Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

Name: MALIT, Mia Grace D. Section: BA 301

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

Readings
Chartered Public Relations: Lessons From Expert Practitioners
Reference: Waddington, S. (2015). Chartered Public Relations : Lessons From Expert Practitioners. Kogan Page.
Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/ZTAwMHh3d19fOTQ0NDk5X19BTg2?sid=59b1e7ed-
14f5-4437-8e1c-b32a5e26f7c6@sdc-v-sessmgr03&vid=1&format=EB&rid=1.

Myths of PR: All Publicity Is Good Publicity and Other Popular Misconceptions
Reference: Leigh, R. (2017). Myths of PR : All Publicity Is Good Publicity and Other Popular Misconceptions. Kogan
Page. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=48720612-0b2d-4b80-b81a-
ed63efec0429%40sessionmgr4008&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=1494511&db=e000xww.

What do you think are the challenges of the public relations profession? What must public
relations writers do in the face of these challenges?
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

Friend, Foe, or Fraud?

Dissecting misconstrued perception/s in the field of public relations

Mia Grace D. Malit

BA 301
Public Relations Writing & Program Planning
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

“We are becoming a nation that no longer has negotiators and peacemakers
 and in which our first response to crises is 
 to shoot first and ask questions later
 or not at all.”

ー Ronan Farrow, author of ‘War on Peace’

Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

Lying is a very prevalent aspect of human nature (Curtis, 2013). Whether it may be to
protect the feelings of the other or by falsifying statements to a graver extent with the sole
intention to confuse or deceive, people lie regularly and often (Vrij, 2008).
Extending to social interactions, people are accustomed to make lies for their benefit yet
public distaste remains as it is seen as an act of outsmarting the very dignified self ought to be
valued and respected: a visible strike to the ego as it may seem. This is a manifestation that
although it is accepted, people do not like to be lied to (Epley & Huff, 1998). 
Nevertheless, an individual cannot visibly take away the capability of one, especially
when it comes to the stringing of lies. Pragmatically, people willfully partake in these actions to
achieve an end goal―almost always theirs to be exact.
With this context of lying in place, it has also appeared to be of prevalent tendency in the
realm of public relations. As likely promulgated by culture and fleeting trends, the general public
(or those outside the bounds of the profession), more often than not, are susceptible into thinking
that PR is nothing but “spin.” Hence the long-standing debate of whether or not professionals in
the said field―more than being revered as highly valued communicators―are prevailing masters
of deception has been ensuing for decades. As one side of the spectrum leans toward public
relations practitioners being highly ethical alongside being equipped with top-level reasoning,
critical thinking skills, and effective communication skills to boot, another side contends that
these practitioners are marred with the “pressure to be organic” (Leigh, 2017).
Yet it is still a naked truth as to how pursuing a career in public relations is deemed a
smart economic move that promises stability and efficacy in the long run. Much so that in a 2019
college salary report, career research website PayScale has listed the profession as the best job
for Communication majors, amounting the highest salary potential at 92,000 USD as a mid-
career pay behind being a director for Marketing Communications at 85,400 USD.  
The figures aforementioned do not entirely astound a Communication student as it would
a lone outside observer. This is due to the fact that public relations, as Rich Leigh (2017) puts it
into perspective, “is silently present in near enough everything people read, watch, listen to, and
consume in the media.” The field and its vestiges unwittingly exist and are highly prevalent in
news or talk shows, both television and radio broadcasts, and even in the celebrities people
religiously follow in various social media platforms (p. 2). As the profession is invariably cast in
the shadows, away from the prying eyes of a hawk-eyed public, people tend to forget that behind
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

every image a powerful personality hones and holds is a team of public relations operatives
working tirelessly (and seamlessly) so as to beautifully paint a picture of their client, therefore
maximizing profit returns for the company. Yet in the eyes of an unknowing consumer, public
figures and personalities become their role models―someone they look up to; the opposite
simmers once the curtain is pulled open as these high-profile people are deemed [as] brands
exhibiting such sheer and exquisite power in influencing people. That is where public relations,
in hindsight, comes and goes.
Thus far in retrospect, the general public are (still) near clueless as to what public
relations is and actually does. In fact, the question “What is public relations?” has been
countlessly asked by people from all walks of life for several years, if not decades. This puzzling
inquiry has yet to be resolved as academics, professionals, and students alike posit that the
profession in and of itself is in a “continuous process of redefining” (Leigh, 2017).
Heeding all these in mind, it is only proper for this paper to place its endeavor on
studying, analyzing, and dissecting the misconstrued perception people have of public relations,
most especially in terms of deception and the stringing of lies as it is the foremost challenge seen
proliferating the public relations spectrum. 
Anchored on the required reading, “Myths of PR: All Publicity is Good Publicity and
Other Popular Misconceptions” by Rich Leigh, an esteemed public relations practitioner in the
United Kingdom, alongside other notable studies crafted by academics and scholars through the
years, these serve as the foundations as well as the parameters of the claim.
Upon accomplishing this, only then can the proponent (hopefully) give light on the
misconstrued perception/s through sheer knowledge and differing perspectives in hopes of
mending the lack of public knowledge, recognition, and awareness about public relations; what it
truly entails beyond the perceived mechanisms of “spin”; and as an ethical, managerial function
which would hopefully lead to a widened perspective and/or understanding of the subject at
hand.
Thus with no twists and turns, the paper presents the facts about lying, ethics in the
industry, and perception of different sectors with regard to the said profession, with conscious
efforts in an attempt to, at the very least, give reasonable resolution to the stated query.
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

