The Global Foundations of Public Relations: Humanism, China and the West [1 ed.] 0815372485, 9780815372486

Table of contents :
Cover
Half Title
Series Page
Title Page
Copyright Page
Dedication
Table of Contents
Contributors
Chapter 1 The Humanistic Turn
Chapter 2 The Western rationales for public relations: The engineering of human interactions
Chapter 3 Ancient Chinese roots
Chapter 4 History and legitimacy in the West: Public relations aesthetics from Hippocrates to Luis Buñuel
Chapter 5 The trajectory of practices and values of public relations in China: The ascent of a humanistic turn within Chinese public relations
Chapter 6 Turning to humanism: Merchants, guilds, and managed public communication in Medieval Europe and Middle Period China
Chapter 7 Toward a new dawn of public relations: With charity toward all
Chapter 8 Crisis communication in China
Chapter 9 Crisis communication and humanism in Nigeria: Challenges and opportunities
Chapter 10 Public relations and the performance of everything
Chapter 11 Humanistic turn: A new home for public diplomacy?
Chapter 12 A humanistic turn of place branding in public relations: From marketing to a social science and sustainability perspective
Chapter 13 A new model of humanistic PR: The social business
Index

Citation preview

Routledge New Directions in PR & Communication Research

THE GLOBAL FOUNDATIONS OF PUBLIC RELATIONS HUMANISM, CHINA AND THE WEST Edited by Robert E. Brown, Burton St. John III and Zhengye Jenny Hou

The Global Foundations of Public Relations

The Global Foundations of Public Relations: Humanism, China and the West explores the growing humanistic turn in public relations proposes that this has compelling parallels in the roots of Chinese philosophies. As the leader of growth and power across the Pacific Rim, public relations in China is not developing in isolation from the West, but via mutual accommodations and culturally complex interactions. By collecting cases and reflections on PR practices from both Chinese and Western scholars, the chapters propose that Chinese philosophies are playing a role in the development of modern Chinese PR practices, and—focusing less on the obvious differences and contracts—seek to highlight their spiritual, philosophical, and political confluences. The conclusions drawn enhance and advance our understanding of public relations globally. This innovative work is of interest to educators and researchers in the fields of public relations, strategic communications, and public diplomacy. Robert E. Brown is a Professor Emeritus at Salem State University, USA, and a member of the Affiliated Faculty of Emerson College. Burton St. John III is a Professor of Public Relations at the University of Colorado-Boulder, USA. Jenny Zhengye Hou is the Chief Investigator of Strategic Communication and Public Relations at Queensland University of Technology, Australia, and Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy.

Routledge New Directions in PR & Communication Research Edited by Kevin Moloney

Current academic thinking about public relations (PR) and related communication is a lively, expanding marketplace of ideas and many scholars believe that it’s time for its radical approach to be deepened. Routledge New Directions in PR & Communication Research is the forum of choice for this new thinking. Its key strength is its remit, publishing critical and challenging responses to continuities and fractures in contemporary PR thinking and practice, tracking its spread into new geographies and political economies. It questions its contested role in market-orientated, capitalist, liberal democracies around the world, and examines its invasion of all media spaces, old, new, and as yet unenvisaged. The New Directions series has already published and commissioned diverse original work on topics such as: • PR’s influence on Israeli and Palestinian nation-building • PR’s origins in the history of ideas • a Jungian approach to PR ethics and professionalism • global perspectives on PR professional practice • PR as an everyday language for everyone • PR as emotional labor • PR as communication in conflicted societies, and • PR’s relationships to cooperation, justice, and paradox. We actively invite new contributions and offer academics a welcoming place for the publication of their analyses of a universal, persuasive mindset that lives comfortably in old and new media around the world. The Global Foundations of Public Relations Humanism, China and the West Edited by Robert E. Brown, Burton St. John III and Jenny Zhengye Hou For more information about this series, please visit: www.routledge.com/Ro utledge-New-Directions-in-PR--Communication-Research/book-series/ RNDPRCR

The Global Foundations of Public Relations Humanism, China and the West

Edited by Robert E. Brown, Burton St. John III and Zhengye Jenny Hou

First published 2022 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2022 selection and editorial matter, Robert E. Brown, Burton St. John III and Jenny Zhengye Hou; individual chapters, the contributors The right of Robert E. Brown, Burton St. John III and Jenny Zhengye Hou to be identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record has been requested for this book ISBN: 978-0-8153-7248-6 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-032-05475-9 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-351-24534-0 (ebk) DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340 Typeset in Bembo by Deanta Global Publishing Services, Chennai, India

For my wife, Delia, a meticulous editor and author: il miglior fabbro. — Robert E. Brown, co-editor I wish to thank all of my colleagues, past and present, who have encouraged me to keep on questioning what public relations is. This mindset has been especially helpful during a time when facts and reality are constantly being called into question by those who successfully wield megaphones (whether actual or virtual). And my deepest appreciation to my supportive family: Dana, Melissa, Aaron, and Nick. —Burton St. John III, co-editor It has been such a rewarding and fulfilling journey to work with my two co-editors Robert and Burton and the very insightful contributors from around the world, especially my former colleagues Ming and Joanne who have generously supported this project. I am immensely grateful for their dedication and commitment to sharing this important knowledge with global audiences who appreciate the value of humanism in this increasingly commercialized world. I would also like to extend my gratitude to my mentors, advisors, and fellow colleagues in the field of public relations, who have guided and assisted me in pursuing my dream along this career track. As always, I especially thank my family and parents for their unconditional love, care, and support without which I would not have gotten where I am today. —Jenny Zhengye Hou, co-editor

Contents

Contributors 1 The Humanistic Turn

ix 1

ROBERT E. BROWN, BURTON ST. JOHN III, AND JENNY ZHENGYE HOU

2 The Western rationales for public relations: The engineering of human interactions

7

BURTON ST. JOHN III

3 Ancient Chinese roots

24

MINGSHENG LI

4 History and legitimacy in the West: Public relations aesthetics from Hippocrates to Luis Buñuel

48

JORDI XIFRA AND MAURICI JIMÉNEZ

5 The trajectory of practices and values of public relations in China: The ascent of a humanistic turn within Chinese public relations

63

JENNY ZHENGYE HOU

6 Turning to humanism: Merchants, guilds, and managed public communication in Medieval Europe and Middle Period China

80

SIMON MOORE

7 Toward a new dawn of public relations: With charity toward all 95 DONN JAMES TILSON

8 Crisis communication in China JOANNE CHEN LYU AND PEIYI HUANG

116

viii

Contents

9 Crisis communication and humanism in Nigeria: Challenges and opportunities

130

AMISO M. GEORGE

10 Public relations and the performance of everything

145

JOHANNA FAWKES

11 Humanistic turn: A new home for public diplomacy?

162

EFE SEVIN

12 A humanistic turn of place branding in public relations: From marketing to a social science and sustainability perspective

182

CHUNG-SHING CHAN

13 A new model of humanistic PR: The social business

200

A CONVERSATION WITH ROBIN LOW

Index

209

Contributors

Robert E. Brown is a Professor Emeritus at Salem State University, USA, and is the senior editor of The Global Foundations of Public Relations, the author of The Public Relations of Everything, a contributing editorial board member of Public Relations Review and Public Relations Inquiry, and a member of the Affiliated Faculty of Emerson College. He has taught PR and crisis communication at the Blanquerna School of Communication (Ramon Llull University), Barcelona, Spain, and at UExternado, Bogota, Columbia, as well as spending 24 years at Harvard Extension School, Bentley University, Boston College, Boston University, California State University: LA, Emerson College, Salem State University, and the University of California: Riverside. Chung-Shing (Johnson) Chan is a research assistant professor in the Department of Geography and Resource Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong. His doctoral research investigates the potential of green resources for city branding in Hong Kong. His research and teaching research interests include place branding, sustainable tourism, accessible tourism, urban tourism, and eco-tourism. Jenny Zhengye Hou is the Chief Investigator of Strategic Communication and Public Relations at Queensland University of Technology, Australia, and Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy. She has published in international journals like Public Relations Review, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, Public Relations Inquiry, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, and Communication Research and Practice. She was awarded the 2017 Plank Centre for Leadership in Public Relations Educator Fellowship, the 2019 Arthur W. Page Centre Legacy Scholar Grant, and 2020 Australia Government CRC funding. Johanna Fawkes has worked in public sector communications and, since 1990, higher education, designing and delivering undergraduate, postgraduate, and doctoral degrees in public relations in British and Australian universities. She was then Principal Research Fellow at the University of Huddersfield, UK, leading an international team to produce a global

x

Contributors

capability framework for PR. Johanna has written extensively on PR ethics, including Public Relations Ethics and Professionalism: The Shadow of Excellence (Routledge, 2015) and is working on a sequel, Public Relations as Performance: Behind the Mask. Amiso George is a professor and former chair of the Strategic Communication Department at Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, USA. A Fulbright scholar, she is the Public Relations Society of America’s “2017 Educator of the Year.” She also received the 2017 Bridge Award for Excellence in Strategic Communication Research from the International Crisis and Risk Communication Conference (ICRCC) and the University of Central Florida Nicholson School of Communication. Amiso directed the Public Relations program at the University of Nevada, Reno, where she developed and taught the first crisis communication course. A visiting professor at Swinburne University in Australia, she has worked as a crisis consultant in the United States, Nigeria, Australia, and Malaysia, and has been quoted many times on crisis communication cases in the media. She is co-editor of three books, including Crisis Communication: International Perspectives on Hits and Misses (Routledge, 2012) and Culture and Crisis Communication: Transboundary Cases from Nonwestern Societies (Wiley, 2017). Mingsheng Li is an associate professor in communication at the School of Communication, Journalism, and Marketing, Massey University, New Zealand. He received his doctorate in education from La Trobe University, Australia. His research interests include intercultural communication, international education, migrant studies, and media education. Robin Low is the co-founder of Civil Innovation Lab, promoting social impact through civil action and local innovation. Robin co-founded Relief 2.0 and went on an international tour for the photo exhibit, Tohoku: Road to the Future, to promote sustainable disaster recovery by engaging, empowering, enabling, and connecting survivors to the support they need. Robin is the author of several books including Good Intentions Are Not Enough. Joanne Chen Lyu earned her PhD degree in Communication from The Chinese University of Hong Kong and used to be an Assistant Professor in communication in Hong Kong. She has been transitioning from a communication scholar to a public health researcher focusing on leveraging and improving communication elements to enhance the efficacy of health behavior change interventions. Joanne is currently a postdoc fellow at the University of California, San Francisco. Simon Moore is an associate professor and past chair of Information Design and Corporate Communication at Bentley University, USA. He is interested in the philosophical, historical, and technological impact of managed public communication on the human condition.

Contributors

xi

Peiyi Huang earned her MPhil degree from the School of Journalism and Communication, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, and worked at an international consulting firm in China. She is now studying psychology at the University of Mannheim. Her research interests are crisis management, media, and consumer psychology. Efe Sevin is an assistant professor of public relations at the Department of Mass Communication at Towson University (Maryland, USA). His current research focuses on identifying and measuring the impacts of social networks on place branding and public diplomacy campaigns. His works have been published in several academic journals and books including American Behavioral Scientist, Public Relations Review, and Cities. His most recent coedited volume, City Diplomacy Current Trends and Future Prospects, was published by Palgrave MacMillan in 2020. Burton St. John III is a professor of public relations at the University of Colorado-Boulder and researches public relations and the management of risk and crisis. He is the author of the 2017 book Public Relations and the Corporate Persona: The Rise of the Affinitive Organization (Routledge), a finalist for AEJMC’s 2018 Tankard Book Award. He is also co-author of the 2017 book Crisis Communication and Crisis Management: An Ethical Approach (Sage). He is lead editor of the 2018 volume Cases in Public Relations Strategy (Sage) and also edited the first ever release, in 2017, of Ivy Lee’s book-length 1928 manuscript, Mr. Lee’s Publicity Book: A Citizen’s Guide to Public Relations (PRMuseum Press). Donn J. Tilson is an associate professor emeritus at the School of Communication, University of Miami, and has published and lectured extensively on public relations and religion, including as a Fulbright Scholar (University of Ottawa) in interfaith dialogue. His book, The Promotion of Devotion: Saints, Celebrities and Shrines, is a pioneering work in the field and currently in revision as a second edition. He continues to explore the confluence of public relations, social responsibility, and faith in ancient civilizations, indigenous peoples, and other present-day societies. Jordi Xifra is a professor at Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona. He studies public relations from history, philosophy, and filmic perspectives. His work has been published in journals such as Public Relations Review, Journal of Public Relations Research, Comunicar, and American Behavioral Scientist.

1

The Humanistic Turn Robert E. Brown, Burton St. John III, and Jenny Zhengye Hou

Humanism and the humanities The authors comprising this anthology take the position that, over the past generation, public relations is taking what we are calling a humanistic turn. Reflections on this proposition are woven throughout the chapters in this book written by a dozen authors from Europe, the United States, and China..

Why China? Why not all of Asia? Five editorial decisions guided our editorial planning and strategies. The first decision arose from our sense that humanism—the principle of a definitively humane ethic—was embedded in the culture of ancient China through Confucius and his followers and revisionists. As the reader will encounter in several chapters of this collection, a historically and culturally inflected humanism was encoded into Confucianist philosophy from its ancient outset. The principle of ren—i.e., “humanity,” “humanness,” “goodness,” “benevolence,” or “love”—is among Confucianism’s first principles and, arguably, may be the philosophy’s primus inter pares (or, first among equals). Central to Confucianism is the humane bearing and behavior of the enlightened individual and that, collectively, drives the creation and sustainability of a flourishing and just society (Stefan, 2004). The wisdom of Confucian humanism is still incorporated and infused into China’s modern governance, particularly as an astute tool of persona building for that nation’s authoritarian government.

What are we speaking of when we speak of humanism? Twentieth-century historiographer Wing-Tsit-Chan argued that humanism did not originate with a particular man but with a “historical and social change” (1963, p. 3) For Wing, “If one word could characterize the entire history of Chinese philosophy, that word would be humanism—not the humanism that denies or slights a Supreme Power, but one that professes the unity of man and Heaven” (Wing-Tsit-Chan, 1963, p. 3). He added, “Humanism, in gradual ascendance, reached its climax in Confucius” (p. 3). The change he DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340-1

2

Brown, St. John, and Zhengye Hou

references came with China’s transition from a tribal to a feudal society with the conquest of the Shang (1751–1112 BC) by the Chou. Under the Chou, “Prayers for rain were gradually replaced by irrigation” (p. 3). In this narrative, what Confucius wrought was a quasi-secular humanism, less religious than philosophic. Our second decision to focus attention on China addresses the global centrality of China herself, never more so than at the time of this writing in a period of high drama in her relationship with the West. Therefore, this anthology was designed to offer reflections on the theories and practices of Chinese PR by several Chinese PR scholars, along with Western PR scholars thinking through Western approaches to PR. The third decision was logistical. Rather than attempt comprehensive coverage of Asia or the West, we proceeded thematically and selectively, seeking resonance and context. Other PR scholars—notably Tom Watson, Krishmamurthy Sriramesh, and Dejan Verčič—have approached PR globalism comprehensively and theoretically. The fourth decision was historiographical. The editors recognized the need to avoid the distortions of American-centrism which are the legacy of 20thcentury American PR theorists and practitioners (Lamme & Russell, 2010). The fifth decision was a parsimonious one. While recognizing the abiding concern PR has with the ethics of its principles and practices, the chapters concern themselves individually and collectively with the humanistic turn. While PR ethics have generated some interest (especially from PR scholars) humanism in public relations has received a comparative paucity of attention from scholars, practitioners, journalists, and the generally skeptical, critical, or dismissive public. This book’s focus on a humanistic turn in PR is bound to highlight that PR has a contentious role in modern times. PR has never lacked for critics. Critics of PR run the gamut from dismissive to outraged. The digital era has generated another set of critics.. These include those who argue that the digital era has rendered analog, print-centered PR obsolescent due to the rise of internet- and technology-driven strategic communications. Other critics march to different drummers, offering that PR is, at best, an adjunct to integrated marketing communication, branding, influencer social media marketing, and content marketing. In fact, the accretion of these practices, along with the concomitant claims that PR is somewhat of a handmaiden, has been driven by the phenomenon of convergence. In the digital era, what were formerly distinct practices, tools, and strategies have been moving ever closer together, sometimes overlapping. In our globalized era, public relations itself has become global, and can sometimes appear to be a bit opaque. This is because PR has been modifying its asserted universality by paying close and careful attention to the inherent individualism and/or distinctiveness of the nations, societies, cultures, values, media, and ethical norms within the nations where it operates. These matters form the subtext, so to speak, of this Global Foundations anthology.

The Humanistic Turn

3

A distinction must be made between the terms humanistic and humanities. The former suggests contemplation and ideology, while the latter is a field of study that has been associated with PR and its multidisciplinary nature. PR has always been accretive, borrowing, absorbing, digesting, and applying itself to the humanities as well as to the arts. This was evident in the United States by the early 1920s with PR “pioneer” Edward.Bernays’s affinity for Freudian psychoanalysis, 19th-century “herd” sociology, and his metaphorical conceptualizing of PR in such scientific-sounding terms as the “engineering of consent” and the “crystallizing of public opinion.” In the first half of the 20th century, Bernays’s ambition for PR to be legitimized as a science was extended upon by PR scholars like J. E. Grunig in the second half of that century. Professor Grunig helped inspire generations of positivist scholars to re-create PR as an organizational behavior that needed to be subjected to statistical measurement. In fact, the continuing scholarly focus on data signifies how both public relations practice and scholarship, for at least the last 25 years, have put a priority on measurement. This focus, of course, reflects multiple realities: a) PR clients who do not understand the field and insist on PR always having measurable objectives, b) the pressure on PR practitioners to be able to justify their existence to c-suite executives through mimicking the reportage of business-school trained peers, c) the ascendancy of communication tactics (e.g., social media messaging) that readily lend themselves to data analytics, and 4) the increasing influx of young PR scholars who have a quantitative preference while exhibiting little flexibility for engaging in qualitative research (and the willingness of some established scholars, conferences, and certain journals to gear themselves toward promoting such work). Cumulatively, this movement within the field tends to amplify the adage “what gets measured gets done.” That is, the focus on data points is the stance to take if one is going to show that an effort has had an effect. While this premise certainly aligns with quantitative understandings of the world and certainly has a great deal of validity, it does not adequately address how PR speaks to the human condition. As one of our co-editors found, PR practitioners in the United States, since the late 1930s, used many approaches to amplify shared values between corporations and individuals, all the while using a limited amount of evaluation (St. John, 2017). In some cases, these efforts went on for decades, with no corresponding reams of data sets. While it is certainly possible that several factors lead to a lack of evaluation (e.g., lack of funding, lack of client interest, etc.) it is also important to ask this fundamental question that challenges the need to see PR through the data set prism: if public relations is speaking to, and attempting to amplify, a culturally dominant shared value, why would such an effort inherently need to be measured? Of course, measuring other matters that might parallel such an effort (e.g., sales data trends, market share increase, success in defeating proposed legislation) may well be appropriate, but such items by themselves do not signal adequately how PR operates at a humanistic level within society. It is in this spirit that this volume, with its understanding of PR’s historiography, its focus on philosophy and the arts, and its emphasis on the diversity

4

Brown, St. John, and Zhengye Hou

and multiplicity of PR’s cultures, takes a strikingly different path away from positivism. In this way, this work carries forward a reaction against the uniform, positivist PR that has come from a variety of scholars. This book, therefore, owes much to the work of rhetoricians like Robert L. Heath and Elizabeth Toth, historians like Ray Hiebert, critical theorists like Jacquie L’Etang and Magda Pieckza, critical theorists and “action PR” advocates like David McKie, communication aestheticians like Jordi Xifra, performative scholars like Johanna Fawkes, feminist scholars like Kate Fitch, and many other authors in the recent, post-symmetry era.

A Note about the ethical and the spiritual The book’s subtitle—Humanism, China and the West—focuses attention on the values of the human and humane across the hemispheres and throughout the history of the West and China. Each of our authors was asked to engage with humanistic values in the history, theory, and practices of public relations. That said, it remains to be seen whether the growing emphasis of the public relations industry’s understanding of itself as passionately ethical constitutes a humanistic turn. The terms diverge somewhat. That is, conceptions of professional ethics veer outward toward a codified, monitored, regulated, and somewhat enforced system governing more the professional behavior of organizations, management, employees, and individuals. In contrast, conceptions of humanism pivot away from system and probity and move inward toward a core apprehension of values and beliefs, rendering it softer and perhaps more sentimental than what we think of as ethics. And while there can be little doubt that the PR industry has, in modernity, been clear about its emphasis on ethics, it has been less clear that its awareness of ethics has made a turn toward humanism.

