Feeding the PR stereotype

According to Jack O'Dwyer's Newsletter, the industry trade pub, The Princeton Review -- a college guide used by many high school students and parents as they explore colleges and possible career tracks -- is telling students they don't need to study public relations in order to succeed in the profession.  They also describe to student readers what PR people do, including a quote from an unnamed public relations person, who says "A PR person might have to shepherd an alcoholic half-mad author through a 20-city interview tour or try to put a warm 'n fuzzy spin on the company's latest oil spill."    (Oh yeah, that really explains what we do.)

They also quote another unnamed PR person who says, "If you can write a thesis about Dante, you should be able to write a press release."  (Really?!)

While there is some truth that some formal education in p.r. is not required (but it is very helpful), the write-up sends many erroneous and bad messages to young people about the work we do.

Commenting at the PR Conversations blog, Michael Zimet, who heads the IABC (International Assn of Business Communicators) Advocacy Work Group, reminds us that the Princeton Review's rankings are based on feedback from 120,000 current students.  Are current students qualified, he asks, to assess now the value of their studies in the workplace in the future?  Zimet also says Princeton Review is not associated in any way with Princeton University.  The publication is best known for its rankings of which schools are the best party schools.

But we can't afford to ignore this latest reinforcment of the stereotypes of public relations.  Most of us are not party-giving, handholding, lying spinmeisters trying to make an oil spill look harmless or cigarettes good for your health.

I think it's time for the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA), the primary national trade group for PR, to take a break from its political infighting and take a real leadership role in correcting erroneous portrayals of our industry.  It won't be corrected overnight, but it must start.  They should follow the example of PR organizations in many other nations, where they work to promote the industry and push for public relations studies in college. 

Heather Yaxley, a PR professional who blogs at Greenbanana and teaches at Bournemouth Univ. in England, writes about undergrads she taught last year.  She notes that "Some may have been disappointed if they thought they were getting into a party-profession.  But the vast majority discover a much more interesting career.  During their studies, they gain a solid foundation in a wide range of specific and transferable skills -- covering everything from politics to economics, rhetoric to persuassion, new media to global affairs.  Most of the PR graduates I know from 2007 have opted for a career in the industry."

The bottom line...

PRSA needs to mount a serious and aggressive campaign to educate people about what PR is and what it does. If we are seen simply as party planners, publicity hacks and cover-up artists, we can hardly expect to be taken seriously by CEOs, CMOs and other marketing and communications disciplines.

It's time for PRSA to:

1) Target high school guidance counselors, to educate them with accurate information about what we do and what educational tools young people need to enter and excel in the profession.

2) Create an ongoing campaign to improve understanding and elevate respect for the PR function within the overall business community.

3)  Develop recommendations for training programs that p.r. agencies and corporate p.r. departments can use to train and develop recent college grads as they come on board.   

4) Push for more inclusion of public relations in marketing and general business curriculae at the college level.

It's ironic that PR has always suffered from bad PR about itself.  Step up, PRSA and take the lead.

Comments

[Benita Steyn]

There was a comment on O'Dwyers to the above article asking why us educators are up in arms about the Princeton Review's career advice to PR students, wanting to know whether we are not making the situation worse by speaking up. I definitely do not think so. Rather, I agree with David who says we should do something about it and educate those people who do not know what PR is and what it does (or can do). I also agree with Heather that many PR students (also in my country) obtain solid skills and practice PR in a way that they and their educators and companies can be proud of.

With regards to what PR can do, if taken seriously: I teach a master's course in Strategic Public Relations in South Africa -- a course which focuses on the role of the 'PR strategist' (in the true sense of the word). Yes, there are such courses and even such degrees. And yes, our students are getting jobs and even more so, the ones with jobs are getting promotions (one of them 3 promotions in 2 years at one of South Africa's biggest companies). So there ARE companies that believe that 'PR strategists' can add value.

I therefore owe it to my students and graduates to speak up when I see such rubbish as that portrayed in the career guidance section of the Princeton Review.

Benita Steyn
Cape Peninsula University of Technology

[David Reich]

I agree with you, Benita. We can't just ignore this. That would be like putting our heads in the sand.

[Drew McLellan]

David,

How ridiculous and insulting. No one would say "anybody can deliver a baby. You just wait for it to pop our and catch it. No reason to go to medical school."

I agree...the professional association needs to step up and both defend and educate.

Do you think they will?

Drew

[David Reich]

A big part of the problem has been that the PR association here has not really addressed its own industry's image problem. Of course, as I've been saying, it's part an image problem and part a problem of real action to educate and be educated. I am just not sure of the PRSA is up to the challenge.

[CK]

Very good. Did you send this to the PRSA? I would hope they read your blog but I don't see a link to the PRSA (sorry if I missed it)...and I think that what your good intentions/teachings can do is to teach the PRSA. Admittedly there are a LOT of PR problems--and marketing ones for sure--so I think while the PRSA needs to take the lead it would help to send them this. Then again, I think you should be at the helm over there...but I know you've got to run your busy, highly ethical biz ;-).

[David Reich]

Actually, ck, Jack O'Dwyer, who writes the leading industry newsletter and who has been a watchdog for the p.r. industry, saw my posts and called me. We'll be meeting in a couple of weeks to talk about getting the word out and trying to push PRSA into real action. I think it's a long shot, since the PRSA leadership is so entrenched and self-serving, but it's worth a try.