On Lying
There is no universally accepted definition of lying as it is proven to be difficult to
describe objectively, therefore making it unclear (Mahon, 2015). Yet the most widely accepted
definition comes from Primoratz (1984) wherein “lying is making a statement believed to be
false, with the intention of getting another to accept it as true.”

According to Primoratz (1984), for a lie to be considered as one, it should follow these
four conditions:
1. Statement of Condition. Lying requires that a person make a statement;
2. Untruthfulness Condition. Lying requires that the person believe the statement to
be false, therefore asserting it to be untruthful;
3. Addressee Condition. Lying requires that the untruthful statement be made to
another person; and 
4. 4. Intention to deceive the addressee Condition. Lying requires that the person
intend that that other person believe the untruthful statement to be true.

Being closely intertwined with lying, deception, for the purpose of this paper, is defined
as “a successful or unsuccessful deliberate attempt, without forewarning, to create in another 
belief which the communicator considers to be untrue” (Vrij, 2008, p. 15). Therefore, an
intention to deceive constitutes lying (Kharel, 2018).

On the profession, Code of Ethics, and Leigh’s PR Ethos

Public relations, decades after its conception, has been “repeatedly refined, rehashed, and
revisited,” partly driven by socioeconomic and political changes (Callison, Merle, & Seltzer,
2014). With a desire to distinguish public relations from the related fields of marketing and
advertising that have threatened to impinge on the profession, fellow scholars and academics
alike found a need to distance the field from the negative perceptions that have plagued it as “a
result of (1) transgressions from high-profile practitioners, (2) an association with advocacy on
behalf of “big business,” (3) inherent public mistrust for the field, and (4) less than flattering
media portrayals” (pp. 3-4). 
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

Thus in an effort to veer away from the negative, almost fatalistic connotations the term
“public relations” entails and is associated with, a plethora of titles to refer to the field were used
instead, one of which was “corporate communications” among others. The abundance of
terminology used to describe the said profession has only exacerbated public confusion regarding
“what public relations is, the types of people who practice it, and what they actually do” (Cropp
& Pincus, 2001 as cited in Callison et al., 2014).
With hopes of steering clear of the elemental image of public relations as a profession
and as an industry filled with nothing but convoluted lies, with practitioners propagating to stir
the public perception, action, and behavior to their utmost favor; this has inevitably led to
comments and inquiries dogged with negative connotations and perceptions [that are] oftentimes
left unanswered more than being duly addressed and clarified over time. 
Yet with their desire of coming up with a consensus on ‘what’ public relations is, the
Public Relations Society of America through the 2012 “Public Relations Defined” campaign,
pooled hundreds of submissions for developing a modern definition of the said profession in
question. Among the thousands of votes cast, PRSA announced that “‘the profession’s choice for
the modern definition of PR is ‘Public relations is a strategic communication process that builds
mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and their publics.’” 
This, in turn, has led to public relations cementing its role as a management function that
not only caters to media relations but also toward the betterment of an organization and its
stakeholders through the establishing and maintaining of strategic communication embedded in
ethical principles. The said campaign also is a testament to the progress public relations have
accrued over the years. 
A prime example of the prevailing code of ethics in the public relations industry is that of
the PRSA (2012) in which it cites six core values a public relations professional must possess so
as to rightfully and aptly set the industry standard and protect the level of public trust in serving
[for] the public good ethically:
1. Advocacy. We serve the public interest by acting as responsible advocates for
those we represent. We provide a voice in the marketplace of ideas, facts, and
viewpoints to aid informed public debate;
2. Honesty. We adhere to the highest standards of accuracy and truth in advancing
the interests of those we represent and in communicating with the public;
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

3. Expertise. We acquire and responsibly use specialized knowledge and experience.

We advance the profession through continued professional development, research,
and education. We build mutual understanding, credibility, and relationships
among a wide array of institutions and audiences.
4. Independence. We provide objective counsel to those we represent. We are
accountable for our actions;
5. Loyalty. We are faithful to those we represent, while honoring our obligation to
serve the public interest; and
6. Fairness. We deal fairly with clients, employers, competitors, peers, vendors, the
media, and the general public. We respect all opinions and support the right of
free expression.