The authors Isaiah Berlin’s oft-cited hedgehog was said to know one big thing, but Berlin’s fox knew many things. The authors of this anthology are part hedgehog, part fox; they know many things about one big thing. In his chapter, Simon Moore contrasts the mercantile ethos of medieval Europe with the “entrenched humanism” of China’s Middle Period. Burton St. John III explores modern PR’s scientific ambitions and its search for mechanical precision in the early 20th century when Edward Bernays made the case that public opinion could be “engineered,” and, in Bernays’s later metaphor, “crystallized.” Jordi Xifra and Maurici Jiménez open a wide-angle historical lens on PR, from Hippocrates’s medical ethics to the avant-garde cinema of Luis Buñuel, making the case that PR’s legitimacy may be understood in its long history from ancient medical humanism to the avant-garde cinematic humanism of the 20th-century Spanish director.

The Humanistic Turn

5

The ancient, ever-growing phenomenon of crisis in the digital age is considered from the perspective of the way it is understood and addressed in Chinese and Nigerian approaches. Authors Joanne Chen Lyu and Peiyi Huang observe ways in which Chinese crisis communication both converges and diverges from Western models. They explore a “face culture” where, the authors note, “saving face for oneself and giving face to others contributes to the Chinese tendency to cover up faces.” Crisis PR scholar Amiso George’s chapter considers the practice of PR in Nigeria, where, unlike current standards in the West, “in traditional Nigerian society, the true nature of a crisis was never fully disclosed.” Mingsheng Li views the turn toward humanism in China as a re-affirmation of the exhortations of Confucius which is shown today in the state pragmatism of Xi Jinping. He identifies PR’s DNA in the “cardinal Confucian values” of ren, li, and he (or humaneness, rules of propriety, and harmony). Donn James Tilson makes a case that the humanistic turn can be understood in spiritual terms, adducing both Western and Eastern societies as they have been pivoting away from the modern secular, positivist PR tradition that too often relies on American-centric, managerial models. In the post-symmetry era, there has been a call for a sociology of PR (L’Etang, 2008, p. 5). But PR has always been a definitively social institution all along. In her chapter, Johanna Fawkes frames PR in theater and performance terms. Her chapter, “Public relations and the performance of everything,” thinks of PR in the dramaturgical terms of the sociologist Erving Goffman. For Fawkes, PR is “inherently a performance practice.” Theatricality plays a role in Efe Sevin’s chapter on conceptualizing public diplomacy in her native Turkey. A performative thread is found as well in Chinese PR scholar Jenny Zhengye Hou’s chapter which addresses the “trajectory of values” that have been reinvigorated to shape Chinese communication in accordance with China’s modernization, industrialization, and globalization. Hong-Kong-based scholar Chung-Shing Chan offers a rethinking of the typically marketing-driven conceptualization of place branding from a different PR perspective. In the final chapter, the editors interviewed Robin Low, an entrepreneur and social theorist based in Singapore. Low’s contribution proposes a model of social business that would move beyond the traditional ethics of corporate social responsibility. Let us imagine an astrophysics of public relations—that public relations is a dynamic universe of bodies in motion. What we have observed in the last several generations is a trend of convergence amounting to a centripetal force that has pushed once separate and distinctive disciplines ever closer to each other’s orbit. We are now able to notice a whirling nexus of PR, integrated marketing communication, advertising, and branding. Furthermore, 50 years ago, the specialty area of crisis communication was a little planet on the outer reaches of the PR galaxy. Today, in an era of disasters and pandemics, crisis communication is close to the galaxy’s center.

6

Brown, St. John, and Zhengye Hou

Collectively, the chapters of The Global Foundations of Public Relations offer evidence of a postmodern, post-symmetrical humanistic turn in the theories, concepts, and practices of PR. Although such humanism in PR is a contemporary development, it is a humanism that is not unprecedented because it draws upon ancient humanistic principles. This volume captures how PR is attempting to move past positivism toward re-invigorating its ability to tap into our humanistic sensibilities and thereby attempt to help us make sense of the world. It is never more important than now to explore how PR attempts to operate on us in a humanistic way by appealing to our common notions of a constructive life.

References Lamme, M. O. & Russell, K. M. (2010). Removing the spin: Toward a new theory of public relations history. Journalism Communication Monographs, 11(4), Winter 2010, 281–362. L’Etang, J. (2008). Public Relations: Concepts, Practice and Critique. London: Sage. Stefan, M. (2004). Ren, in Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica .com/topic/ren St. John, B. (2017). Public Relations and the Corporate Persona: The Rise of the Affinitive Organization. New York: Routledge. Wing-Tsit-Chan. (Trans. & ed.) (1963). A Sourcebook in Chinese Philosophy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

2

The Western rationales for public relations The engineering of human interactions Burton St. John III

The field of public relations has been widely understood as significantly developing in the United States in the early decades of the 20th century. That nascent rise, however, was mostly centered in the area of publicity primarily designed to achieve the movement of the crowds in support of an organization’s goals. The railroads, for example, were a particularly notable early user of public relations throughout the late 19th century and early 20th century to mass westward migration and favorable state and national laws (and sometimes subsidies) that would burnish the railroads’ business model. By the 1920s, however, US public relations practitioner Edward L. Bernays, often considered a pioneer of the field of public relations, continually worked through, in public writings and speeches, the premise that the emerging profession of public relations was about more than efforts to persuade crowds to adopt certain beliefs and actions that could benefit public relations’ clients. Instead, Bernays articulated that public relations had a unique ability to speak to the values and biases of the human condition. Public relations, he maintained in his first book, Crystallizing Public Opinion (1923), was an effort by the informed and those with resources (essentially, the elite) to help actualize democracy in the face of resistance, fear, selfishness, and ignorance. But Bernays offered that public relations’ kind of humanism was not esoteric or abstract. Instead, he referred to a systematic approach—the notion of engineering consent—when he pointed out that Lippmann’s 1922 book Public Opinion asserted there had been an upswing in professionals who were skilled, said Lippmann, in “the manufacture of consent” (1922, p. 248). Bernays elaborated on that observation by asserting that the public relations counsel breathes life into the potential for humanistic progress by working to move “mass opinion against the old belief or in favor of the new” (1923, p. 68). Bernays, however, did not immediately expand on this engineering concept. Instead, in 1938, public relations practitioner and Ivy Lee associate Bronson Batchelor (1938), in his book Profitable Public Relations, said of public relations: this broad generic term is descriptive of a new kind of social and political engineering. It endeavors to apply to the human relationships of business something that approximates the engineer’s knowledge of stresses and DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340-2

8 Burton St. John III

strains, something of his ability not only to calculate and balance known factors, but to anticipate unforeseen contingencies. (p. 30) Nine years later, Bernays coined his own version of this concept, writing of the “engineering of consent.” He wrote that public relations uses its “knowledge of the situation and … the application of scientific principles” so as to “persuade and suggest,” displaying that “the engineering of consent is the very essence of the democratic process” (1947, p. 114). By 1952, he further asserted that the engineering concept was central to public relations; “public relations is the attempt, by information, persuasion and adjustment, to engineer public support for an activity, cause, movement, or institution” (1952, pp. 3–5). In laying out the approach, he stressed the importance of researching audiences, the setting and modifying of objectives, the formation of strategy and themes, and the dissemination of messages, including relevant symbols. Bernays’ increasing articulation of the engineering aspect of public relations is particularly reflective of what was happening with the field in the United States at that time. For example, the profession’s leading trade newsletter, PR News, began in 1944 and the Public Relations Society of America came into existence in 1948. By 1950, more than 4,000 US companies were engaged in public relations (Davenport, 1951). The field’s growing presence in society, however, was met with skepticism by the mainstream press (St. John, 2009, 2010). The profession needed its own public narrative that justified its continued existence. Bernays offered the engineering concept as a rationale for the field’s existence. Noted Raucher (1968): One way business occupations have tried to establish higher status has been through the creation of a rationale … Though practice preceded theory, those who wished to justify their activities reached beyond actual experience to formulate a rationale in the language then fashionable … [they] justified their existence by claiming a rare and necessary erudition. (1968, p. 115) Bernays perceived the growing field needed to show its value to society by displaying that it had a systemic framework that was particularly distinctive. In articulating the engineering of consent approach, he aimed for a more dispassionate intentionality to public relations actions: that public relations was designed to affect some level of precision when it came to achieving an equilibrium concerning the wants and needs of clients and their publics within a democracy. In the years to come, however, Bernays made limited references to the concept, for example, mentioning it only fleetingly in his voluminous 1965 autobiography. Three separate interviews, in three different decades (1956, 1984, 1990) with Bernays, in fact, reveal no substantive discussion by Bernays on the engineering of consent concept (Ewen, 1996; Olasky, 1987;

Western rationales for public relations

9

Bernays, 1971). Only sporadically have arguments been made for how this phrase may prove to be a useful descriptor for how public relations operates in the modern world (Cunningham, 2002; Cutlip, 1994; Ewen, 1996; Pollay, 1990; Steinberg, 1975). One of the last examples was offered by public relations practitioner Jackson (2001), who acknowledged that the word “engineering” has wrongly encouraged criticism of the profession as manipulative, but maintained that the term is “precise and accurate” (2001, p. 308). Public relations, Jackson said, needed to aspire to the methodological mindset of engineering consent and “employ a rigorous and scientific system … to systemize one’s methods based on research findings” (2001, p. 308). Grunig, however, deemed Bernays’ engineering approach representative of a “linear, modernist and elitist view,” one that influences too many practitioners (and theorists) to believe inaccurately that they can engineer a consent that “benefits society as well as the special interests for which they plead” (2001, p. 305). Haberman and Dolphin (1988, p. 4) said that the term made Bernays a ready target for detractors. Bernays’ engineering concept, they said meant doing things and providing information and persuasion that would move key persons and groups to accept or “consent” to programs and policies. But many found that word “engineering” something that could have come right out of the ominous doublespeak of George Orwell’s 1984 and therefore dismissed this attempt at defining public relations. (p. 4) Still, time has shown that, indeed, the engineering aspect of public relations can be an apt framework. Relationships, just like components of a road construction project or land use configuration, do not just happen; the various parts must be brought together in such a way so that they hang together. This also applies to attempts to bring some kind of cohesiveness or resonance to human relationships—what Bernays called achieving adjustments between and among publics and organizations (1947). Over time, however, it appears that both Bernays’ description of the engineering of consent concept and, not surprisingly, scholars’ critiques of it, have been too simplistic. The human condition inevitably brings forward a complex mix of values, beliefs, and emotions that push back against a dispassionate engineering of consent. Instead, rather than a simple engineering of consent, the public relations field’s ascent in the West has exhibited an engineering of human interactions as its claim to acting as a constructive force for the modern world. This work maintains that Bernays’ earlier writings in the 1920s actually point to this wider engineering framework that appears through four rationales, all of which have varying degrees of persistence today. ••

The engineering of a defined end rationale—the impetus being the movement of publics toward a specific objective.

10 Burton St. John III

•• •• ••

The engineering of conflict rationale—the impetus being the battle of ideas in the marketplace. The engineering of consensus rationale—the impetus being emphasizing commonalities in values. The engineering of activism rationale—the impetus being encouraging direction toward change or restoration.

The engineering of a defned end rationale The rationale of a defined end is perhaps the best known of the four rationales for public relations. Bernays, in his 1923 book, Crystallizing Public Opinion, maintained that publics within a democracy were often inchoate, undereducated, and subject to biases and blinders that kept them from being able to act in constructive ways. Bernays’ thinking was informed by turn-of-the-20thcentury writings (Le Bon, 1896; Trotter, 1917) that saw the crowd as limited in capacity and subject to heard impulses. Bernays asserted (1923, p. 122) that the public relations professional had the training that allowed for going beyond “his own group to look at a particular problem with the eyes of an impartial observer and to utilize his knowledge of the individual and the group mind to project his client’s point of view,” helping drive the crowd to achieve a client’s objective. By 1928, in Propaganda, he pointed out that public relations was for the “regimenting [of] the public mind” to reach a pre-conceived goal (1928a, p. 52). This way of directing the crowd was the best way that the intelligent few could “fight for productive ends and bring order out of chaos” (p. 168). Contemporaries of Bernays certainly contributed to this foundational rationale for public relations. Lasswell (1927/1938) observed that the public relations profession was inhabited by a “corps of men who do nothing but study the ways and means of changing minds or binding minds to their convictions” (p. 34). Even Ivy Lee, who had professed difficulty articulating the nature of public relations, had, by 1928, written of the defined end rationale. After devoting several chapters to describing historical attempts to direct crowds, and how observers conceptualized such efforts, he wrote that public relations “attempts to use science in the application of stimuli designed to make the public respond in a desired manner” (1928/2017, p. 350). Time has not been kind to this particular rationale for public relations. As early as 1927, Lasswell said that this directional impulse of public relations was often coercion or trickery that was justified as being a pro-social effort. This concern about public relations’ directional impulse became apparent as more observers across the decades linked public relations to propaganda. Critics came to see this particular rationale as linked to nefarious aspects of propaganda— revealing that Bernays had largely failed in his effort to claim, most notably in his 1928 book Propaganda, that both public relations and propaganda’s drive to move crowds had potentially beneficial capacities. Cutlip (1994, p. 182) noted that Bernays’ claim that public relations helped shape and guide the public was an “inept public relations decision”—the country still was disenchanted with

Western rationales for public relations

11

how propaganda had led it into WWI, and displayed a continuing suspicion of mass persuasion messages. By and large, the defined end rationale has been particularly tainted by Bernays’ early linkage of public relations to propaganda. It is true that Sproule’s (1997) extensive study of propaganda offers what appears to be a less pejorative description of propaganda: it is “an attempt by leaders, educators, and media types to modify democracy’s rank and file, who, because they are citizens, deserve a say in the change” (p. 269). With this description, Sproule actually situates a level of agency within members of the public that propaganda must account for. Others, however, question whether propaganda accounts for audiences’ autonomy and informed consent. As Miller and Dinan (2008) have pointed out, “one of the most important aspects of propaganda is that it organizes conduct even in the absence of fully informed consent. It secures compliance” (p. 180). Contemporary understandings of the defined end rationale appear to tend more toward this latter concern. For example, one description of propaganda is that it is seen as “systematically-constructed messages designed to move mass audiences toward acceptance of attitudes, predispositions and behaviors that will benefit a privileged group” (St. John, 2009, p. 13). As such, noted Ewen (1996), Bernays articulated a “hallucination of democracy” (p. 10). Bernays, said Ewen, asserted that a very elite group of “opinionmolding tacticians is constantly at work … adjusting the mental scenery from which the public mind, with its limited intellect, derives its opinions” (1996, p. 10). Not surprisingly, the defined end rationale has largely been eclipsed by other public relations theoretical frameworks such as two-way symmetrical communication, corporate social responsibility, stakeholder theory, and systems theory. But scholars and practitioners would be prudent to consider how the defined end rationale likely persists and intermingles with other public relations rationales and practices.

Engineering of confict rationale The engineering of conflict rationale asserts that public relations is a constructive force because it puts forward new ideas and approaches that fight for acceptance in the public arena. This rationale parallels the concerns of the first—that the public needs direction—but it emphasizes that the competition of ideas in the public sphere allows for achieving progress by inducing crowds to overcome their inertia and make decisions. In Crystallizing, Bernays said, “The social value of the public relations counsel lies in the fact that he brings to the public facts and ideas of social utility which would not so readily gain acceptance otherwise” (1923, p. 216). By 1928, he continued asserting this rationale, saying in a speech on propaganda and “impropaganda” that this mode of persuasion was designed to get underrepresented voices into the marketplace of ideas (Bernays, 1928b). He also wrote in a 1928 piece for New York Metropolitan Life, “In the struggle among ideas, the only trust is the one which Justice Holmes of the Supreme Court pointed out—the power of

12 Burton St. John III

thought to get itself accepted in the open competition of the market” (1928c, p. 16). Smith said that Bernays “identified the chief archetypal men and ideas of the modern age” and advanced them to the public as breakthroughs to overcome crowd stasis, promising them a “harmonious forward march” (p. 255). This, said Smith, was evident in Bernays’ claims that public relations helped the public through surfacing enhancements to American life through products. “All wants could be met, all criticisms answered,” said Smith, “if consumer needs were satisfied” (p. 255). While this consumerist aspect of public relations no doubt still persists, scholars have pointed out that this conflict rationale appears notably around the contestation of issues within the public sphere. Cutlip, in a 1980 lecture, said that public relations’ key role was to contribute to the “democratic spirit and process” by “plead[ing] the organization’s cause in the forum of public debate” (1980, p. 16). More recently, Heath has been one of the more active proponents of understanding the value of a persisting conflict rationale within public relations. He has examined it within the arena of rhetorical studies, situating public relations as a key player in the “messy business of interested parties setting forth and contesting propositions in an effort to gain concurrence” (2000, p. 73). He further added that this particular perspective maintains that “the ideas, values, and policies improve through the clash of propositions and identifications that carve society into camps that compete to forge consensus as an ideal and concurrence as an acceptable alternative” (2000, p. 73). Note that even though Heath uses the word “consensus” here, the larger dynamic is competition, or the battling of conflicting positions so that the best ideas prevail. The conflict rationale’s emphasis is organizing information and viewpoints in such a way so that they can ascend amidst other viewpoints. What Bernays referred to as discrediting existing authorities while creating new authorities (1923, p. 68) has also been simplified over time as the public relations person acting as “storyteller with a purpose in the free market of ideas, advocating a certain point of view in the court of public opinion” (Jackall, 2010, p 186). However, since the 1940s, this rationale has not proven to be a singularly sufficient justification for the influence of public relations. Scholars and practitioners have found problematic the simple assertion that the best ideas will carry the day because of at least two complicating factors: (1) prevailing and persistent values that shape audience receptivity and processing of messages and (2) the ability of power centers (e.g., organizations and networks of powerful individuals) to marshal disproportionate power in favor of their prerogatives. The next two rationales—consensus and activism—contextualize these elements.

Engineering of consensus rationale This rationale stresses a linkage, and even allegiance, between the values, beliefs, and aspirations of various publics and the entity using public relations. Although Bernays, in 1923’s Crystallizing, focused on the first two rationales

Western rationales for public relations

13

of defined end and conflict, by 1925 he articulated a basis for the consensus rationale. That year, in a speech on selling good government, he pointed out the importance of analyzing the “very small number of fundamental desires and emotions and instincts” that drove various audiences (1925, p. 3). By 1928’s Propaganda, in a chapter on how business used public relations effectively, Bernays laid out that corporations needed to take a partnership approach with the public. Public relations practitioners needed to do more than sell a new idea, product, or service, they also needed to address any emotional prejudices that could block the building of common purpose between stakeholders and organizations. Bernays referred to this as business keeping “its finger continuously on the public pulse” (1928a/2005, p. 107). Similarly, almost 40 years later, Ellul (1965) referred to a form of propaganda that focuses on both moving groups and appealing to individuals’ values. Calling this “integration propaganda,” he pointed out that this messaging is effective when it looks at more than behavioral patterns but, instead, appeals to what people see as prevailing truths (pp. 74–75). Public relations literature, when it explores the consensus rationale, has not used this propaganda framing offered by Bernays and Ellul. Instead, from the mid-20th century forward, it has referred to the consensus rationale within the language of organizational good citizenship—that the organization is aware of what individuals in groups want and that the organization will then exhibit a helpfulness and sense of civic duty to help individuals realize those values (Burnett, 1943; Kruckeberg & Starck, 1988; Lundborg, 1950, Moore & Canfield, 1977; Nielander & Miller, 1951; Starck & Kruckeberg, 2001). Valentini et al. (2012) pointed to public relations’ ability to reach into “tribes” and attempt to engage in dialogue with those groups so that the organization can act as a fellow community member. Similarly, Dervin and ForemanWernet (2013, p. 147) have highlighted public relations’ ability to find points of resonance between groups and organizations in a way that makes “lasting and viable intersections.” Other public relations scholarship has pointed to the consensus rationale as appearing within efforts to portray an organization as having character, soul, or a corporate persona (Ewen, 1996; Marchand, 1998; St. John, 2014a, 2014b, 2017). Burke (1999) has referred to these approaches as the organization working to be seen as a “neighbor of choice” who is a “necessary and desirable asset” (p. 24). As with the other rationales, this one too came under criticism. Lasswell, by 1927, had asserted that such appeals to values served to build divisions and obscure inconvenient truths. The following year, in Propaganda, Bernays countered that the consensus rationale was a logical complement to the conflict rationale. That is, the American public shared common values like independence and a love for liberty that would allow them to avoid any potential manipulations by those selling them a new idea or product. Americans knew how to exert their independence in the marketplace of ideas, and they were not going to succumb to any “committees of wise men” who would manipulate them into what kinds of clothes Americans choose or the foods they eat

14 Burton St. John III

(Bernays, 1928a, p. 11). Still, in today’s interconnected, transnational marketplace, it is problematic to assert that global companies have the knowledge of particular tribes, communities, or regions to truly act as fellow citizens who are mindful of the values within a particular locale (Starck & Kruckeberg, 2001). The rise of social media may not overcome this factor; individuals can readily wall off corporate intrusions into their circle of news and daily happenings by carefully curating their accounts. Furthermore, as Waddock (2007) said, a corporation’s assertions of human-like benevolence may serve to blur how the organization’s drive for profits may be at the cost of the wider society (e.g., low employee wages subsidized by food stamps). Instead, observers point out that the consensus rationale can serve to obscure such private interest imperatives by emphasizing how the values of power centers link to prevailing societal values. Heath (2001, p. 88) noted that this is a type of public relations that appears to “help people realize their ‘true nature’”—appealing to individuals’ self-interest and then showing how that self-interest can be in concurrence with others within a democracy. Corporations have shown that they can be particularly adept at making such associations in times when their interests appear threatened; they attempt to display that what may undermine the aims of business will also put in peril the future well-being of Americans. Moreover, with such an appeal, organizations customarily do not settle for informing key audiences, but also can appeal to their audiences to translate shared beliefs and values into action.

