探索英国公关周刊对专业公关身份的塑造(1985-2010 年)

IF 4.1 3区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS
Nicky Garsten, Bruce Cronin, Jane Howard
{"title":"探索英国公关周刊对专业公关身份的塑造(1985-2010 年)","authors":"Nicky Garsten,&nbsp;Bruce Cronin,&nbsp;Jane Howard","doi":"10.1016/j.pubrev.2024.102468","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>A trend of increased specialisation in public relations has been widely asserted but little substantiated. Specifically, there is no longitudinal study of the development of specialist coverage in the principal trade journal of the industry, <em>PR Week.</em> Neither has there been an exploration of the perspectives of <em>PR Week</em> UK’s senior managers on specialist-practitioner identities. This article seeks to fill these gaps.</p><p>This examination of specialist coverage in <em>PR Week</em> 1985–2010 finds a punctuated process of constructing specialist practitioner identities within an institutional subsystem. We examine over 220 editions of <em>PR Week,</em> in the UK, over a 26-year period. We calculate that there was indeed a statistically significant trend of published regular specialist pages.</p><p>We analysed editorial announcements about regular specialist pages and interviewed three former senior managers from <em>PR Week</em>. We considered page titles as both content and discourse. We also adapted Bucher et al.’s (2016) framing strategies. In doing so, we revised one of Bucher et al.’s strategies, re-terming the ‘self-casting’ strategy as a <em>media casting</em> strategy in the context of a trade publication’s framing of a profession’s boundaries.</p><p>Building on the scholarship of Edwards and Pieczka (2013), we suggest that the trade media play an institutional role in boundary setting. A trade publication's role in the promotion of jurisdictions was, and has not been, previously ascribed by Abbott (1988) or Waisbord (2019). We newly find that when <em>PR Week</em> introduced specialist pages, the publication’s executive <em>actively</em> sought to bring sector-specialist practitioners, with waning identification with the profession, back into the PR fold. Like a sheepdog, <em>PR Week</em> played a <em>proactive</em> institutional role in the professional reframing of public relations around specialisms. Yet the boundaries that <em>PR Week</em> defended were fuzzy given that over 95% of the regular specialist pages titles did not include the name ‘PR’. We also argue, that in establishing the specialist pages <em>PR Week</em> executives not only championed PR’s legitimacy, but also sought to protect the magazine’s market and to enhance the title’s journalistic brand.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48263,"journal":{"name":"Public Relations Review","volume":"50 4","pages":"Article 102468"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036381112400047X/pdfft?md5=b3c1fcc92ee96ebc60bc3896e932d52b&pid=1-s2.0-S036381112400047X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An exploration of PR Week UK’s framing of specialist PR identities (1985–2010)\",\"authors\":\"Nicky Garsten,&nbsp;Bruce Cronin,&nbsp;Jane Howard\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pubrev.2024.102468\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>A trend of increased specialisation in public relations has been widely asserted but little substantiated. Specifically, there is no longitudinal study of the development of specialist coverage in the principal trade journal of the industry, <em>PR Week.</em> Neither has there been an exploration of the perspectives of <em>PR Week</em> UK’s senior managers on specialist-practitioner identities. This article seeks to fill these gaps.</p><p>This examination of specialist coverage in <em>PR Week</em> 1985–2010 finds a punctuated process of constructing specialist practitioner identities within an institutional subsystem. We examine over 220 editions of <em>PR Week,</em> in the UK, over a 26-year period. We calculate that there was indeed a statistically significant trend of published regular specialist pages.</p><p>We analysed editorial announcements about regular specialist pages and interviewed three former senior managers from <em>PR Week</em>. We considered page titles as both content and discourse. We also adapted Bucher et al.’s (2016) framing strategies. In doing so, we revised one of Bucher et al.’s strategies, re-terming the ‘self-casting’ strategy as a <em>media casting</em> strategy in the context of a trade publication’s framing of a profession’s boundaries.</p><p>Building on the scholarship of Edwards and Pieczka (2013), we suggest that the trade media play an institutional role in boundary setting. A trade publication's role in the promotion of jurisdictions was, and has not been, previously ascribed by Abbott (1988) or Waisbord (2019). We newly find that when <em>PR Week</em> introduced specialist pages, the publication’s executive <em>actively</em> sought to bring sector-specialist practitioners, with waning identification with the profession, back into the PR fold. Like a sheepdog, <em>PR Week</em> played a <em>proactive</em> institutional role in the professional reframing of public relations around specialisms. Yet the boundaries that <em>PR Week</em> defended were fuzzy given that over 95% of the regular specialist pages titles did not include the name ‘PR’. We also argue, that in establishing the specialist pages <em>PR Week</em> executives not only championed PR’s legitimacy, but also sought to protect the magazine’s market and to enhance the title’s journalistic brand.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48263,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Relations Review\",\"volume\":\"50 4\",\"pages\":\"Article 102468\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036381112400047X/pdfft?md5=b3c1fcc92ee96ebc60bc3896e932d52b&pid=1-s2.0-S036381112400047X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Relations Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036381112400047X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Relations Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036381112400047X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