Taking all these in mind, Leigh (2017) has opined in the introductory chapter of his book,
“Myths of PR”, how he wants his work as a public relations practitioner to “make somebody
think―but in a way that makes them think they thought it.” He also contends that a public
relations professional’s line of work entails the cultivation and utter propagation of voluntary
behaviors, in which the audience becomes “malleable and all the more predictable” (p. 2). Public
relations then, in his context, accentuates its aim on affecting the media, social media, and other
content a target audience consumes. Professionals in this field hold the responsibility of
establishing and maintaining a certain image or branding of a person, product, or organization as
duly perceived by the public.  
With Leigh’s PR ethos in hand, the target audience are likely to perceive that they
themselves have come up with a particular action/decision/conception when in hindsight, there
are people (like Leigh) behind the scenes that attest to making sure that every situation works in
their favor. While his ethos may be seen as deceiving or fatuous even, he is quick to stand on his
ground that he deals with his clients and the public as fairly as possible. This then becomes a
point of contention for consumers once they find out that their actions are being studied and
predicted (almost tantamount to being fed with lies), since humans have always had a sense of
entitlement to themselves as bearers of agency―equally asserting themselves as immune to
outside influence. Yet the fact still remains that persuasion is venerated as a vital component in
public relations. 
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

According to  Mirelles (2014), it [persuasion] visibly heightens a professional’s ability to

“build relationships, create compelling content, manage crises and reputations, propel media and
blog outreach, improve public speaking, sharing and connecting in social  media, and getting
one’s colleagues, clients, and bosses to support their strategies.” 

PR practitioners as masters of “spin” and lies

In spite of the progress achieved by the profession, public relations still possesses the
tendency to be viewed or seen as highly deceitful, marred with a conundrum of ethical disputes
and moral tribulations, especially by the public. Leigh (2017) thinks public relations
professionals have partly contributed to this notion held by skeptical citizens as they “...hide
behind [our] clients just as much as they want [us] to stay there.” 
This ‘culture’ of laying low or staying behind the public eye likely contributes to creating
the image of a client (i.e. personality) strictly for public consumption; forming a beautiful mirage
that these personalities are invariably governed by their sense of agency only. In support of this
‘culture,’ Tracy Clement posits that “good PR should be invisible” (Clement, 2011 as cited in
Leigh, 2017). She thinks in order to effectively negotiate and sell a brand, public relations
practitioners should only act as their clients’ shadow. In contrast to her beliefs was Leigh, seeing
this very practice as one that “diminishes the value society puts on good PR” (p. 6). For him,
long gone were the days of equating public relations with “spin” ― taking the truth and
representing it in a way that suits agenda. The message PROs craft and the aim it now presents
lies not in telling people that “up is down or that black is white,” it serves to build trust and
understanding. 
Thus, as enablers of platforms, brands, and individuals toward the path of success, it is
rendered incontestable how PR people often go by unnoticed despite their huge involvement
behind the scenes. The lack of praise and recognition also likely leads to the public’s
misconstrued perception of public relations, stringing along the professionals within the said
field of specialization. Public relations roles are shrouded in secrecy, equally paving the way for
a web of lies to infiltrate and propagate within society, oftentimes left unchecked. Nonetheless,
as Honeysett (2016) succinctly puts it, “there may have been a time and a place when companies
put out messaging that misrepresented what was actually happening in the company [yet] it is
definitely not the chosen approach anymore.” For them, public relations is now in the frontlines,
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

aiding companies toward transparency; all due to the advent of social media rising in an era of
wide-scale digital footprint equally enveloped with mistrust and skepticism. Hence they posit
that building trust and understanding in the industry could only be achieved by being transparent,
honest, and engaging (Wilson, 2012 as cited in Leigh, 2017). 
Other perspectives beg to differ. Former convict, tabloid scandal architect, and one of the
most disreputable representatives of public relations in the UK, Max Clifford regards lying as a
central component of the job (Leigh, 2017). With high-profile figures like Clifford at the
forefront of media relations, unwittingly becoming one of the few faces widely recognized and
seen by the public, public relations is then relegated to the very thing it aims to avoid―being a
field rooted in the mechanisms of “spin”. All the more does it leave the industry with people that
stir public opinion often to the most nefarious, undesired direction. In turn, the profession and its
dutiful practitioners are left in radio silence. Skulking around the shadows and showing
reluctance to be transparent about their own work and tactics thereafter, people outside the
bounds of the industry have since filled the gaps left by public relations, most of which they have
stayed mummed and silent (pp. 8-11). Hence public relations practitioners may hold the strings
of the marionette that is their client, yet it is debatable how the ones who may be holding the
purse strings are still the clients themselves. 