Engineering of activism rationale At the beginning of chapter two of Crystallizing, Bernays asserted that social movements use public relations due to increasing societal demand for more transparency from both business and non-profit entities and because the public sphere was becoming more suffused with the “modern methods of ‘selling’” (1923, p. 35). Four years later, in An Outline of Careers, Bernays claimed that the public relations person worked to unveil what was the status quo and then to provide information that encourages the public to question established viewpoints. He said that an effective social movement leader was actually a “great unconscious propagandist for his cause” (1927, p. 286). By 1929, in a piece for the Forum, he articulated that those advancing new ideas used public relations to promote the well-being of society and that those seeking private gain may also work for broader beneficial social changes. Bernays’ claims, said Smith (1994), displayed an “an efficient method of progressivism … [he] had rearranged the old reformer’s vision of an ignorant educable mind” into publics that were “made falsely confident by their numbers and a little education” (p. 251). By no means did Bernays originate the idea that an organization’s systematic efforts could be channeled toward encouraging individuals to grapple with societal problems. Scholars (Anderson, 2017; Lamme & Russell, 2010; Lamme 2014; Martinelli, 2014) point out that significant campaigns were held by

Western rationales for public relations

15

non-profit interests throughout the 19th century and early 20th century concerning temperance, birth control, evangelism, social hygiene (i.e., preventing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases), and women’s suffrage. Moore (2014) in his comprehensive review of public relations across times and societies, said this activist rationale was often propelled toward “harmony, or virtue, or perfection, emancipation, liberty or self-knowledge” (p. 131). The tone, he said, centered on preparing one “to operate with greater integrity, education or psychological autonomy” (p. 131). But, contrary to Bernays’ early 20th-century assertions about public relations, activism through public relations was not only about reform, it was also activism in service of preserving (or returning to) the status quo. For example, by the mid-20th century, organizations and trade associations often took the position that the corporation was an effective and appropriate voice for advocacy in the United States—especially in relation to power centers’ views about the proper understanding of the interrelations between the benefits of the free enterprise system, the appropriate place of the state, and the correct articulation of Americans’ values and aspirations (Cutlip, 1994; Ewen, 1996; FonesWolf, 1995; St. John, 2017; Tedlow, 1979). Bernays tended to obscure that public relations activism was often reactionary—that power centers pursued public relations as a peculiar reformist call for restoring institutions the links between the corporation’s desire and interests and the wants and needs of the individual. The environment in the mid-20th-century United States was ripe for public relations as a reform of restoration as proposed by corporations. The post-WWII era featured the rise of communism and socialism internationally, the ascent of unions and an active federal government in the United States, and increasing post-war prosperity for many Americans. These factors led to manufacturing organizations, fossil fuel companies, and business trade organizations embarking on public relations campaigns that asserted individuals and businesses were the optimal nexus for pursuing a destiny of fulfillment possible only through capitalism. For example, in the mid-1950s, corporations engaged in calls to resist socialism as a force that could undermine American progress. Said Standard Oil in their organizational newsletter: The plain fact is that the American system of private ownership pays off in both freedom and prosperity, and socialism, as a way of life, never has. Our system, using the productive virtues of opportunity and competition, has given all its people more of the good things of life—including freedom— than socialism has ever dared to promise, let alone produce. (1952, p. 24) Variations of this restorative rhetoric for capitalism exist today—one scholar has gone so far as to claim that capitalism not only allowed for individuals to progress but has been especially beneficial for the world’s poor, with those in poverty “in capitalist countries [living] like kings” (Horwitz, 2016, para. 13). This is a continuation of an activist message that asserts individuals who have

16 Burton St. John III

been living within capitalism should, during tougher times, hold fast to private institutions within the existing order. Smith (1994) said that this form of public relations as activism clearly derived from Bernays’ early 20th-century observations. Bernays, said Smith, saw that the social purpose of public relations was to locate the common interests among them in order to forge a collective culture that would better be able to confront the necessities of confusing, modern circumstances … It was the profound sense of modernity’s essential chaos that compelled Bernays to adopt a doctrine of manipulation and fabricated order. (p. 253, emphasis added) In sum, the activism rationale for public relations appears to be varied and sporadic, veering from progressive to restorative, depending on what progressive reform impulses or status quo pressures are operating within a society and the wider international order.

The continuing relevance of the rationales and PR’s humanistic turn Raucher (1968) observed that the rationales for public relations offered by Bernays, and his 1920s contemporaries like Ivy Lee, were too influenced by social science views of the time that the public within a democracy was docile and vulnerable to manipulation. In fact, Bernays, by the 1940s, expanded on his view that public relations’ engineering approach addressed humanistic concerns. That is, he said, it benefited democracy through its ability to inform and energize a public that did not have the capacity to get past its own biases and limited understandings of others to give full life to the American project. “The average American adult has only six years of schooling behind him,” said Bernays, therefore, leaders needed to use the engineering of consent to move the public through “pressing crises and decisions” so as to encourage consensus toward actions that reflect “socially constructive goals and values” (1947, p. 114). Smith (1994) similarly pointed out that Bernays’ rationales for public relations were a product of the post-WWI apprehensions. Smith said that Bernays valorized public relations as a mechanism for overcoming “reticence over change, a sense of impotence in the face of social chaos, the threat of mechanization” while it also worked for “the survival of morality amidst abundance, and especially the loss of individual identity in an age of the ‘masses’” (p. 257). In this way, said Smith, Bernays’ rationales for public relations “presumed the merit of orchestrating ideas, symbols and people in order to impose order upon a seemingly chaotic society” (p. 258). Consequently, the four rationales appear to fall within more of a functionalist approach to public relations, what Trujillo and Toth (1987) called an orientation focused on how to “maintain social order” in effective and efficient ways (p. 202). However, while all four rationales may have the goal of social order,

Western rationales for public relations

17

they may not clearly display such an orientation. For example, the consensus rationale prioritizes concern about audience values, beliefs, and aspirations, and then attempts to display how such humanist aspects link to organizational worldviews. In doing so, the consensus rationale embraces less of an organization-centered functionalist approach and more of an audience-centered interpretive approach. The consensus rationale concentrates more on the rhetorical and cultural touchstones of key audiences, and their sense-making practices, rather than, for example, keying on tactics that call for publics to choose the best idea, product, or service (conflict rationale) or push for some particular reform or restoration (activism rationale). The way the four rationales work in various combinations, however, is not necessarily the most striking aspect. The mere existence of the four rationales for public relations points to a large question: do they have a rightful and beneficial place in contemporary democracy? As critics (Bivins, 2013; Ewen, 1996, Olasky, 1987) have pointed out, Bernays claimed in his 1920s writings that the public relations person was the individual best suited to judge the socially beneficial rationale for public relations, both at the micro level and then at a broader societal level, an elitist claim that clearly is in conflict with deliberative and dialogic conceptions of democracy. Messina (2007), reflecting on this patriarchal strain within the field, said that public relations, whatever combination of rationales it might embrace, is compromised when it asserts that it can act in a way that benefits the public interest. He said that attempts to situate a public relations client’s narrow self-interest into the realm of the public good is problematic; public goods, he said, need to be asserted in the interplay between citizens and officials (Messina, 2007). Spicer (1997, p. 295) added that public relations people operate within a “strong alliance to the system in which they work—its cultures, its rules, its historical approaches, its policy.” Additionally, one cannot overlook that these rationales are focused on managing relations, something that Stoker (2014) said may impinge on other parties’ freedom “to define and manage their activities” (p. 353). Relatedly, public relations scholars from around the world question the Western-style assertions that public relations can, in essence, operate, particularly through profit-seeking enterprises, to engineer beneficial outcomes for a society. International scholarship has found that, for example, various non-profit/non-market-oriented entities can use public relations to 1) ease suffering and ultimately foster more just conditions, especially within humanitarian frameworks (Lugo-Ocando & Hernandez-Toro, 2016), 2) develop narratives for the internal and external promotion of nation-states (Dolea, 2016), and 3) organize publics and nations into collectivities (L’Etang, 1996). These international scholars point to a role for public relations that goes beyond the functionalist engineering perspective toward a more dialogic and constructivist understanding of public relations. Accordingly, Australia’s Macnamara (2016) has articulated that a less-western and capitalist oriented public relations would focus on integrating public relations better within society by emphasizing that public relations (1) serve more than an organizational dominant coalition, (2)

18 Burton St. John III

be reflexive about power disparities and address them through dialogue and negotiation, and (3) pursue systematic and active listening. Macnamara’s recommendations appear to fit well with a more humanistic, soft-power conception of public relations that is not necessarily in alignment with the Bernaysian/ Western view of public relations. In fact, as Servaes (2012) notes in an overview of how China and the United States use public relations and soft power, China has been increasingly showing to the West its human side through avenues that are not solely corporatist. The Beijing Olympics, the 2010 Shanghai Expo, and the emergence of high-quality movies for international consumption are all examples, he said, of the country’s increasing emergence of cultural capital that can garner China increasing appreciation around the world. This broader international view of the humanistic side of public relations points to a valid criticism regarding the engineering rationales for public relations—the West’s bent toward concentrating on power. Heath (2000, p. 79) maintained that the concept of the engineering of consent “stresses the pragmatics of winning.” Instead, he says, (2000) the “dominant narrative to guide this practice should be the good organization (good spokesperson) communicating effectively in the interest of building narratives that foster community through mutually beneficial relationships” (p. 81). Still, Heath’s aspirational observation appears to fall short of addressing the way that power both informs and constrains relationships among, and between, individuals and organizations. For example, what is characteristic of “good” in the neoliberal, Western individualistic context? In international contexts? To that matter, how is “community” defined in an era where tribes and cultures may exhibit increasing polarization? Who are the parties that ascertain what is mutually beneficial? These contextual factors that surround (and help propel) the four rationales are important to consider because, as James (2009) put it, “the intentional construction of meaning … is at the heart of public relations” (p. 118). Therefore, it is useful to see the rationales as ways to channel power centers’ intents, but scholars and practitioners should also inquire about the contextual factors (e.g., dominant societal values, economic imperatives, and competing transnational goals) that inform how the rationales are used both domestically and internationally. Additionally, scholars and practitioners need to consider how the Americanist roots of the public relations profession tend to make it difficult to see how power operates through the rationales for public relations. That is, the Western culture imperative toward equality can actually work to inform a false narrative that overstates the benefits of individualism in service of obscuring the continual presence of power centers. De Tocqueville noted, during his early 20th-century visit to the United States, the American passion for equality and individualism. “These people owe nothing to anyone, and, in a sense, they expect nothing from anyone,” he said, observing that Americans imagine “their fate lies entirely in their own hands” (1835/2004, pp. 586–587). He also noted, however, “when citizens are all almost equal, it becomes difficult for them to defend their independence against the aggressions of power” (1835/2004, p. 60). In this observation, De Tocqueville asserted that such

Western rationales for public relations

19

equality made for a dispersion of resources to the point that individuals did not put themselves within a collaborative network that could resist threats to their liberties. His comments, however, also point more broadly to an overvalorizing of individualism in the West that can leave citizens adrift in the face of both overt and covert power. Clearly, public relations, when used in the service of power centers, can avail itself of the four rationales to attempt to foster more concentration of power and influence or temper that approach with a broader realization that it may be able to improve the human condition while also benefiting its clients. Signs are that public relations will continue to encounter dynamics around the world that will challenge it to take the more balanced approach of the latter. Consider BlackRock CEO Laurence Fink’s letter to 1,000 global CEOs in early 2018: Since the financial crisis [of 2008–2009], those with capital have reaped enormous benefits. At the same time, many individuals across the world are facing a combination of low rates, low wage growth, and inadequate retirement systems. Many don’t have the financial capacity, the resources, or the tools to save effectively … For millions, the prospect of a secure retirement is slipping further and further away—especially among workers with less education, whose job security is increasingly tenuous. I believe these trends are a major source of the anxiety and polarization that we see across the world today. (Fink, 2017, para. 2) Fink’s letter next points out that private corporations are witnessing an increasing demand from the societies in which they are located. He rightfully observes that, worldwide, many governments struggle to prepare for the future, failing to grapple adequately with issues ranging from aging infrastructure and power grids to automation and worker retraining to dysfunctional social safety nets and health care systems. “Society is demanding that companies, both public and private, serve a social purpose,” he said. “Companies must benefit all of their stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, customers, and the communities in which they operate” (Fink, 2017, para. 3) Kruckeberg and Starck (1988) said that public relations “is a humane and altruistic function, but one based on a sound and pragmatic philosophy. It is a role that … should result in a more humane and mutually supportive society” (p. 117). Krukeberg and Starck dispute any charges of naiveté in such an assertion, but rather offer that they are being aspirational—asserting that the power of public relations can work to improve the human condition. Clearly, as Fink pointed out, there is a wide range of problems that were formerly addressed through the state but that, in an era of increasing neoliberalism, are now seen as within the purview of private enterprise. These private power centers, with an increasing profile in the public arena, will have no choice but to consider how to come to grips with the demand for accountability

20 Burton St. John III

from the public that comes with private organizations assuming a wider public footprint. In a sense, the private company will need to assume a broader humanistic framework for conceptualizing, and conveying to multiple audiences, how the organization’s private ends will also meet public needs. The four rationales—the engineering of a defined end, conflict, consensus, and activism—point to ways that scholars and practitioners can better understand and articulate how a humanistic public relations will likely inform the increasing public presence of the private organization in an era where the reach of the state continues in decline. There is, of course, always a danger that a humanistic public relations framework will be more about appearance, image, and posture. Jackall (2010), calling this “public relations mindedness” (p. 208), remarked that “Paradoxically, the more artifice used in constructing social reality, the more does that reality come for many to seem commonplace, natural, and taken for granted” (p. 182). This is apparent in Bernays’ observations from more than 70 years ago: Words, sounds, and pictures accomplish little unless they are the tools of a soundly thought-out plan and carefully organized methods. If the plans are well-formulated and the proper use is made of them, the ideas conveyed by the words will become part and parcel of the people themselves. (1947, p. 120, emphasis added) The danger that audiences could accept artifice as reality looms if public relations does not moderate its four rationales by accounting diligently for the needs, wants, and aspirations of a society’s multiple publics. If public relations fully embraces such concerns, its power to be beneficial is considerable; however, if public relations privileges the narrow desires of its clients exclusively, a damaging impoverishment of the public sphere—including the diminution of community, dialogue, and deliberation—is a very real danger.

References Anderson, W. B. (2017). Social movements and public relations in the early 20th century: How one group used public relations to curtail venereal disease rates. Journal of Public Relations Research, 29(1), 3–15. Batchelor, B. (1938). Profitable Public Relations. New York: Harper & Brothers. Bernays, E. (1923). Crystallizing Public Opinion. New York: Boni & Liveright. Bernays, E. (1928a). Functions of a public relations counsel. In Manuscript for New York Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. Edward L. Bernays Papers, Container 507, Manuscript Division. Washington, DC: Library of Congress. Bernays, E. (1928b/2005). Propaganda. Brooklyn, NY: IG Publishing. Bernays, E. (1928c, June 9). Propaganda and impropaganda. Rochester, NY. Unpublished manuscript of speech presented at the 25th convention of the Advertising Affiliation. Edward L. Bernays Papers, Box I:422, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Bernays, E. (1929, March). Are we victims of propaganda? The Forum, pp. 142–49.

Western rationales for public relations

21

Bernays, E. (1947). The engineering of consent. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 250(1), 113–120. Bernays, E. (1952). The theory and practice of public relations: A resume. In E. Bernays (Ed.), The Engineering of Consent: A Scientific Approach to Public Relations (pp. 3–25). Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. Bernays, E. (1971/1956). What do the social sciences have to offer public relations? Public Relations Quarterly, 16(2), 10-29. Bivins, T. (2013). A golden opportunity? Edward Bernays and the dilemma of ethics. American Journalism, 30(4), 496–519. Burke, E. (1999). Corporate Community Relations: The Principle of the Neighbor of Choice. Westport, CT: Praeger. Burnett, V. (1943). You and Your Public: A Guidebook to the New Career: Public Relations. New York: Harper & Brothers. Cunningham, S. (2002). The Idea of Propaganda: A Reconstruction. Westport, CT: Praeger. Cutlip, S. (1980). Foundation lecture: Public relations in American society. Public Relations Review, 11, 29–37. Cutlip, S. (1994). Public Relations: The Unseen Power. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Davenport, R. (1951). U.S.A.: The Permanent Revolution. New York: Prentice-Hall. De Tocqueville, A. (1835/2004). Democracy in America. (A. Goldhammer, Trans.) New York: The Library of America. Dervin, B., & Foreman-Wernet, L. (2013). Sense-making methodology as an approach to understanding and designing for campaign audiences: A turn to communicating communicatively. In R. Rice, & C. Atkin, (Eds.) Public Communication Campaigns (4th ed., pp. 147–162). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Dolea, A. (2016). The need for critical thinking in country promotion: Public diplomacy, nation branding and public relations. In J. L'Etang, McKie, D., Snow, N. & Xifra, J. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Critical Public Relations (pp. 274–288). New York: Routledge. Ellul, J. (1965). Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes. New York: Random House. Ewen, S. (1996). PR! A Social History of Spin. New York: Basic Books. Fink, L. (2017). Larry Fink’s annual letter to CEOs: A sense of purpose. BlackRock. Retrieved from https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/en-us/investor-relations/larry -fink-ceo-letter Fones-Wolf, E. (1994). Selling Free Enterprise: The Business Assault on Labor and Liberalism, 1945–60. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Grunig, J. (2001). Bernays’ the engineering of consent. Journalism Studies, 2(2), 302–305. Haberman, D., & Dolphin, H. (1988). Public Relations: The Necessary Art. Ames, IA: Iowa State Press. Heath, R. (2000). A rhetorical perspective on the values of public relations: Crossroads and pathways toward concurrence. Journal of Public Relations Research, 12(1), 69–91. Horwitz, S. (2016, June 9). Capitalism is good for the poor: Markets beat back poverty. Foundation for Economic Education. Retrieved from https://fee.org/articles/capitalism -is-good-for-the-poor/ Jackall, R. (2010). Moral Mazes: The World of Corporate Managers. Oxford University Press. Jackson, P. (2001). Bernays’ the engineering of consent. Journalism Studies, 2(2), 307–310. James, M. (2009). Getting to the heart of public relations: The concept of strategic intent. Asia Pacific Public Relations Journal, 10, 109–122. Kruckeberg, D., & Starck, K. (1988). Public Relations and Community. New York: Praeger. Lamme, M. (2014). Public Relations and Religion in American History: Evangelism, Temperance, and Business. New York: Routledge.

