contact area of these two

professions that influence journalists’ attitudes?

Methodology and data collection

• This research used qualitative methods to achieve the
• bjectives set in beginning of study. As the goal was not to

provide extensive perspective but rather intensive insight into the subject matter, a limited but carefully selected sample was pulled from the target population

• The target population for the study was Estonian journalists

working for written and audiovisual media. Interview respondents were selected by non-random theoretical sampling.

• Invitations to participate in the study were sent out to 44
• journalists. 19 journalists did not reply or their e-mail addresses

were not correct and they were not reached by call-ups. Overt non-responses came from 4 journalists, who asked not to participate in the study for following reasons: (1)one journalist said he does not communicate with PR practitioners in principle and he does not participate in any common “field” with them; (2)another said he has shared all his knowledge in this sphere and has nothing new to add; (3)one explained that he has no knowledge of PR and based on his observance has never been an object nor a subject to PR work; (4)one journalist said he simply does not like to be studied.

• in-depth interviews were conducted with 21 Estonian

journalists.

• Written media
• Newspapers: 8
• Weeklies: 3
• Audiovisual media
• Radio: 4
• Television: 6

• Respondents hold different positions in these channels:
• Editor 4
• Editor/program producer 2
• Senior editor 2
• Head of editorial opinion 1
• Head of news department 3
• Deputy editor in chief 3
• Member of the board 1
• Program director 1
• Acting editor 2
• Editor in chief 2

• Respondents divide based on their language of

reporting as follows:

• Estonian 18
• Russian 4
• Respondents represent for both private sector

and public broadcasting media:

• Public broadcasting 9
• Privately owned 12

Findings: generally

• Journalists were open to discuss about their working relationships

with PR practitioners as they recognize them as partners. Journalists described PR practitioners as “guide dogs”, “corridors of information”, ”PR person is a professional hedgehog in the bushes who advises what to do”, “PR person is like a navel-string that connects the

• rganization with the public through immediate information and

sometimes even more importantly through background information so that journalists would understand what and why is really going on and what might follow that makes it even more important”.

• More negative connotations had expressions like “it

seems that if there is no other work to do, person goes into PR” and “PR person’s slogan is “Truth, truth and

• nce more truth, but not the whole truth and definitely

not a lie”. Thus, as these descriptions show, journalists are in many cases divided into two groups, those with very positive and others with mainly negative or even patronizing attitudes about PR and PR practitioners.

Findings: PR as Field

• Public relations, as the interview results suggest, comply with

these field characteristics (more deeply in full text). Public relations, through its work with the information from different

• rganizations change journalists’ understandings and opinions

and add viewpoints and aspects to the general information flow. Public relations is a field interacting with journalistic field and the result of that interaction produces new knowledge or changes in the old one. The amount and depth of information provided by public relations causes the activities or passiveness

• f journalists. Public relations itself without being practiced

does not exercise force. There are rules on the public relations field and ways of practice that, if put in effect, will cause one or another reaction.

• It is possible to apply the term ‘field’ to the area of public

relations also because public relations is an analytic are where there are people acting on their own and as members of organizations or specialized agencies. The force on public relations field is the information it handles and canalizes inside the organization, to journalism and to the public.

• Following Bourdieu’s concept of the field and analyzing

public relations sphere in that light it is possible to find parallels in the public relations field.

PR in relations to journalism

• The responses from the interviews describe the

daily contacts of public relations practitioners and journalists mainly as cooperative and open.

• Almost all respondents admitted that they have

daily contacts with PR practitioners and that is the regular practice and a natural part of journalists’ work today. Estonia as a transitional society has come through rough developmental periods and both professionals, journalists and PR practitioners have developed over time along with the society.

• Confrontations that occurred ten years ago have smoothened.

Society is more open today, but journalists have other obstacles to work with, as one respondent put it, “there are processes that have become more hidden and harder to track down”.

• The overall level of public relations practitioners is uneven, but

journalists perceive PR practitioners more and more as partners in communication process: “in principle PR is about helping journalists”.

• PR practitioners do not only provide answers to questions but

are competent of the work of the organization they represent. The ability to provide background knowledge is very highly valued by the journalists and was mentioned many times by almost all journalists during the course of the interviews

• Studies quoted in this paper indicate that journalists

generally dislike public relations practitioners.

• Sometimes in the interviews the respondents used several

war or battle-related words when describing their attitudes towards PR practitioners or PR in general, such as front, defense, attack. This indicates that journalists do see them as on two different sides: “our goals are different and there is a line between”.

• Journalists had two opposing concepts if PR practitioner is

a source or mediator of information.

• Journalists who appeared to have good personal contacts

with some PR practitioners said that they can be a source and often are a source if they are well respected within their organization and know what lies beneath the decisions.

• Others were convinced that PR practitioner could only be a

mediator and never a source, except in case of police or

• ther security matters

• Thus it is apparent that journalists do recognize if PR

practitioner has been successful in establishing PR function in the organization: “it sticks out if PR is not on the level”, “there are examples where communication rules with media are not discussed and the outcome is ridiculous”.

• This supports the understanding that if PR is well

established internally in the organization it provides ground for stable external relationships.

