Positioning public relations as an academic discipline in Australia

William Hatherell · Jennifer L. Bartlett

21 citations0/0 files storedQUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology)

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Public Relations and Crisis Communication Media Studies and Communication Communication Studies and Media

Abstract

Academic public relations in Australia appears to be entering a new phase in its relatively short history. The early model in which tertiary courses were confined to teaching-focussed institutions and conducted largely by teacher-practitioners is being supplanted by one in which the discipline is now offered in most Australian universities, is increasingly embracing research, and is being taught by staff following more traditional academic career paths. Despite the formal association with the communication discipline through ANZCA, public relations academics have increasingly asserted the independence of their discipline and in reality have very little dialogue with other strands of the communication discipline. These developments call into question the most appropriate knowledge base for public relations as an academic discipline in Australia and its proper relation to the profession (and the PRIA as the professional body). One danger associated with the assertion of disciplinary independence lies in the risk of excessive reliance on a relatively narrow body of work emanating from the more established US public relations academy, in the process ignoring much richer work in surrounding disciplines such as social theory, rhetoric, organisational communication, and business and society. The emphasis on disciplinary demarcation also seems curious during a time of growing ‘interdisciplinarity’ in the humanities and the social sciences. This paper critically reviews the construction of public relations as an academic discipline in Australia, drawing on some of the literature on academic disciplinarity to propose a repositioning of the discipline, one that is less focussed on asserting difference than on finding connections with other bodies of knowledge while maintaining close links with professional practice.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 21 citations exist upstream.

References

1964The Professionalization of Everyone?2018MANAGING PUBLIC RELATIONS 1997Toward a Concept and Theory of Organization-Public Relationships 2004Public Relations: State of the Field 2001OPRA: A Cross-Cultural, Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring Organization-Public Relationships 2000From Organizational Effectiveness to Relationship Indicators: Antecedents of Relationships, Public Relations Strategies, and Relationship Outcomes 2000Postmodern Values in Public Relations 1999The definition, dimensions, and domain of public relations

Cited by

2014Professionalisation and public relations education: Industry accreditation of Australian university courses in the early 1990s 2020Problematising history in the public relations curriculum 2021Making space for activism studies in public relations curricula 2015Are Strategic Communication Management Competencies and Personal Attributes Global? A Case Study of Practice in Finland and New Zealand

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.