22 Burton St. John III Lamme, M. O., & Russell, K. M. (2010). Removing the spin: Toward a new theory of public relations history. Journalism & Communication Monographs, 11, 281–362. Lasswell, H. (1927/1938). Propaganda Technique in the World War. New York: Peter Smith. Le Bon, G. (1896). The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind. New York: Macmillan Co. Lee, I. (1928/2017). Mr. Lee’s Publicity Book: A Citizen’s Guide to Public Relations. (B. St. John, Ed.) New York: PRMuseum Press. L'Etang, J. (1996). Public relations as diplomacy. In J. L’Etang & M. Pieczka (Eds.), Public Relations: Critical Debates and Contemporary Practice (pp. 373–388). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Lippman, W. (1922). Public Opinion. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co. Lugo-Ocando, J., & Hernandez-Toro, M. (2016). Public relations and humanitarian communication: From persuasion to the creation of a community of equals. In J. L’Etang, McKie, D., Snow, N. & Xifra, J. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Critical Public Relations (pp. 226–234). New York: Routledge Lundborg, L. (1950). Public Relations in the Local Community. New York: Harper and Brothers. Macnamara, J. (2016). Socially integrating PR and operationalizing an alternative approach. In J. L’Etang, McKie, D., Snow, N. & Xifra, J. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Critical Public Relations (pp. 335–348). New York: Routledge Marchand, R. (1998). Creating the Corporate Soul: The Rise of Public Relations and Corporate Imagery. Berkeley: University of California Press. Martinelli, D. (2014). The intersection of public relations and activism: A mulitnational look at suffrage movements. In B. St. John, M. Lamme, & J. L’Etang (Eds.), Pathways to Public Relations: Histories of Practice and Profession (pp. 206–223). New York: Routledge. Messina, A. (2007). Public relations, the public interest and Persuasion: An ethical approach. Journal of Communication Management, 11(1), 29–52. Miller, D., & Dinan, W. (2008). A Century of Spin: How Public Relations Became the Cutting Edge of Corporate Power. Ann Arbor, MI: Pluto Press. Moore, H., & Canfield, B. (1977). Public Relations: Principles, Cases and Problems. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin. Moore, S. (2014). Public Relations and the History of Ideas. New York: Routledge. Nielander, W. A., & Miller, R. W. (1951). Public Relations. New York: The Ronald Press Company. Olasky, M. (1987). Corporate Public Relations: A New Historical Perspective. Hilldale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Pollay, R. (1990). Propaganda, puffing and the public interest. Public Relations Review, 16, 39–54. Raucher, A. (1968). Public Relations and Business: 1900–1929. Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press. Servaes, J. (2012). Soft power and public diplomacy: The new frontier for public relations and international communication between US and China. Public Relations Review 38(5), 643–651. Smith, S. (1994). Personalities in the crowd: The idea of the “masses” in American popular culture. Prospects, 19, 225–287. Spicer, C. (1997). Organizational Public Relations: A Political Perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates. Sproule, J. (1997). Propaganda and Democracy: The American Experience of Media and Mass Persuasion. New York: Cambridge University Press. Starck, K., & Kruckeberg, D. (2001). Public relations and community: A reconstructed theory revisited. In Handbook of Public Relations (pp. 51–59). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Western rationales for public relations

23

Steinberg, C. (1975). The Creation of Consent: Public Relations in Practice. New York: Hastings House. St. John, B. (2009). Claiming journalistic truth: US press guardedness toward Edward L. Bernays’ conception of the minority voice and the “corroding acid” of propaganda. Journalism Studies, 10(3), 353–367. St. John, B. (2010). Press Professionalization and Propaganda: The Rise of Journalistic DoubleMindedness. Amherst, NY: Cambria Press. St. John, B. (2014a). Conveying the sense-making corporate persona: The Mobil oil “Observations” columns, 1975–1980. Public Relations Review, 40(4), 692–699. St. John, B. (2014b). The “creative confrontation” of Herbert Schmertz: Public relations sense making and the corporate persona. Public Relations Review, 40, 772–779. St. John, B. (2017). Public Relations and the Corporate Persona: The Rise of the Affinitive Organization. New York: Routledge. St. John, B., & Lamme, M. (2011). The evolution of an idea: Charting the early public relations ideology of Edward L. Bernays. Journal of Communication Management, 15(3), 223–235. Stoker, K. (2014). Paradox in public relations: Why managing relating makes more sense than managing relationships. Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(4), 344–358. Tedlow, R. (1979). Keeping the Corporate Image: Public Relations and Business, 1900–1950. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Trotter, W. (1917). Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War. New York: MacMillan Co. Trujillo, N., & Toth, E. L. (1987). Organizational perspectives for public relations research and practice. Management Communication Quarterly, 1(2), 199–281. Valentini, C., Kruckeberg, D., & Starck, K. (2012). Public relations and community: A persistent covenant. Public Relations Review, 38(5), 873–879. Waddock, S. (2007). Corporate citizenship: The dark-side of success. In S. May, G. Cheney, & J. Roper, The Debate over Corporate Social Responsibility (pp. 74–86). New York: Oxford University Press. Who wants socialism? (1952, June). The Standard Oiler, p. 24.

3

Ancient Chinese roots Mingsheng Li

Introduction In January 1998, the first international conference of Nobel Prize winners was held in Paris. Seventy-five participants, including 52 scientists, deliberated on the theme of “Facing the 21st Century.” One of the conclusions from the conference was that “if mankind is to survive it must go back 25 centuries in time to tap the wisdom of Confucius (551–479 BCE)” (Marnham, 1998, p. 1). Confucianism was believed to be the solution to the betterment of human development and the eradication of human ills. Earlier, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the UN General Assembly in 1948 had taken many important concepts and ideas from the fundamentals of Confucianism (Gier, 2008). Confucianism is described as tradition, a philosophy, the way of heaven, the way of humans, and the way of harmony (Yao, 2000). Confucianism has played an important role in China’s rapid rise in its economy and world politics (Nuri, 2016). Bains (2015, p. 158) suggested that as China gradually assumes dominance in the world, it is important for the world, and for China as well, to “understand and come to terms with the fundamental psychological DNA of Chinese culture” that has been largely shaped by Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism, with Confucianism as a dominating philosophy. Confucianism is becoming increasingly influential globally, following the establishment of 512 Confucius Institutes and 1,073 Confucius classes in 140 countries and regions by the end of 2016 (Confucius Institute Headquarters, 2017). Confucian values are open, inclusive, all-encompassing, accommodating, and universal in nature, and these values are embedded in all religions (Nuri, 2016). There has been a surge in research in Confucian ethics in public relations inside and outside China. Many global researchers and PR practitioners take great interest in ancient Confucian wisdom, ethics, values, humanism, and the underlying principles that are still relevant and can be used to guide our PR practice in everyday life. Wakefield (2010) believed that the impact of culture on public relations should not be underestimated in international public relations. To Starck and Kruckeberg (2001), it was the responsibility of PR practitioners and researchers in various communities to fill the intellectual gaps by DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340-3

Ancient Chinese roots

25

giving back to the field of international public relations their ancient philosophies on public relations. Building a genuine international community requires the cocultivation of “agreement and disagreement of many complementary and competing perspectives” (Heath, 2001, p. 7) and the understanding of the nature of relationships based on the mutual benefits of giving and taking (Wakefield, 2010). The public relations that originated in the West was introduced to China in the 1980s. It was welcomed in China with open arms (Hung-Baesecke & Chen, 2014). Xu (1994) found that many of the PR principles and theories were similar to and compatible with traditional Chinese philosophies, such as humanism, morality, social responsibility, and reputation management. Confucianism is like a gold mine where many of the ideas can be revived, refined, and redefined to add scholarly rigor to public relations practice and research. Hung-Baesecke and Chen (2014) found that ancient Chinese philosophies of PR have exerted significant influence on the knowledge, thinking, behavior, and performance of Chinese PR practitioners. These philosophies include the concepts of people as the state foundation, keeping promises, valuing reputation, emphasis on interpersonal relationships and relational harmony, understanding guanxi, being firm with principles and flexible with strategies, and highlighting proprieties. Meng (2014) asserted that Confucius was the first Chinese PR practitioner and the Analects was the first PR book in Chinese history. Meng observed that many of Confucius’s PR philosophies are still relevant and useful today. Confucianism emphasizes self-cultivation, knowledge acquisition from learning and practice, pragmaticism, ritualism, dramaturgy, the doctrine of the mean (zhong-yong), harmonious relationships (he), modesty, humility, trust, seeking truth from fact, the Confucian golden rule (zhong-shu), and the principle of constancy and flexibility (jing-quan). Liu (1999) argued that the integration of modern PR practices with Confucian PR principles is the key to the success of PR practice in China. Hao (1999) agreed that the bases for integration could be found in the emphasis on human relations, attitudes toward nature, trustworthiness, politeness, social and cultural orientation, and global ethics by both Confucianists and modern PR practitioners. The integration of Confucianist ethics with the codes of ethics of Western public relations trade organizations, such as the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA), does not need to be complete and seamless for it to be highly significant, nor does it argue for the primacy of Western or Confucianist ethics. In this chapter, I will discuss three cardinal Confucian philosophies that are relevant and influential to modern PR practice. Firstly, ren (benevolence, humaneness) is the essence of the best of humanity being manifest in human compassion, human relatedness, and proper relationships. The meaning of ren is explained and the six dimensions of its associated themes are discussed: de (virtuosity), ren as love, the Confucian golden rule, cultivation of special relationships, ren as ethical wisdom, and cheng (trustworthiness). Secondly, li (ritual propriety) is a system of ritual norms, etiquette, behavioral rules, human relationships, and cultural grammar that determines how a person should properly

26 Mingsheng Li

act in everyday life.1 One’s appropriate li-practice depends on the balancing and the fitting of the application of rules and norms and the demands of situational factors. Upholding yi (righteousness) as an ethical skill will enable an individual to make accurate judgments of situational factors and eventually make appropriate decisions. Li-practice involves one’s dramaturgical performance, emotion management, and verbal and nonverbal communication competence in dealing with human relations. Lastly, he (harmony) is a very important Confucian concept that shapes people’s worldviews and communication patterns in human relationships. Zhong-yong (the doctrine of the mean) is Confucius’s greatest contribution to world philosophy.2 The connection between Confucianist wisdom and PR and how Confucian wisdom can be applied in modern PR practice will be expanded upon later in the chapter.

The concept of ren (humaneness) Confucius’s philosophy can be summed up in one word, ren (仁). It is considered to be “the highest of all virtues” (Chang, 2013, p. 3), as a way of being in the world, and as the basis for all human relationships. The ren principle is concerned not only with the innate nature of man but also with the practical applications in daily practice (Chai, 1959). Confucius did not give any clear definition of ren. He applied the ren principle as a guide to his daily moral conduct to practical contexts. The ideograph ren suggests human relatedness, connectedness, and correct procedures and appropriate ways to deal with human relationships (Chai, 1959). A precise definition has not yet been found and no translators have reached an agreement on a fully satisfying translation (Ni, 2014). Ren is identified with a combination of moral attributes: humanity, humaneness, human excellence, human-heartedness, emotion, compassion, benevolence, authoritativeness, goodness, altruism, sympathy, mutuality, deference, tolerance, promise-keeping, generosity, uprightness, courage, and interpersonal excellence (Chai, 1959; Lai, 2006; Littlejohn, 2011; Ni, 2014). Zhu Xi (1130–1200), the preeminent neo-Confucian master of the Southern Song (1126–1271), referred to ren as “the virtue of the soul,” “the reason of love,” “the principle of love,” and “the centre of Heaven and Earth” (cited in Chai, 1959, p. 31). Chang (2013) pointed out that among all the virtues, ren takes priority; “it is the starting point for the formation of character, and at the same time the highest standard for human behavior” (p. 14). Tu (1985) referred to Confucian ren as a manifestation of humanity in its “highest state of perfection” (p. 87). A person embodying the ren virtues is called a junzi (gentleman). The virtue “requires a man to be 100% of a man, a complete man, a true man, a real man” (Chang, 2013, p. 3). A junzi is a remarkable person “whose comportment, words and actions suggest that in this specific individual the human being is particularly striking” (Littlejohn, 2011, p. 29). As “a master of communication,” he transmits his intended meanings through “the performative power of language” and “the orchestration and attuning of his composite dispositions”

Ancient Chinese roots

27

(Hall & Ames, 1987, p. 261). Confucius noted that “One who does not understand language has no way of understanding others” (Analects 20:3). A ren-person never gives up the effort to practice ren: “never for a moment does a junzi part from ren, he clings to it through trials, he clings to it through tribulations” (Analects 4:5). Ren is “an all-encompassing ethical attainment” (Li, 2007, p. 314) exemplified by the junzi who is amiable in daily life, respectful in handling affairs, and sincere and trustworthy in dealing with others (Analects 13:19). Ren is multi-faceted and so it should be understood from different perspectives. In general, it can be studied from the following six dimensions, each being inclusive of and complementary to the other: ren and de, ren as love, zhong-shu, the cultivation of relationships, ren as ethical wisdom, and cheng. Ren and de

De (te 德) is an important ethical concept in Confucianism. It means virtue, virtuosity, power of virtue, influence, charisma, insight, generosity, power, a favor, prestige, reputation, role model, favorable attitudes, endorsement of Heaven, feelings, motivations, imperatives of conduct, and internalized moral quality (Hansen, 1996; Nivison, 1996, 2003). Hansen (1996, p. 237) defines de as “what you have in yourself, not depending on what is outside.” De becomes “a moral-making property of a person” that gives the person “psychic power or influence over others, and sometimes even over one’s nonhuman surroundings” (Nivison, 1996, p. 17). In the Daodejing (Tao Te Ching道德经), de is associated with dao, “the principles by which everything exists and every being lives” (Nivison, 1996, p. 58). Dao provides a theoretical space, and de is operationalized to fill the space (Hansen, 1996). De serves as dao’s specific content. In Hansen’s analysis, de is parasitic to dao and dao is indeterminate without de (p. 175). Hansen (1996) compared dao with a computer program, an instruction set, and de the output, the performance, and a translation of dao into a physical form, the realization of the abstract dao. A ren-person must possess the moral virtue of de. A person without de is a petty person, an un-ren-person. A person with de will gain prestige and recognition: “He who rules with de is like the polestar, which rests in its place while all the other stars bow to it” (Analects 2:1). De embodied in a ren-person can be a powerful force to motivate others, to win their trust, respect, admiration, and to influence them without force. Confucius said, “The de of the gentleman is wind; the de of the ordinary man is grass. Let the wind pass over the grass and it is bound to bend” (Analects 12:19). Although an individual has a natural endowment to obtain de, de is nurtured through self-cultivation, self-discipline, “subjective appropriation of the norms of behavior willed by heaven” (Hansen, 1996, p. 234). Ren as love

Ren is often translated into “benevolent love.” Ren means love of all humanity (Analects 12:22). To Confucius, “filial piety and brotherly love are the root of

28 Mingsheng Li

ren” (Analects 1:2). Mencius made a similar statement, “Loving one’s parents is ren” (Mencius 7A:15). Confucius’s ethical philosophy aims to create a perfect world, a world of harmony based on love. The ren love can be extended beyond the family to all humanity. In this sense, Confucian love is universal (Huang, 2005). However, Confucian love is love with distinction. There are different degrees of love for different kinds of people in different situations. One loves one’s parents and children more than those of other people. Confucius claimed that “only a person of ren knows how to love people and hate people” (Analects 4:14). In another word, a ren-person is the one who knows how to love and how to hate. Therefore, love with distinctions refers to love not based on “whom or what we should love or love more and whom or what we should not love or love less; it is rather to decide how to love everyone and everything in ways most appropriate to the person or thing” (Huang, 2005, p. 39). Zhong-shu, the Confucian golden rule

In the Analects (12:2), Confucius presents the golden rule: “do not do to others what you do not wish to be done to yourself.” The rule contains two important words: zhong (忠) and shu (恕). Zhong means loyalty, faithfulness ,considerateness, commitment (being one’s best) (Lai, 2008, p. 22). It is a virtue needed for the commitment to one’s social, cultural, and historical community with which one identifies. It stems from one’s heart/mind within the community, as shown by the two parts of the word: center (中) and heart (心) (Wang, 1999). It focuses on the relationship between self and the community. Shu refers to sympathy, reciprocity, and mutuality. Shu deals with a specific interpersonal loving and caring relationship between self and others in the community in everyday life. Such a reciprocal relationship is demonstrated in this Confucius’s statement: The true junzi, wishing himself to be established, sees that others are established, and, wishing himself to be successful, sees that others are successful. To be able to take one’s own feelings as a guide may be called the art of ren. (Analects 6:30) The zhong-shu as a golden rule suggests that helping others to be successful will lead to one’s success. The relationship between self and other is interdependent and reciprocal. Zhong and shu are inseparable; they reinforce and influence each other in social interactions. The notion of zhong-shu refers to “true and unselfish love or singleness of mind” and human-heartedness (Chai, 1959, p. 32) and “a unified theme” of the core of Confucianism (Lai, 2006, p. 31). Confucius stressed that zhong itself does not make ren (Analects 5:19); a ren-person should develop shu as communication competence to deal with interpersonal love and care in the Confucian version of the golden rule (Wang, 1999). In this sense, shu should be viewed as a method to help people to become sensitive to the

Ancient Chinese roots

29

needs, wants, interests, feelings, emotions, and attitudes of others, and to perform the right action in a particular context (Ni, 2014). Ren and the cultivation of special relationships

Filiality, or filial piety (xiao孝), is the foundational value of Confucius’s social, ethical, and political thought (Littlejohn, 2011). Ren is cultivated with the development of the five relationships: ruler–subject, father–son, husband–wife, brother–brother, friend–friend. These dyadic relationships form the moral fabric of society and a particular pattern of social stability and hierarchy that entails role expectations from the rigidly prescribed rules of conduct (Tu, 1998). In such a hierarchical and patriarchal society, respect for age and standing in the family, and in any social environment, is embedded in verbal and nonverbal communication. Filiality, considered as the root of ren from which all other virtues arise (Lai, 2006) and as a “defining trait of all humanity,” involves caring love, “human attachment,” and “correlative emotions and special obligations” in social interactions with others (Lai, 2008, p. 23). Caring love, affection, and loyalty toward family members can be extended to “the mode of service and loyalty towards others outside the family context” (Lai, 2006, p. 26). To Confucius (Analects 2:21), politics and government mean applying values cultivated at family relations to society, as a country is no more than an enlarged family. Training in the family equips individuals with interpersonal communication skills, cognitive and social competence, and emotional intelligence that enable them to understand obligations and responsibility, to learn the significance and difficulties when engaging with others (Lai, 2006), “to be loyal, to empathise, negotiate, love, care, gain sympathy, express regret, balance competing loyalties and prioritise obligations” in their personal interactions with others in later life (Lai, 2008, p. 23). Ren as ethical wisdom

Mencius defined wisdom (zhi智) as “the feeling of approval and disapproval” (Mengzi, 6A6). Wisdom refers to the innate knowledge by which to make sense of right and wrong, good and evil, right or fair, in the behaviors exhibited by others. It is through practical wisdom that one acquires ethical-social skills and virtues to cultivate and discipline oneself, to scrutinize and reflect on one’s actions and behavior in practice, and to distinguish between what is appropriate and what is not in specific circumstances (Hall & Ames, 1987). Confucius encouraged his disciples to learn widely and extensively and reflect on what is close at hand (Analects 2:11, 19:6). Developing the disposition of a ren-person requires an individual to apply practical wisdom to have the ability to learn from experience and from others, to reflect on one’s own situations, and ultimately to apply the insight to action (Lai, 2008). As Confucius stated: “The wise are not confused; the ren are not beset with cares, the valorous are not fearful” (Analects 9:29). Language is considered to be a key element of

30 Mingsheng Li

wisdom. A junzi is expected to have verbal communication skills to achieve pre-set goals: to organize community activities, to predict future developments by understanding “the conditioning features of the past and present that form the context,” and to cast the future “in such fashion and with such persuasive authority as to invite sympathy and participation” (Hall & Ames, 1987, p. 55). Confucius said, wisdom enables a junzi to “love others,” “realise others,” and “promote the straight over and crooked … [and] make the crooked straight” (Analects 12:22). Cheng (trust, faithfulness)

Cheng (诚, 誠) is the central concept and foundation of Confucianism as applied in Mean and Constancy (also translated as The Doctrine of the Mean) and The Great Learning. Like other Confucian concepts, there is not a single English word that can fully define its meaning. It can be translated as true, truly, genuine, sincerity, honesty, faithfulness, trust, trustfulness, trustworthiness, perfectly genuine, true feelings, or being genuine without self-deception. The Chinese ideograph cheng (誠) has two parts: speech (言) and success/ achievement (成), meaning one’s success is achieved in the congruence of words with actions and one’s inner feelings and outward expressions through trusting in and getting trust from others. As a foundational concept, cheng can powerfully form, shine, move, change, and transform things and people (Zhong-yong, Chapter 23). Very often, in the Chinese language, cheng and another word, xin, are used together as one concept, cheng-xin (诚信). An (2004) explained that cheng means xin; cheng is revealed through the manifestation of xin. They can be used interchangeably. Fan (2010) defined cheng-xin as promotion of moral sincerity, maintenance of the unity of words and acts, and trustworthiness in dealing with others (p. 78). The basic meaning of xin in the Analects 8:2 and 17:8 refers to trust, faithfulness, trustworthiness, keeping one’s word, and unity of speech and deed. Not keeping one’s word is regarded as “thievery,” harming other people’s welfare, and losing the trust of others. One should strategically follow li norms in appropriate situations in speech, because “if one is straightforward but without practicing appropriate li, one causes affronts” (Analects 8:2). Cheng, being trustworthy to oneself and other people, is a moral quality developed by cultivating, actualizing, and transforming the nature-endowed inner goodness of self and others to ultimately develop a union with Heaven and Earth. Therefore, cheng is identified as the Way of Heaven and the Way of Men (Zhong-yong, Chapter 22). It is a Confucian belief that everyone has the potential and capacity to be sincere (cheng). To achieve the ideal of cheng, one should consider curbing one’s excessive and improper desires (Xiao & Chen, 2009). According to Zhou Dunyi (1017–1073), a neo-Confucianist, cheng is the activating source of human activities (Chan, 1963). Cheng is pivotal to help people realize other virtues. It is described as “the conditions of trust in Confucian society” (Fan, 2010, p. 77).

