Content uploaded by Helena Stehle
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Helena Stehle on Aug 13, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
The media environment is changing. With the rise of digital media newspapers, magazines, radio,
and even television stations are struggling. By providing free content, new digital media challenge
traditional business models in the media industry. Journalism as we used to know it seems to have
taken a serious hit. In June 2009, David Schlesinger, editor-in-chief of Reuters News, said in a speech
on rethinking journalism in the age of twitter: “So what can we do to survive, or more fundamentally,
to stay relevant? I think the only path is to embrace the change and embrace the new. Longing for the
ways of the past will not work.” The structural changes of traditional media on the one hand and the
rise of social media on the other hand have not only put journalism under pressure, but media relations
as well. Like journalism, media relations have to adapt to new realities that challenge principles and
practices. At the same time, they can profit from new digital channels to address new digital publics.
Media relations have always been considered one of the most important, if not the most essential
part in the field of public relations. Mass media have been, and still are, agenda setters that public
relations (PR) address as gatekeepers and mediators to convey organizational messages to a wider
audience. Media coverage on an organization is an elegant and effective way to get public awareness
and receive acceptance. If journalists report on an organization, organizational events or issues they
provide credibility as well as relevance. Within the context of the new media landscape, usage patterns
of traditional media have changed. At the same time attributions of relevance and credibility are shifting.
New digital media complement, some even supplement the traditional media. They challenge traditional
business models as circulations drop and the advertising market gets smaller. With traditional media
on the defense, media relations’ impact on news coverage is likely to increase in the short term. When
editorial staff is reduced and time pressure on journalists rises the chances of PR material shaping the
news are rising. But in the long run, if print media, radio, and television loose in reach and reputation,
PR will no longer profit from relevance and credibility. Although efforts and expenses for effective media
relations may decrease, it no longer can gain from traditional media’s additional benefits for PR.
Media Relations under Pressure:
What’s Left in Times of Change?
8In recent years, more and more authors argue that a “new era of media relations” (Waters et al.
2010: 242) has begun. The discussions are about a loss of importance as well as the search
for a reorientation in times of structural change of the public sphere and massive turmoil in the
media system. Changes take place particularly in traditional journalism and its functions. Some
practitioners report that media relations as a field of PR are losing in relevance—at least in their
traditional form. Others are convinced that media relations will remain at the core of PR, even
gaining in relevance by using new channels to address traditional journalists as well as new forms
of journalism. They both argue with the formation of new media. Their perspectives only differ
on whether to conceptionalize social media relations as a new field for PR or an extension of
traditional media relations. Both perspectives do not fully address the fundamental change that
is taking place in relationships between organizations, journalism, and the public. The “interplay
between journalists and PR practitioners” has changed, as Waters, Tindall and Morton (2010:
241) remark. There are new arenas and new intermediaries to public opinion. Traditional media
relations’ strategies and patterns have to adapt to new communication channels and to “new”
journalists. Traditional journalism has remained the same, and nonetheless has to be addressed
different by media relations. Nowadays, it for example uses social media as research channels,
adapts work routines and processes or reports cross-media.
How do current developments affect media relations as a PR discipline? Are media relations still
“the same” despite new contexts or do we have to adapt, maybe even redefine the term and
concept itself? What is left in times of change—and what is new? The aim of this paper is to
present new theoretical perspectives on media relations. This will be argued with regard to two
research areas: On the one hand, in PR research there are theoretical frameworks addressing the
fundamental role of PR for organizations. With regard to media relations, a transfer however is still
missing. On the other hand, journalism research analyzes the current change using fruitful system-
theoretical approaches. Especially those concepts that explain the difference between traditional
and “new” social media are relevant for media relations and their theorizing.
The paper addresses three questions emerging from current challenges and developments in
public sphere and media system:
•Whatroledomediarelations(still)playwithinPR?Ifthemediasystemischangingand
particularly the traditional journalism loses in importance while at the same time being
subjected to fundamental functional change, there are direct consequences for media
relations. This applies on one hand to their quantitative importance, and on the other
hand to the status they hold in public relations—e.g. the goals pursued and the services
provided.
73
>> Papers
•Howdomediarelationsdealwithdifferentareasinjournalismandnewmediasegments
on the Internet? Journalistic content, editorial organization and working methods are
becoming more diverse. Various types and genres appealing to specific audience groups
are active in various public spheres, and fulfill specific accomplishments. They have
therefore different meaning with regard to media relations, create different opportunities
and risks, and must each be addressed in a specific manner.
•How does the relationship between media relations and journalism develop? The
increasing professionalization of media relations on one side and resource cuts in the
newsroom on the other side seem to influence the balance of power in favor of the
media relations. In any case, the type of collaboration and the quality of relationships
between journalists and media relations experts are in motion. For example, long-term
relationships are established by so-called media partnerships. However, in the long run
such developments curtail the role of media relations: When the relationships between
media relations practitioners and journalists become even more closely connected and
borders dissolute, media relations’ attractiveness decreases. Only independent media,
to which the public can ascribe credibility, are helpful to public relations.