On Practitioner and Academic Perception

Scholarship in public relations is inundated with attempts to understand how
practitioners, academics, and students perceive both the profession and the discipline, including
key characteristics that lead to astronomical success alongside the necessary skills and
knowledge one must be equipped with and should be part of formal training programs (Bowen,
2003, 2009; Broom, 1982; Broom & Dozier, 1986; Broom & Smith, 1979; Dozier & Broom,
1995; Heyman, 2005; J. E. Grunig, L. A. Grunig, & Dozier, 2006; Kelleher, 2001; Moss,
Newman, & DeSanto, 2005; Newsome, Ramsey, & Carrell, 1993; Pieczka & L’Etang, 2001;
Toth, Serini, Wright, & Emig, 1998; van Ruler, Vercic, Butschi, & Flodin, 2004; Wright &
VanSlyke Turk, 2007 as cited in Callison et al., 2014).
A study conducted in the late 20th century by J. E. Grunig, L. A. Grunig, and Dozier
(2006) which had taken into account 5,337 CEOs, senior communication officers, and employees
from 327 organizations located in three different countries to address the questions: (1) ‘how
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

does public relations contribute to organizational effectiveness?’, and (2) ‘how should a public
relations unit be structured to make this contribution?’ Subsequent in-depth interviews were
made with CEOs and corporate communication staff in 25 of the organizations that were
identified as the most- and least- “excellent” based on the survey data. In addition to findings
with regard to perceptions of the value of the profession and the characteristic of “excellent”
public relations units, important individual-level (i.e. practitioner-level) traits that contributed to
public relations effectiveness were also identified by the practitioners and CEOs. Among their
responses were “...the included knowledge of and the ability to practice a two-way symmetrical
model of public relations and knowledge of the managerial role.”
More than the establishing and further studying of public sentiment and perception by
audiences outside the parameters of the profession and/or industry, much of the research crafted
decades after has its focus lain on self-perceptions of the practitioners as well as on the status of
public relations as a bonafide profession (c.f. Dozier & Broom, 2006; Pieczka & L’Etang, 2001
as cited in Callison et al., 2014). Some studies have gone beyond practitioners to consider how
CEOs perceive public relations as an organizational function. These perceptions include the
belief that public relations is best used to build and protect corporate reputation (Murray &
White, 2005) and that the public relations function has evolved from “old” (i.e. “fluff” and
tactical) to “new” public relations (i.e. strategic and substantive) (Sterne, 2008). Influential
reports released by the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
(AJMC) over the years namely, A Design for Public Relations Education (1975), A Port of Entry
(1999), and the Professional Bond (2006), have also engendered skills and knowledge deemed as
content areas for academic programs in public relations: “...communication and persuasion
theory, finance, public relations law, ethics, research and analysis, management, planning, and
oral and written communication.”
  Another practitioner perception that has instigated long-winding debates and discussion
among the public relations circle was Ronel Rensburg’s 2015 study entitled, “Lying to protect an
organization: An occupational hazard?” The paper presented at the 23rd International Public
Relations Research Symposium in Slovenia offered insights from over 20 top executives and
professionals in South Africa on the subjects of lying and ethics in the PR industry. All
respondents were top earners with large salaries as of the said study’s culmination.
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

Although small, the original qualitative interviews have given a glimpse on the
ruminating and second-guessing of PR professionals, especially when it comes to telling ‘white
lies’ at their company’s behest. As one [PR person or respondent] said, “I can’t afford to lose my
credibility… As PR professionals, it’s all we have. And if I lose my credibility here, it’s not like
[I] can just go start over with someone else, somewhere else. Credibility is something that you
can’t afford to lose.” 
Rensburg also found that top executives lie not just to the media which they regularly
communicate with, but also to both their subordinates and superiors. When asked as to why they
resort to such actions, the proponent pooled ten predominant responses in her presentation: “To
protect the organization”; “I am supporting my CEO, he knows best here”; If I gave the facts, it
would have been the end of my CEO”; “I am paid to lie”; “It was a white lie”; “Every day I ask
myself ‘how much money is my soul going for’”; “We are actually professional liars”; “Codes of
ethics never work – there are no recourse”; “Few people can tolerate the unadulterated truth on a
nonstop basis”; and “I am the hired gun.” It also revealed that 17 of the participants had lied in
the course of doing their jobs and that 16 of them attested that they would do it again. 
The study garnered a slew of criticisms from professionals and practitioners in the
industry due to their posit that it eliminates the sentiment of other people in the industry due to
the devoid of a larger sample size. Yet among the recommendations and follow-up research
suggested by the proponent herself, Rensburg is advocating for a wider scope of population that
would not only rely on offline means but also online as the advent of social media becomes all
the more eminent and powerful. 
As a response to the study at hand, Shannon Bowen, an academic and a columnist for
trade journal site PRWeekly, has contended the possibility that “...what if these PR pros, in their
brutal honesty, revealed what many feared all along about their profession[?].” Yet the Public
Relations Society of America (PRSA), in the words of its former CEO Gerard Cobert as stated
on his op-ed for The Guardian, has maintained their stance that “all of whom pledge to abide by
a stringent code of ethics, [we] are firmly committed to ethical practices. Our members and,
indeed, all public relations professionals, seek a high level of public trust. That requires a special
obligation to operate ethically.”
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

