Search results

Meta reviews are central for mapping the state of the field, consolidating the heterogeneous public relations body of knowledge, and pointing to new potential research directions. Habermas is one of the most influential contemporary social theorists and his work has repeatedly been used in public relations scholarship. While some have maintained that his work has been most influential in the development of public relations theory, this stream of research has never been reviewed empirically.

In this paper, the authors present a bibliometric literature review of 263 public relations research articles published between 1980 and 2016 that cite and use Habermas’ work. A network analysis of these publications based on the technique of bibliographic coupling was used to identify common forms of application, research themes, as well as patterns of impact.

Results show that the use of Habermas has grown significantly, specifically in the recent decade. At the same time, researchers have a narrow focus specifically on earlier developments in the theory. Finally, we discover three main topical research clusters that have been influenced by the theory: public relations and the public sphere, dialogic stakeholder relationships, as well as public relations and communication ethics.

The findings map out an important stream of scholarship in the field by showing where public relations scholars have been and where the research community has not ventured yet. Based on the results of our analysis, the authors propose directions for research to advance future theory development in public relations using Habermas’ work.

There is a great potential in pulling together science communication and strategic communication, especially given how the former has gained importance in organizational contexts. Strategic communication, including rhetorical theory, can offer insights that are invaluable to understand the contests over what “truth” is and how different political perspectives influence such debates. The case of vaccine hesitancy is used as an illustration of the challenges posed to organizations and organizational communication around science-related issues today. There is a need to understand the audience in order to build credibility, or ethos, while at the same time recognizing the contingent and situational character of this endeavor.

Rhetoric and strategic communication can offer science communication the essential knowledge to strengthen credibility. While much attention has been geared toward understanding the audience, strategic communication and rhetoric in particular go further and also spell out the strategic implications for communication that is intended to strengthen credibility. Additionally, rhetoric alerts us to how credibility, or ethos, is not a fixed quality in a sender or a text but is situational and constantly negotiated. While the case of vaccine hesitancy and health authorities is used as an illustration, all organizations share the need to somehow have others believe in what they are saying. The toolboxes of strategic communication and rhetoric hold a number of insights and approaches that could benefit science communication.

The study pulls together insights from rhetoric and strategic communication that can inform science communication.

The paper aims to analyze the contribution of young academics to the field of public relations (PR) and shows which authors exert most influence on them. The study thereby contributes to the assessment of the state of the art of theory building in the field. The authors analyzed the study data against the background of two approaches on progress in the field: Nothhaft et al.’s (2018) idea of strategic communication as an elusive concept and Winkler et al.’s (2021) narrative approach.

The study comprises two parts. First, the authors conducted a survey among participants of the EUPRERA PhD-workshops between 2007 and 2019, asking respondents about their perception of the state of the field. Second, the authors performed a bibliometric (co-)citation analysis of the young scholars’ most important works.

Results indicate that though the field has progressed in terms of quantity and diversified with regard to established paradigms, it has not matured in a sense that it has settled on a generally accepted theoretical underpinning. However, the data show how the dominant paradigms in the field map onto the co-citation networks that emerged out of the works of young scholars. The authors’ findings imply that this new generation might signal their allegiance to a paradigm by citing the works of its emblematic authors.

Unlike most bibliometric studies, this one uses an author-centered approach, thus studying works that matter most to young academics themselves. Not only do the authors thereby contribute to the analysis of the state of theory building in PR research, but also expand the scope in looking at research as a social system, in which young researchers need to position themselves.

The purpose of this chapter is to address the question of how communication studies can prove its value in relation to corporate social responsibility (CSR). As many disciplines seek to understand CSR, the role of communication has been relatively underexplored despite its prevalence in demonstrating and shaping social responsibility positions and practice.

Literature review.

The literature review points to what we consider as four aces. Communication studies alert us to (1) how meaning is constructed through communication, something that has implications for the management of organizations as publics hold different views of CSR and expect different things from them; (2) how a dialogue between an organization and its publics should unfold; (3) how practices of transparency can assist organizations to come across as trustworthy actors; and, importantly, (4) how a complexity view is fruitful to grasp the CSR communication process.

These four key themes could be instructive for practitioners who want to argue for and demonstrate the usefulness of strategic communication for the management of CSR and bridge meso and macro levels of analysis.