To answer these research questions, we analyze functions that traditional and new forms of
journalism provide for PR—and are used by it. Based on a functional model of traditional and
participatory media, characteristics and principles of each context are identified in order to analyze
their main functions that can be used by PR. These functions help to discuss strategies, principles,
and practices of media relations, on a basic theoretical level as well as in a more operational point
of view.
For a company it is important to gain public presence. PR aims at influencing how a company
is discussed in public or by publics. In this regard, media relations are a PR discipline that offers
a comparably economical and effective way to address the public sphere. It is about initiating
(preferably positive) media coverage or mitigating possible negative effects. Traditionally it is
journalism in the role of a gatekeeper who selects and decides who or what issues gain access to
the public sphere. Rather an active communicator than a passive transmitter, journalism shapes
messages, frames topics and evaluates statements as well as actions of actors. It thus creates
shared reality for its audiences. By media relations, organizations try to get attention for the
organization itself, for its topics and representatives. Media relations also have another advantage:
By means of traditional media an organization can address large audiences that could not easily
be reached by other media. While owned media can be used to address specific publics mass
media still is one of the most effective ways to reach the broad majority of the population.
PR’s main objective as understood by functional approaches is to get public awareness for an
organization and its issues and to gain trust. PR strives to contribute to organizational goals
by gaining public trust, building legitimacy and securing the “licence to operate”. Due to its
close link to an organization and its goals, contributions on the micro level (e.g. for individuals or
groups outside the organization) as well as on the macro level (e.g. society) are no primary task
of organizational PR (Hoffjann 2011: 73). A spokesperson of a company has to represent the
interests of her or his organization. When in conflict with the information interests of publics, it is
the organization’s interest that has to prevail.
As strategic communication PR represents the interest of an organization—a fact the public is well
aware of. As a result, PR is perceived as targeted communication on behalf of an organization and
mostly critically examined by publics (Hoffjann 2011: 65).
PR neither has the credibility nor direct access to the broad majority of the population like
journalism does, which serves public information interests independently and objectively and,
thus, has different functions. Nevertheless—in order to achieve its goals—PR has to reach relevant
publics and gain attention for its contents (public attention). It has to get the audience’s interest
(relevance). Not least, the audience has to perceive a message as being credible (credibility). All
three criterions depend on issue and situation. The major challenge, however, remains. In order to
overcome it, PR can and does rely on media and journalism. Therefore, media relations are one
specific and prominent field of PR.
Organizational messages gain attention, relevance and credibility when they are selected and
reported by the media. They profit from the credibility that audiences attribute to independent
media, which check facts and assess corporate messages. PR does not have to conceal its
interest-based goals in this approach. But in media relations, PR professionals can only partly
influence on what, when, and how the media report. In this context, media relations adapt to
journalistic principles and routines like news value and adequate timing, and establish relationships
to journalists. Regarding the relationship between journalists and PR practitioners, Hon and
Grunig (1999: 24) state: “Savvy media relations experts know […] that good relationships with
reporters are ones in which both feel they have some degree of control over the reporting of
the organization […]. Both parties trust each other to help them do their job; indeed they have
a communal relationship so each helps the other even though they may get nothing in return.”
To sum up: By media relations, PR can profit from journalism’s credibility and overcome its
own restrictions. Media’s main functions—to receive attention, relevance, and credibility for
messages—are key to media relations’ important role in corporate communication. But with
the media landscape changing, the reach of traditional media declines while at the same time
new publics form in digital media. New media offer to get attention, relevance, and credibility for
organizations and their messages in wider publics, too. Will media relations be as important in the
74
>> Papers
years to come as they have been in the last decades? How do they (have to) change regarding,
e.g., their function, form, and processes due to social media?
PR values journalism due to its impact on public opinion. What journalists report is publicly
perceived as relevant and credible. With PR messages, relevance and credibility are not readily
associated. As a representation of organizational interests, PR lacks the independence that
journalism has to offer as it was described in chapter two. What are the specific characteristics of
journalism? Journalism offers exclusive values for society in general (macro level) and for individual
publics in particular (micro level):
“Journalism researches, selects, and presents issues that are new, fact-oriented, and relevant.
It creates a public forum by observing society, by presenting these observations via periodical
media to a mass audience and, thus, constructing shared reality. This constructed reality offers
orientation in a complex world”, describes Klaus Meier (2007: 13) the main characteristic of
journalism. 1
To create public atttention is one of the main services or so called “functions” of journalism.
Journalism structures public issues by deciding what actors are presented with what messages.
