PUBLIC RELATIONS AND SOCIAL MEDIA

HOW PR IS ADAPTING TO NEW FORMS OF COMMUNICATION

By Kerry Thomas
For Chelsea Morning PR
Introduction

The emergence, popularity and rapid growth of social media is impacting the way people
communicate, and is therefore beginning to have its effect on public relations practice.
This paper forms a review of the literature on PR use of social media. As social media is
such a new phenomenon, relatively few academic texts exist on its use in PR. Many of the
texts cited equate PR with marketing when it comes to social media use, thus the paper is
focused on a marketing communication and consumer PR look at social media. The review
concentrates on a pool of practical texts on applied social media use.
It begins with a look at definitions of social media and discusses the prevalence of its use
and impact in terms of organisations and their marketing, public relations and reputations. It
goes on to look at research conducted in to how PR practitioners are adapting and using
social media, considering several theories as to why, considering the popularity of social
media, adoption has been relatively slow. A number of ideas are discussed with regard to
what constitutes best practice use of social media and finally, some suggestions are made
as to possible further research or dialogue in the field.

Defining the social media

Mangold & Faulds (2009) take a consumer-focused view of social media, equating the term
with „consumer-generated media‟ and providing the following definition, taken from
Blackshaw & Nazzaro (2004): social media are “a variety of new sources of online
information that are created, initiated, circulated and used by consumers intent on educating
each other about products, brands, services, personalities and issues” (Blackshaw &
Nazzaro, 2004, cited in Mangold & Faulds, 2009, p. 357). This definition, however, ignores
the fact that many people use social media mainly for social purposes, without the
purposeful objective of „education‟ outlined above.
Kaplan & Haenlein (2010), on the other hand, differentiate social media from any kind of
user-generated media. They define social media as “a group of internet-based applications
that build on the idealogical and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the
creation and exchange of User Generated Content” (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010, p. 61). Social
media, then, are used to produce user-generated content, but the two terms are not one and
the same.
Kaplan & Haenlein also classify social media in to various types: collaborative projects,
blogs, content communities, social networking sites, virtual game worlds, virtual social
worlds.
Other definitions concentrate on the collaborative aspects of social media. According to
Mersham et al. (2009), „social‟ refers to (two-way) communication activities, and „media‟
refers to the platform used for these activities. On this view, social media are interactive and
collaborative technologies, a “web of never-ending and constantly shifting clusters on
conversation that have collapsed the traditional boundaries of space and time” (Mersham,
Theunissen, & Peart, 2009, p. 148).
Solis & Breakenridge (2009) also see the rise of social media as a shift from the traditional
„broadcast mechanism‟ of communication to a „many-to-many model‟ of two-way
communication, defining the term as a “democratization of content and the shift in the role
people play in the process of reading and disseminating information (and thus creating and
sharing content)” and “anything that uses the internet to facilitate conversations” (Solis &
Breakenridge, 2009, p. xvii).
However, Giannini (2010) has the clearest and most succint definition, labelling social media
as “all sites where participants can produce, publish, control, critique, rank and interact with
online content” (Giannini, 2010, p. 157).
Common social media tools include: blogs, social networking sites, podcasts and webcasts,
video and photo sharing, micro-blogging, virtual worlds, online games, social bookmarking,
reviewing and rating sites, forums etc.

