This paper explores the issues of public relations academics credentials on teaching public relations at undergraduate level. Generally, most Asian universities look to the United States education system as the ideal model in developing their own curricula, and frequently invite American professors as visiting fellows to help set up their programmes. In addition, Asian universities, including those in Malaysia and Indonesia still harbour the view that the US offers the best public relations education and practices, and therefore follow the US model regarding any matters related to curriculum, study materials, teaching modules, learning resources and the structure of exam papers. Whilst seeming efficient, as the US leads the fields of public relations, it appears to be done blindly without considering such variables as the encompassing political, economic, legal, media and cultural factors of the society adapting these curricula that should determine the roles and functions of public relations practitioners in any given country. This paper concludes that US still offers the best public relations education in comparison to any Asian universities due to lack of academic credentials. VOLUME 5, NOMOR 1, DESEMBER 2008 Public relations education has arguably become more important with the unfolding of the information age and rapid globalisation (Jamilah 2001; Botan and Taylor, 2004; Heath, 2001;Sriramesh, 2002;Van Leuven, 1989; Vercic and Ruler, 2004). Most scholars concede that during the past 10 to 15 years, public relations practice and education have grown and changed prodigiously (Grunig 1993;L'etang, 2002). At the same time, scholars claim that public relations education has not kept pace with the rapid globalisation that has occurred since 1992, and that the existing body of knowledge and public relations curricula around the world carries a United States bias (Jamilah, 2005;Sriramesh, 2002;2003). This is due to the fact that little research literature written by non-American public relations scholars currently exists and that which does exist attributes these differences to politics, culture and economic environments, rather than acknowledge that public relations curricula are biased towards the US model. The absence of indigenous research and literature on public relations education from countries other than the US could be one of the main reasons why American literature on public relations is so significant to most of the universities that teach the discipline and also to organisations that practise public relations worldwide (Sriramesh, 2002; Vercic and Ruler, 2004).Generally, most Asian universities look to the US education system as the ideal model in developing their own curricula, and frequently invite American professors as visiting fellows which often aided by the Fulbright Foundation to help set up their programmes (Sriramesh, 2002). In addition, Asian universities, including those in Malaysia and Indonesia, still harbour the view that the US offers the best public relations education a...