As gatekeepers, they select who or what topic will get public awareness. Journalism creates
a public forum in which topics that are relevant for society are discussed. On the one hand,
mass media address broad audiences. When PR content is reported on in mass media, it, thus,
has the possibility to get a broad public forum. On the other hand, journalists report for specific
audiences—for example economic publics or topical experts—thereby offering access to specific
publics. From a PR point of view, mass media are “the vehicle to reach an audience” (Fortunato
2000: 482).
Journalism offers two main benefits for the general as well as specific publics: observation and
validation (Neidhardt 1994: 22 f.):
(1) Journalism observes society. It selects incidents or topics that are relevant for its audiences
and reports on them in adequate scopes and timeframes (theme selectivity). To present the main
aspects, it stresses the more important elements of a topic (fact selectivity; Kohring 2004).
(2) Journalism validates information by critically examining facts, rationales, and public reasoning.
Regarding facts, it carefully verifies whether data and descriptions are valid (information accuracy).
1 Original quote in German, translated by the authors.
Regarding rationales and reasoning, it evaluates how coherent and reasonable a line of argument
is and comments on it in broader contexts. Journalism thus offers assessments (information
assessment).
By observation and validation journalism offers its audiences knowledge, insights, and guidance.
Thus, it contributes to forming public opinion and societal orientation. These four contributions
constitute the specific information quality of journalism and its high level of credibility.
Traditionally, these particular benefits or functions are closely linked to the particular organizational
and normative framework of professional journalism: Full-time journalists work together in
editorial teams with a high level of specialization and division of labor. They commit to ethical
standards, and to professional norms like currentness, relevance, diversity, and independence.
Using standardized routines and procedures, information of varying quality is transformed into the
journalistic output (Karlsson 2011: 281, Kovach & Rosenstiel 2007). The processes of gathering,
processing, and distributing news are controlled centrally and result in complex, self-contained
media content. They refer to a particular editorial concept and result in media products defined
as a bundle of information focused on the special needs of its audience. Therefore, traditional
media’s output can be marketed with a clear focus—provided that business models are efficient.
In the world of traditional media, journalists are the gatekeepers that PR and media relations
have to address. The framework of traditional media relations is quite clear: Relevant media can
be identified and selected easily. Professional norms and editorial routines of journalism are well
known.
One important change that is ongoing in the media system is that traditional journalism is
challenged with regard to new forms of communication and information. On the Internet, there are
various platforms of gathering and exchanging information apart from traditional journalism. So-
called participatory media can be compared with traditional journalism (Neuberger & Nuernbergk
2010). Under certain circumstances, they are able to provide similar benefits for their users and
the society in general. When users exchange ideas on different topics in forums, blogs, and on
social networking sites, they constitute digital public spheres. They collect, select, and evaluate
information and thus offer value for their users by delivering relevant and evaluated, in some sense
verified informations.
On the Internet, publics are formed without traditional media’s mediating. This development,
however, is not new. Public spheres have been shaped by small-group media or face-to-face
interactions before (Neuberger 2008: 33). Unlike the situation in traditional media the Internet,
however, offers the means and “place” for publics to form, become visible, and gain in size. Over
time digital publics can become larger and more influential, e.g. by networking: “The common claim
that the Internet generates a ‘fragmented’ public (cf. Holtz-Bacha 1997) is […] hardly accurate.
75
>> Papers
Rather the opposite might be true: The Internet initially creates an integrated public, which
includes different layers of public in one medium”, stresses Neuberger (2008: 33). This relates to
both stages: ahead of and after traditional publicity (pre-media and follow-up discussions).
Although there is a large range of forms and topics in participatory media, they—at least in part—
can be described as functional equivalents of professional journalism. Moreover, participatory
media go beyond traditional journalism in making follow-up-discussions on media content visible
and granting all users the opportunity to participate in public debates. Thus, like traditional
journalism, certain forms of participatory media can create public forums, provide their audiences
with orientation, and offer attention, relevance, and credibility for corporate contents. For instance,
in participatory media credibility through adherence to professional codes of journalism can be
replaced with credibility that results from sharing a common concern, as Russel (2001) argues.
However, compared to traditional journalism, participatory media work differently. While journalists
refer to professional standards, follow complex newsgathering and editorial processes, and have
extensive resources at hand, users in social media networks generate content by collaborating. In
a continuous process comments are posted, contents are shared and edited. Many participants
shape a story. Reporting and exchanging information become an open process. Individual
contributions of users are linked in different forms and range—both within a single blog or social
media network and across different platforms.
