I am wondering what you both feel should be the response from the PR/marketing world to this movie?

For me, there is much to think about here and it is fascinating that it has taken so long for these stories to be documented. In many ways, the issues are similar though to those we do hear (occasionally) regarding disaster relief and aid initiatives. I’m sure similar stories could also be documented (but rarely are) for those engaged in supply industries that have recently been subject to the CSR/sustainability glossy spotlight.

Part of the problem I think has to be that everything in society is now considered within the prism of modern promotional culture (Wenick’s term). This perspective that everything is marketed (from causes to social change) results in the pink, fluffy glow that is seen in the breast cancer ‘promotional industry’; whilst the real experiences are less attractive in terms of their promotional aspects. Where are the campaigns for the less glamourous illnesses? At the same time, unfortunately charities learn that playing the promotional game gets attention. So we’ve had celebrities talking about their mental health issues to get this subject on the national media agenda in the UK. That may be useful in opening the door to previously taboo topics – but it doesn’t seem to progress to more meaningful discussion of real life experiences and challenges.

Life is made more superficial – which prevents genuine understanding and dialogue. It can also be used to by causes (and governments) to manipulate the public. With PR students over the past three years, I’ve discussed the Scottish Kill Jill donor campaign using the argument put forward by Professor Hugh McLachlan. In its original form, this was a print article that online led to a debate with someone responsible for the campaign.

The issues raised for PR/marketing practitioners by such debate need to be reflected upon not just by students but by our trade bodies. These ethical matters cannot simply be addressed by codes of conduct – and require a deeper understanding than most communication practitioners have which essential is derived from their personal beliefs. I wrote a post last year in which I advocated a need for the establishment of a centre of ethical enquiry for public relations.

I’m sure most of us believe that PR and marketing can be a force for good and likewise that the motivations of businesses and government are not solely selfish. This means we have to get grown up about our work and recognise the legitimate concerns that appear to be evident in this documentary. Do you agree?

“Public Relations is a ‘condition’, we all have it, whether we know it or not, the key is how we manage that “condition.” That is the practice we call public relations.”

Now that was some 25 plus years ago and I have never forgotten that definition. It is rather simplistic particularly given the gravitas of this conversation, and I am certainly not advocating it as a formal definition. Perhaps it is an approach or a concept that may help newcomers to the profession think about public relations as more than a message, as more than communications. Everything we do and say is communicating something. It is a little like breathing, you cannot stop – easily.

The Australian definition of public relations includes the word “deliberate” in its definition, and I think that is an important word to be considered when one is defining public relations.

A job in Public Relations can be very rewarding, fast-paced and exciting. It is because of this, however, that PR is a very competitive industry to break into. For any budding PR practitioners out there, it’s important you take this into account before applying for a job or contacting an agency for work experience. To get noticed you need to have a bit of an edge over your competitors – don’t leave things up to chance. We receive hundreds of emails a week from people looking for work so make sure you stand out from the crowd.

At InsideOut PR we recommend the following:

Research the company first
Find out the type of PR they specialise in and look up the brands they represent. Could you see yourself working for similar brands? Do they work for an industry area you’re interested in? PR agencies often specialise in niche areas. If you’re interested in representing people, then it’s not really worth your while working for a corporate agency. Find out about the companies values and culture. Make sure they’re in line with you and your work ethic.

Check and re-check your email or cover letter then check again
Believe it or not, we’re constantly receiving letters of application or cover letters for public relations agency jobs with spelling errors and mistakes. It doesn’t take long to proof your work, and remember, writing and communicating is the biggest part of what we do so we want to ensure we’re hiring someone that is capable of the work. Mistakes and typos happen, so give your application to a friend to check for you. We can always see through a rushed application.
Tailor your application to suit the agency
We know you’re applying for a number of different jobs at the same time, but if you’re interested in working for us, then make sure you show that. A generic application stands out just as much as an amazing application so if you’re serious about the job, go that little bit further and let us know you’re interested. Oh and be sure to attention it to the director of the agency you’re applying to and not the one before!

Hopefully these tips will come in handy when you begin the job hunt.
Good luck!

- InsideOut PR

Thank you very much for the compliment, but more-so the comments. I really enjoyed the parallel you identified between social media and the ATI legislation. I believe there is two sides to the social media coin, or referencing your work, there is the Janus-face of social media in any industry. On one hand you have a platform that was intended to increase engagement as well as transparency (of sorts). However, social media at times is still leveraged in ways that are self-serving; almost a shrouded veil that people, or brands, can hide behind. You are spot on when you mention there is a need for “policies or guidelines that permit and encourage open and more transparent communication”. This I fully agree with.

I would be remiss if I didn’t state that the criticism of the omnibus crime bill did in fact come from various groups and individuals, not connected with the media. I do however think that certain criticisms and responses shaped by the media could be analyzed through a partisan lens. I think my main goal of using that example was to highlight the ideological influence that shapes communication (tough on crime vs. other forms). You do raise a good point in that organizations/citizens played a large role in the response to the bill’s introduction. That should have been included in the original post.

You are quite correct in that publics tend to view certain acts of authenticity illegitimate or “forced”. However, I believe social media has added a sense of authenticity through its personal level of connectedness. Publics are no longer only getting press releases or flyers, they now have a vehicle that is directly connected to their representative. Stated in my post, I tend to find that social media is not utilized in its most beneficial form by some. In this I mean, and you clearly indicate, there is no tangible dialogue that discusses policy issues past talking points. Maybe this comes back to the idea of risk aversion that is prevalent, but I agree that for social media to be truly beneficial in this world, it must be used to enhance discourse.

I appreciate your hesitation to agree with my comment that social media is reshaping our relationship between publics and politics. In your article “The Janus-Face of the Conservative Government and New Technology” (http://bit.ly/tPJg2A) you bring up a few points that I really enjoyed – that more Canadians are using social media, the discussion of politics/policy is on the rise, it promotes transparency/accountability and it allows publics to engage. I agree with these points in that this platform is reshaping that traditional relationship. Written letters and telephone calls are being replaced by Tweets, Facebook messages and wall posts. You do raise a good point in that it is a small number of Canadians who are engaging through this forum. However, I think this will continue to grow and become the norm. I think there is something to be said for being able to connect directly with your representative and not just their office.

Thanks again for the comments, you gave me a few things to think about as well. I appreciate your feedback and I really enjoyed your Janus-themed article.