Trust and public relations: Center and edge

Moloney, Kevin

doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2005.08.015

Cited by 32 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this respect, where the debates did prompt reflection it was shallow or cynical and only about the political process and the choice available to voters. We can see this as an example of the individualized and non-civic "whinging" that Moloney (2005) identified. …”

Section: Purposes Of Talk About the Debatesmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…These are knowledge, values, identities, affinity, experience, and discussion with the latter-talking about politics-envisaged as the lubricant keeping the circuit alive. At its core, the notion of being a citizen embraces the act of participation in political processes (Marshall 1950;Crick 2000) and means expressing concern on public problems that go beyond simply making personal "whinges" about society (Moloney 2005).…”

Section: Civic Culture and Political Talkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Performance, Politics, and Media: How the 2010 British General Election Leadership Debates Generated “Talk” Among the Electorate

Scullion

Jackson

Molesworth

2013

Journal of Political Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the British General Election 2010, a major innovation was introduced in part to improve engagement: A series of three livetelevised leadership debates took place in which the leader of each of the three main parties-Labour, Liberal Democrat, andConservative-answered questions posed by members of the public and subsequently debated issues pertinent to the questions. In this study, we consider these potentially ground-breaking debates as the kind of event that was likely to generate discussion. We investigate various aspects of the "talk" that emerged as a result of watching the debates. As an exploratory study concerned with situated accounts of the participants' experiences, we take an interpretive perspective. In this paper we outline the meta-narratives (of talk) associated with the viewing of the leadership debates that were identified, concluding our analysis by suggesting that putting a live debate on television and promoting and positioning it as a major innovation is likely to mean that is how the audience will make sense of it: as a media event.Political discussion is understood to be a vital part of deliberative democracies (Crick 2000;Dahlgren 2003). More than this, with a reduction in traditional political party engagement and a more sceptical electorate (Couldry 2005; Dermody, Lloyd-Hamner, and Scullion 2009), talk between members of the electorate-including online discussion-is likely to have increased potential to influence voting behaviors. We ask how such talk can be instigated by the media, looking specifically at the three live debates between party leaders (Labour, Conservative, and Liberal Democrat) that took place in the 3 weeks leading up to the 2010 UK General Election, as a potential catalyst for political talk. The three debates were broadcast live on ITV, BBC, and Sky News at weekly intervals during the campaign, all using questions put forward by a voter audience.The debates became a major feature of the election campaign (BBC News 2010; Times 2010) with much media coverage in the lead-up to and subsequent detailed analysis of each debate. Indeed, Beale (2010), writing in The Independent, said, "if this election has taught the parties' communications strategists and their advertising agency partners anything, it's the power of television. There's no doubt that all the time and money spent on advertising has been overshadowed by the impact of the televised debates." Several surveys seem to support the idea that the debates were excellent public relations tools for the election itself. For example, PR Week (2010) noted: "More than 80% of the 3,000 respondents to PR Week poll survey said future elections should include debates." Their survey also found that 70% of respondents believed the debates made them feel more engaged with politics and that they paid more attention to the leaders' debates than other types of campaigning such as canvassing, social media, advertising, and editorial. Sixty-five percent said the debates had increased their understanding of what the leaders and the...

show abstract

Section: Purposes Of Talk About the Debatesmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Civic Culture and Political Talkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance, Politics, and Media: How the 2010 British General Election Leadership Debates Generated “Talk” Among the Electorate

Scullion

Jackson

Molesworth

2013

Journal of Political Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is clear that Page was demonstrating Aristotelian, rather than Isocratean rhetoric. The fact that Page did not display the character that he advocated lends credence to Moloney’s (2005) assertions about public relations as a ‘communicative expression of competing organizations and groups in pluralist states’ (p. 554). Rather than viewing this finding as a character flaw, the authors refer, instead, to Barney and Black’s (1994) description of public relations’ role.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Positioning AT&T: A rhetorical analysis of Arthur W. Page speeches

Lambert

Landau²

2015

Public Relations Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While many American businesses were losing consumer trust during the 1920s and 1930s, American Telephone & Telegraph Company (AT&T) maintained a solid reputation. Much of the credit is due to Arthur W. Page, the first vice president of public relations at the mammoth telephone company. Little attention has been paid to the rhetorical strategies Page utilized to construct a compelling image of AT&T in company during that timeframe. In this rhetorical analysis of previously unpublished speeches, we assert that Page shaped company discourse through strategic use of rhetoric. Analysis of his unpublished speeches yielded five themes: conveying company capabilities, embracing societal connectedness, distinguishing AT&T, managing public opinion, and repurposing public relations. Corporate communicators who are currently struggling to gain consumer trust can benefit from understanding the rhetorical strategies that Page employed during a tumultuous time for American business.

show abstract

“…We are putting a psychological cart before the horse in wanting a gentle reward like trust to be associated with PR. (p. 55) Moloney (2005) says it is naïve to expect trust from PR message receivers. Rather, definitions of PR that identify goodwill, mutual understanding, adaptability, and trust should be redefined as the communicative expression of competing organizations.…”

Section: Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While acknowledging that trust is crucial wherever risk, uncertainty, or interdependence exists, McKnight and Chervany (2000) warn that vague prescriptions about generic trust may not address the concept in a productive way. Moloney (2005) argues that PR is not about trust because its activity results in more conflict and less agreement, as well as stasis, among competing interests in market-oriented, capitalist, liberal democracies in which PR gives ‘voice’ to organizations and groups that seek to maximize their advantage in political economy and civil society:PR is not the cause of that conflict, agreement, or stasis: it is the communicative expression of these conditions. We are putting a psychological cart before the horse in wanting a gentle reward like trust to be associated with PR.…”

Section: Authenticity and Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pitfalls and promises of transparency in the digital age

Vujnović

Kruckeberg

2016

Public Relations Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article re-examines transparency as it is conceptualized in communication, particularly in public relations, and it introduces the concept of pseudo-transparency. Transparency in the public relations literature is rarely examined from a critical perspective. We conclude from our re-examination that transparency is a product of modernism and neoliberalism; as such, we argue that the concept is used by organizations, that is, governments, civil society organizations, and corporations, to reproduce and to maintain a status quo to be accepted without interrogation or critical inquiry. Based on this re-examination, we advocate that public relations practitioners must be at the forefront in resolving ethical issues that are related to transparency and to pseudo-transparency in contemporary global society.

show abstract

Trust and public relations: Center and edge

Cited by 32 publications

References 1 publication

Performance, Politics, and Media: How the 2010 British General Election Leadership Debates Generated “Talk” Among the Electorate

Performance, Politics, and Media: How the 2010 British General Election Leadership Debates Generated “Talk” Among the Electorate

Positioning AT&T: A rhetorical analysis of Arthur W. Page speeches

Pitfalls and promises of transparency in the digital age

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About