Furthermore, the norms and modes of communication differ between traditional and participatory
media. Journalism communicates in the classical mode of objectivity and neutrality. It is bound
to professional standards whereas network communication complies with the rules of everyday
communication and social relationships. Participatory media operate in the network mode of
subjectivity and authenticity. The single acts of communication are driven by personal experiences
and evaluations of the users. Participatory media are based on dialogue on an equal footing rather
than on omniscient reporting.
professional journalism participatory media
classical mode
•objectivity
•neutrality
I
traditional journalism
journalism conducted by profes-
sional journalists in their official ca-
pacity in traditional or digital media
III
citizen journalism
journalism conducted by amateurs
in traditional or digital media, e.g.,
community newspapers, micro-
blogs
network mode
•subjectivity
•authenticity
II
open journalism (journalism 2.0)
professional journalists engaging in
a dialogue with audiences by open-
ing the editorial workflow for user
input and comments
IV
social media sphere
individual or collaborative content
production without a journalistic ap-
proach in social media, e.g. in com-
munitys
Figure 1: Journalism and its functional equivalents in new media
The emergence of participatory media with its possibilities of network communication has
consequences for PR and media relations. The participation and networking of many participants
provide observation and validation as two key benefits for PR. Public opinion is no longer shaped
only by professional journalists. Users, who select, validate, and examine events and issues,
also shape it. Media relations can draw on participatory media in addition to or even instead of
journalism so as to gain attention, relevance, and credibility for their contents. But in order to
benefit from this chance, suitable concepts and instruments are so far needed.
How can the new possibilities for PR in the new media environment with participatory media
complementing traditional journalism be described in more detail? The assumption is that traditional
and participatory media are not independent. With the changing media landscape boundaries
between traditional journalism and other, more participative forms of content production become
blurred. Network communication is influenced by both the content and the professional standards
of traditional media. Vive verca traditional journalism adapts to the emerging participatory
media, e.g. regarding professional routines and practices. Hybrid forms of traditional journalism
and participative media emerge in various constellations and media formats. Hence there is a
wide range of terms used to describe the phenomenon, e.g., participatory journalism, network
journalism or amateur journalism (Fröhlich et al. 2012: 1043).
Depending on the type of media (professional journalism or participatory media) on the one hand
76
>> Papers
and the mode and norms of communication (classical or network) on the other hand four fields
that are relevant for media relations can be distinguished (see figure 1). In this matrix, traditional
journalism (field I) and the social media sphere (field IV) describe the pure types: professional
journalism traditionally operating in the classical mode and participatory media basically
communicating in the network mode.
(I) Traditional journalism still plays an outstanding role in electronic media and the press but also
on the Internet. Due to formalized processes and extensive resources in editorial departments,
journalists reporting for traditional media including their Internet presences can recognize
relevant topics effectively and research them systematically. Although the main characteristics of
traditional journalism are still valid in this field digital media do change the routines of gathering and
processing news on an operational level.
(II) Fundamental changes take place when professional journalism adapts the network mode of
communication used by paticipative media. Besides subjectivity and authenticity transparency
becomes an important norm within journalism (Karlsson 2011: 279). Journalists engage in a
dialogue with their audiences by opening the editorial workflow for user input and comments.
Due to the open process, we propose to refer to this form as open journalism. Thus, editorial
departments are no longer a “black box” to the audience. Journalists are well aware of the
audience’s expectations, interests, and feedback. Journalism is rather an open process with
users contributing to newsgathering and reporting than one-way communication as in mass
communication (Mast 2012: 449).
(III) Within participatory media there are media formats that adapt the classical mode of
communication based on the norms of traditional journalism. As a form of newsgathering and
reporting by amateurs who have no or merely basic journalistic training it can be called citizen
journalism. “Amateur journalists” commit themselves to journalistic standards and codes. Outside
mainstream media, they report for official community magazines or city journals. On the Internet,
citizen journalism can be found in weblogs or on interactive portals where users collaboratively
cover topics according to journalistic criteria.
(IV) All participative media that do not refer to the traditional journalistic mode of communication
belong to the social media sphere. In social networks a lot of content either traces back to
traditional media or it concerns events and aspects of private space, which are not relevant to
the general public. Nevertheless, social media are more than a means for private communication.
Network communication so far includes primarily private exchange, identity management, and
relationship management. But there is a lively exchange between traditional and social media.
Content from the social media sphere gets coverage in traditional journalism and thus gains a
broader audience. Vice versa social networking sites pick up media coverage. They discuss,
comment, and add new information. Thus, they validate information in a collaborative process
thereby adding to journalists’ work in their professional role.
Nowadays, traditional journalism still dominates public agenda setting (Kiousis et al. 2007: 151).
But the network mode of communication and participative media are gaining in relevance. Social
media platforms are both an important source of information for professional journalists and a
prominent subject of media coverage, e.g. regarding “shitstorms” created in social networks.
Traditional and open journalism on the one hand, citizen journalism and the social media sphere
on the other hand—although the concepts partially overlap, they represent four different public
forums that could be relevant for media relations.