On Student Perception
In the first of two studies conducted by Bowen (2003) as cited in the study of Callison et
al. (2014), public relations students enrolled in the two universities she had based her sample on
indicated that PR majors “did not understand the discipline nor the profession.” Majors thought
that public relations was centered on primarily media relations and events planning, being “good
with people” as the most significant skill a practitioner has to possess and strictly bear in mind,
the major would be easy, and that the field in and of itself is “glamorous.” Furthermore, the
students still classified the profession with words that elicit negative connotations such as “spin.”
They were also quick to pinpoint the media and interpersonal communication as the
preponderant sources that either framed public relations as duly unethical or rendered several
alternate descriptions of the field. Hence it has become all the more perplexing for students to
adequately define, recognize, and aptly categorize what public relations was or what public
relations practitioners did. Bowen contends that both educators and the PR industry allow
negative media representations to be accepted as inexorable facts without question and public
relations does “…a great disservice to itself by not countering negative and inaccurate
representation of the PRP [Public Relations Practitioner] as a professional manipulator, face of
marketing, front of superficial image or accidental professional, completely devoid of the ethical
responsibility inherent in professionalism” (p. 409). Bowen (2009) is concerned that the
profession may be doing an unsatisfactory job of accurately communicating the core functions of
public relations to current and potential PR majors. Bowen also concluded that the US students’
misconceptions of the field stem from ideological confusion among “publicity, integrated
marketing communication, and propaganda” (Bowen, 2003, p. 200).
Meanwhile in a nationwide survey conducted by Fullerton and McKinnon (2015) on
“What College Students Think About PR Education and the PR Profession”, US college and
university students who were members of Public Relations Society of America student chapters
(PRSSA) found mixed attitudes toward and conflicting perceptions of the public relations
industry. 
When asked about what they see as the biggest challenges the industry face, 32.62
percent of the responses allude to new media and technology (“The constant flow of information
via the internet, social media, and other networking platforms can make it harder to control what
information is released in PR statements or press releases and how the public interprets that
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

information;” “Social Media used the wrong way”), 9.77 percent mentioned the poor image
public relations has (“Being transparent to the audience - telling the truth, not mixing fact with
fiction”; “Balancing your personal values and ethics in relation to the company. I feel like I will
face a decision between losing my job or lying about an incident. I think it would be best to work
for a company whose values you align with”), and amounting to 2 percent of the total responses
were about ethical issues, including transparency and lack of trust (“Becoming a more respected
profession that people don't see as a bunch of liars”; “It's hard to know still being a student. I
would assume PR doesn't have the best reputation. So, trying to improve the reputation, overall
image & the reality of PR as a real and difficult and stretching job just as any other major. I think
movies and TV have a lot to do with the view of PR”).
 
On Media Perception
The mass media may be one of the arbiters of the widespread perception of public
relations centering on the art of “spin” with practitioners playing the roles of “spin doctors” due
to “journalists’ framing of the profession and how popular culture portrays the field” (Callison et
al., 2014). In line with this, a number of studies conducted from the late 90s to the early and mid-
2000s have examined and addressed the perceptions journalists hold of the said profession.
As noted by Spicer (1993) and his study in relation, print media often portrayed,
associated, and framed public relations with words such as “hype.”  Moreover, Keenan (1996)
through his investigations found that the image of public relations professionals projected in
broadcast news coverage was often portrayed as “practicing the press agentry model.” Whence in
the spectrum of major newspapers and network television, Jo (2003) found that the field was
often marred with persuasion, publicity, and image-building at the clients’ behest.
It could also be noted as to how today’s media landscape and exposure are often centered
on the worse, if not the worst, representatives of public relations. From the likes of Kayleigh
McEnany as the White House’s fourth press secretary to the Malacañan’s masters of spin and
logical cartwheels, first spokesman for the Duterte administration Salvador Panelo and the
current man on the job, Harry Roque. All these underpinnings contribute to journalists’ framing
and what people see and perceive as representatives of public relations, therefore affecting the
profession’s protection of credibility and reputability.
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

