Paradox in Public Relations by Stoker Kevin L.;

Author:Stoker, Kevin L.;
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Taylor & Francis Group
Published: 2020-07-15T00:00:00+00:00

Two-way symmetrical communication

Since first introduced as the most ethical and desirable of four models of public relations (Grunig & Hunt, 1984), two-way symmetrical communication has achieved wide acceptance among scholars and, to a lesser extent, practitioners across the world. In contrast to the first two models—press agentry/publicity and public information—symmetry promotes communication exchanges that lead to mutual understanding and ultimately collective change. The third model, asymmetric communication, applies social science theory and research to develop communication strategies aimed at persuading the public to align with organizational goals and interests. The four communication models describe both the range and evolution of public relations communication. Thus, the models reflect a developmental approach to history in which one-way dissemination, education, and strategic communication evolved into symmetry and dialog. Although the first three models were not inherently unethical, they did require that practitioners follow certain rules and procedures and make sure their actions did not harm people (Grunig & White, 1992; Grunig, 2001).

The symmetrical model, on the other hand, was inherently ethical because it included reciprocity, mutuality, and adaptation (Grunig & White, 1992; Grunig, 2001). It represented the most advanced form of practical and ethical public relations. It also provided a defense against public relations critics who classified all public relations as asymmetrical and unethical (Grunig & Grunig, 1992). Pearson (1989a) was credited for developing symmetry’s ethical rationale and creating rules for its ethical application. By focusing on processes and not the outcome of communicative action, symmetry avoided the pitfalls of ethical relativism. It brought people together and served as a forum for dialog, discussion, and discourse (Grunig & Grunig, 1992). It also associated ethical public relations with dialog and viewed publics as partners in and not targets of communication (Pearson, 1989b). Grunig and White (1992) claimed that “excellent public relations is based on the worldview that public relations is symmetrical, idealistic in its social role and managerial” (p. 56). If all parties participated in making decisions and accepting consequences, “the outcome then must be ethical” (p. 57).

Huang (2004) equated symmetrical communication with ethical communication because it directed organizations to try to understand publics and reach mutually satisfactory results. If persuasion was used in symmetrical communication, the organization had to be as willing to be persuaded as it was to persuade (Phillips, 2019). In the ideal situation, both change and both benefit from the interaction (Laskin, 2009; Phillips, 2019). Shaw (2004) went a step further and claimed symmetry benefited publics at the expense of the organization while asymmetry allowed organizations to achieve their goals at the expense of the public (Shaw, 2004). There was little evidence, however, that public relations professionals fully embraced symmetry as normative or practical. They talked about symmetrical communication but struggled when faced with public expectations that conflicted with the organization’s core values and culture.

The Excellence project tested the four models and found that one-way communication models dominated the profession. Little support was found for two-way symmetrical communication, but Grunig and Grunig (1992) continued to advocate it as “a major component of excellence in public relations and communication management” (p.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.