The question where traditional journalism ends and new kinds of public spheres begin is important
for journalistic practice as well as theory building. Current changes have a direct impact on the
identity and prospects of the discipline. From a PR perspective, a clear understanding of notions
and distinctions is important, too. But regarding media relations, traditional journalism is not an
end in itself. It is a means to access the specific functions that so far only mass media could
offer: attention, relevance, and credibility for organizational messages through observation and
validation by professional journalists.
Nowadays, there are participatory media and social platforms offering those very functions in new
kinds of public spheres. The main question is no longer if it is professional journalism or citizen
journalism, open journalism or social media sphere. Rather it is which public sphere addresses
an audience that is relevant for an organization, and if this public sphere is perceived as offering
credible orientation. More and more such platforms are other than traditional journalism.
(I) Traditional journalism = traditional media relations?
Nevertheless, traditional journalism will still play a crucial role in the years to come. Its ability to
address large parts of the public as well as setting the agenda is unmatched by new forms of
journalism or social media so far. Additionally, PR practitioners perceive traditional media as more
accurate, credible, more truthful, and ethical than social media and blogs (Wright & Hinson 2010).
Media relations shaped their programs and instruments to address editorial routines, production
processes, and professional norms of traditional media. But traditional journalism as displayed in
figure 1 has changed (Bajkiewicz et al. 2011).
77
>> Papers
So have media relations by adapting to new journalistic routines. They offer content for different kinds
of media, e.g. pictures, footage, audio files, and interactive charts accompanying a press release.
They adapt to shorter production processes and times of journalists, e.g. with pull communication via
online press rooms (Reber & Kim 2006, González-Herrero & Ruiz de Valbuena 2006) or social media
releases (Steyn et al. 2010). There are also new instruments that redefine the relationship between
media relations specialists and journalists, like e.g. media catching (Waters et al. 2010, Tallapragada et
al. 2012): Based on the LISTSERV technology, journalists address a large number of PR practitioners
with e-mail requests looking for information or contacts: “Rather than having practitioners contacting
lots of journalists, broadcasters, and bloggers in hopes of gaining media placements, thousands of
practitioners are being contacted at one time by journalists and others seeking specific material for
stories, blog postings, and web sites with upcoming deadlines” (Waters et al. 2010: 243). As traditional
journalism has adapted to new technologies and media, so has PR.
(II) Open journalism = open media relations?
Open journalism is an extension of traditional journalism. Professional journalists engage in a dialogue
with their audiences using similar elements as participatory media. As two-way communication
between a journalist and her/his audience or as dialogues about media content among users
themselves it refers to the network mode. It is communication on equal terms, based on subjectivity
and authenticity. As a result, the editorial workflow opens up for a systematic user input. An open
process offers a direct contact to users, readers, listeners, or watchers. It can be used for research
as well as direct user contributions in the process of reporting. For media relations it is important to
understand these new work flows and contact points of journalism. They bear chances as well as risks.
So far, a high percentage of traditional media coverage—both offline and online—is initiated or influenced
by PR material (Schweiger & Jungnickel 2011). Through open innovation, journalists generate ideas
on subjects in direct contact with the audience. Thus, it is to be expected that media relations’ impact
on what topics traditional and new media choose for coverage will sink. At the same time, journalist-
user interactions create new opportunities for media relations. Media relations specialists could follow
these discussions in order to monitor issues, gain insights in what users perceive as relevant and what
attitude towards these subjects exist. This insight could lead to topical ideas for media relations as well
as to the possibility to anticipate issue trends.
(III) Citizen journalism = new publics for media relations?
In citizen journalism, amateurs assume functions that were traditionally performed by professional
journalists. They base their work on journalistic standards and strive for journalistic quality, e.g. reporting in
non-professional online newspapers, weblogs, or on twitter. Public journalists have become an important
public for media relations as accreditations of bloggers as journalists show. Especially in local reporting,
areas of special interest and specific situationspublic journalism can be an important extension of traditional
media. Such “social media influencers represent a new type of independent third party endorser who shape
audience attitudes through blogs, tweets, and the use of other social media“ (Freberg et al. 2011: 90).
Media relations can be described as a discipline of PR addressing journalists. In this
regard it addresses not only traditional (professional) journalists but also public (semi-
professional or lay) journalists. The grid of journalism and its functional equivalents can be
extended by this notion of media relations (see figure 2). Despite extension of the notion
the instruments of media relations remain the same. Both publics can be addressed by a
press release, press conference, background discussion etc. due to their journalistic role.