Impact of social media

The last decade has seen the rapid growth of social media‟s popularity among internet
users. According to Chaney (2009), 73% of Americans are online, and 35% of adults are
using a social networks (85% of 18-34 year-olds). Similar statistics were recorded in New
Zealand in 2009, with 37% reportedly using the internet for social networking (Bascand,
2010).
Kaplan & Haenlein state a growth from 56% in 2007 to 75% in 2008 of internet users using
social media in its various forms (in this case joining social networks, reading blogs or
contributing reviews on shopping sites). This growth, they claim, represents “a revolutionary
new trend that should be of interest to companies operating in online space – or any space
for that matter” (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010, p. 59).
If these trends indicates what technology people are using, where they are, and how they
are communicating with each other, they are of interest to PR practitioners. As Chaney
remarks, practitioners should use the same media as consumers to generate brand
awareness, create positive brand impressions, and incite customers to spread the word
about products and services.
Samuels et al. (2009) explain that whether businesses choose to participate in social media
or not, these media pose challenges. However, those who do chose to participate in „the
conversation‟ are also presented with opportunities.
The biggest challenge lies in the fact that the rise of social media means that organisations
are less in control of their brand and reputation. Whereas in the past consumers might have
told only a few other people about their experience with a business, social networks and
other forums can now be used to spread the word to many people. “These online
communications can be anything from a few comments to even a full-scale campaign
against a business” (Samuels, Newson, & Patten, 2009, p. 172). Zarella (2010) adds that
these smaller conversations disappeared as soon as spoken, but today‟s conversations are
not only happening, in some cases, for the entire world to see, but they can also be archived
(and searchable) for years to come.
However, Mersham et al. (2009) draw attention to the fact that once the organisation
relinquish control and begin to engage in social media in a transparent and open way, trust
is fostered among other users, as is receptiveness to the organisation‟s messages. Gillen
(2008) mentions that another pay-off for ceding control is the ability to communicate directly
with audiences, rather than having to navigate traditional media channels.
On a different note, Mangold & Faulds (2009) point out that social media have come to
significantly influence consumer behaviour in terms of awareness, information gathering,
opinions, attitudes, purchasing choices and how consumers communicate their post-
purchase evaluation. Therein lie the opportunities to capitalise on this influence.
For example, rather than using traditional business directories like the yellow pages, people
are turning more and more to the internet to seek new suppliers (Samuels, Newson, &
Patten, 2009). As Chaney (2009) says, “Google is the new yellow pages” (Chaney, 2009, p.
43).
Mersham et al. (2009) add that social media make it easier to find and filter information by
searching for specific information. The opportunity waits for all types of businesses who
make themselves searchable (Samuels, Newson, & Patten, 2009).

Organisational and PR participation in social media arena

While the patterns of behaviour outlined above and the cost-effective nature of social media
use indicate that its adoption would be beneficial to PR, many practitioners have been slow
to embrace social media as a PR tool.
Gillen (2008) and a team of Fellows of the Society for New Communications Research, with
the support of the Institute for Public Relations, conducted some research in the US looking
at how influence patterns are changing and how communications professionals are dealing
with those changes through social media use. A survey was conducted on a group of
practitioners who already have extensive knowledge and usage patterns of social media.
Among this group the researchers concluded social media was becoming an important
channel for disseminating information, and that the practitioners were using a wide variety of
social media tools, with the most popular being blogs, online videos and social networking.
However, a study by Eyrich et al. (2008) of non-specialist PR practitioners in a US city
looked at social media adoption in the profession in general. The researchers claim that
while once PR practitioners were considered to be „laggards‟, they are now slowly catching
up. But the study showed that though use of blogs and podcasts was prevalent,