Ancient Chinese roots

31

The concept of li (rule of propriety) Li (礼, 禮) is one of the key Confucian cardinal virtues. It may be translated as propriety, rituals, rites, respect for social norms, ritual tradition, manners, proper conduct, norms, cultured decorum, and rules of etiquette. It also refers to “politeness,” “social order,” “social institutions,” and “all regulations that arise from the relations between man and man” (Chai, 1959, p. 33). Fu (2003) suggested that the implications of ren could not be well understood without understanding li. Ren and li are interdependent and mutually inclusive. Ren deals with inward personal behavior; li deals with outward social behavior (Tu, 1979). Ren is seen as the content of Confucian ethical systems, and li as its outward form (Yum, 1988). The key concepts of ren are displayed, manifested, reinforced, and executed through outward li-practice. The relationship between ren and li is clearly explained by Confucius in the Analects 3:3 and 12:1: If a man is not ren, what can he do with li? (Analects 3:3) Yan Yuan asked about ren. The Master said, “Subdue oneself and return to the observance of li. If a person can for one day subdue oneself and return to the observance of li, all under Heaven will regard him as having ren. The attainment of ren comes from oneself, and not from others.” Yan Yuan asked, “May I ask about the specifics of this?” The Master said, “Look at nothing contrary to li; listen to nothing contrary to li, say nothing contrary to li; do nothing contrary to li.” (Analects 12:1) Confucius said the Analects 12:1, “to master oneself in line with li is ren.” Li (2007) used an analogy of language grammar and mastery of language: understanding li as cultural grammar and ren as the mastery of culture. Li serves as an instrument for individuals to understand, express, and cultivate ren. The cultural grammar (li) can change over time, but ren as the spirit and basis of li remains constant. Just as mastering language grammar is a determining factor for the mastery of the language, mastering li is a condition for mastering ren. Li is cultivated and practiced to facilitate an individual’s expression, mastery, and realization of ren. To attain the status of ren, one must learn and practice li with ease as a conditioning factor. A ren-person is a master of a culture and a master of li. Confucius observed that ren-persons “learn broadly of culture, discipline this learning through observing li, and moreover, in so doing, can remain on course without straying from it” (Analects 6:27). Confucius believed that “people are similar by nature, but it was their li-practice that set them apart” (Analects 17:2). He told his disciples that observing li should not be executed in a superficial way, such as giving gifts, knowing when to play the bells and drums, dressing for the occasion,

32 Mingsheng Li

and relating to officials of various ranks, but should be carried out in a way to fundamentally change one’s inner feelings (Analects 9:1, 17:11). Disciplining oneself by li on all occasions would enable him to retain ren and “spiritual transformation” (Littlejohn, 2011, p. 27). An undisciplined person becomes an un-ren. However, a mastery of li may not necessarily make a person of ren, a person who is “creative, exemplary, and influential, a person whom others look up to, admire, and take as a model” (Li, 2007, p. 322). The meaning of li shifted from ritual actions to encompass normative codes of conduct, social norms, customs, and mores that shape interpersonal communication and relationships and “regulate their lives in concert with the ordered patterns perceived in nature” (Hall & Ames, 1987, p. 86) in daily activities in all walks of life in ancient and modern Chinese society. The norms initiated, established, and transmitted in the li-practice in the human situation provide guidelines for individuals to integrate all kinds of skills, to refine their life in the community, and to appropriately engage in formal social, interpersonal, and political activities in the changing society. Chang (2013) stressed that li that was understood as normative played a critical role in shaping Chinese mentality, moral judgment, personal disposition, worldviews, orderly habits, and interpersonal communication, and so “the importance of the li can never be over-stated” (Chang, 2013, p. 17). However, Lai (2006) argued that li should be viewed as adaptive rather than normative from a developmental context. The role of li varies according to different stages of acculturation and character development. Li is primarily normative in childhood when one learns the rules of the game, but for mature individuals li becomes one’s artistic and aesthetic expressions. For example, Confucius described his path of growth in this way (Analects 2:4): He concentrated on learning the cultural grammar (li) at 15, became aware of his position and self-identity at 30, and following the desires of his heart by effectively, skilfully, and subliminally following, adapting, and changing the rules of li without overstepping the bounds at 70. Li-practice pertains to self-cultivation, cultural and moral awareness, and commitment to others (Lai, 2006, p. 111), and needs to change with time and to be constantly readapted to fit the needs to changing social and cultural contexts. In the Analects 1:12, Confucius stipulated that “In the actual practice of li, flexibility is important.” Although Confucius emphasized the importance of the rules of li, he knew very well that these rules were not good or bad by themselves. It was the appropriateness and the needs of a particular case at a particular time in a particular context (Chang, 2013, p. 18). There are times when rules, principles, and behavioral norms have to be relegated to low priorities in situations when dealing with uncertain, exigent situations, or hard cases that are rule-indeterminate and when established rules cannot not offer clear guidance (Cua, 2003b). Cua (2003a, 2003b) applied the Confucian doctrine of jing-quan (经-权) to the analysis of the problem of rules and exceptions. In the jing-quan principle, jing refers to the constant aspect of dao (way), “an invariable rule or a standard of conduct, the constant

Ancient Chinese roots

33

or the recurring,” and quan stands for the changing aspect of dao; “steelyard or balance,” and as a verb, “to weigh,” “to estimate,” or “to consider” (Cua, 2003a, p. 156). The exercise of quan is necessary in making moral judgment by comparing the importance of competing options in response to a problematic situation. Quan is an exercise of moral discretion based on a principled and reasoned judgment and on the requirements of yi (righteousness), which means doing the right thing “appropriate to the demands of the current situation” (Cua, 2003a, p. 156). Yi (义, 義, righteousness) as an ethical standard is a very important concept in Confucian humanism. It provides a rationale for evaluating and making principled, reasoned, and decisive judgment on li through quan that focuses on assessing what is right and what is wrong, what is fitting or not fitting, what is appropriate or what is not appropriate in particular exigencies at hand (Cua, 2003c). Chen (2001) identified yi as the internal criteria that guide an individual’s behavior against the social li norms, stipulating what people ought do or ought not do in social interactions. According to Chen (2001), yi takes a contingency approach, examining and analyzing all the elements of the everchanging environment, such as time, space, people, and situations to identify an appropriate response in every move to achieve the best outcome in human interactions, equilibrium and harmony. As discussed above, li-practice involves dramaturgical performance, framing, and “socially mediated games” (Goffman, 1969, p. 116). The multi-talented Confucius was an outstanding actor, having served as master of ritual ceremonies, knowing all the rules, norms, and impression management. He told his students that in game-like social interactions, they should look decent, stand and walk in a gesture acceptable to others, talk in audible and comprehensible tones, do his chores to keep his house or room clean, yield precedence to the elders when getting in and out of the doors, and carry on conversations with friends or strangers in a polite way. (Chang, 2013, p. 16) It was reported in the Analects 7:18 that in performing rites at ceremonies at the court, Confucius “always employed court dialect: the Poetry, the Documents, the conduct of li. For all these, he employed court dialect.” He paid much attention to his pronunciation, verbal and nonverbal communication strategies and employed appropriate formulas to transform the objects used in the rituals to make them appear sacred in communion with spirits and with the audience watching the ritual performance (Littlejohn, 2011, p. 37). In performing li rituals, Confucius tried to align his framing with ren norms, values, beliefs, and yi within the society, and to achieve a frame resonance, credibility, and trust among potential adherents. Confucius stressed that effective li-performance required controlling of emotions. He told his disciples to manage four emotions to rectify the mind: anger, fear, exhilaration, and worry

34 Mingsheng Li

(The Great Learning, Chapter 8). Furthermore, Confucius advised his disciples to develop their verbal and nonverbal communication skills in li dramaturgical performance (Analects 16:10): The junzi focuses his attention in nine ways. In observation, he focuses on clarity; in listening, he focuses on acuity; in facial expression, he focuses on gentleness; in bearing, he focuses on reverence; in words, he focuses on loyalty; in affairs, he focuses on attentiveness; in doubt, he focuses on questioning; in anger, he focuses on troublesome consequences; in opportunities to gain, he focuses on right. In the Analects 16:6, Confucius told his students about the importance of appropriate time and timing in li-performance: In attending a ruler there are three mistakes. To speak of something before an appropriate time has come is to be impetuous; to fail to speak of something when an appropriate time has come is to be secretive; to speak without gauging the ruler’s expression is to be blind. One’s styles of li-performance and verbal and nonverbal behavior in dramaturgical actions betray one’s personality, traits, feelings, emotions, tones, deportment, cultivated attitude, virtuous disposition, and moral import in interpersonal relationships (Cua, 1979). These are Confucian ethical considerations. All the elegant forms of dramaturgical performance that possess high emotional quality, are viewed “as a sign of a moral quality or virtue” (Cua, 1979, p. 382).

The concept of he (harmony) He (和harmony) is the essence of Confucian philosophy. It is a cardinal cultural value and the most cherished ideal in China that guides people’s communication patterns in all aspects of Chinese social and political life (Li, 2006; Wei & Li, 2013). According to Chen (2001), harmony is a philosophical concept that is the foundation of all schools of thought in China, such as Confucianism, Moism, Daoism, and even Buddhism. The key proponents of harmony in ancient China, such as Confucius, Mencius, Laozi (Lao Tzu), Xunzi, Zhu Xi, and Wang Yangming, all regarded the realization of harmony as foundational moral theory to guide and regulate human relations. In Chapter 42 of the Daodejing, Laozi saw the harmonization of Heaven, Earth, and Humanity as dao (tao): Tao gives birth to one. One gives birth to two. Two gives birth to three. Three gives birth to all things and all beings.

Ancient Chinese roots

35

Here one refers to Heaven, two Earth, and three Humanity. The cosmic harmony of the three could produce myriad things. Dao signifies “the underlying natural order of the universe and the relationship between all inanimate and living things” (Bains, 2015, p. 168). Confucius considered his mission to achieve grand harmony by following the Way through active coordination with Heaven, Earth, and Humanity (Li, 2006). A harmonious world could be established when people achieve harmony with their own selves and other individuals, with their own society and other human communities, with the living environment and the universe (Li, 2006). The concept of harmony involves five levels: internal harmony in the person, harmony in the family, harmony in the state, harmony in the entire human world, and harmony in the entire universe (Li, 2008). Confucius emphasized that harmony must be regulated by ren as a base and li as a regulatory scheme in social interactions (Wei & Li, 2013). He said, In the practice of li, harmony is the key … To act in harmony simply because one understands what is harmonious, but not to regulate one’s conduct according to li: indeed, one cannot act in that way. (Analects 1:12) Confucians would reject any harmony that was not in accordance with the norms of the central concept of li (Rosker, 2013). To Confucians, there is a direct connection between li and harmony. The purposes and functions of li are to achieve harmony. Confucius insisted that effective use of li in government would eventually result in social harmony. Mencius considered harmony as the most important virtue among the three aspects of human interaction, timing, location, and people: “good timing is not as good as being advantageously situated, and being advantageously situated is not as good as having harmonious people” (Mencius 3B.1). Xunzi commented: When harmony among people is established by the means of goodness, everything will flow smoothly. To harmonize with others by goodness is being reasonably accommodating and to harmonize with others by wickedness is fawning. (Xunzi, ‘Xiushen’) Confucius told his disciples not to blindly follow the crowd while seeking harmony: “the junzi harmonises without following the flow” (Zhong-yong, Chapter 11) and not to seek sameness. In the Analects 13:23, he made a clear distinction between “sameness” and harmony: “The junzi harmonizes but does not seek sameness, whereas the petty person seeks sameness but does not harmonize.” Sameness is concerned with conformity and uniformity; harmony is concerned with the retaining of individuality within the whole. Harmony is not uniformity and it does not endorse “unprincipled compromise” (Li, 2004,

36 Mingsheng Li

p. 184). Harmony out of diversity energizes the world but over-presence of sameness without adequate difference will lose internal energy to maintain harmony (Li, 2006, p. 592). Differences and diversity can lead to creativity, development, growth, and thriving. Li (2004, 2006) and Bains (2015) believed that Confucius’s greatest contribution to world philosophy and world politics was the ideal of harmony best highlighted in zhong-yong (中庸, the doctrine of the mean). Chang (2013) concurred that the concept of zhong-yong was Confucius’s greatest invention that demonstrates his talent, genius, and depth of learning. The Confucian ideal of harmony is found in the first chapter of the Zhong-yong: Centrality is the great foundation under Heaven, and harmony is the great Way under Heaven. In achieving centrality and harmony, Heaven and Earth maintain their appropriate positions and the myriad things flourish. Centrality is the way to achieve harmony of balance. Li (2006) viewed harmony as “the highest ideal for Confucianism as a whole” (p. 588). In zhongyong, zhong means the middle, the mean, center, centrality, equilibrium, right time, right place, appropriate attitude, or harmony of balance. It is something that is neither too much nor too little, neither too strong nor too weak, neither too hard nor too soft, neither too stressed nor too relaxed, neither too heavy nor too light, neither too long nor too short, neither too strict not too lenient. (Chang, 2013, p. 34) Li (2004) defined zhong-yong as “centrality-persistence” and “central harmony as the virtue that can be constantly practiced” (p. 180). Zhong requires appropriate balance and counterbalance to ensure the central course is taken, and yong refers to perseverance and sincerity in pursuing harmony. The concept of zhong-yong has been translated into English “the doctrine of the mean.” Li (2004), however, said that such translation was misleading because it was not Confucius’s intention to take the middle road; instead, his goal of the philosophy was the realization of central harmony, based on appropriate timing, appropriate situations, avoidance of extremes, and promotion of balance. The notion of Confucian harmony was derived from the analogies of the symphonic harmony of musical instruments and delicious flavors of soup. Musical harmony is achieved by bringing various instruments and sounds and people together into the performance of one single event through integrating and coordinating these different elements and relations. The relationship between harmony and music implies “corresponsiveness” that is embedded in the mingling and integration of different parties into a whole in which “both partnership and wholeness are at the core of harmony” (Li, 2014b, p. 48). In

Ancient Chinese roots

37

this kind of harmony, each is responsive to the other in a harmonious way, and each gets it due. Li further pointed out that the music analogy suggests that harmony is inclusive, allowing rather than suppressing all the components to take their appropriate places and get their appropriate due. Harmony is about social coexistence and cooperation, about harmonious relationships among people, and between Humanity, Earth, and Heaven. Aesthetically, the Confucian form of harmony as displayed in music is regarded as “the highest form of beauty” (p. 49). In another analogy, harmony is compared to making soup. In making a delicious soup, the cook needs to mix ingredients of different flavors and tastes and balance excessive flavors and opposing elements into an organic whole (p. 26). The music and soup analogies indicate that the Confucian dynamic process of harmony recognizes coexistence of pluralities, diversity, differences, heterogeneity, disharmony, opposites, and the relatively equal status of all elements in the interaction, and provides optimal space and context for interaction, but at the same time, it places a constraint on each party. That is, “parties in a harmonious relationship are both the condition for and the constraint against one another’s growth” (Wei & Li, 2013, p. 62). There is an inherent tension (disharmony) in harmony (Sundararajan, 2015). Harmony is realized through the interaction and coexistence of different elements, including opposing perspectives, in “creative tension” (Li, 2006, p. 589). Harmony should not be viewed as a static, pre-given state; instead, it should be viewed as an emergent order in which harmony is created and recreated each and every time: “every performance is the first performance” (Sundararajan, 2013, p. 26). Such an emergent order does not mean a status quo. Harmony is pursued in every new communication act. Sundararajan (2013) wrote that Confucian harmony should not be understood in terms of any single term; it should be understood from a holistic perspective in terms of a dialectical relationship, such as “similarity and difference, uniformity and diversity, the one and the manifold, the parts and the whole” (p. 27). To Laozi, harmony is the dynamic process of the equilibrium and balance of yin and yang: “All beings bear the negative physical form which is represented by yin, and embrace the positive true nature which is represented by yang. With the union of these two, they arrive at a state of harmony” (Daodejing, Chapter 42). In Chapter 3 of the Daodejing, Laozi stated that the elements of yin and yang coexist in all things: As soon as beauty is known by the world as beautiful, it becomes ugly. As soon as virtue is being known as something good, it becomes evil. Therefore being and non-being give birth to each other. Difficult and easy accomplish each other. Long and short form each other. High and low distinguish each other. Sound and tone harmonize each other Before and after follow each other as a sequence.

38 Mingsheng Li

Realizing this, the saint performs effortlessly according to the natural Way without personal desire, and practices the wordless teaching thru one’s deeds. Harmony is sought through a continuous process of compromising and negotiation of dualities, opposites, diversity, and disharmony. The notion of yin and yang calls for alignment and realignment, balance and counterbalance of the counterpart in every action without any element dominating the other (Bains, 2015). Harmony is reached through the continuous interplay and neutralization of opposing forces “not from a predestined principle but through some kind of compromise, some kind of give-and-take” (Li, 2006, p. 594). The Chinese yin–yang dialectical thinking assumes that the dialectical interplay of yin and yang, the two opposing and complementary forces in the universe and in the human world, is always in a dynamic and cyclic process of constant changing and transforming through mutual dependency to create and recreate equilibrium and harmony (Chen, 2001). Individuals involving in the process must constantly adapt and readapt themselves to fit themselves in their human interaction. To understand Chinese yin– yang dialectical thinking, Peng and Nisbett (1999) and Li (2008) proposed three principles. The principle of change suggests that everything is dynamic, changeable, subjective, imprecise, non-static and unidentifiable in a constant flux; harmony is a state when two opposites mutually transform and balance each other under various conditions. The principle of contradictions posits that reality is full of contradictions; the world is well integrated over opposites which are interdependent and mutually controlling. The principle of relationship or holism recognizes that everything is interdependent and well connected; reality cannot be understood without understanding its relations; everything is an integration of yin and yang; the opposites establish harmony in time and space as a whole; the reality cannot be complete without its two opposites.