What’s left of media relations in times of change? The hypothesis can be put forward that media
relations in their traditional sense have lost in importance paralleling traditional journalisms loss
in reach. But when expanding the definition to new journalistic publics in new media that fulfill
classic functions of journalism the scope of media relations could be broadened. It is no longer the
professional, full-time journalism that defines media relations. It is the journalistic function that media
can provide for the organization.
professional
journalism
participatory
media
classical
mode
•objectivity
•neutrality
I
traditional journalism
journalism conducted by
professional journalists
in their official capacity in
traditional or digital media
III
citizen journalism
journalism conducted by
amateurs in traditional
or digital media, e.g.
community newspapers,
micro-blogs
> media relations
addressing professional
journalists or amateur
journalists who base
their work on journalistic
standards in a journalistic
role
network
mode
•subjectivity
•authenticity
II
open journalism
(journalism 2.0)
professional journalists
engaging in a dialogue
with audiences by open-
ing the editorial workflow
for user input and com-
ments
IV
social media sphere
individual or collabora-
tive content production
without a journalistic ap-
proach in social media,
e.g. in communitys
> social media rela-
tions
addressing individuals or
groups in their private role
in social media
Figure 2: Media relations in a new media environment
78
>> Papers
(IV) Social Media apart from journalism = no task for media relations?
Social media offer journalists the opportunity to follow news and user discussions, too. In the social
media sphere users select, present, and edit content. This content could affect organizations
directly or mediated through mainstream media. Journalists monitor these new forms of public
sphere in order to catch news, ideas, and trends for their own coverage. From a PR point of view,
Lariscy et al. (2009: 314) argue: “Social media can be used for agenda building, as journalists look
to these third-party ‚general population’ sources in writing their stories and certainly public relations
practitioners have begun engaging social media content authors with this in mind.” Are wikis,
weblogs, social networks, communities or video platforms relevant for media relations, although
they are not necessarily journalistic media or platforms? The functional approach proposed so far
has shown that some social networks provide similar functions as traditional journalism. Media
relations can use social media to gain attention, relevance, and credibility for its messages. The
focus of social media differs from traditional journalism in two regards: Firstly, their functions refer
to specific digital publics instead of the general public. Secondly, social media perform their
functions in a different way. Thus, classic instruments of media relations cannot be applied. Similar
to open journalism the social media sphere is dominated by subjectivity and authenticity. But there
are no standardized production cycles. Publication is a continuous process in which every person
or group could participate. There are no editorial offices and no journalists, and journalistic quality
criteria are of minor or no importance to those who participate in the individual or collaborative
content production online. Instead it is the sum of all subjective, authentic contributions that leads
to the three functions that are relevant for media relations.
The social media sphere is a relevant “place” to be for PR. PR practitioners address new media
„as a means of reaching beyond the media“ (Bajkiewicz et al. 2011: 331). For a company it is
important to have a presence in new digital media. It can communicate with publics that form in
social networks or simply use social media as a platform for dialogue. Social media are important
for media relations, too. As mentioned in context with open journalism, discussions in social
media often precede media coverage when journalists use social networks for research. But
media reporting as well can inspire content in social media that is individually or collaboratively
generated. Therefore, the notion of media relations could be expanded.
When media relations address publics that contribute to content production in the social media
sphere or to user generated content in the context of open journalism it can be called social
media relations (see figure 2). Social media relations communicate with publics who offer relevant
functions in a network mode. Addressing subjectivity and authenticity social media relations
are based on dialogue. They present information, put it into context, and discuss it with users.
Social media relations moderate a dialogue with all those publics in the social media sphere that
could offer specific functions identical or similar to mass media. By personalizing issues in tweets
or posts, users add personal relevance to organizational messages and grant organizational
legitimacy to the information or opinion that is communicated (Smith 2010: 333). Although it does
communication with non-journalists, it affects traditional journalism as well as civic journalism.
Professional journalism, lay journalism and social media sphere are increasingly linked. Classic
forms of media relations and social media relations are similarly bound together. They need to be
coordinated and integrated as “new media relations”.
To sum up: The hypothesis is that the concept of media relations should be more specifically
analyzed. With new forms of journalism, the rise of social media, and their interconnectedness
new possibilities of participative or collaborative content production are emerging. Media relations
are no longer a field of PR only addressing professional journalists working in traditional media. It
addresses public journalists, too. When communicating with authors in the social media sphere,
the field can be broadened. It is social media relations that extend traditional media relations
from a functional point of view. Within this new understanding of media relations there is need
for theory building. What models can describe the concept? Which communication patterns and
instruments emerge? How are power and resources allocated between traditional and social
media relations?
This paper discusses the ongoing changes in media system describing how new forms of
communication and information on the Internet challenge journalism and especially media
relations. A functional approach is presented that integrates traditional as well as participatory
media into the concept of media relations. On the one hand, media relations in a classic sense
remain focused on traditional journalism and its adaption to new principles and practices formed
through the Internet. But their scope has widened: Media relations address public journalists, i.e.,
amateurs reporting according to journalistic standards, too.