Popular films and television shows are also likely to emanate the perceptions and
stereotypes that are often subjected to said industry professionals. In their respective studies,
Tavcar (1993), Miller (1999), and Ames (2010) addressed this very issue by conducting film
analyses and review, in which the 17 films released from 1937 to 1993 touching upon public
relations practitioners tended to depict these professionals in an “older mold – as press agents
and publicists” (p. 21); in terms of analyzing the presentation of public relations in films released
from 1930 to 1995, although the portrayal throughout the years were consistent, the
“representations of PR are woefully inadequate in terms of explaining who practitioners are and
what they do, and it shows that writers dislike primarily PR’s apparent effectiveness” (p. 3); and
a follow-up study of Miller’s analysis reviewed films released from 1996 to 2008, in which
practitioners were portrayed as people greatly involved in a wider variety of PR activities beyond
mere publicity. Whereas with films accentuating on practitioners in public administration, Lee
(2001) found that professionals were most frequently portrayed as males highly engaged in
technical, managerial roles of publicists and press agents.
From public relations-centered films like Tom Cruise’s “Jerry Maguire” to John
Travolta’s “Primary Colors” to Jesse Eisenberg’s “Social Network” based on the story of the
founding of Facebook, public relations as a profession is at the center of leaving vestiges to the
public that it entails―like other fields requiring negotiation and communication―the practice of
lying, deception, and spinning a situation, no matter how sublime or ordinary PR practitioners’
means are,  to steer the boat in their clients’ utmost favor. 
Hence despite the move toward forming, practicing, and maintaining ethical duties in the
profession, media perception still holds the tendency to lean toward the abhorrent aspects of the
field at hand.

On Public Perception
When US students majoring in public relations were asked if they believe that most
Americans would classify the industry as highly ethical, only 15 percent of the students agreed
and strongly agreed with the statement, whereas more than half of the students (55.3 percent)
consider public relations as a whole to be highly ethical (Fullerton & McKinnon, 2015). 
Taking note of the sheer disparity, two national surveys of the US public were conducted
by Callison, Merle, and Seltzer (2014) in 2003 and 2012 so as to gauge the “Public perception of
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

public relations practitioners over time”. The participants were asked to list words describing
public relations practitioners. Heeding in mind how perceptions may have evolved over time due
to external factors, the studies were conducted almost a decade apart.
In describing a typical public relations practitioner, ten most common words were
analyzed as predominant in the said survey when collapsed: (1) Liar (7.46%), (2), Outgoing
(5.94%), (3) Smart (5.48%), (4) Intelligent (4.66%), (5) Friendly (4.55%), (6) Spin Doctor
(4.20%), (7) Creative (4.08%), (8) Knowledgeable (3.73%), (9) Informative (3.26%), and (10)
Biased (3.15%).
When tallied based on the prevailing positive and negative words over time:

Positive Words

2003 2012

Outgoing 8.85% 2.15%

Friendly  6.58% 1.88%

Smart  5.35% 5.65%

Creative  4.94% 2.96%

Intelligent  4.66% 2.69%

Knowledgeable  4.53% 2.69%

Informative  3.09% 3.49%

Negative Words

2003 2012

Liar 5.97% 9.41%

Spin Doctor 2.06% 6.99%

Biased 1.85% 4.84%

 
In terms of defining the key traits by valence:
 

Valence

2003 Positive Neutra Negative

Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

Intellectual Trait (smart, informed, dumb, 94.5% 1.6% 3.9%

etc.)

Ethical Trait (honest, liar, spin doctor, etc.) 22.1% 23.7% 54.2%

Personality Trait (charming, aggressive, etc.) 81.8% 10.9% 7.3%

2012

Intellectual Trait (smart, informed, dumb, 91.4% 2.1% 54.2%

etc.)

Ethical Trait (honest, liar, spin doctor, etc.) 11.2% 31.5% 57.3%

Personality Trait (charming, aggressive, etc.) 76.9% 12.5% 10.7%

 
 
