Public Relations- Intro and PR Models (Quiz) from Darshan Prakash
In 1984, James Grunig and Todd Hunt proposed these four models of public relations and this theory is still valid today.
The first model is call press agentry or publicity. It’s a one-way style of communicating where an organization pumps out information, often through a press agent, if that helps you remember the term. Another word for this might be “propaganda” because messages are often based on emotional appeals that can be presented as only part of the information or that has been distorted in some way. There is little emphasis on facts.
The second model, also a one-way style of communicating, is called public information and it differs from press agentry in one important way: There is an emphasis on truthfulness. The organization is generally trying to provide information that is meaningful to audiences. While messages might also use emotional appeals to connect with those audiences, there is an effort made to provide truthful facts or information.
In the two-way asymmetrical model information is presented and feedback from a small number of receivers is solicited. Therefore, more information goes out than feedback is returned, which is why it’s called asymmetrical. The message appeal used in this model usually involves a scientific persuasion base or an expert. Sometimes, an organization is thought to be trying to manipulate its publics using this model.
In the gold-standard of models, a two-way symmetrical approach means that equal information is being sent out as feedback is received by an organization, hence it’s termed symmetrical. An organization is often reacting to and changing how it communicates based on information its receiving back from its audiences.
It’s essential to understand that each of the four models of public relations suggested by Grunig and Hunt have a place within a successful PR strategy. Even though we call one of them the “gold standard” it doesn’t mean that there is no value in using the other models, too. In fact, these are the two most common models used in sport public relations: press agentry/publicity and public information.
At some point in every communicator’s professional life, they will use each type of model so, get comfortable with Grunig & Hunt’s (1984) four models of public relations.
The next two models of public relations are based on research. Using research to gather public opinion data led scholars to label these models two-way rather than one-way because they more resemble a conversation than a simple dissemination of information. Grunig and Hunt termed the two management models asymmetrical and symmetrical.
The asymmetrical modelA research-based, two-way model of communication in which the imbalance of information favors the communicator. The public's beliefs about an organization or issue of importance is incorporated into the public relations messages distributed by the organization. The information presented seeks to persuade the public to adopt the attitudes and beliefs that are favorable to the organization. was pioneered between 1920 and 1950 by Edward Bernays, nephew of psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud, and is based on the principles of behavioral psychology. Public relations research seeks to determine what publics know and understand or believe about the client organization, issues of importance, and so on. Then, in the asymmetrical model, once these beliefs are learned through polling and other means, they are incorporated into the public relations messages distributed by the organization. It is called asymmetrical because it is imbalanced in favor of the communicator; the communicator undergoes no real change, but simply uses the ideas she knows will resonate in communicating with publics with the purpose of persuading them on some issue or topic. For example, if I am a politician running for reelection and my research identifies tax cuts as an important topic with publics, then I include the importance of tax cuts in my next campaign speech. Research is a key component of this model, as it seeks to persuade publics to adopt the attitudes and beliefs that are favorable to the organization based on the collection of data about their existent beliefs.
The symmetrical modelA research-based, two-way model of public relations in which research is used not with the intent to persuade but to build mutual understanding between publics and organizations. It is a collaborative approach to building understanding in which organizations are open to changing internal policy based on what they learn from the public. was also pioneered by Edward Bernays and several prominent public relations practitioners and educators between about 1960 to 1980. It seeks also to use research on public opinion just as the asymmetrical model does. However, it does not use research with the intent to persuade, but to build mutual understanding between both publics and organizations. Organizations are open to changing their internal policies and practices in this model based on what they learn from their publics. It is a collaborative approach to building understanding, and, although not perfectly balanced, it is a moving equilibrium in which both sides in the communication process have an opportunity to have input and change an issue. To revise this example, after research identifying tax cuts as an issue, a symmetrical politician would actually incorporate tax cuts into her belief system and offer ideas supporting those beliefs on the campaign trail.
In modern public relations, we often see a mixing of the public relations models among multiple tactics or communication tools within one public relations campaign. It is best to think of the models as theoretical constructs that, in implementation, become combined through the mixed motives of public relations. In most cases, public relations professionals not only want to aid their employer or client but also to assist the publics outside the organization to access and understand the inner workings of the firm. This mixed-motive approachAn approach to public relations that facilitates communication on both sides of an issue, both for organizations and for publics. In this approach, public relations professionals not only want to aid their employer or client, but also to assist the publics outside the organization to access and understand the inner workings of the firm. is based on the real-world contingencies that impact public relations decisions, and the desire to facilitate communication on both sides of an issue, both for organizations and for publics.
Summary of the Models of Public Relations
In summary, the historical development of the field showed four distinct models of public relations, as identified by Grunig and Hunt. With this brief background in the history of public relations, you likely know enough about the models now to begin employing each in your public relations management. All are still in use in public relations practice today, and these terms are used in the academic literature and in public relations management. The one-way models are not based on social scientific research but on a simple dissemination of information. The two-way models are based on research, which is what makes them the two-way management model. In order of their development, the models are as follows:
- Press agentry. One-way (information) dissemination focusing on publicity for persuasion/attention.
- Public information. One-way (information) dissemination providing information.
- Two-way asymmetrical. Two-way (research), which is imbalanced in favor of persuading publics to support the organizations’ interests.
- Two-way symmetrical. Two-way (research), which is more balanced in terms of creating mutual understanding; moving equilibrium.
Due to the mixed-motives inherent in the public relations process, public relations professionals will most likely use a combination of these models in public relations management. These models suggest an overall philosophy of public relations, while situations require different approaches. Therefore, it is also useful to have public relations strategies that reflect a contingency of varying approaches, as discussed later in this volume.