practitioners were slower to adopt “more technologically complicated tools that cater to a
niche audience” (Eyrich, Padman, & Sweetster, 2008, p. 414), such as text messaging
(23.6%), social networks (24%) and virtual worlds (6.7%). Surprisingly, only 1.7% said they
used micro-blogging sites.
In a similar vein, Wright & Hinson (2008) conducted a three-year international survey of PR
practitioners that examined the impact blogs and other social media were having on PR
practice, and came to rather different conclusions. The authors claim that relatively few
practitioners are using blogs and social media, despite the benefits of such use. However,
results of their study showed that most practitioners believe that blogs and social media
have enhanced PR practice and have changed the way their organisations or client
organisations communicate. Many also believe that social media complement traditional
media.
Respondents suggested that social media makes communication more instantaneous and
assists the implementation of two-way communication. One person said that social media
“have provided an opportunity to truly put the public back in public relations by providing a
mechanism for organisations to engage in real-time, one-to-one conversations with
stakeholders. Additionally, they serve as a focus group for thousands, allowing offline
communications to be more relevant” (Wright & Hinson, 2008, p. 19)
Evidently PR practitioners in general see the benefit of social media use in their practice, so
why aren‟t more adopting it? Several theories about why this might be are outlined below.
Brian Solis, an influential blogger who runs a PR and New Media agency in California,
coined the term „PR 2.0‟ in the mid-90s to refer to the shift he saw coming in PR with the
emergence of the internet. Solis & Breakenridge (2009) see this move towards direct
communication with publics (while still utilizing traditional media and methods) as a trend
that will leave some behind. “Unfortunately, the outcome will be the gradual obsolescence of
many marketing departments and advertising and PR teams” (Solis & Breakenridge, 2009,
p. xvii). Some companies are resisting learning to use and implementing social media out of
a desire, the authors claim, to cling to traditional methods and on hold on to a semblance of
control over the messages about their products or services. However, companies ignore
what people are saying about their brand, products or services online are warned that they
do so at their peril. Solis & Breakenridge advise „embracing the chaos‟ and relinquish
control.
In contrast, Mersham et al. (2009) say that the rapid change has left public relations
practitioners overwhelmed. Even though the shift from traditional toward social media
represents a shift toward two-way communication, a model espoused by Grunig since 1984
and taken to be the ideal by many since, it is the technology, the authors say, that poses the
problem for some practitioners, a theory supported by Eyrich et al.‟s research.
Issues with technology and time pressure form the basis of James‟ (2007) several reasons
that PR practitioners may be slow to take advantage of new media as a strategic tool. The
long lead-in times for some large campaigns and events mean that ideas related to new
media must be returned to again and again to accommodate changing technological and
usage trends. The instant nature of the internet and new media mean that practitioners
need to prepare material very quickly and accurately, and have procedures in place to obtain
prompt clearances, all this makes for high pressure working environments. James also
points out that practitioners, in general, need to update their skills to be able to use new
media effectively. “Conventional techniques of public relations are being undermined by the
mobile nature of new media and this requires public relations practitioners to rethink how
they relate to publics” (James, 2007, p. 141).
Mangold & Faulds (2009) point to a lack of guidance in theoretical, rather than technological,
use in academic literature and the business press for managers in terms of social media
implementation. This, they say, means many managers fail to fully comprehend the ways in
which social media could help their marketing efforts. “Even though social media is
magnifying the impact of consumer-to-consumer conversations have in the marketplace,
methods for shaping those conversations have not yet been articulated” (Mangold & Faulds,
2009, p. 358).
Still, while there is a need for further relevant content, a number of books and articles have
been produced in the last two years that do, in fact, offer advice for the best organisational,
PR or marketing use of social media.
Best practice uses of social media