The analyses above have shown that “the majority of the words related to practitioner
personality and intellectual traits were positive, while the ethical terms used to portray
practitioners remained predominantly negative over the last decade.” As this finding was found
stable over time, it may simply be that the typical American citizen has been made well aware
through media portrayals that reference the “prototypical characteristics practitioners share
(correctly or incorrectly), but do not show practitioners at work engaged in meaningful, realistic
professional activities,” thus resulting in ethical assumptions marred with negative connotations. 
The data also revealed that majority of the words used to describe practitioners were
positive, alluding to their intellect and personality. Almost seven of ten words used in 2003 were
labeled as positive while the said number dropped to almost six out of ten in 2012. This suggests
that public relations and its practitioners may not be as poorly considered as has been feared
(Cropp & Pincus, 2001; Hutton, 1999 as cited in Callison et al., 2014).
From 2003 to 2012, although positive words remained the “chief descriptors” that shape
public perception, the use of positive words in describing public relations practitioners
decreased. If negative portrayal of practitioners has increased in the news and entertainment
sphere, then it is likely that positive perceptions would decrease in a context where the general
public may have few other experiences to base their judgements. Aside from that, the proponents
found out more than half of the words coded as ethical traits were also classified as negative.
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

“Liar” was the single most common word provided overall, taking the topmost spot in the top
ten. 
More so, more than 80 percent of all the words provided detailed a practitioner trait with
personality traits equally drawing the largest share. Thus, the data points to the public thinking
more about who a practitioner may be as a person more so than what a practitioner may do as a
professional. This finding alone seems to expose the gap between the perceptions of the field as
provided by practitioners as opposed to the general public.
Ultimately, the data paint a picture here, consistent over both time periods, of a
stereotypical, almost quintessential practitioner as being “intelligent and charming but one who
bends the truth.” These obstacles and/or hurdles toward establishing credibility and reputability
can be seen as inherent in what the public perceives as the primary purpose of the public
relations function; add to the mix that practitioners themselves are perceived as “smart,
charming, but also unethical liars,” hence establishing credibility with stakeholders becomes an
even steeper hill to climb. 
 As public relations practitioners, educators, students, and researchers continue to wrestle
and grapple with the definition of public relations among themselves alongside the consolidating
of principles that make it as a management function that promotes transparency among others,
the proponents of the study takes it as a wise action to consider the long-term implication a
negative perception of practitioner ethics held among the general population may have on the
practice at present and its cultivation in the future.  
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

With the pursuit to find in the very least a reasonable resolution about the query
regarding the misconstrued perception of public relations and its practitioners, especially in
terms of deception, the paper then presented information that are deemed related and applicable
toward further understanding and analyzing the context in place.
In line with this, three major realizations were developed: (1) as academics, scholars, and
professionals grapple with distinguishing public relations from other professions with almost the
same dynamic, all the more does it result in convoluted attempts of defining the said field; (2)
public and student perception of public relations are likely influenced by trends which tend to be
inherently transient, and by media portrayal that yields negative connotations to what
practitioners do, unwittingly giving media exposure the least favorable representatives of the
field; (3) although a small traction was documented yet still remains [a] significant, public
relations professionals, in order to maintain credibility and flourish company reputation, resort to
lying or other means of deception; and (4) public relations professionals are viewed with high
regard in terms of intellectual and personality traits yet struggle with ethical traits.
 
Lies are not black and white, true and false, or right and wrong
The telling or stringing of lies, how to define it, and why people skirt themselves around
it―trying their best not to be ‘caught in a lie’ until it becomes a convoluted web―is not as easy
as differentiating black from white. Black may be turbulent and chaotic while the opposite goes
for white―pure and almost evangelical. Yet no matter what perspective one tries to look at,
there invariably lies a gray area―a fine line between two monochromatic colors that seem to
permeate the choices professionals in the field adhere to. Setting two opposing principles that are
clear and morally grounded, although highly discernible and comprehensible in theory, becomes
increasingly difficult to respect and follow when practiced. In fact, balancing one’s personal
values with the ethics of the company becomes an internal point of contention once a
professional finds out that his [values] does not align with that of the company’s. As credibility
is venerated as the cornerstone attribute public relations practitioners must possess “if they have
any hopes of influencing an audience’s perceptions or attitudes” (Budd, 2000; Judd, 1989 as
cited in Callison, 2004), the ethical debate becomes even more complex. Hence even when the
realm of public relations and its playing field are guided with overarching ethics and principles
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