The prime goal of this chapter is to discuss what the notion of rhetorical citizenship as a normative aspiration might entail for corporations.

The chapter draws on a pilot study of the Facebook pages of two banks. A rhetorical criticism of these pages was conducted.

We suggest that while corporations are assuredly entities very different from the individual citizens who hold civil, social, and political rights – which do not directly apply to corporations – rhetorical citizenship is nevertheless a suggestive and constructive metaphor for corporations to communicate by.

Rhetorical citizenship for corporations must, we argue, be(come) rooted in organizational reality, and should involve a continued critical questioning as to what might constitute citizenly communication for corporations under any given circumstances. The chapter is, however, built on limited data from a pilot study and needs to be complemented.

We suggest from our pilot study that the active engagement of corporations in social media may currently be seen as one form of rhetorical citizenship that the public expects corporations to enact. Thus, we argue, corporations in general might as well attempt to do their best to act as rhetorical citizens.

The chapter highlights how communication is a set of practices in which social responsibility must be enacted. We find that this is not a prevalent perspective in the existing literature on CSR and communication.

This article seeks to analyse the skills and knowledge that have a positive impact on the reproduction of the core frames of social actors in the mass media.

The theoretical discussion is accompanied by a cross‐cultural case study of the debate surrounding the leaked e‐mail correspondence between climate researchers at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in 2009. First, the authors analysed the framing work of the three main actors with their respective views, namely UEA and the blogs “Real climate”, “Climate audit” and “The air vent”. Second, they conducted an analysis of the media coverage of the issue in the UK, the USA, Germany and Norway, focusing on the importance of cultural factors, psychological biases and conformity to journalistic needs.

The literature review came to the conclusion that public relations practitioners stand good chances to succeed with their framing when they are able to conceive a message in a way that: is resonant with the underlying culture; appeals to psychological biases; and conforms to journalistic needs. The authors use “framing expertise” as an umbrella term for the knowledge and the skills related to these aspects when designing and promoting frames. In the case study, these theoretical assumptions were tested. While three different frames dominated the discourse, no clear winner of the framing contest was observed. Though qualitative differences in their framing expertise were noted, the frames of all of the strategic actors were accepted in the media, perhaps due to the norms of journalistic balance.

As this study is based on a single case, more research is needed to back up the findings and elaborate on the knowledge and skills needed when framing an issue.

The article pulls together, discusses and elaborates on a body of literature that thus far has been scattered, and makes contributions towards a better understanding of what it is that public relations practitioners actually do.

The purpose of this paper is to improve upon lobby theory by learning from a failed lobby campaign in which the lobbyist managed to annoy and anger key constituencies.

The paper is a qualitative case study, conducted on attempts made by the Norwegian oil industry in 2002‐2004 to achieve a tax amendment. Qualitative interviews were carried out with oil industry representatives, two former ministers, political advisers, and members of parliament, and with journalists who had followed the campaign.

The main argument being put forward in this paper is that lobbyists should use insights from stakeholder theory.

The paper is a single‐case study and it is difficult to generalise its findings. This invites more research.

The paper combines lobby theory with an approach suggested by stakeholder theory which might temper single‐minded advocacy that is too preoccupied with getting immediate political results, and help organizations to remember that it is important to develop good long‐term relations with stakeholders.

The paper has potential to improve lobby theory and efforts.

The purpose of this paper is to seek to improve how companies map their environment in order to identify the social norms and values that exist in relation to corporate social responsibility (CSR).

A theoretical discussion is accompanied by a short case study that includes analysis of ten sustainability reports published by the oil company Shell.

The mapping tools recommended in the literature of management and public relations have limitations. There are also weaknesses in the way that Shell, a supposed leader in the CSR movement, maps its environment. The public sphere concept is suggested as a fruitful supplement.

More in‐depth case studies accompanied with qualitative interviews are needed to back up the conclusions put forward.

The norms, values and expectations regarding CSR are not fixed entities, and it is thus vital for organisations to engage in ongoing listening and dialogue to keep abreast of these changing factors. Companies have to attempt to be well informed and well read participants in civic society. Conceptualizing their environments as made up of stakeholders and a public sphere, can help in this endeavour.

The paper points to the limitation of current environmental mapping tools, and discusses how such mapping exercises can be improved.