[David Reich]

This from Jack O'Dwyer, publisher of Jack O'Dwyer's Newsletter...

Author: Jack O'Dwyer
Comment:
Princeton Review Responds:
Take vs. PR Is “Official”
PR profs wanted to know if advice against “PR” courses was the “official” stand
of Princeton Review. It is, said the Review, but it notes “communications” is a
popular major.
Fri., Aug. 31

PRINCETON REVIEW REITERATES PR STAND
The Princeton Review, in response to a query from this website, has reiterated its
stand against undergrads taking public relations courses.
Said the response:
“Yes, this is the Princeton Review’s view of the PR field. PR specialists are talented
individuals with great communications skills and varied backgrounds. In our view,
it’s such a fluid career that students do have the flexibility to major in something
other than PR, which helps them perhaps specialize in a segment of any number of
industries—from trucking to government.”
A section on “Major: Public Relations,” provides a definition of the field by Kent
State University.
PR is said to be “the strategic management of communication and relationships between
organizations and their key publics.” Once students master the basics of PR, they’ll
be able to “drive sales for your client and earn favor in the public eye…knowing
when to communicate what is essential in PR.”
The Review lists the “ten most popular majors” based on data it collects from students
and ranks “communications” as the eighth most popular major.
The rankings are:
1. Business administration and management.
2. Psychology.
3. Elementary education.
4. Biology.
5. Nursing.
6. Education.
7. English.
8. Communications.
9. Computer science.
10. Political science.
Communications Defined
Communications majors “learn how certain messages influence individual and group
behavior as well as how our reactions reflect the underlying values of society.”
Students study “different kinds of speaking and writing and the strategies people
use to make their points and drive them home.”
They will also “delve into monumental speeches, revolutionary political campaigns,
radical social movements, and the trends in news reporting.”
Communications majors can pursue careers in business, PR, advertising, human resources,
government, education, media or social services, the Review says.
English Majors Are “Well-Rounded”
English major can be found in “countless types of jobs, advises the Review, including
author, reporter, journalist, editor, radio broadcaster, advertising and PR executives.
With their “well-rounded, well-read background,” they can also become “teachers,
lawyers (after law school, of course), film directors, politicians, actors, you
name it,” the Review adds.
English majors should be “be prepared to read, think, write, discuss, and then read
a whole lot more,” it says.
Use of “Princeton” Being Investigated
Some professors have complained that the use of the term “Princeton,” especially
with the word “Review” strongly suggests that the college rating and test preparation
service is part of Princeton University.
The media relations dept. of the University said it will look into this issue.
Princeton is the name of a town in New Jersey and numerous local businesses use
that name.

[CK]

Awesome...keep us posted, k? I really like seeing examples of these good posts getting attention and important action.

They'd be smart to listen to this post and the others you've written here (and at the Fix).

[Michael Zimet]

IMHO, the Princeton Review just doesn't get it.

1. Their ratings may be an accurate reflection of their survey findings -- but they only survey current students, not graduates in the real (read: working) world. They obviously don't seem to understand that current students are in no position to assess how well a given major prepares them for a chosen career. It's only after years of experience that people can judge whether their education had any value in their preparation -- or whether a more specialized major adds value to a particular career choice.

2. "Popularity" should have nothing to do with an allegedly objective assessment of a career or major. (The Review lists the "ten most popular majors.") Otherwise, why not list "sex therapist" and "comedian" as potential careers and/or majors? They would surely rise to the top of the list. ("Gosh, Mom/Dad, doctor and physicist aren't very popular majors; I'd rather switch to something that's more popular." Ouch!)

FWIW, I have a degree in the communications field -- but my coursework included electives in English, business and other fields that leave me sufficiently "well-rounded" to be comfortable going into other fields, if I ever choose to do so.

Come to think of it, how does the Review define "well-rounded"? If, as it seems with the Review, it's simply taking enough "different courses," you could wind up with minuscule amounts of education in myriad areas, making it questionable whether you'd be a good candidate for many positions. That may work well for some people in some fields. But in general, if that's okay for today's employers, why bother getting a college education in the first place?

What's wrong with this picture?

(Disclaimer: I mean no disrespect to those who have achieved success and/or fulfillment in our field without a relatively specialized profession-oriented education. But for the Review to paint the picture with such a broad brush does many educators, institutions, accomplished professionals and aspiring communicators a great disservice.)

[Lewis Green]

David,

If anyone asked me, and no one has, I would recommend that any person wanting a career in PR should consider a major in Journalism, where they will be required to take a few PR classes but primarily students will learn how to write for publications. Furthermore, they will learn what editors want and how they think, and at a good J School, they will be required to intern at a newspaper for practical experience.

I am one of those people who believe we need to know what our audience wants and needs to be good at anything. So for PR folks, working for a newspaper or a magazine can't help but make us better at PR, once we dive into that pool.

[David Reich]

Right you are, Lewis.

[Sean Howard]

Hey David,

Good to hear people talking about this. I had a low view of PR as well before meeting yourself and some other folks in the last few years.

I think part of the challenge is how broad the term has become. PR stands for so many different things. And for some, it likely is to "cover for an oil spill."

[Character Education]

Education is very necessary on each step... But we need character education initially for all ages...