that should govern that of every practitioners’ agency, decisions and/or choices to be made on
behalf of who these people are working for are never black or white. 
In lieu of this, Rich Leigh cites the public relations industry’s silence as one of the
incontestable reasons as to why public relations is often viewed in a negative light. Yet how does
a mere public relations writer/operative/professional battle against the hand that feeds them? The
mechanisms of “spin” alongside all those negative connotations and unwarranted practices are
deep-seated in culture and society that people are just left to contend with either following or
getting lost in the wild race toward success. The author in his book also specifies systemic
change as the answer to this problem. Yet how does one ignite change when some key players in
the field fail to see the need to broaden, widen their perspective beyond the place where they are
currently standing? Significant data are being yielded so as to offer new perspectives on getting
into the very root of the problem, yet they are oftentimes ignored or left unanswered. 
Based on the observations made, it is all the more proper for people within the said
profession to address the situation that public relations in and of itself continues to be viewed in
a negative light by the public. Only then can the process of gradually dismantling misconstrued
perceptions take place. Even if various academics and scholars lay ground on the most apt
definition of public relations, propelling the field as a bona fide profession, change will always
cease to begin.
Heeding this in mind, public relations writers are still part of a system in which they have
little to no agency on matters that they think should be dealt with as ethically as possible. They
would always play by the rules of the company and how they would be able to protect its dignity,
stability, and reputability for the long-term. Yet as humans endowed with agency and free will, it
is still up to the professional if they would let their inhibitions get the best of them or traverse
down the opposite of it. Although easier said than done, finding a balance is one of the few ways
professionals could wrestle with mounting turmoil. If professionals must construe facts––at least
they should do it in a credible, believable, and convincing way. Harm as few as possible,
utilizing utilitarian ethics. More than that, the analysis of trends and culture as well as studying
how a certain niche population views the field alongside how they choose to communicate is
significant if professionals want to break the divide. Nonetheless, the people in this field,
especially those who have yet to reach the starting point, are only barely scratching the surface.
Hence being a friend, foe, or a fraud becomes all the more convoluted and perplexed.
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

References

Assassination ‘akyat-bahay’ style. (n.d.). Inquirer.Net. Retrieved August 16, 2020, from
https://opinion.inquirer.net/132654/assassination-akyat-bahay-style

Bowen, S., & Carolina, U. of S. (n.d.). ’We are professional manipulators’—PR pros, are we
lying to ourselves? PR Weekly. Retrieved from http://www.prweek.com/article/1359922?
utm_source=website&utm_medium=social

Callison, C. (2004). The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: Perceptions of Public Relations
Practitioners (Vol. 16).

Callison, C., Merle, P., & Seltzer, T. (2014). Smart friendly liars: Public perception of public
relations practitioners over time. Public Relations Review, 40(5), 829–831.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.09.003

Cialdini’s 6 Principles of Persuasion – The World of Work Project. (2019). World of Work
Project. Retrieved from https://worldofwork.io/2019/07/cialdinis-6-principles-of-persuasion/

Corbett, G. (2012). All public relations professionals are liars? – That is not the case in America
| Media | The Guardian. The Guardian. Retrieved from
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/mar/09/public-relations-liars-blog-ethics

Fullerton, J. A., & McKinnon, L. M. (2015). U.S. Public Relations Students’ Perceptions of PR:
What College Students Think About PR Education and the PR Profession. Public Relations
Journal, 9 (2), 17.

High Paying Jobs for Communications Majors. (n.d.). PayScale. Retrieved from
https://www.payscale.com/college-salary-report/common-jobs-for-majors/communication

Klein, B. (2020). Kayleigh McEnany set to become fourth Trump press secretary—CNNPolitics.
Retrieved from https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/07/politics/kayleigh-mcenany-new-white-house-
press-secretary/index.html
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment

Leigh, R. (2017). Myths of PR: All Publicity Is Good Publicity and Other Popular
Misconceptions. Kogan Page. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=e000xww&AN=1494511&site=ehost-live

Mass confusion. (2020). Inquirer.Net. Retrieved from https://opinion.inquirer.net/130166/mass-

confusion

Mirelles, A. (2014, November). Persuasion: 6 Principles That Power PR Success. Cision.

Retrieved from https://www.cision.com/us/2014/11/persuasion-6-principles-that-power-pr-
success/

PRSA Code of Ethics. (n.d.). Public Relations Society of America. Retrieved from
https://www.prsa.org/about/ethics/prsa-code-of-ethics

Rensburg, R. (2015, November 6). Lying to protect the organisation and the. 23rd International
Public Relations Research Symposium, Slovenia. Retrieved from
https://www.reputationmatters.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/RENSBURG-REPUTATION-
CONFERENCE.pdf

Rijt, A. van de, Shor, E., Ward, C., & Skiena, S. (2013). Only 15 Minutes? The Social
Stratification of Fame in Printed Media: American Sociological Review.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122413480362

Waddington, S. (2015). Chartered Public Relations: Lessons From Expert Practitioners. Kogan
Page. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=e000xww&AN=944499&site=ehost-live

Willens, M. (2015, September 3). Are All Publicists Liars? Study Ignites Controversy In PR
Field. International Business Times. Retrieved from https://www.ibtimes.com/are-all-publicists-
liars-study-ignites-controversy-pr-field-2080151

Zitron, E. (2015, August 31). You’re probably lying, especially if you’re in PR. The Next Web.
Retrieved from https://thenextweb.com/insider/2015/08/31/youre-probably-lying-especially-
youre-pr/
Lesson 1: Reading and Writing Assignment