• Bentele’s intereffication model studies mutual influences

and mutual accommodating processes of public relations and journalism. There were two groups of PR practitioners most often mentioned as the best help for journalists: those who were former journalist and well educated or – trained PR professionals. These PR practitioners realize journalists’ needs the best and provide newsworthy information, do it fast and keep promises. They know what interests journalists, what kind of information they want and are able to find interesting information from their

• rganization

• Respondents repeated often that as Estonia is a small

country, people from the same line of work know each

• ther. Personal relationships develop often and are useful

for both journalists and PR practitioners as they know then more each other’s expectations, possibilities and needs

• Several journalists expressed that these relationships

need to be kept professional and should not become very close, as there are examples when these have affected journalists: “Personal relationship can become a burden. Dilemma rises when unpleasant story for that organization

• develops. Cannot say that PR doesn’t use the

relationships then.”

• Russian journalists expressed that as Estonian journalists have

better personal contacts with PR practitioners as they often have similar backgrounds, they get more and sometimes even different information.

• Most respondents agreed that regardless to the possible

dangers, relationships should be kept. These relationships are built on trust that once destroyed is hard to rebuild: “Trust is like demining, you can take advantage of it only once.” Journalists named lying, muddling, holding back information, manipulating, not keeping promises, providing only formal answers, not understanding media, hiding real motives, not providing information equally most often as trust destroying incidents.

• PR practitioners forward their information to journalists

usually through press releases. Many journalists regard the constant flow of press releases as a spam and they read only 1% of these. This flow devalues press releases and several important releases may sink in this stream. Journalists also pointed out that often press releases are full of clichés, very formal and too often not well formed

• Others pointed out that press releases are very

professionally composed and helpful

Pressures on journalism

• Several respondents, especially those on managerial

positions in the papers stressed that they are hiring rather than firing journalists. There are no financial temptations for journalists as their salaries are competitive.

• Overall conviction of the respondents is the belief that

Estonian journalists follow honest conscious and high moral standards of journalism.

• Another form of pressure that was studied in current study

was the new media influence. Most journalists perceive new media as an additional source of information for journalists, not as a competitor or communication channel helping PR practitioners to reach their target audiences directly and create alternative public discussions.

Masterminds in public relations

• The aspect brought up by Mayhew in the literature review,

the phenomenon of New Public where professional communicators play extremely important and decisive role in today’s communication process were described by several respondents as already pretty disturbing phenomenon in Estonia’s information field as well. The responses to the question about skilful PR describe the alertness of journalists to the existence of well-developed spin skills of some Estonian PR practitioners.

Public relations and their clients in media – what shapes journalists’ attitudes?

• Respondents agreed that public sector is under a lot of

scrutiny as required by Estonian Law (Public Information Act) that obliges public sector to provide information: “Biggest difference between private and public sector is that we have the right to get information from the public sector.”

• Some journalists complained that private sector is very

closed: “Private sector can deny from providing information, we can only stress on public interest, but it does not make them talk, they do not have to answer.”

• Journalists were asked how successful are NGOs today in

getting into information flow. Many respondents expressed the feelings that NGOs are too emotional and are not able to provide concrete facts: “NGOs are too emotional, do not provide facts.”

• Others saw NGOs as most sincere and very interested in

their subject matter, thus great representatives of their

• rganizations. If they find interesting information from their
• rganization, they have a sure chance to get coverage.

NGOs are not perceived as regular mainstream news beats and the lack of knowledge how media works, how to find information that would interest journalists and how to provide it to media are serious obstacles in achieving journalists’ attention

• Practically all respondents shared the opinion that PR of

political parties is the worst and it is not pleasant to work with them: Journalists are most hostile to political parties’ PR people.

• Journalists were very much of the same mind when they

were asked if there is a difference between in-house and

• utsourced public relations function. The hierarchy can be

described as follows: in-house PR is better than

• utsourced PR that is better than no PR at all.

Russian practices

• Russian journalists expressed that PR practitioners

understand and have been successful in explaining to their managements that relationships with Russian speaking audience are valuable.

• Minority audience’s needs are more and more
• acknowledged. Problematic areas are that it is easier for

Estonian journalists to establish personal contacts with PR practitioners, as the backgrounds are often similar.

• Thus they get more information and sometimes even

different information. It is understandable to certain extent as there are issues and approaches that would not matter to Russian audience at all: “I haven’t felt differentiation by

• language. There can be political specifications as there is

no reason to talk to Russian person about (Estonian politicians) Tõnis Lukas, Tunne Kelam, Ivari Padar but rather about Russian candidates.”

• Public sector is more developed here as well and Russian

journalists expressed content about that. They named several governmental institutions that take Russian audience seriously.

• PR is Russian businesses in Estonia has practically not

developed at all.

• As developments in Russian journalism are behind – as one

respondent explained – it seems to be the same in Russian PR: “As we are Russian language newspaper, we work with three kinds of Russian PR persons. First, who are most impatient and ignorant, are those who bring Russian stars to Estonia. They want to promote their stars and events. They still have an opinion that media owes them. I don’t think so. During pre-elections period its interesting to follow Russian parties’ PR – well, its not worth talking about. They have no understanding, no concept, strategy how to achieve something. They have a certain idea, ideé fixe – we are Russians, we should support each other. Why should I give advertising space simply because we are both Russians? This mentality doesn’t bring anywhere. Pure Russian business PR is on basic level, can’t actually say even that.”

Conclusion

• Estonia as a transitional society has gone through rapid

developments and all different areas of the social life has developed as well. Both journalism and public relations have developed remarkably.

• Level is still pretty uneven and old prejudices glow through, but

definitely aiming for the better, as improvements are obvious. PR practitioners understand more journalists’ needs and journalists realize that practitioners are a great help for them. Today, as the research results prove, the critical model of public communication is prevailing in Estonia. The evidence shows that if both professions continue to develop, the dialogical model is not unreachable.