公共关系日益专业化的趋势已经被广泛证实,但却鲜有证据。具体来说,对于公共关系行业的主要期刊《公共关系周报》上专业报道的发展并没有纵向研究。英国《公共关系周报》的高级经理们对专业从业者身份的看法也没有进行过探讨。本文试图填补这些空白。本文对《公关周刊》1985-2010 年的专家报道进行了研究,发现在一个机构子系统中,专家从业者身份的构建过程是一个点缀性的过程。我们研究了英国 26 年间超过 220 期的《公关周刊》。我们分析了有关定期专业版面的编辑公告,并采访了《公关周刊》的三位前高级经理。我们将页面标题视为内容和论述。我们还采用了 Bucher 等人(2016 年)的框架策略。在此过程中,我们对 Bucher 等人的策略之一进行了修订,将 "自我塑造 "策略重新命名为媒体塑造策略,其背景是行业出版物对某一行业边界的框定。Abbott (1988)和 Waisbord (2019)之前都未对行业出版物在促进司法管辖区方面的作用进行过论述。我们新近发现,当《公关周刊》推出专业版面时,该刊物的管理者积极寻求将对公关行业认同感减弱的行业专家从业者拉回公关行业。像牧羊犬一样,《公共关系周报》在围绕专业性的公共关系职业重构中扮演了积极的机构角色。然而,《公关周刊》所捍卫的界限是模糊的,因为超过 95% 的常规专业页面标题都不包括 "公关 "这个名称。我们还认为,《公关周刊》的高管们在设立专业版面时,不仅捍卫了公关的合法性,还试图保护杂志的市场,提升杂志的新闻品牌。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An exploration of PR Week UK’s framing of specialist PR identities (1985–2010)

A trend of increased specialisation in public relations has been widely asserted but little substantiated. Specifically, there is no longitudinal study of the development of specialist coverage in the principal trade journal of the industry, PR Week. Neither has there been an exploration of the perspectives of PR Week UK’s senior managers on specialist-practitioner identities. This article seeks to fill these gaps.

This examination of specialist coverage in PR Week 1985–2010 finds a punctuated process of constructing specialist practitioner identities within an institutional subsystem. We examine over 220 editions of PR Week, in the UK, over a 26-year period. We calculate that there was indeed a statistically significant trend of published regular specialist pages.

We analysed editorial announcements about regular specialist pages and interviewed three former senior managers from PR Week. We considered page titles as both content and discourse. We also adapted Bucher et al.’s (2016) framing strategies. In doing so, we revised one of Bucher et al.’s strategies, re-terming the ‘self-casting’ strategy as a media casting strategy in the context of a trade publication’s framing of a profession’s boundaries.

Building on the scholarship of Edwards and Pieczka (2013), we suggest that the trade media play an institutional role in boundary setting. A trade publication's role in the promotion of jurisdictions was, and has not been, previously ascribed by Abbott (1988) or Waisbord (2019). We newly find that when PR Week introduced specialist pages, the publication’s executive actively sought to bring sector-specialist practitioners, with waning identification with the profession, back into the PR fold. Like a sheepdog, PR Week played a proactive institutional role in the professional reframing of public relations around specialisms. Yet the boundaries that PR Week defended were fuzzy given that over 95% of the regular specialist pages titles did not include the name ‘PR’. We also argue, that in establishing the specialist pages PR Week executives not only championed PR’s legitimacy, but also sought to protect the magazine’s market and to enhance the title’s journalistic brand.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
19.00%
发文量
90
期刊介绍: The Public Relations Review is the oldest journal devoted to articles that examine public relations in depth, and commentaries by specialists in the field. Most of the articles are based on empirical research undertaken by professionals and academics in the field. In addition to research articles and commentaries, The Review publishes invited research in brief, and book reviews in the fields of public relations, mass communications, organizational communications, public opinion formations, social science research and evaluation, marketing, management and public policy formation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信