Mirror, mirror on the wall, what is the best PR approach of them all?

Mirror, mirror on the wall, what is the best PR approach of them all?

Blogs about Public Relations are not unique. That may seem like a negative factor, but in my opinion all these different posts can also give rise to a lively discussion on how Public Relations should be practiced or they may be able to give new insights on subjects. For example, I read a blog from a Sophie Staartjes, a fellow student of mine who’s ending statement in her blog about the crisis concerning the infamous Yuri van Gelder, the “Lord of the Drinks”.

The chef the mission, Maurits Hendriks, said in an interview that he would he would do things differently next time when he was asked about their PR strategy. Sophie did not agree with this, as she stated that he should not ever change his strategy, whatever the public says because that would mean you would lose your credibility. However, I do think that this kind of reflectiveness is important for public relations which I can base on arguments of Ihlen and Verhoeven. In their article they argue that maintaining a reflective approach will enhance the legitimacy of an organisation, which in this case was the NOC*NSF. As society is changing PR should change with it, otherwise an organisation could lose its legitimacy eventually. By applying a critical and reflective approach towards PR, an organisation will be more able to retain their legitimacy. A organisation can lose credibility, but that can build up again. But losing your legitimacy is in many cases the end of the organisation.

As seen on LinedIn

Also, based on the excellence theory of Grunig, I argue that a reflective approach comes closest towards a two-way symmetrical interaction. Only when an organisation is open for criticism or suggestions they will be able maintain a strong relationship with their stakeholders. By implying that he would have done things differently, Hendriks, states that he takes the critics seriously and that he does want to change their PR strategies in similar situation, hence, stating a two-way interaction.

Lastly, Sophie’s comment that Hendriks was not able to solve the situation properly because he was not trained as a PR professional does not make sense to me. As we see in an article from Von den Driesch and Van der Wurff, a lot of people with different degrees than communication work in PR and PA. Although I do think that a background in communication with a speciality can benefit the PR and PA discipline in general, I argue that the different backgrounds such as political science and law can act as positive contributions. Different backgrounds provide different perspectives, and these different perspectives are needed to move forward. Because without discussion, PR would never evolve along with society. For that reason, blogs like these are important as they can contribute towards a better understanding of PR in general.

So when can I see your blog?