Oh my what a wonderful course... ¬_¬ not.

So hi blog, long time no see. I am not encouraged to lvoe you and show you the tender loving care you deserve but I have returned with a gift. <3 Here is the complaint that I will be adding to my entire class' joint complaint to the Big Cheeses of my university. I really do hope you enjoy as there is a fun analogy to keep you going half way ;D

 .....................................................................................................................................................

To whom it may concern.

This letter culminates my complaints toward the course I am currently undertaking at University College Falmouth; Public Relations. Money is a severe issue for not only students buy every individual member of society during this time of recession. I understand completely that the University requires payment from each student to be able to give a qualitative teaching unit to complete a degree; however, it can hardly be said that I, nor my classmates, have received this quality, or in fact the quantity required to complete a degree.

It is not fair that we must pay the same fees as other students at different universities that have a more structured and successful course. Below are the details on which I base my complaints; I hope you take them seriously and I require a reply within the week on how you plan to rectify these.

1.       Issue one is value for money.

a.       The summer term I am about to go into during my second year has no contact time whatsoever, yet I am paying a full terms tuition fees. The reason given by lecturers is that this is the time in which to complete the ‘case study’ module.  This specific module must be submitted mid May, after this we have nothing. It could be used to prepare us for Dissertation exercises, as we have 3 months open until our next term, but there is nothing like this planned.

2.       Quality of teaching when we do get contact time.

a.       We have been given puzzle sheets to learn how to write a press release; of which the sole purpose was merely a reminder of what should be included.

b.      The second lesson we had was a three hour test in which we were given a block of information and told to write news articles and one press release. This was before we had been taught how to write or given any house styles.

c.       The journalism tutors often criticise our work saying we have not been adopting the ‘house style’ in our essays and other references to which we have not been given the resources for. It has mostly been a mere accident when talking informally with friends on the journalism course we have found out about essay deadlines, titles, change in lecture times or rooms and also most of the assignments that we should have already completed. This information should have been communicated to us in emails; which is where the Journalism students have received it, but as we are ‘Public Relations’ students we are not included on many group emails.

3.       I chose Public Relations because I did not want to study Journalism.

a.       All but one of our lecturers in first year was a journalism tutor. And even though we were told in third term that the topics covered in the journalism degree are recommended to us and should be useful we were constantly told in presentations that the ‘following section is more journalism based rather than for PR.’ It could be compared to buying a banana but being given an apple. Although they are both good sources of vitamins and can be enjoyable, it is not what I wanted and I cannot do what I wanted with it- you can’t make a banana milkshake with an apple, no matter how you try and look at it.

4.       Journalism has a better structure.

a.       Our friends on the Journalism course that runs side by side to ours are given regular two maybe three a week assignments to update a blog, given ideas to start and feedback on each piece. In the 18 months of studying this course I have had perhaps two modules that have inspired me to keep a blog, but both are more academic theorising than practical pieces that I can show my talents as a media writer.

5.       CIPR crediting.

a.       Within three months of winning the title of being accredited by the CIPR we were told of the dissolution of the course and that the current students would be the last. A limited edition degree may not be appealing to any employer; it is understandable that the course should be stopped if the university cannot support it any longer; however with the quality of teaching we have so far received before the decision, and then the comparison to how we are being treated after, this course is barely giving us the background needed for the competitive careers market we will be in soon.

The obvious lack of passion from you and our lecturers destroy the remaining fires that we students have to continue injecting effort into our degree. We have paid for a service that we are still yet to receive.

Yours faithfully;

Natalie Venning

Second Year Public Relations BA (Hons)

University College Falmouth

PR depicted in fiction: histories assignment

PR practitioners depicted in fiction since 1995.




“Darling, she does a lot more than planning parties. She chit chats with club owners and trades on gossip about other people’s clients to the columnists so they’ll write good things about her own clients and sends gifts to celebrities to convince them to attend her events so the press will as well- all the while looking very pretty when she goes out every night.” (Weisberger, 2005: 57) This is a fictional journalist in ‘Everybody Worth Knowing’ explaining the career of a pr practitioner. This pr is depicted as an event and celebrity specialist, but one who encourages social networking in a physical sense. The whole agency is in the big name clubs of Manhattan every night, not leaving until after three am and expected back in the office. They are shown as being very knowledgeable about their topic and incredible stamina on such little sleep as they all go to morning meetings every day. But their personalities are left questionable.

