Spinning - a threat to the profession of PR

People working in PR often have to face a rather negative reputation being associated with the act of spin. The PR practitioners that mostly have to cope with this image are probably those in position of the communications director of a political person. It is their duty and responsibility to change, kill, cover up or weaken negative stories about the person they are working for and ensure that these people are shed in positive light in front of the public.

Although ‘spinning’ is viewed as a highly unethical act “it is the most common form of PR as electoral politics and is political news management between political parties, government and the electorate.” (Moloney, 2000, p. 105). Moloney continues referring to Freidenberg (1997), pointing out that within the last few years, political consultants have achieved a status other than their actual position implies – being hyped by the media as celebrities themselves (Moloney, 2000, p. 106). One of these very “well-known celebrities” is Alistair Campbell who used to be Director of Communications and Strategy for former Prime Minister Tony Blair. Campbell is officially known and called “Spin doctor” among the public, especially after the scandal of the “September Dossier” in 2002 and the “Iraq Dossier” in 2003. These two documents were intended to gain great support by the public containing falsified and misleading information that “justified” the invasion of Iraq.

Spin used to be and will continue to be ethically wrong. Spin will never be approved of but will always be used – especially in politics. It is questionable if those people using spin will ever set themselves or stick to certain simple ethical boundaries instead of doing whatever they (in their eyes) have to do to achieve a certain goal – like Alistair Campbell who made the whole public think that going to war is the right thing to do.

The issue of spinning will always be a “hot topic” and a worry to those PR practitioners that operate in other sectors. They might do everything else but spinning and if there is not a drastic change, the image of a “spin doctor” will probably always be glued to their job, damaging the overall reputation of the profession Public Relations.

NGO's - Frenemies to Corporates?

NGO’s and non-profit organisations are usually not connected with negative thoughts. They stand, work and fight for good causes, call attention to these causes and educate the public about them and how they can actively get involved in doing something good for a cause. When a corporate company joins together with an NGO, it is usually intended to give the corporate company a positive image.

However it is often not considered that a collaboration with an NGO also can turn into a negative situation for the corporate company. This could be the case when the individual interests and activities of the two collaborators don’t coincide or just clash. The NGO will not be ashamed to make these internal discrepancies public, while the corporate company might fear a negative image and damaging reputation among the public.

In cases of a conflict, NGO’s often use the following tactics to draw public attention to the problem that exists with the corporate company intending to make it change its ways of operating and behaving:

1.    Non – violent  Direct Action (NVDA)
2.    Rogue websites
3.    Surveys
4.    Reports
5.    Mass Events
6.    Stunts
7.    Letters to officials
8.    Soundbites
9.    Social Media (YouTube, Twitter, Facebook)

When deciding on a collaboration, corporate companies need to carefully select the NGO’s they want to join together with and need to be aware of their common interests and the possible conflicts that could arise during the partnership. If there are no problems at all, a co-operation with an NGO will most likely help shed positive light on a corporate company’s name and image and build a positive reputation among the public.

Grunig's situational theory

One of the most important aspects companies have to deal with and pay great attention to are stakeholders. Today there are various models suggesting the best ways on how to deal with them. One of the most well known Public Relations theorists James E. Grunig has developed the situational theory which concentrates on changing publics. Its concept involves non – public, latent public, aware public and active public.

Non – public refers to the public that is not affected by an organisations decisions, behaviour or problems. They might be recognized but don’t play a very important role for a company. The latent public applies to the public that might unconsciously be aware of a company’s or organisation’s moves but does not recognize them. The aware public is a public, which is aware of the effects of an organisation’s matters and recognizes them. The active public refers to the public that recognizes a company’s or organisation’s moves in full context and wants to react and act in response and organise to do something about the problem or situation.

Grunig’s situational theory can well be applied by companies and organisation as it is but continues to be developed.