On the other hand, there is a new form that could be named social media relations. They
communicate with publics who arise in journalistic contexts like open journalism using elements
of participatory media or in the social media sphere. Social media relations address individuals or
groups communicating in and by digital networks. Similar to traditional media, they can provide an
organization with attention, relevance, and credibility with their audiences. Additionally, they offer
new opportunities for relationship management and dialogue through PR.
>> Papers
Addressing PR’s need for credibility the two models of media relations can be described in more
detail: While media relations profit from professional reporting according to journalistic standards,
social media relations are based on the authenticity of content and communication context.
Media relations address journalists in their professional role in order to reach media audiences.
In social media relations, the ranking of those target groups is exactly the opposite: Social media
relations directly address users of social networks in order to get the attention of journalists who
research subjects in the social media sphere in a second step. While traditional media and their
audiences can be identified easily, to identify and describe publics in the social media sphere is
rather difficult. Additionally, it is difficult to identify key media who could generate relevance and
credibility as digital audiences are mostly segmented.
To address a selected group of gatekeepers and opinion leaders as it is possible in traditional
media, is a difficult task in the social media sphere. Another challenge is to change principles
and practices of media relations themselves. Speaking with one voice has become difficult, and
authorization of every statement is in times of social media almost impossible.
New forms of journalism and participatory media have broadened media relations’ scope. To build
relationships with professional journalists, public journalists, and users contributing in the social
media sphere, media relations have to adapt.
Traditionally, media relations have addressed general, special interest, and specialized media.
Nowadays, they face a wide variety of new publics with different stakes and interests in the
organization. Figure 2 has shown that it is no longer the professional role that defines media
relations. It is the function that a journalistic or journalistic-like public can provide for PR. The
question, what’s left of media relations in times of change has to be reformulated. It must be:
What’s possible now?
• Bajkiewicz, T. E., Kraus, J. J., & Hong, S. Y. (2011). The Impact of Newsroom Changes and
the Rise of Social Media on the Practice of Media Relations. Public Relations Review, 37(3),
329-331.
• Fortunato, J. A. (2000). Public Relations Strategies for Creating Mass Media Content: A Case
Study of the National Basketball Association. Public Relations Review, 26(4), 481-497.
• Fröhlich, R., Quiring, O., & Engesser, S. (2012). Between Idiosyncratic Self-Interests and
Professional Standards. A Contribution to the Understanding of Participatory Journalism in
Web 2.0. Results from an Online Survey in Germany. Journalism, 13(8), 1041-1063.
• Freberg, K., Graham, K., McGaughey, K., & Freberg, L.A. (2011). Who are the Social Media
Influencers? A Study of Public Perceptions of Personality. Public Relations Review, 37(1),
90-92.
• González-Herrero, A., & Ruiz de Valbuena, M. (2006). Trends in Online Media Relations: Web-
Based Corporate Press Rooms in Leading International Companies. Public Relations Review,
32(3), 267-275.
• Hon, L. C., & Grunig, J. E. (1999). Guidelines for Measuring Relationships in Public Relations.
Gainesville, FL: Institute for Public Relations.
• Hoffjann, O. (2011). Vertrauen in Public Relations. [Confidence in Public Relations.] Publizistik,
55(1), 65-84.
• Karlsson, M. (2011). The Immediacy of Online News, the Visibility of Journalistic Processes,
and a Restructuring of Journalistic Authority. Journalism, 12(3), 279-295.
• Kiousis, S., Popescu, C., & Mitrook, M. (2007). Understanding Influence on Corporate
Reputation: An Examination of Public Relations Efforts, Media Coverage, Public Opinion, and
Financial Performance From an Agenda-Building and Agenda-Setting Perspective. Journal of
Public Relations Research, 19(2), 147-165.
• Kohring, M. (2004). Vertrauen in Journalismus. Theorie und Empirie. [Confidence in
Journalism. Theories and Empirical Research.] Konstanz: Universitätsverlag.
• Kovach, B., & Rosenstiel, T. (2007). The Elements of Journalism. What Newspeople Should
Know and the Public Should Expect. New York: Crown Publishers.
• Lariscy, R. W., Avery, E. J., Sweetser, K. D., & Howes, P. (2009). An Examination of the Role
of Online Social Media in Journalists’ Source Mix. Public Relations Review, 35(3), 314-316.
• Mast, C. (Ed.) (2012). ABC des Journalismus. [ABC of Journalism.] Konstanz: UVK.
• Meier, K. (2007). Journalistik. [Journalism.] Konstanz: UVK.
• Neidhardt, F. (1994). Jenseits des Palavers. Funktionen politischer Öffentlichkeit. [Beyond
Palaver. Functions of Political Public Sphere] In W. Wunden (Ed.), Öffentlichkeit und
Kommunikationskultur. [Public Sphere and Communication Culture.] (pp. 19-30). Hamburg/
Stuttgart: Steinkopf.