Weisberger’s views of the media are shown as early in the book as page 58, with the same above journalist saying “I’ll give you 24 hours to debate the pros and cons of accepting a job where you can party for a living.” The phrase itself has the tone of ‘of course you will accept’ as it seems so good, but this is said by another media professional. The real tone behind it was more sinister, for the reader could assume that this ‘career’ has no seriousness attached to it, that it is just another institution whereby money is given to be squandered by an individual for pleasure with no real hard work attached to it.

The book itself relays again and again how good the main character, Bette, is a fantastic writer, slipping in how she got awards and how her writing was praised by many people and this is why she is offered the job as a PR. Yet she never utilises this talent, she is only ‘seen’ going to more parties and complaining about the amount. It is as though Weisberger wants the reader to dislike marketing social events. She gives Bette mini parties with a book club as well which is written with a lot of humour and compassion, but the bigger more agency related parties were always described with debauchery antics. Everyone who attended these parties were drug addicts, and so were so often acting immorally under the influence, they had no reservations against what most people would blush at the thought of.

The main character also becomes estranged from her friends so that she can socialise with people she doesn’t know, to help better the agency. This denotes that a pr practitioner is quite false as they don’t really have a true friend around them, they are out doing a job at these parties and do not care as long as they get press coverage which means more money to go to more parties. It became a monotonous circle in the book; even the reader became bored of the parties but was captured by the sense of disaster that looms with each turn of the page.

Continuing with the concept of falseness, it is reiterated quite obviously by Kelly, the owner of the pr agency in the book; “Bette, honey, I don’t care if it’s not true, I just care that it’s being covered...” (Weisberger, 2005: 133). It is as though a pr is untrustworthy because their job is to become trustworthy. They just want to be in the media, they do not ‘care’ about the reasons, as long as it isn’t bad. That specific use of the phrase ‘I don’t care’ by the manager leaves the reader with the idea that pr only do half a job. Even though the agency is successful, the reader does not seem to connect nor be impressed as the people within are just so unlikeable, especially when they are out trying to be liked. It is not a good book for a pr.

However, just the tagline to the film ‘Thank you for smoking’ negates Weisberger’s ‘false’ views, stating “don’t hide the truth... just filter it.” Meaning that PR practitioners, or ‘lobbyists’ as the film calls them, do actually deal with truth, but they spin it to make it sound good for whatever campaign or company they are representing.

‘Thank you for smoking’ really illustrates how dangerous a pr career can be. A pr practitioner can sometimes become the face of the company, they are the spokesperson and they are who everyone turns to. Therefore fictional pr tends be made from strong characters when they reach the top, it is the people who can easily bluff and talk their way out of problems, it was seen in both the film and Weisberger used it to when Bette could have a conversation with anyone without really paying attention, she was just talented at being able to reply when she needed to make it look like she was giving full attention.

“Everyone needs to pay the mortgage,” says Nick Naylor (Played by Aaron Eckhart in Thank you for smoking) when challenged as to why he is a pr for a tobacco company, therefore naturally hated by many. He is good at his job and it gets him the money he needs, just like any other job, even if the morals are, like in Weisberger’s novel, questionable.

There is one practitioner who has innocent reasoning in fiction, and does pr campaigns for the good of society and his fellow man. In ‘Hancock’, starring Will Smith, the pr Ray Embrey says to Hancock “People should love you. They really should, okay? And I want to deliver that for you. It's the least that I can do. You're a superhero. Kids should be running up to you, asking for your autograph, people should be cheering you on the streets...” Ray literally is in the job to help society feel better, to boost morale. He is depicted as very war time pr when the government needed to send out messages to make society feel safe and keep people happy enough to survive through the war.

In conclusion, pr practitioners are depicted mostly as people with a talent for words just working another job but do it celebrated in the media. They talk to people and they get to know people, even if it is just making acquaintances rather than real friendships. It also seeps into their personal lives, it is very much a career that covers your life for 24/7 and the practitioner used for analogy tends to be a strong character that can cope with the pressures of the workload, but of course the plot of a fiction would be difficult and complicated to overcome so there is some extremist scenarios you have to overlook for a representation of the character.



1002 words.



 

References



Hancock, 2008. [Film] Directed by Peter Berg. USA: Columbia Pictures.

Thank-you for smoking, 2005. [Film] Directed by Jason Reitman. USA: 20th Century Fox.