Applying Confucian wisdom in modern PR practice There are many definitions of public relations. Grunig and Hunt (1984) defined it as “the management of communication between an organization and its publics” (p. 4). It is about relationships and “lines of communication, understanding, acceptance and cooperation” (Harlow, 1976, p. 36) between an organization, its internal members, families, stakeholders, external publics, “individuals or groups of people who are not formally organized” (Hutton, 1999, p. 202), and local, national and global communities. It is concerned with image/reputation management, relationship management, strategic relationship, trust, credibility, commitment, social responsibility, accountability, contingency, role modeling, self-dynamics, self-development, strong ethical orientation, and client-cantered and public-centered communication as the

Ancient Chinese roots

39

bedrock of PR (Berger & Meng, 2010). These long-standing PR notions can find their corresponding or similar expressions in Confucianism. The Confucian concept of ren promotes moral perfection, “a quality that makes a person an authentic human being” (Ni, 2014, p. 65), a role model, a junzi with high virtues of de, and cheng, love, compassion, altruism, and interpersonal excellence. PR practitioners are expected to strive to be a junzi with such high moral standards, an outstanding ren-person who embodies the ren virtues and an all-encompassing ethical attainment. A PR practitioner with Confucian virtues and attributes is the ideal person a company looks for. Such a practitioner is a master of communication who embodies an extensive range of attributes: respect for authority, honesty, adaptability, integrity, intellectual curiosity, and trustworthiness, and excels in professional knowledge, verbal and nonverbal communication, dramaturgy, relationship management, reputation management, and contingency management (Theaker, 2016). It is a Confucian belief that ren-persons, identical to PR practitioners, should set high professional and ethical standards for themselves, take an other-centered communication approach, and respect others based on the ren ethical requirements for humanity rather than on one’s own judgments (Ni, 2014). Public relations is ritualistic (Brown, 2015). Ritualistic communication is prevalent in all organizations. Interaction rituals are practiced to communicate organizations’ missions, values, beliefs, norms, image, and symbolism of shared reality, and solidarity with stakeholders (Collins, 2004). Ritualistic communication in public relations is similar to Confucian li-practice in which the behavior of li-practitioners is regulated by rules of propriety, rites, manners, politeness, decorum, codes of conduct, and conventional norms. PR practitioners, like Confucian li-practitioners, are obligated to enact their roles, understand the cultural grammar and the culture of the society, and follow the game rules in the ritual dramaturgy to meet the pre-established expectations and organization’s goals in their routine practice in all situations, such as greetings, meetings, phone calls, presentations, verbal and nonverbal exchanges, news releases, and the use of the Internet and social media. Letang (2008), a British scholar, has long called for a sociology of public relations. Collins (2004) would agree with the Confucian idea that li should be practiced appropriately according to circumstances rather than rules: timeliness, appropriateness to situations, and harmony of human relationships (Mencius, 5B:1). Collins (2004) and Goffman (1971) noted that in performing interaction rituals, an individual should be aware that it is an interplay of moment-to-moment, situation-by-situation, and person-by-person interaction and thus each interaction is different from the other. Such variations and fluctuations require PR practitioners to master the art of flexibility, to be sensitive to the changing situations, and to take an adaptive and flexible approach in dealing with human relationships in the “social drama” (Brown, 2015, p. 7). In Brown’s (2015) words, PR should be understood “as a staged but improvisatory performance” (Brown, 2015, p. 183). Brown’s view resonates with Confucianist li that requires “self-conscious knowledge of any explicit rules of ritual” and “an implicit ‘cultivated

40 Mingsheng Li

disposition’” (Bell, 1992, p. 98), an appropriate inner feeling to improvise a particular act or event (Hagen, 2010). In Chen’s (2001) view, out of the trio— timeliness, situational appropriateness, and human harmony—human harmony is the most critical. It is people who assess the moment of timeliness and appropriateness of the situation. Their communication behavior determines how they communicate to achieve harmony. He observed five communication rules that regulate Chinese interaction rituals: Chinese exercise self-restraint and self-discipline, use indirect communication strategies, adopt face-saving and facing-making mechanisms, emphasize the importance of reciprocity, and practice particularism in social relationships based on a hierarchical social structure. These rules surely can influence PR practitioners working in China. Thus, the ability to harmonize all the elements in interaction rituals and to play the ritual games becomes a benchmark for PR practitioners. Public relations is personal and social (Brown, 2015). Like a ren-person, a PR practitioner should understand that one cannot succeed without relating to and collaborating with others. Confucius’s zhong-shu golden rule can be a very helpful guide to deal with the relationships between self and others: “Do not impose upon others what you yourself do not want” (Analects 12:2) and “If you want to establish yourself, establish others. If you want to promote yourself, promote others” (Analects 6:30). Zhong means fairness, equity, trustworthiness, faithfulness, centrality, and balance. It is the attitude and perception to be upheld by a PR practitioner in relationship management. Shu means comparing one’s heart with others’ hearts with compassion. Human beings do not live alone; they are all interrelated and interdependent. One becomes complete in the process of relating to others. The zhong-shu philosophy suggests that the Confucian concept of the ren-persons does not see people “as atomic, autonomous individuals,” but as relational and interrelated individuals, each having some influence upon the other in interaction, and thus, “no one can become fully human in isolation, nor can one say that what happens to others has nothing to do with him or herself” (Ni, 2014, p. 60). Whether public relations is trivial or ordinary, or significant (Brown, 2015), the golden rule is always insightful. Brown (2015) says that “public relations is strategically ambiguous.” Indeed, there are many complex, fluid, ambiguous, and contingent variables in public relations that require PR practitioners to apply the zhong-yong approach to deal with emerging issues. As explained above, zhong stands for centrality, “not to be one-side,” not to be inclined to extremes of ideas and things and yong refers to constancy, commonness, practicality, ordinary and trivial things, not to be subject to change (Kong, 2009). Together, zhong-yong suggests that one should constantly pursue the virtue of excellence embodying balance of equilibrium by “avoiding two extreme vices—deficiency and excess”—in everyday life (Ni, 2014, p. 75). PR practitioners need to develop gongfu (kong fu) sincerely cultivated in the process of practicing zhong-yong in different situations in a constant way. Gong means skillful work, effort, endeavor, hard training, and fu means time spent. Together gongfu means “embodiment of abilities” attained

Ancient Chinese roots

41

from time and efforts spent on something through hard training, experiential learning, education, cultivation, and constant practice (Ni, 2004, pp. 191– 192). However, Confucius said that practicing zhong-yong is not an easy job: People believe that they know it all. However, even when they have decided to practice the way of The Mean and Constancy [zhong-yong], they fail to continue to do so for a month. (Zhong-yong, Chapter 8) Brown (2015) posited that public relations is contingent. Our life is full of uncertainties and our life situations are dynamic and “there is no rigid rule to follow” (Ni, 2014, p. 75) or there are rules that may not apply to the situations or cannot provide clear guidance. When established rules become indeterminate, the Confucian jing-quan principle may offer clear guidance in contingent conditions to creatively identify contingent alternatives and provide high-quality contingent responses. The jing-quan principle allows PR practitioners to adhere to the organizational position and stance (jing) and make a principled decision by critically analyzing the problematic situations (quan). The jing-quan principle promotes flexibility, adaptability, situational sensitivity, creativity, investigation, and problem-solving, and rejects rigidity and extremes. The principle stipulates that nothing is static; only change is constant. Confucius encouraged ren-persons to constantly assess the situational factors and adapt positively and appropriately to their positions, roles, and situations (Zhongyong, Chapter 14). PR practice involves a combination of contingent factors that may influence the adoption and implementation of PR strategies in dealing with external interdependencies and the publics (Cancel et al., 1997). The jing-quan principle, similar to the contingency theory in the West, requires PR practitioners to have the ability to manage contingent factors by investigating and accurately assessing these factors ranging from antecedent conditions to the current situations and at the same time detecting new factors to determine the stance and position to be taken in the situation. PR practitioners must understand, and have the ability to strategically manage the dynamics, interrelatedness, and the interplay of three key factors that may significantly impact an organization’s PR stance and practice. These are the predisposing factors (the characteristics, intents, and motivations of the organization); situational factors (the external constraints, demands, and realities of a crisis); and proscriptive variables (legal factors, regulatory agencies) (Pang et al., 2010). The concepts of the trio zhong-shu, zhong-yong, and jing-quan are instrumental in understanding the central theme of harmony, which is the goal of PR practice, achieving harmonious relationships between the organization and its internal members, clients, other organizations, stakeholders, the public, and the community. Harmony encompasses disharmony. Harmony recognizes and accommodates plurality, diversity, and differences, including differences in attitudes, views, and values. It is not about “conforming to a fixed order in the world” but “about creating orders” (Shen, 2014, p. 16), specifically, new

42 Mingsheng Li

orders that transcend old ones. Harmony is expected to bring about growth, vitality, force, power, energy, production, and a favorable environment for all elements to coexist, which means to be “mutually promoting, mutually complementing, and mutually stabilizing” (Li, 2014a, p. 380). An organization’s development and growth relies on diversity, rather than on sameness. Whether one can adopt the ideal depends on whether one can harmonize diversity or not. This capability, in turn, becomes a criterion for being a good person junzi (Analects 13:23). The ideal PR practitioner is a junzi who respects and is able to work with people who have different views, ideas, opinions, backgrounds, faiths, religions, and political views. Harmony is also regulated and reinforced by principles that differentiate right and wrong, appropriate and inappropriate, and good and bad. Confucius emphasized that “a junzi relates to people in harmony while holding fast to his belief in zhong-yong” and standing firm in a neutral, unbiased position (Zhong-yong, Chapter 11). A junzi should stay in the way of zhong-yong every moment in the whole life; regrettably, according to Confucius, not many people could adhere to the way of zhongyong in their everyday life (Zhong-yong, Chapter 12). Harmony is realized when there is a balance of yin and yang. The yin–yang philosophy that centers on the dynamics of balance of opposites and acceptance of inevitable change has extensively shaped Chinese dialectical thinking and interpersonal communication behavior in the past 2,000 years (Wang & Zou, 2011). The yin–yang theory claims that aspects of yin and yang exist in everything. Yin refers to everything in the world that is bad, dark, heavy, hidden, vicious, negative, passive, pessimistic, receptive, submissive, yielding, static, and feminine, while yang represents everything that is good, dynamic, creative, illuminating, evident, active, aggressive, controlling, hot, light, optimistic, positive, initiative, and masculine (Wang & Zou, 2011, p. 39). Yin and yang are mutually inclusive and are inseparable. They nurture, promote, generate, complement, reinforce, and transform into each other. When the equilibrium of balance (harmony) is upset, one polarity will be transformed into another polarity. The symbiotic relationship is founded upon the principle of both–and, not either–or. If harmony cannot be realized through reconciliation of the two opposites, turmoil, disturbances, disasters, and tragedies will follow (Wang & Zou, 2011). The yin–yang theory is useful to PR practitioners to assess critical situations, particularly in crisis communication, from a both–and rather than either–or perspective, guiding practitioners to look for opportunities in a crisis, as seen in the translation of Chinese word, weiji (危机), meaning the familiar idea of the coexistence of “danger” and “opportunity.” Public relations is naturally an interpersonal relationship (Ledingham & Bruning, 1998). PR is an art in which the practitioner builds relational networks and harmonious relationships serving to project the individual’s and the organization’s positive image or reputation, to maximize the reputational benefits, and to minimize reputational disadvantages. Brown (2015) agreed that PR “comprises the problematics of face” to build “mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and their publics” (p. 37). The concept of face

Ancient Chinese roots

43

(mianzi) is central in Chinese interpersonal relationships that involve facework derived from the Confucian ordering of relationships. In this relational structure, “individuals are placed into a system of hierarchical positioning relative to each other” to allow their mianzi to be in proportion to their positioning in the hierarchy (Chang & Holt, 1994, p. 105). The social hierarchy determines the degree of emotions (renqing) devoted to each other according to the amount and significance of mianzi and its holder. The concept of mianzi has significantly influenced how Chinese interact with one another in their daily lives. Mianzi, which can be claimed by an individual from the society, and is “under the scrutiny of others in the process of relating,” is associated with mutual social responsibility, image, prestige, reputation, recognition of social status, a mask, a quality, a resource, and impression management (Chang & Holt, 1994, p. 100). The quality of mianzi is measured by the degree and proportion of human emotion (renqing) invested and possible favor that could be provided in the relationships. Renqing, favor, and mianzi are interrelated. One cannot claim mianzi without renqing and favor, which generates indebtedness in the sense of the exploitation that characterizes healthy or effective relationships. Positive human emotion is the basis for good relationships. Lin (1939) referred to “face,” “fate,” and “favour” as “three sisters” that “have always ruled China and are still ruling China” and they become a very powerful force of corruption in Chinese society (Lin, 1939, p. 186). The implication is that the concept of mianzi encompasses both positive and negative dimensions in human relations. This entails a PR practitioner’s need for more than superficial knowledge of Chinese culture. It is this understanding which could enable the practitioner to use mianzi as a relational lubricant and as a resource for interpersonal effectiveness by keeping a delicate balance between the positive and negative sides of mianzi in dealing with human relationships (Chang & Holt, 1994, p. 116).

Conclusion This chapter has investigated three important Confucian moral philosophical principles (ren, li, and he) and associated themes that are still relevant to the modern practice of public relations. Confucianism adds scholarship and intellectual wisdom to the major dimensions and perspectives of current PR endeavors. Like the ethical underpinnings of modern PR, Confucian philosophy emphasizes the significance of humanism, human relations, agents, and social, psychological, and situational factors that influence human interactions. Confucianism provides principles, theories, methods, and strategies to guide people’s actions in building and maintaining mutually beneficial relationships. The ren theory tells people how to become perfect persons (junzi) embodying the highest moral standards. The golden rule (zhong-shu) stipulates that one’s success depends on the quality of one’s relationships with others; an othercentered communication approach is crucial in establishing interpersonal relationships. The concept of yi (righteousness) indicates that moral standards are to

44 Mingsheng Li

be upheld to help one to make accurate judgments on what is right or wrong and what is appropriate or inappropriate. The li principle suggests that people’s routine interactions are regulated by rules of propriety and rules of interaction rituals, and dramaturgy. The doctrine of the mean (zhong-yong) as a gongfu is a philosophical approach to help people to avoid extremes and realize harmony, an ultimate goal in human interaction. The constancy–change (jing-quan) principle is a guide for decision-making: while upholding moral standards, one needs to adapt to situational demands. The concept of yin–yang dialectical thinking shows that all things coexist and mutually transform each other with their opposites, and one’s existence is the conditioning of the other. The Confucian facework recognizes the importance of human emotions in interpersonal communication. These values, themes, and principles can contribute to the knowledge and inform the scholarship of international public relations.

Notes 1 Erving Goffman (1971) described “everyday life” as a dotted line to the everyday-life microsociology of sociology, and Jacquie L’Etang (2009), a PR historian, has called for a sociology of public relations. 2 Hamburger (1959) explained that there is a difference between Confucius’ doctrine of mean and that of Aristotle.The Confucian doctrine of mean stresses “the moral law as the criterion of culture and as ubiquitous” (p. 241) and “advises the superior man always to do what is proper to the situation in which he is, and not to desire to go beyond this” (p. 243).The Aristotelian doctrine of mean is about human relations embodying virtues that “are a mean between two extremes,” “nothing in excess” or “the middle course is the best” (p. 243).

References An, Y. (2004). Western “sincerity” and Confucian “cheng”. Asian Philosophy, 14(2), 155– 169. doi:10.1080/0955236042000237390 Bains, G. (2015). Cultural DNA: The Psychology of Globalization. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Bell, C. (1992). Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice. New York: Oxford University Press. Berger, B. K., & Meng, J. (2010). Public relations practitioners and the leadership challenge. In R. L. Heath & R. L. Heath (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Public Relations (pp. 421– 434). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Brown, R. E. (2015). The Public Relations of Everything: The Ancient, Modern and Postmodern Dramatic History of an Idea. London: Routledge. Cancel, A. E., Cameron, G. T., Sallot, L. M., & Mitrook, M. A. (1997). It depends: A contingency theory of accommodation in public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 9, 31–63. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr0901_02 Chai, C. (1959). Chinese humanism: A study of Chinese mentality and temperament. Social Research, 26(1), 31–46. Chan, W.-T. (1963). A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Chang, C. Y. (2013). Confucianism: A Modem Interpretation. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co.

Ancient Chinese roots

45

Chang, H., & Holt, G. R. (1994). A Chinese perspective on face as inter-relational concern. In S. Ting-Toomey (Ed.), The Challenge of Facework: Cross-Cultural and Interpersonal Issues (pp. 95–132). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Chen, G. (2001). The impact of harmony on Chinese conflict management. In G. Chen & R. Ma (Eds.), Chinese Conflict Management and Resolution (pp. 3–17). Westport, CT: Ablex Publisher. Collins, R. (2004). Interaction Ritual Chains. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Confucius Institute Headquarters. (2017). Confucius Institute. Retrieved from http://www .hanban.edu.cn/confuciousinstitutes/node_10961.htm Cua, A. S. (1979). Dimensions of li (propriety): Reflections on an aspect of Hsün Tzu's ethics. Philosophy East and West, 29(4), 373–394. doi: 10.2307/1398811 Cua, A. S. (2003a). Confucianism: Tradition (daotong). In A. S. Cua (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy (pp. 153–160). New York: Routlege. Cua, A. S. (2003b). Quan: Weighing circumstances. In A. S. Cua (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy (pp. 625–627). New York: Routlege. Cua, A. S. (2003c). Yi and li: Rightness and rites. In A. S. Cua (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy (pp. 842–846). New York: Routlege. Fan, R. (2010). Reconstructionist Confucianism: Rethinking Morality after the West. Hong Kong, China: Springer. Fu, P. (2003). Confucianism: Constructs of classical thought. In A. S. Cua (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy (pp. 64–69). New York: Routlege. Gier, N. (2008). The day Confucius went to the United Nations: Chinese influence on the Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngie r/Declaration.htm Goffman, E. (1969). Strategic Interaction. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order. New York: Basic Books. Grunig, J. E., & Hunt, T. (1984). Managing Public Relations. Philadelphia, PA: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Hagen, K. (2010) The propriety of Confucius: A sense-of-ritual, Asian Philosophy, 20(1), 1–25. Hall, D. L., & Ames, R. T. (1987). Thinking through Confucius. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Hamburger, M. (1959). Aristotle and Confucius: A comparison. Journal of the History of Ideas, 20(2), 236–249. Hansen, C. (1996). Duty and virtue. In P. J. Ivanhoe (Ed.), Chinese Language, Thought, and Culture: Nivison and His Critics (pp. 173–192). Chicago, CA: Open Court. Hao, M. (1999). Integration of traditional Chinese humanities with modern public relations [中华传统人学与现代公共关系的交融和回应]. Journal of Kaifeng University, 13(3), 49. Harlow, R. F. (1976). Building a public relations definition. Public Relations Review, 2(4), 34–42. Heath, R. L. (2001). Shifting foundations: Public relations as relationship building. In R. L. Heath (Ed.), Handbook of Public Relations (pp. 1–9). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Huang, Y. (2005). Confucian love and global ethics: How the cheng brothers would help respond to Christian criticisms. Asian Philosophy, 15(1), 35–60. doi:10.1080/1463136042000328025 Hung-Baesecke, C.-J. F., & Chen, Y.-R. R. (2014). China. In T. Watson (Ed.), Asian Perspectives on the Development of Public Relations: Other Voices (pp. 20–33). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.