• Neuberger, C., & Nuernbergk, C. (2010). Competition, Complementarity or Integration? The
Relationship between Professional and Participatory Media. Journalism Practice, 4(3), 319-
332.
>> Papers
Strategic communication is an evolving concept in academe and in militaries around the world.
The purpose of this study was to develop and analyze strategic communication for Multi-National
Forces Iraq, a United Nations military force of 40 countries that comprised Multi-National Forces-
Iraq (MNF-I) during the period of 2007 and 2008. This study is an extension of a study done for the
U.S. Army War College in 2007 that developed a viable, qualitative measurement tool to assess
the relationships with the media for U.S. Army public affairs.
Essentially this study was a multiple case study that included documents, participant
observation, and direct observation in strategic communication planning. Four separate strategic
communication plans were developed and partially implemented by public affairs staff for each
of these commands. These staffs included personnel from Iraq, Morocco, Egypt, Australia, and
England, and joint forces personnel from the U.S. Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marines. Development
and implementation of these plans relied on current theory related to strategic communication in
the military as well as the civilian academic field of public relations. Such theory included strategic
communication and planning, leadership and negotiation, and evaluation (civilian and military) of
the relationship strategies of trust and transparency (Hon & Grunig, 1999; Ledingham & Bruning,
2000; Rawlins, 2007) to the appropriate elements of a strategic communication plan (Wilson &
Ogden, 2008).
The study presented in this paper investigates the evolving field of strategic communication
planning in the field of public relations as it applies to the U.S. military in Iraq and Kuwait and
Afghanistan during the period of 2007–2008. Strategic communication is defined in the commercial
or private sector for academia by Hallahan, Holthausen, Van Ruler, Vercic, & Sriramesh,. (2007)
as “the purposeful use of communication by an organization to fulfill its mission” (p. 3). The terms
commercial sector or private sector are used here because there is a difference between how
strategic communication is defined for the private sector and for the military, or public, sector. A
16 March 2010 report to the U.S. Congress from President Obama stated, “Different uses of the
term strategic communication have led to significant confusion . . .
Strategic Communication: A Planning Model
Applied Across Four Cases
9
• Neuberger, C. (2008). Internet und Journalismusforschung. Theoretische Neujustierung
und Forschungsagenda. [Internet and Journalism Research. Proposing a Re-Adjustment of
Theory and a Research Agenda.] In T. Quandt, & W. Schweiger (Eds.), Journalismus Online—
Partizipation oder Profession? [Journalism online—Participation or Profession?] (pp. 17-42).
Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
• Reber, B. H., & Kim, J. K. (2006). How Activist Groups Use Websites in Media Relations:
Evaluations Online Press Rooms. Journal of Public Relations Research, 18(4), 313-333.
• Russel, A. (2001). Chiapas and the New News. Internet and Newspaper Coverage of a
Broken Cease-Fire. Journalism, 2(2), 197-220.
• Schlesinger, D. (2009). Rethinking Rights, Accreditation, and Journalism Itself in the Age
of Twitter. Speech, International Olympics Committee Press Commission, 23rd June 2009.
http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-editors/2009/06/24/rethinking-rights-accreditation-and-
journalism-itself-in-the-age-of-twitter (1st May 2013).
• Schweiger, W., & Jungnickel, K. (2011). Pressemitteilungen 2.0¬—eine Resonanzanalyse im
Internet. [Press Releases 2.0¬¬—an Online Resonance Analysis.] Publizistik, 56(4), 399-421.
• Smith, B. J. (2010). Socially Distributing Public Relations. Twitter, Haiti, and Interactivity in
Social Media. Public Relations Review, 36(4), 329-335.
• Steyn, P., Salehi-Sangari, E., Pitt, L., Parent, M., & Berthon, P. (2010). The Social Media
Release as a Public Relations Tool. Intentions to Use among B2B Bloggers. Public Relations
Review, 36(1), 87-89.
• Tallapragada, M., Misaras, I. C., Burke, K., & Waters, R. D. (2012). Identifying the Best
Practices of Media Catching. A National Survey of Media Relations Practitioners. Public
Relations Review, 38(5), 926-931.
• Waters, R. D., Tindall, N. T. J., & Morton, T. S. (2010): Media Catching and the Journalist-
Public Relations Practitioner Relationship. How Social Media are Changing the Practice of
Media Relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 22(3), 241-264.
• Wright, D. K., & Hinson, M. D. (2010). An Analysis of New Communications Media Use in
Public Relations. Results of a Five-Year Trend Study. Public Relations Journal, 4(2).
Hereby, we give permission to publish this full paper on BledCom’s website and to reproduce it in
BledCom 2013 proceedings.
Klaus Spachmann, Simone Huck-Sandhu, Helena Stehle
81
>> Papers