Among the several articles and books reviewed here there is very little contradictory advice
on the best practice use of social media, rather distinctions can be made where emphases
vary.
Paul Chaney (2009), an internet marketing director and president of non-profit trade
association the International Blogging and New Media Association, describes consumer
trends that are „turning the business world upside down‟. A rise in consumer scepticism
means traditional forms of advertising are becoming less effective. Media fragmentation
means consumers are using many different media channels and businesses are facing
pressure to improve targeting and audience relevance in their marketing to reduce waste.
In Chaney‟s view, these trends can be countered with the use of social media. If 90% of
social media users are „lurkers‟ who might read or observe content, but don‟t normally
contribute, 9%, contribute every now and again, but only 1% of users participates a lot and is
responsible for most contributions, that 1% holds a lot of influence. Chaney calls this one
percent potential „tribal leaders,‟: “Think of the ways that could benefit your business”
(Chaney, 2009, p. 49).
Advocating that organisations become part of that 1%, Chaney recommends exerting
influence over the other 99% of users by providing useful content enriched with
substantiated commentary, references and links, and thinking in terms of what will benefit
the community within which the organisation places itself. Chaney abhors the use of
automated posting and replies or direct marketing techniques. For him social media use is
about being personal and conversational in order to blend in.
David Meerman Scott (2010) published the first edition of the influential book The new rules
of marketing and PR in 2007, and has been cited in other work (Chaney, 2009; Giannini,
2010; Wright & Hinson, 2008) and has spoken on the subject of the internet‟s influence on
marketing and PR many times since. His book outlines the changes occurring online and
how these „new rules‟ can be applied.
Importantly, Scott believes that the internet and social media are causing a convergence of
marketing and PR in the online arena. “When your buyer is on the Web browsing for
something, content is content in all of its manifestations. And in an inter-connected world,
content drives action” (Scott, 2010, p. 19).
In many ways, Scott is in agreement with Chaney, particularly when it comes to quality social
media content. Scott is an advocate of creating good internet content to cater to the large
number of people who do their research before making a purchase decision. He argues that
wherever it is on the net, quality content, i.e. content that is useful to the audience, positions
the organisation as a trusted resource.
One of the benefits of the online world, says Scott, is that PR practitioners can seek to have
their messages disseminated through influential bloggers, online consultants and analysts,
online news sites or micro-publications, or they can bypass third-party media altogether and
speak directly with the audience using social media. High quality content can help
organisations communicate with authority and credibility without the need of a third party
intermediary.
Conversely, Brown & Hayes (2008) talk about social media mainly in terms of influencer
marketing, which works on the premise that „influencers‟ in society impact on people‟s
purchasing decisions and marketing efforts, therefore, should be directed at such
influencers.
Influence requires interaction, and social media provides the opportunity to achieve that
interaction on a global scale. Generally, the authors maintain, social media does not „create‟
influencers, but influencers migrate to social media, where their web of influence is enlarged.
As advertisements on social media don‟t work – they are mentally filtered out – marketers
are advised to convince influencers to pass on their message to the target audience, for
example by approaching influential bloggers or simply by utilising social media that provide
review and feedback (these types of social media are said to have the most influence on
buying decisions). Brown & Hayes emphasise working through influencers , rather than
taking Chaney‟s approach and advising that organisations themselves seek to become the
influencers.
A number of authors focus on collaboration as a way of exerting influence via social media.
Discussing ways in which marketing managers can shape the online consumer-to-consumer
conversations that social media has given rise to, Mangold & Faulds (2009), two
communications academics from Kentucky, USA , place an emphasis on audience
engagement,. They encourage organisations to use social media to engage customers with
the organisation or brand by, for example, soliciting feedback, promoting competitions that
involve active audience participation or voting, asking customers to submit photographs etc.
“People are more likely to communicate through both word-of-mouth and social media when
they are engaged with the product, service, or idea” (Mangold & Faulds, 2009, p. 19).
Among their other pieces of advice are „provide information‟, „be outrageous‟ and „utilize the
power of stories‟. All of these tactics will allow products and organisations to stick in the
mind and therefore more likely to be talked about.
Likewise, Duane Forrester, a senior program manager with Microsoft and expert in search
engine optimisation sums social media up with the word „engagement.‟ “The primary goal of
marketers using social media is to encourage active engagement around a brand or product
name” (Forrester, 2010, p. 90).
Far from being a simple matter of opening a Twitter account, says Forrester, social media
marketing takes a long time and a lot of effort. The key to success (defined as driving traffic
to an organisation‟s website) is to be active in the appropriate community through use of
social media, offering advice and „bringing value to a community‟ by making relevant
contributions and posting a variety of links. The aim, in Forrester‟s view, as in Scott‟s, to
develop credibility by positioning the organisation as an expert in its field.
In their paper on the challenges and opportunities presented to organisations by social
media, Kaplan & Haenlein also emphasise the collaborative aspects of social media. “It‟s all
about participation, sharing, and collaboration rather than straight forward advertising and
selling” (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010, p. 65).
The strategy, they say, is to research and find the appropriate social media to the
organisation‟s target audience. Listen to customers, find out what they would like to hear or
talk about, and develop content that meets those desires. It is important to be active in the
chosen social media, engage in discussions with consumers and ensure content is always
fresh and up-to-date.
Kaplan & Haenlein also highlight the importance of ensuring integration across all social and
traditional media to ensure activities are aligned, that messages don‟t contradict each other
and that there is a unified corporate image.
In a rather more dramatic way, Solis & Breakenridg write about collaboration as well,
stressing the emergence of community and two-way communication that new media
technologies have brought about. “PR today encourages collaborative communication,
enabling people to find, enjoy and share useful information. No pitching or blasting news
releases. It‟s the art and science of a socially powered Web created a conversation
ecosystem, and we‟re now responsible for learning more about what we represent and how
it‟s important to those with whom we want to connect” (Solis & Breakenridge, 2009, p. 46).
While collaboration, engagement and positioning the organisation as a trusted resource and
expert form integral parts of social media use for PR practitioners, these new media also
require a new approach to targeting publics.
Solis & Breakenridge mention a niche market approach as central to successful social media
use for marketers and PR practitioners, based on Chris Anderson‟s „Long Tail‟ theory. This
is referred to more fully in Scott (2010) as the internet‟s cultural and economic move away
from mainstream markets with a relatively small number of larger organisations at the head
of the demand curve towards the smaller niche products and services that make up the tail.
The internet has allowed for marketing and production of narrowly targeted products and
services to become economically viable.
Mersham et al. (2009) also mention this approach as a way organisations can break with
traditional PR practices with an emphasis on controlled messages. “Small, niche
conversations in social media ... can create a long-lasting impact ... While the actual
conversation might be among a relatively small group, social media makes it available to
many others, now and in the future” (Mersham, Theunissen, & Peart, 2009, p. 149).
To succeed in long tail PR, agrees Scott, organisations must change their criteria for
success and aim for many small positive mentions online rather than fewer big ones.