46 Mingsheng Li Hutton, J. G. (1999). The definition, dimensions, and domain of public relations. Public Relations Review, 25(2), 34–42. Kong, S. L. (2009). Confucian Wisdom for the 21st Century: A Selected Rendition. Hong Kong, China: The Chinese University Press. Lai, K. (2006). Learning from Chinese Philosophies: Ethics of Independent and Contextualised Self. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate. Lai, K. (2008). An Introduction to Chinese Philosophy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Ledingham, J.A, & Bruning, S.D. (1998). Relationship management in public relations: dimensions of an organization-public relationship. Public Relations Review, 24(l): 55–65. L’Etang, J. (2008). Public Relations Concepts, Practice and Critique. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. L’Etang, J. (2009). Public relation and diplomacy is a globalized world. Americas Behavioral Scientist, 53(4), 607–626. Li, C. (2004). Zhongyong as grand harmony: An alternative reading to Ames and Hall’s focusing the familiar. Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy, 3(2), 173–188. Li, C. (2006). The Confucian ideal of harmony. Philosophy East and West, 56(4), 583–603. doi:10.1353/pew.2006.0055 Li, C. (2007). Li as cultural grammar: On the relation between li and ren in Confucius' Analects. Philosophy East and West, 57(3), 311–329. doi: https://doi.org/10.1353/pew .2007.0033 Li, C. (2008). The philosophy of harmony in classical Confucianism. Philosophy Compass, 3(3), 423–435. doi:10.1111/j.1747-9991.2008.00141.x Li, C. (2014a). Confucian harmony: A philosophical analysis. In V. Shen (Ed.), Dao Companion to Classical Confucian Philosophy (pp. 379–394). New York: Springer. Li, C. (2014b). The Confucian Philosophy of Harmony. Oxen, UK: Routledge. Li, P. P. (2008). Toward a geocentric framework of trust: An application to organizational trust. Management and Organization Review, 4(3), 413–439. Lin, Y. T. (1939). My Country and My People. New York: The John Day Company. Littlejohn, R. (2011). Confucianism: An Introduction. New York: Palgrave. Liu, C. (1999). The integration of modern PR and Chinese traditional culture. Yinshan Academic Journal, 12(3), 33–38. Marnham, P. (1998). Nobel winners say tap wisdom of Confucius. The Independent, p.1. Retrieved from http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/101971742 Meng, Q. (2014). The implications of Confucian PR philosophy in the Analects [从《论语》看孔子的公关哲学意蕴]. Quannan Minzu Shifan Xueyuan Xuebao, 34(1), 106–110. Ni, P. (2004). Reading zhongyong as a gongfu instruction: Comments on focusing the familiar Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy, 3(2), 189–203. Ni, P. (2014). The philosophy of Confucius. In V. Shen (Ed.), Dao Companion to Classical Confucian Philosophy (pp. 53–80). New York: Springer. Nivison, D. S. (1996). The Ways of Confucianism: Investigations in Chinese Philosophy. Chicago, IL: Open Court. Nivison, D. S. (2003). De (Te): Virtue or power. In A. S. Cua (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy (pp. 234–237). New York, NY: Routledge. Nuri, M. H. (2016). China’s economic development: Confucian values. Business Recorder. Retrieved from http://fp.brecorder.com/2016/04/2016040332073/ Pang, A., Jin, Y., & Cameron, G. T. (2010). Strategic management of communication: Insights from the contingency theory of strategic conflict management. In R. L. Heath (Ed.), The Sage Handbook of Public Relations (pp. 17–34). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Ancient Chinese roots

47

Peng, K., & Nisbett, R. E. (1999). Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist, 54(9), 741–754. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.massey.ac.nz/10 .1037/0003-066X.54.9.741 Rosker, J. S. (2013). The concept of harmony in contemporary P. R. China and in Taiwanese modern Confucianism. Asian Studies, 17(2), 3–20. Shen, V. (2014). Introduction: Classical Confucianism in historical and comparative context. In V. Shen (Ed.), Dao Companion to Classical Confucian Philosophy (pp. 379–394). New York: Springer. Starck, K., & Kruckeberg, D. (2001). Public relations and community: A reconstructed theory revisited. In R. L. Heath (Ed.), Handbook of Public Relations (pp. 51–59). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sundararajan, L. (2013). The Chinese notions of harmony, with special focus on implications for cross-cultural and global psychology. The Humanistic Psychologist, 41, 25–34. doi:10. 1080/08873267.2012.694125 Sundararajan, L. (2015). Understanding Emotion in Chinese Culture: Thinking through Psychology. New York: Springer. Theaker, A. (2016). The Public Relations Handbook (5th ed.). New York: Taylor & Francis Group. Tu, W. (1979). Humanity and Self-Cultivation: Essays in Confucian thought. Berkeley, CA: Asian Humanities Press. Tu, W. (1985). Confucian Thought: Selfhood as Creative Transformation. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Tu, W. (1998). Probing the “three bonds” and “five relationships” in Confucian humanism. In W. H. Slote & G. A. D. Vos (Eds.), Confucianism and the Family: A Study of IndoTibetan Scholasticism (Vol. 121–136, pp. 121). New York: State University of New York. Wakefield, R. I. (2010). Why culture is still essential in discussions about global public relations. In R. L. Heath & R. L. Heath (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Public Relations (pp. 659–670). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Wang, N., & Zou, Y. (2011). Yin-yang theory and globalization. Studies in Sociology of Science, 2(2), 38–49. doi:10.3968/j.sss.1923018420110202.067 Wang, Q. J. (1999). The golden rule and interpersonal care: From a Confucian perspective. Philosophy East and West, 49(4), 415–438. Wei, X., & Li, Q. (2013). The Confucian value of harmony and its influence on Chinese social interaction. Cross-Cultural Communication, 9(1), 60–66. doi:10.3968/j. ccc.1923670020130901.12018 Xiao, X., & Chen, G. (2009). Communication competence and moral competence: A Confucian perspective. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 4(1), 61–74. doi:10.1080/17447140802651652 Xu, B. (1994). Public relations and its connection with traditional Chinese culture [公共关系与中国传统文化渊源]. The Journal of Shanghai University, 1, 56–59. Yao, X. (2000). An Introduction to Confucianism. New York: Cambridge University Press. Yum, J. O. (1988). The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communication patterns in East Asia. Communication Monograph, 55(4), 374–388. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637758809376178

4

History and legitimacy in the West Public relations aesthetics from Hippocrates to Luis Buñuel Jordi Xifra and Maurici Jiménez

Ethical PR was originally aesthetic Lucien Matrat’s (1907–1998) appearance in the theoretical context of public relations represents the first great turning point in the theoretical construction of the discipline, both at the European and international levels, matched only by the contributions of James E. Grunig, whose excellence dominant paradigm has its (unrecognized) origins in the postulates of the French practitioner (Xifra, 2006a, 2006b). If not born with Matrat, with/under him the theory of public relations at least reaches the level and maturity necessary to be considered a discipline. Matrat was the head of the public relations department of one of the largest French corporations, the Elf group. He founded the French Association of Public Relations (Association Française des Relations Publiques, AFREP) and the European Public Relations Confederation (CERP). As an ardent proponent of ethical behavior in public relations practice, he was the author of the International Code of Ethics adopted by the International Public Relations Association in Athens (1965), inspired by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Xifra, 2006a, 2012). Lucien Matrat considered public relations to be an anthropological discipline because it is based on humans (anthropos). On the other hand, Matrat’s body of knowledge was founded on his own experience as a professional, leading him to be considered one of the first public relations theorists to build his theory from and through ethnographic methods. As a result, a number of French authors and professionals who found common ground in Matrat’s ideas—which became known as the “European doctrine (or school) of public relations” (Boiry, 2004, p. 1)—developed a series of public relations techniques based on ethnography (Xifra, 2012). This concern for human beings was intimately linked to a respect for their dignity, which differentiated public relations (based on trust) from other forms of persuasive communication, such as advertising and propaganda (Matrat, 1971, 1975). Public relations therefore only made sense if it was practiced under the highest ethical standards, leading Lucien Matrat to draft the entire Code of Athens on the basis of the United Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights (Sellnow et al., 2005). DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340-4

History and legitimacy in the West

49

According to Watson (2014), in 1965 the International Public Relations Association (IPRA) adopted the International Code of Ethics, which became known as the Code of Athens (IPRA, 2001). The code was authored by Lucien Matrat, a French public relations pioneer, and reflected a hopeful, post–World War II ethical framework with its strong links to the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 (IPRA, 1994). A code of ethics was an early strategic imperative of IPRA, established ten years previously, and was coupled with a Code of Conduct, known as the 1961 Code of Venice (IPRA, 1961). Both codes were adopted by many national public relations associations and widely promoted. Among those who received presentation copies of the Code of Athens were Pope Paul VI and government leaders. First of all, it should be noted that, rather than being based on the United Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights, the Code of Athens was practically a copy of it. Matrat’s intellectual work was practically non-existent and for this reason, among others, the code was not exempt from controversy. As Watson (2014) explains, the criticism was led by the UK’s Alan Eden-Green, Chief Executive of Public Relations for the British Oxygen Company (BOC), who considered the code to be a set of rules—it said “must” and “must not”— rather than guidelines. This was not, however, Eden-Green’s only reproach, as there was also pragmatic criticism. Matrat did not respond immediately to the criticism (Watson, 2014) and when he did his main argument was based on religious grounds: Matrat replied, as usual, in French in early November 1967 defending his approach which was utterly based on the UN Declaration of Human Rights and citing the endorsement of religious leaders, including Pope Paul VI, as justification for the moral certainties that it expressed. He also proposed that IPRA could invoke the Code against a country which was restricting human rights or limiting the media. (Watson, 2014, p. 711) What Matrat does in this response is resort to aesthetic motivations to justify the ethical truth of the Code of Athens. And this ethical reason is based mainly on Pope Paul VI’s reception of the authors of the code as a legitimizing act. It is worth recalling at this point that Matrat was hugely influenced by the French Personalist movement led by Emmanuel Mounier. Personalism was seen as an alternative to both liberalism and Marxism, respecting human rights and the human personality without indulging in excessive collectivism. As a consequence, familiar with Mounier’s Christian phenomenology in the French Personalist movement, Matrat had his Code of Athens reflect its proposed Christian humanitarianism approach to public relations as part of the effects of Christian phenomenology on the post-war French intellectuals, thinkers, and scholars. Furthermore, Matrat and his colleagues repudiated propaganda. In fact, one of the pillars of his theory, known as the European doctrine of Public Relations (Xifra, 2012), is the clear distinction between advertising,

50 Jordi Xifra and Maurici Jiménez

propaganda, and public relations. While advertising is seen as the strategy of desire that motivates the demand for a product or service and propaganda the strategy of conditioning that replaces reflective actions with reflex acts, public relations is the strategy of trust that lends communication its authenticity (Matrat, 1971). This near-obsession with opposing public relations and propaganda from such anthropological and Christian approaches seems to respond to a rejection of the Catholic origins of the term propaganda. Through a Christian idea of public relations, where ethics is based more on considering public relations as the only discipline that guarantees human rights and whose aesthetic was based on a campaign of presentation before “Christian society” and its highest representative (the pope), in the elaboration of the ethical code, Matrat found an aesthetic justification of public relations as the only form of humanistic communication, as opposed to the anti-humanistic communication served up by advertising and propaganda. Therefore, although this humanistic dimension of public relations defended by European doctrine might be thought to be the clearest example of the Western humanism of the field, it was in fact an operation of social aesthetics, in a sense that we shall analyze later, by means of which the photo with different personalities holding a copy of the Code of Athens, including the spiritual leader (Pope Paul VI), was the main (aesthetic) goal. Thus, the most famous code of ethics in public relations history was principally an aesthetic campaign. This fact need not surprise us or meet with our disapproval. It forms part of the history of persuasion. Indeed, this strategy was not new, since it had been practiced from Classical Antiquity to the present day. In fact, aesthetics has played a fundamental role in the history of humans’ concern for their social recognition and reputation, as fundamental as the one it has also played in the diffusion of ideas. Thus, this chapter will provide examples as different and distant in time from one another as Hippocrates and the Spanish filmmaker Luis Buñuel to show that behind the idea of building a public image or an environment of trust there have always been aesthetic elements that have taken precedence over ethics, and that ethics have often been justified in aesthetic terms. The case of the Corpus Hippocraticum constitutes the most evident proof of our argument and is yet another example of what we now know as public relations being nothing more than today’s manifestation of very ancient social concerns.

Reputation was a matter of aesthetics at the beginning: PR in the Hippocratic Corpus The collection of Greek medical writings handed down to us under the general name of Corpus Hippocraticum (CH) comprises 53 mostly short treatises generally written in a concise style and referring to a broad subject matter, ranging from general considerations about the profession and the ethics of the physician to studies on physiology, pathology, dietetics, and gynecology, among others.

History and legitimacy in the West

51

Most of the texts included in the CH are a product of the research and teaching of several writers who composed their works during the final decades of the 5th century and early 4th century BC; that is, they were written by contemporary physicians of Hippocrates, if not Hippocrates himself, and his disciples from the following generation (Jouanna, 2017). It is worth recalling, incidentally, that it was precisely at this time that the written word imposed itself as the definitive vehicle of cultural tradition, while the oral transmission of knowledge remained an archaic procedure, and when the new Sophistic Enlightenment spread new and critical ideas (García-Gual, 1983). Among the most distinguishing intellectual figures of the time, together with historians, philosophers, sophists, politicians, and orators, we find physicians who entrusted writing as a decisive technique of expression and dissemination of their wisdom and their ideas about the human world. Within this context, the issue of the physician and his decorum was treated in considerable detail, to the point of it becoming the object of a treaty, “Decorum,” which deals with the reputation of the physician and its relationship with his aesthetics. However, the question was not confined exclusively to this treatise, but rather also appears in the other more generalist texts known as “Physician.” In “Decorum,” however, we find the following: More gracious is wisdom that even with some other object^ has been fashioned into an art, provided that it be an art directed towards decorum and good repute. (I) Any wisdom, in fact, wherein works some scientific method, is honorable if it be not tainted with base love of gain and unseemliness. If they be so tainted, such kinds of wisdom become popular only through impudence. (II) Dress decorous and simple, not overelaborated, but aiming rather at good repute, and adapted for contemplation, introspection and walking. The several characteristics are: to be serious, artless, sharp in encounters, ready to reply, stubborn in opposition, with those who are of like mind quickwitted and affable, good-tempered towards all, silent in face of disturbances, in the face of silence ready to reason and endure, prepared for an opportunity and quick to take it, knowing how to use food and temperate, patient in waiting for an opportunity, setting out in effectual language everything that has been shown forth, graceful in speech, gracious in disposition, strong in the reputation that these qualities bring, turning to the truth when a thing has been shown to be true. (III) When you enter a sick man's room, having made these arrangements, that you may not be at a loss, and having everything in order for what is to be

52

Jordi Xifra and Maurici Jiménez

done, know what you must do before going in. For many cases need, not reasoning, but practical help. So you must from your experience forecast what the issue will be. To do so adds to one's reputation, and the learning thereof is easy. (XI) As a general idea espoused in “Decorum,” Jones (1923) suggested that wisdom preserves man from evil, and the best kind of wisdom is the one that has become art. That is to say, the art of making life more decorous and honorable, according to the typical point of view of late Greek thought and particularly the Stoic perspective. If we accept Jones’s interpretation to be essentially accurate, then we should expand upon it and qualify it with some further considerations. As is well known, at the time our writing likely took place, it was common to find orators on the most diverse subjects, defending or criticizing knowledge acquired in all fields of wisdom. There were many kinds of sophists: some may have been mere ignorant charlatans selling useless knowledge, but others were skillful dialecticians. Others criticized the former as mere tricksters, arguing that only the type of wisdom that leads humans to proper conduct enables them to act correctly in all orders of life. The author of “Decorum” begins by making his own the opinion of those who defend the usefulness of wisdom; however, under the influence of Stoic thought, he only admits that wisdom which serves for good living, for right behavior, and for good reputation. This is because according to him most of the varied knowledge that the sophist orators offered their listeners was totally useless for life and the claims they made for it. Our author did not think that all knowledge was equally useless, however: there is some (that of the good dialectics) which at least has the benefit of exercising the mind, and this already prepares one, to some extent, for a good life. That said, our author dispensed with all this discourse and did nothing of the kind, not even to exercise the mind: for him, it was much more fruitful to speak of true and useful knowledge for life, which is also wisdom and which also leads medicine to good behavior and good reputation. As García-Gual (1983) pointed out, one of the goals proposed by “Decorum” is that of achieving a fair reputation. The thirst for prestige was fairly widespread among Hippocratic physicians, even if they also criticized it as being excessive at times. Lain (1970) highlighted some passages of the CH where this can be clearly discerned: “Joints” (XLV) considers it embarrassing for a doctor to carry much external apparatus and refers to doctors who presume to be “elegant” and are likely to impress those who contemplate them when they try to cure a hip dislocation with procedures that, although correct, are theatrical (LXX). Similarly, “Physician” (II) criticizes those who seek reputation through the luxury and brilliance of the metallic instruments of their iatreion (office). In “Decorum,” prestige and good reputation are based on the doctor’s correct behavior, but also on the virtue of an effective treatment (XVII) and a successful prognosis, as is the case with other treatises in the CH.

History and legitimacy in the West

53

In order to give a fairly complete account of what was considered good manners and good behavior for doctors in ancient times we must add to “Decorum” the first chapter of “Physician”: The dignity of a physician requires that he should look healthy, and as plump as nature intended him to be; for the common crowd consider those who are not of this excellent bodily condition to be unable to take care of others. Then he must be clean in person, well dressed, and anointed with sweet-smelling unguents that are not in any way suspicious. This, in fact, is pleasing to patients. (I) This is not the first time that Hippocrates has been linked with the theory and practice of public relations. In 1993, Dan Kruckeberg presented a paper at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association entitled “Hippocrates and Bernays: A Medical Ethics Perspective on the Ethics of Public Relations.” In it, the author argued that public relations practitioners should attempt to emulate a metaphorical “physicians’ role” as “healers” within their organizations and in the society of which their organizations form a part. Nevertheless, the metaphor did not refer to the medical specialist one may encounter today; public relations’ use of the physician as a metaphor must consider this healer as he supposedly and ideally had performed his role in the past. Kruckeberg (1993) concluded his research by stating that the role of the physician as “healer” provides an ideal metaphor for “excellent” public relations, and the ethics for such “excellent” practice remain exceedingly simple: love. As we shall see later, this idea of love is not far removed from the origins of one of the most ethically justified activities of public relations: corporate social responsibility. In his study of fashion, the German sociologist Georg Simmel argued that life has a dualism, which as a unity tends on the one hand to universalization and on the other to particularization (Carnevali, 2016). Living in society, this metaphysical dualism materializes in fashion, which manifests itself as “a form of practical synthesis between the psychological tendency to imitation and the psychological tendency to distinction” (Vandenberghe, 2001, p. 55). These words could find their historical origins in the role of decorum for the Hippocratic physicians. Indeed, having defined fashion as a form of association between the aristocratic tendency of distinction and the democratic tendency of imitation in a single behavior, Simmel immediately reveals an analogy between the institutional function of fashion and that of reputation. Both are products of the social division into classes and have the function of gathering together their peers in a circle that isolates them from others. Certeris paribus, its function is analogous to that of the frame of a painting that “characterizes the work of art as unitary, solidarity-based, a world in itself, and at the same time cuts out all relationship with the social environment” (Simmel, 1905, p. 71).

54 Jordi Xifra and Maurici Jiménez

It is very interesting to apply the metaphor of the frame to the use of art in conveying persuasive messages. In this case, it would be easy to fall into the trap of vulgarizing the metaphor and use it to justify any artistic manifestation in which the author has clearly delimited space such as, for example, painting or cinema, in which the frame is bounded by the outline of the space in which the message takes place (statically in the case of a painting, dynamically in the case of cinema). A cinematographic case will allow us to show how Simmel’s sociology of fashion is a theoretical framework that can be applied to public relations and, thus, to further evidence of the aesthetic dimension of public relations.