Weisberger, Lauren. Everyone Worth Knowing. 2005. Harper Collins: London.

Myc Ruggelsford workshop review

Grassroots pr workshop for pr histories and practices. A review.




We had entered the room with two men already standing talking in there. One was our tutor, Jon, the other, the man who would be talking at us for the next 48 hours. We all drifted in and sat in two rows whilst we were introduced to Myc Riggulsford and explained to that this was a workshop over two days whereby we would be learning about our new module PR histories and practices. A head-bob goodbye from Jon left us with Myc who we all tiredly turned towards.

The first thing he did was smile in a way that made the whole atmosphere change, everyone sat a little straighter, notebooks were out and pens were ready. He let us know it was important for us to spell everything right, including names, which can be complicated, writing his own on the board. Welsh origins, a little different, but you could tell that this man was not going to be an ordinary Mike.

Myc hadn’t started with public relations. Originally he was a journalist; mostly on radio for Plymouth Sound, but after went freelance. He had his first taste of pr in the health service and enjoyed it but when in 1991 regulations were brought in to limit who he could contact he realised it was time to break free.

This was when he created his own agency, the Walnut Bureau. His eyes sparkled with compassion as he described his agency. “Imagine a very old bureau made from walnut wood, very old school, where you would not be sitting typing at a computer but have a quill with paper, how writing should be.” Myc wanted his agency to be simply PR that everyone understood, no complexities that would make people confused, nothing so futuristic that it couldn’t keep up with itself. Although he did have to make an income, even myc knew an agency needed a reputation before it could win good deals, so he made the first UK issues management pr. Crisis has to be managed by an agency already associated with the company, as it needs to be a speedy response and know the people and inner workings to make a respectable campaign. Issues are long term, another agency can come in and work solely on them rather than trying to juggle with all the other sides of pr, as there are many. Issues can be with extremist groups, or that the company may not be as ‘carbon footprint’ friendly as others but cannot cut down any more than they have so need the public convinced they are still good.

We learnt of four categories that all institutions fall into; the ‘public funded’ who need power, this is usually government and related; the ‘non-government organisations’ (NGOs) who are pushed into their causes by ethics, mostly charities; the ‘industry’ segment has a lot of marketing based pr as it is selling things to make profit; finally the ‘academics and professionals’ who are ranking up their reputation and need to relay facts and knowledge to the public, this is from scientists, lawyers, universities, etc. The media joins all four of these groups together. Myc gave us the tip that this square was important, if we were up against an issue with one of these segments then we needed the other three on our side to create an effective campaign.

Moving on to communication and what we pr do, Myc said that the main fear of clients is that pr can’t prove what they have done, excellent pr is hidden, the public shouldn’t realise, but how do the company know they are paying you to do something and not nothing. Trust; but a detailed plan and organisation help a lot. See flow chart below.

However, even with all the details written down, even if you have calculated every move you make, pr will sometimes be easily way sided by journalists due to context and barriers. If everything goes right at the right time then pr will happen, but there are news priorities such as tragic anniversaries like September 11 and annual holidays like Christmas. There is no use trying to overrun that coverage, it will fail. See chart below.

We started the second day with the question “what is PR for?” But before we actually answered it Myc asked us why we wanted to go into PR. Our answers referred to the challenges that it gives whilst also being able to travel for the work, socialising, the creative aspect and of course there is money to be had. He smiled, and agreed that we were in it for the same reasons as most. Then we looked at what it is for. There is an argument that PR is advocacy for clients in the media. Everyone has the ‘right to be represented’ such as a lawyer would a defendant, and that is what a pr does in front of the media and the public, like judge and jury, although many times these roles are switched between the pair so a pr also has to be able to adapt quickly and seamlessly.

As pr is new there are many arguments for what it really is, all true and all not quite exact. There are so many definitions that it is hard to pinpoint, but many still insist it is just another part of marketing for a company. As Myc had said the day before, this is quite accurate for industry pr, but what about NGO and Professionals/Academics pr? These institutions are not being marketed but just convey information and sometimes needs more media coverage to gain access to the public; those who insist pr is marketing have just overlooked the subtlety that pr practitioners work with to get media coverage and probably don’t realise that there is so much to be done.