Suggestions for further research

Because the technology and trends of social media move so quickly, regular research is
needed to keep PR practitioners up to date.
Although some research exists as to how quickly practitioners are adopting social media,
and which tools they are using, more could be done to investigate reasons behind the
relatively slow uptake and suggestions made as to how to remedy this.
This could be backed up with research in to the true value of social media to PR practice, if
practitioners had a clear understanding of this value (or lack of it, as the case may be), they
would be better positioned to adopt social media usage at appropriate rates. It goes without
saying that they must also keep informed of the latest trends and usages of social media in
the publics they are trying to target.
A debate may also be necessary to delineate the fields of marketing and PR as they relate to
social media. Is there really no difference between the two? Few academic texts exist on
the theoretical implications that social media has on traditional PR models. As these are
produced they might add fuel to such a debate.

Conclusion

Focusing on practical and applied PR use of social media, this paper has examined how PR
practitioners are adopting social media and how they can best use them in practice.
These new media require a change in thinking for PR practitioners, a move away from one-
way communication to large audiences and a dependence on traditional media, and a move
toward two-way collaborative models of communication in smaller, niche markets.
Organisations can no longer control to the same extent the messages being communicated
about their brand, products or services. An online conversation exists around them, whether
they like it or not, and it is PR‟s job to now seek to influence and manage that conversation.
References

Bascand, G. (2010, April 16). Household use of information and communication technology:
2009. Retrieved October 28, 2010, from Statistics New Zealand:
http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/people_and_communities/households/householdu
seofict_hotp2009.aspx
Brown, D., & Hayes, N. (2008). Influencer marketing: who really influences your customers?
Oxford: Butterworth-Heinmann.
Chaney, P. (2009). The digital handshake: seven proven strategies to grow your business
using social media. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley.
Eyrich, N., Padman, M. L., & Sweetster, K. D. (2008). PR practitioners' use of social media
tools and communication technology. Public Relations Review , 34, 412-414.
Forrester, D. (2010). Turn clicks into customers. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Giannini, G. T. (2010). Marketing public relations: a marketer's approach to public relations.
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: 2010.
Gillen, P. (2008). New media influencers and implications for public relations. Journal of New
Communications Research , 2 (2).
Grunig, J., & Hunt, T. (1984). Managing public relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.
James, M. (2007). A review of the impact of new media on public relations challenges for
terrain, practice and education. Asia Pacific Public Relations Journal , 8, 137-148.
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world unite! The challenges and
opportunities of social media. Business Horizons , 58, 59-68.
Mangold, W. G., & Faulds, D. J. (2009). Social media: the new hybrid element of the
promotiona mix. Business Horizons , 52, 357-365.
Mersham, G., Theunissen, P., & Peart, J. (2009). Public relations and communication
mangement: an Aoteroa/New Zealand perspective. Auckland: Pearson.
Newson, A., Houghton, D., & Patten, J. (2009). Blogging and other social media. Farnham,
Surrey: Gower.
Phillips, D., & Young, P. (2009). Online public relations: a practical guide to developing an
online strategy in the world of social media (2nd ed.). London; Philadelphia: Kogan Page.
Samuels, C., Newson, A., & Patten, J. (2009). Chapter 19: online reputation. In A. Newson,
D. Houghton, & J. Patten, Blogging and other social media (pp. 171-180). Farnham, Surrey:
Gower.
Scott, D. M. (2010). The new rules of marketing and PR (2nd ed.). Hoboken, New Jersey:
Wiley.
Solis, B., & Breakenridge, D. (2009). Putting the public back in public relations: how social
media is reinventing the aging business of PR. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: FT Press.
Wright, D. K., & Hinson, M. D. (2008). How blogs and social media are changing public
relations and the way it is practiced. Public Relations Journal , 2 (2).
Zarrella, D. (2010). The social media merketing book. Sebastopol, California: O'Reilly.