Myc also explained that when you are working on a campaign for a company you may want to enlist help with others, but there are levels to how you work with people:

You can engage with other companies or individuals, whereby you just make sure you will not upset them, as it would be detrimental to your cause if you did. Just informing someone with information keeps them separate from your work but they feel a part of it all, and consulting and collaborating means you physically take advice from them or let them have some run of the project too. Knowing who fits these categories is as important as the campaign itself.

A few final tips and a heartbreaking goodbye from Myc ended our two day workshop. Full of ideas, knowledge and eagerness we awaited the first sessions of our new module.

Assignment 1; Histories: Academia verses Practitioner.

Academic definition:


“PR is about managing communications in order to build good relationships and understanding between an organisation and its most important audiences.” (Gordon, 1997: 5)
Verses

Practitioner definition:

“PR is the discipline that looks after reputation with the aim of earning understanding and support and influencing opinion and behaviour. It is planned and sustained effort to establish and maintain goodwill and mutual understanding between an organisation and its publics.” (PRCA definition, 2004: 6.)
Objective: discern which of the above definitions are most appropriate for PR.

Public Relations is a developing career, it is still young in terms of the time it has been recognised as an occupation. When PR emerged it shared a quantity of theories with other professions, thus creating a change in definitions depending on the standpoint of the practise.

Those teaching the theology of Public Relations will need to focus on an ethical perspective, so that students may enter the vocation with an understanding mind of what is expected from both company and audience; while people already in the work of PR will be more attentive on how to communicate between client and publics. The latter already understand the perspectives on their employment, and so the definition of PR to them would be focused on maintaining the attention of the target audience for the client, not the audience itself.

The Academic one leans on the idea that the target audience is the important aspect in the equation of PR communication; whereas the Practitioner definition describes the ongoing communication used by PR practitioners and highlights the importance of mutual benefits for both company and audience. This may be because the academic can take an objective view of the execution of PR in use as they do not have the responsibility of accounts and financial reviews, therefore can perceive the campaign set up without the profitable benefit.

One could suppose that both definitions could be viewed as Grunig’s [A]Symmetric theories (1984: 147). The Academic; with its view of the publics importance has a Asymmetric ideology to public relations; whereby the company is in a mutual position as their audience (or stockholders, retailers, etc) to possess the power of control over said company.

Conversely, the Practitioner definition can be alleged as Symmetric. It quotes the term ‘mutual understanding between an organisation and its publics,’ explaining that both require information and feedback from the other to continue on.

However, this definition appears to have the tone of an afterthought for the publics. The definition begins with the role of ‘looks after reputation’. One may consider the effect of this discourse, psychologically we as humans categorise and prioritise; the easiest route to this are lists. The definition has phrases, or more obvious key words, in a specific list: Reputation, support, influence, maintain, mutual, organisation and finally publics. The inclusion of these words show a respect and awareness to each one, but their order provides knowledge of the thought process when preparing a campaign.

The argument at this point is that the Academic also ends with ‘audiences’ and leaves it at the end of the definition, the ‘final thought.’ Alas, lexically they still differ greatly, Practitioner used ‘Publics’ which include a multitude of societies and communities aside from audience, whereas Academics specified ‘Audience;’ the latter lacks the financial necessity that attaches publics such as shareholders and employees, for example, to the organisation, causing the effect that the PR is focused on primarily on the target of the campaign, no-one else.

In Conclusion, the Practitioner definition seems most appropriate as it negotiates the many outlooks and skills required of Public Relations practitioner within the industry. The Academic definition left wanting in regards of differentiating between departments in the organisation that the PR practitioner shall work in.





References



TENCH, Ralph. YEOMANS, Liz. 2006. Exploring Public Relations. Essex. Pearson Education Limited.



Bibliography



PARTRIDGE, Eric. [revised by WHITCUT, Janet] 1942. Usage And Abusage: A Guide To Good English [third edition: 1999] London. Penguin Books Ltd.



CARDWELL, M and FLANAGAN, C. 2003. Psychology AS The Complete Companion. Cheltenham. Nelson Thornes Ltd.



Self Assesment:



• Pros: I found I could appeal to the differences within the definitions given and had, in my own opinion, understood what was meant by the assignment task of which would be more ‘appropriate’.

• Cons: Although I was intrigued by this assignment I found it very difficult to articulate, I feel as though I may have allowed myself to ramble within the discussion and could have got my point across better plus gone into the use of mutual and how this was an important word etc.

• Self motivated task: plan assignments beforehand. Shirk the habit of writing out the thought process during the essay.