Using cinematic aesthetics to build public image: the case of Luis Buñuel The aim here is not to analyze Buñuel’s best-known work, our object of study being a documentary that does not appear in the Spanish director’s filmographies: Menjant Garotes (Eating Sea Urchins, 1930), a “five-minute Lumière-style home movie made by Buñuel and cameraman Duverger of Dalí’s father and his spouse in their holiday home in Cadaqués” (Gubern & Hammond, 2012, p. 26). On December 16, 1988, three Spanish researchers preparing a documentary on Spanish surrealism—Román Gubern, Ian Gibson, and Rafael Santos Torroella—went to visit Anna-Maria Dalí, the elderly sister of the painter Salvador Dalí. Anna-Maria told them that Buñuel filmed a documentary about Dalí’s family when he came to Cadaqués to locate scenarios for L’Âge d’Or (The Golden Age, 1930), showing them the 35mm roll of the film. As Fanés (2000) has pointed out, this is not the usual home movie, because the sequence of shots builds a discourse, even if only a brief one. Why did Buñuel make it? Clearly, something must have drawn his attention to what he saw there and awakened his “documentary” sense that he would later develop in Las Hurdes, Tierra sin Pan (Land Without Bread, 1933). The film was shot in April 1930, taking advantage of the fact that he was already shooting L’Âge d’Or on the property belonging to Dalí’s father on Llané beach. Gubern and Hammond (2012) have argued that it was made to placate the powerful hero and facilitate filming in Cadaqués and its surroundings. However, Fanés (2000) has suggested that at the time Dalí’s father had quarreled with his son and disinherited him, thus justifying the film’s strategic dimension as a product to restore trust between father and son through the then best friend of the latter. Regardless of this, the film does not interest us as an exercise in restoring paternal–filial relations, but as a strategy for building the image of a bourgeoisie that was targeted by the attacks of the Surrealist movement of which Dalí and Buñuel were maximum representatives. Aside from Fanés’ (2000) particular suppositions—which are important because he is the only scholar who has studied the film in depth—Menjant Garotes is an example of how art (in this case, cinema) is a vehicle for image

History and legitimacy in the West

55

construction, or, in other words, how aesthetics is and has been a key element in building a certain perception (first), impression (second), and reputation (third) of an organization, brand, idea, or social structure. In this case, cinematic aesthetics became the catalyst for the social aesthetics of the bourgeoisie represented in Buñuel’s film. A bourgeoisie of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries whose features were housing, family, leisure, and capacity of authority (Maza, 2003). The house was and remains a symbol of the bourgeoisie—of its owner’s economic success. All the action in Menjant Garotes takes place in the summer residence belonging to Salvador Dalí’s father, who was a Figueres notary. The residence is located in a privileged spot on the Costa Brava, in the Mediterranean town of Cadaqués. It is the setting of the film and its surroundings that clearly mark the social position of the protagonists: Dalí’s father and stepmother. The strategy adopted by Buñuel—who was also an excellent photographer—was to award indirect importance to the outside courtyard where the action takes place, the beautiful background landscape, and the family mansion façade that appears in the upper left-hand corner. Everything is perfectly laid out to emphasize the grandeur of the Mediterranean mansion. The film also depicts the idea of acting not intended to reflect reality as it is, but to recreate it (Goffman, 1959), highlighting some elements over others and shaped according to the (director’s) objectives. For instance, the fact that no one looks at the camera gives the feeling that the images have been objectively captured, when it is clear that we are seeing non-professional actors who know they are being filmed and consequently overact. We therefore see a couple aware that they are acting before an audience that did not share the same context. Regardless of the motives that led Buñuel to make this film, with Menjant Garotes the Spanish filmmaker offered an idyllic representation of a bourgeois family during a moment of leisure. Thus, the other bourgeois elements, family and leisure, are also constantly present in the film, to the point of forming, with housing, the thematic triangle of this fascinating portrait of the bourgeoisie. Less present, but no less fascinating, is the presence of the capacity of authority, the fourth characteristic element of the bourgeoisie. From an impression management viewpoint, when Goffman (1959) described the operation of groups of people who are part of a performance, he argued that “when we examine a team-performance, we often find that someone is given the right to direct and control the progress of the dramatic action” (p. 60). In Buñuel’s film, this “someone” is obviously the notary Dalí, but the most interesting aspect is the aesthetic symbolism used by the filmmaker to signify this capacity for authority. At this point, it is essential to point out what motives may have led Buñuel to make this short film. Although the subject has not been studied in depth, we agree with Fanés (2000) when he states that we can only conjecture on this. This scholar does, however, point to a possible reason that seems more than plausible. Indeed, it is probable that what Buñuel was doing in Cadaqués is exactly what he would later do when filming the documentary Land Without Bread

56

Jordi Xifra and Maurici Jiménez

on the harsh living conditions of the Spanish region of Las Hurdes, when he distributed food to the local residents to earn their trust and win their favor, turning him into a kind of modern benefactor who built his image through the use of gifts, just as modern corporations do with their corporate social responsibility programs. In this case, however, he had to gain the trust of a local elite, including the notary Dalí. The film would be … the price to pay to gain the trust of a man with a reputation as rough, all-embracing, and pedantic, who had just fallen out with his son and detested the surrealist group, but at the same time used to establish strange … relationships with the young painter’s friends. (Fanés, 2000, p.120) This theory is consistent with the fact that when the initial conflict broke out between father and son during the shooting of L’Âge d’Or months before, Dalí senior chose the filmmaker as a confidante. After fighting with his father, and with the financial help of the viscounts of Noailles (patrons of L’Âge d’Or), Dalí the son acquired a fisherman’s house in Port Lligat, which later became his famous residence. This infuriated his father, who sent a letter to Buñuel to convey various threats to his son (Aguer & Fanés, 1994). Through Menjant Garotes, Dalí senior restores his authority and his reputation as paterfamilias. The symbolism of the film, and especially the gastronomic act of consuming sea urchins with which the film ends, has been analyzed in depth by Fanés (2000), who concludes that the film shows the notary as a “Pantagruelian, fierce, terrible figure, who devours his own creature, who destroys his son’s work” (p. 213). We cannot dwell on this fascinating aspect, which could be the subject of a whole chapter, but would highlight the fact that the film contains takes that depict the notary in an almost identical way to how his son portrayed him in 1925. Three takes in the film constitute the particular portrait Buñuel wished to paint of Dalí’s father, which shares certain features of portraits we find of monarchs in the modern age. That is to say, it is a portrait that represents the patriarch in his legitimate place, within his territory, where there can be no doubt regarding the foundation of his authority. And this, as Bodart (2012) has pointed out regarding the portraits of the Spanish monarchs of the Habsburg dynasty, cannot be considered propaganda, but an element of legitimacy. Buñuel does the same, restoring the image of a representative of the local elite so that there can be no doubting his authority following his problems with his son. And he does this through the use of the new medium, cinema, and following aesthetic parameters similar to the pictorial ones his friend Dalí used to portray his own father. Filming the notary Dalí, Buñuel also updates, both aesthetically and in terms of prestige, the public figure he is depicting. With Menjant Garotes, Buñuel tries to aesthetically construct an ethics of the bourgeoisie, legitimating the image of the father of his friend Salvador Dalí, who was an important, respected, and influential member of the local elite.

History and legitimacy in the West

57

Public relations and social aesthetics The cases of Hippocrates and Luis Buñuel are two examples, distant both in time and in elements employed, that highlight the importance of aesthetics in the construction of an ethical image throughout history. Also, the two examples allow us to illustrate the thesis of public relations as a function of social aesthetics or, in other words, how social aesthetics becomes a theoretical perspective with which to approach public relations and image construction from ancient times to the present. Although the case of Hippocrates forms part of a historical moment in time that makes it a clear antecedent of social aesthetics as an inseparable pillar of professional ethics, the importance of Buñuel and his film is that, just as Proust did in the literary field a few years earlier (Carnevali, 2008), the Spanish filmmaker understood, through the new mass media (cinema), the complementarity—even the identity—between the social element and the aesthetic. From this perspective, Buñuel was one of the discoverers of social ethics. This can also be seen in L’Âge d’Or, but from the opposite perspective: that of the surrealist artist carrying out a revolutionary act against the bourgeoisie. This complicity between aesthetics and society is important for an aesthetic understanding and appreciation of Menjant Garotes, as already enunciated by the Hippocratic texts analyzed previously. This complicity determines the particular style in which the bourgeoisie is depicted since it involves converting the sensitive form into the mode of expressing and constructing the public image of a representative of that social class, Salvador Dalí’s father. Thanks to his observational skills as a social entomologist (Buñuel was passionate about entomology), Buñuel discovered the dimension of social aesthetics, demonstrating a special sensitivity towards the subject of reputation. In order to decipher the language of aesthetic-social phenomena, it is necessary to be able to blend 1) the attentive sociologist’s view of the dynamics of power and social stratification and 2) the vision of the art connoisseur, who knows how to appreciate the smallest details and differences in style and form. Buñuel’s biographical experience (Aranda, 1976; Gibson, 2013) and his perception of the social world (that of an aesthetically involved bourgeois) exerted an important influence on shaping the sensitivity he has shown in many of his films, despite him being stereotyped as a surrealist filmmaker whose aim was the diametrical opposite of any sensitive manifestation. Thus, if in the CH there is a clear identification of an aesthetic that legitimates ethics, Menjant Garotes is a manifestation of the aesthetic dimension of society, that is, an example of social aesthetics at the service of the construction of a personal reputation and, indirectly, the public image of a social group: the bourgeoisie. Thus, the film could easily have been entitled The Indiscreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie (this is the title given to it by the Film Library of Catalonia once deposited the negative in its archives). To paraphrase Hegel’s definition of beauty, we could define social aesthetics as the knowledge that aims for the sensitive manifestation of society

58

Jordi Xifra and Maurici Jiménez

(Carnevali, 2013). This knowledge considers society as an aesthetic phenomenon: all that is social—and public relations is a social manifestation since it is a manifestation of social relations—has an aesthetic dimension. But what does this form of knowledge consist of and how is it exercised? To the extent that we are worldly beings—beings who relate to each other through their senses and, as such, are necessarily and constantly immersed in the dimension of appearance—we know all about social aesthetics: we know its laws, we speak its language and we are familiar with its artifices, although in most cases this knowledge is thoughtless and presented in the form that Bourdieu would call “practical sense” (Carnevali, 2013). When we do not call a professional (architect, designer, public relations practitioner, etc.) an expert, this knowledge is presented as savoir-faire founded on the semi-spontaneity of habitus in relation to the meaning of convenience and the opportunity that guides us in the thousands of small daily gestures that build social appearances (Bourdieu, 1984). The practical-aesthetic sense, which we could simply call “social taste” (Carnevali, 2013), produces aesthetic judgments and rules by appreciating the spirit of a situation or by elaborating a way of looking according to the circumstances, following the dynamics analogous to those of artistic improvisation. Taste is the compass that guides us in the world of social appearances: it determines how others appear before us and how we stand before them (Dalí’s father in Buñuel’s film, for example). It teaches us to choose the most appropriate dress for a mood or encounter (the Hippocratic physician, for example). The north of this compass is ethics, that is, the moral conversion of appearance. For this reason, ethics is often a matter of aesthetics, as can be seen in Kruckeberg’s (1993) aforementioned ethical analysis of CH. Indeed, when this public relations scholar linked the ethics of public relations to love, he was not far from the truth, at least etymological truth. As Garcia-Gual (1983) pointed out, the Hippocratic physician was a traveling intellectual, like the sophist and the historian, a member of a professional guild, eager to gain attention and renown for his knowledge, acting according to clear ethical principles and who stood out as much for his love of science as for his love of humanity; that is to say, for both his philotechníe and his philanthropíe. However, it must be borne in mind that the word philanthropíe is absent from the most genuine treatises in the CH, since in its sense of “love for humanity” it is a Stoic concept, and therefore comes much later. Humanitarianism is a very typical feature of medical ethics and, from the outset, is associated with appreciation for one’s own profession (Edelstein et al., 1967). Furthermore, love can be considered as one of the highest expressions of sensitivity and therefore a fundamental element of the aesthetic dimension of society. If philanthropy is part of the practice of corporate social responsibility and by extension the practice of public relations, the latter entails a love of humanity—a humanism, we might say—that makes it a socially aesthetic function, independent from its adjustment to ethical standards. An academic field like public relations, which is concerned with the public image of organizations, people, and ideas, is one of the intellectual territories

History and legitimacy in the West

59

where there can be no ethics without aesthetics since aesthetics is an ontological element of public relations. From the moment that reputation became the axis on which practically all public relations professionals pivot, aesthetics became a vital organ of public relations. For this reason, social aesthetics and public relations work in tandem; they are two faces of the same coin. Carnevali (2013) considers samples of social aesthetics to be oratory precautions, cosmetic interventions, rules of diplomacy, politesse issues, in short, any behavior that involves or affects the social appearances and public image of people and organizations. In fact, the whole rhetorical dimension of public relations implies an aesthetic dimension that can be hidden behind a high-voltage ethical discourse. Also, is corporate social responsibility not an aesthetic exercise in looking at what organizations do not really believe in? In fact, social aesthetics infuses our lives and public relations cannot be alien to this fact. The sociological theories of Thorstein Veblen, Max Weber, Norbert Elias, Erving Goffman, and Pierre Bourdieu are a good example of a sociological tradition preoccupied with and attentive to appearances, the social role of lifestyles in social stratification, and, as a consequence, symbolic phenomena with a strong aesthetic potential, such as reputation and charisma.

Aesthetic implications for public relations One of the main approaches of public relations is as a process to construct meanings. Indeed, from a symbolic interactionist perspective, “public relations and symbolic politics are both a meaning-construction process through use of symbols, interactions and interpretations” (Zhang, 2006, p. 27). Aesthetic processes are based on the creation of meanings. Consequently, public relations deals with aesthetics, and public relations processes can be approached as aesthetical processes. In their essay on the aestheticization of the world, Lipovetsky and Serroy (2013) recall how Marx, in his youthful writings, argued that the human-social world differed from the animal world in the fact that it cannot be embodied without regard for the laws of beauty. These laws of beauty are at the origin of social relations because men have produced a multitude of aesthetic phenomena, culminating in an aesthetic capitalism. Indeed, style, beauty, and the mobilization of tastes and sensibilities are imposed as strategic imperatives of brands and ideas: the consumer, design, fashion, decoration, film, advertising, and public relations industries transmit the affections and sensibilities that make up a specific aesthetic universe, one which characterizes modern-day capitalism (Lipovetsky & Serroy, 2013). Unlike reputation and social recognition, public relations is the fruit of capitalism. Indeed, public relations as a professional activity arises from the need to adapt the philosophical-sociological phenomenon of social recognition to a new reality derived from capitalism and comprising equally new actors: organizations. But the phenomenon of social recognition and its aesthetic

60

Jordi Xifra and Maurici Jiménez

foundations have existed since the emergence of complex societies somewhere in the ancient Near East (Xifra & Heath, 2015). This has two consequences. First, it shows the senselessness of limiting the history of public relations to its origins as a profession. Second, it shows that public relations forms part of the system of aesthetic capitalism and plays an important role in this process. The cases of Hippocrates and Buñuel lie lightyears away from one another, but ultimately they respond to the same dynamic of what we consider today as reputation management. Reputation management has been considered a key element of public relations to the extent that it has been considered the same activity or, at least, reputation has become a structural element of any public relations process (Heath & Xifra, 2016). An aesthetic approach to the phenomenon of public relations also affects the definition of some of its elements. Thus, reputation can be considered as the sensitive representation of social status in the public space or, in other words, the social hierarchy represented in a sensitive way. Likewise, the concept of the public can be defined as the group that meets for a common aesthetic hope, such as listening to the same things or seeing the same images. In any case, building a concept of the public based on sharing feelings is a methodology that public relations theory should explore. Applying this methodology would surely allow us to discern when we are faced with a strategy of aesthetic or ethical nature. From this perspective, we would surely realize that a field such as corporate social responsibility has more to do with aesthetics than with ethics. And not only because it can be considered as a made-up operation of the organization that wants to present itself as socially responsible, but because it is addressed at an audience composed of members who share sensibilities, even if the outcomes of CSR strategy do not improve the quality of the shared sensibility. Building public image and reputation is an ontologically aesthetic phenomenon that affects all levels of human activity. In fact, the choice of the two examples for this essay, Hippocrates and Luis Buñuel, was an aesthetic one to demonstrate that we in the scientific community are specialists not only in public relations but also in its intersection with history and cinema. Thus, this chapter is also a personal aesthetic operation aimed at reinforcing our reputation as specialists in these academic fields, as there are many more explicit and evident cases to illustrate our arguments, such as all the iconography that has legitimized power since Antiquity or the use of art for persuasive purposes, whether propaganda or public relations, if indeed they can be differentiated from one another.

References Aguer, M., & Fanés, F. (1994). Illustrated biography. In M. Racburn (Ed.), Salvador Dali: The Early Years (pp. 17–48). London: Hayward Gallery Publishing. Aranda, J. F. (1976). Luis Buñuel: A Critical Biography. New York: De Capo Press. Bodart, D. H. (2012). Pouvoirs du portrait sous les Habsbourg d’Espagne. Paris: INHA/CTHS.

History and legitimacy in the West

61

Boiry, P. A. (2004). Des public-relations aux relations publiques: la doctrine européenne de Lucien Matrat. Paris: L’Harmattan. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Carnevali, B. (2008). Proust philosophe du prestige. In M. Carbone & E. Sparvoli (Eds.), Proust et la philosophie aujourd’hui (pp. 305–322). Pisa: ETS. Carnevali, B. (2013). L’esthétique sociale entre philosophie et sciences sociales. Tracés, Revue de Sciences Humaines, 13, 29–49. Carnevali, B. (2016). Aisthesis et estime sociale: Simmel et la dimensión esthétique de la reconnaissance. Terrains/Théories, 4. In: http://teth.revues.org/686 Edelstein, L.; Temkin, O, & Temkin, C. L. (1967). Ancient Medicine: Selected Papers of Ludwig Edelstein. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press. Fanés, F. (2000). Antes de Las Hurdes. In E. Guigon (Ed.), Luis Buñuel y el surrealismo (pp. 189–213). Teruel: Museo de Teruel. García-Gual, C. (1983). Introducción General. In Tratados Hipocráticos I (pp. 11-61). Madrid: Gredos. Gibson, I. (2013). Luis Buñuel: La forja de un cineasta universal (1900–1938). Madrid: Aguilar. Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday. Gubern, R., & Hammond, P. (2012). Luis Buñuel, the Red Years: 1929–1939. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Heath, R. L., & Xifra, J. (2016). What is critical about critical public relations theory? In J. L’Etang, D. McKie, N. Snow, & J. Xifra (Eds.), Handbook of Critical Public Relations (pp. 200–210). New York: Routledge. International Public Relations Association (IPRA) (1961). Minutes of the Eighth meeting of the Council of the International Public Relations Association, Venice, Italy, May 22, 1961. IPRA (1994). A Commitment to Excellence. Sweden: GormanGruppen. IPRA (2001). IPRA Codes and Declarations (6–7). Esher, UK: IPRA. Jones, W. H. S. (1923). Hippocrates, vol. II. London: William Heinemann. Jouanna, J. (2017). Hippocrate. París: Les Belle Lettres. Kruckeberg, D. (1993). Hippocrates and Bernays: A medical ethics perspective on the ethics of public relations. Paper presented at the 79th Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Miami Beach, FL, November 18–21, 1993. Laín, P. (1970). La medicina hipocrática. Madrid: Alianza. Lipovetsky, G., & Serroy, J. (2013). L’esthétisation du monde. Vivre à l’âge du capitalisme artiste. Paris: Gallimard. Matrat, L. (1971). Relations publiques et management. Brussels: CERP. Matrat, L. (1975). Doctrine européenne des relations publiques, condition du dialogue et de la participation. Estudios de Comunicación Social y Relaciones Públicas, 1, 29–33. Maza, S. (2003). The Myth of the French Bourgeoisie: An Essay on the Social Imaginary, 1750– 1850. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Sellnow, T. L., Seeger, M. W., & Ulmer, R. R. (2005). Codes of public relations practice. In R. L. Heath (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Public Relations (p. 140–142). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Simmel, G. (1905). Philosophie der Mode. Berlin: Pan-Verlag. Vandenberghe, F. (2001). La sociologie de Georg Simmel. Paris: La Découverte. Watson, T. (2014). IPRA Code of Athens: The first international code of public relations ethics: Its development and implementation since 1965. Public Relations Review, 40(4), 707–714.

62

Jordi Xifra and Maurici Jiménez

Xifra, J. (2006a). Lucien Matrat y la consolidación de las relaciones públicas en Europa. Historia y Comunicación Social, 11, 229–240. Xifra, J. (2006b). Pioneros e ignorados: la escuela de París y la doctrina europea de las relaciones públicas. Ámbitos, 15, 449–460. Xifra, J. (2012). Public relations anthropologies: French theory, anthropology of morality and ethnographic practices. Public Relations Review, 38, 565–573. Xifra, J., & Heath, R. L. (2015). Reputation, propaganda and hegemony in Assyriology studies: A gramscian view of public relations historiography. Journal of Public Relations Research, 27(3), 196–211. Zhang, J. (2006). Public diplomacy as symbolic interactions: A case study of Asian tsunami relief campaign. Public Relations Review, 32(1), 26–32.

5

The trajectory of practices and values of public relations in China The ascent of a humanistic turn within Chinese public relations Jenny Zhengye Hou

There is a famous Chinese saying from Lao Tzu’s Tao Te Ching: “The best virtue is as kind as water,” often translated as “the highest excellence is like [that of] water [Shangshan ruishui].” This aphorism indicates that water, albeit soft and even shapeless, has the power to moisturize and change things in an unobtrusive way. In an interview with a senior executive I met in Beijing a decade ago, the Public Relations Director of Microsoft (China) used this metaphor to describe her understanding of the ideal PR as being powerful yet invisible, able to penetrate and influence everything. I cannot agree more when it comes to describing PR with Chinese characteristics, especially when it comes to the trajectory of practices and values of PR in that country, which not only carries the traditional Chinese cultural imprint but also blends with modern Western features. As Salcedo (2008) argues, “the study of PR must, simultaneously, be a history of ideas and a history of praxis, an examination of the relationships between ideas and action” (p. 281). In light of this historical spirit, this chapter seeks to paint an evolving picture of Chinese ancient thinking, philosophy, and PR-like activities. Also, this chapter reviews the four decades of modern PR development that inherited traditional wisdom but was also reshaped by China’s institutional transition through learning from the West and, consequently, becoming more immersed with the globe. On this basis, it concludes that China, as the world’s next superpower, has and will continue to experience a humanistic turn in PR to not only boost the value of its traditional culture but also rejuvenate the “Chinese Dream” through keeping its people at heart and addressing people’s needs to seek balance in the face of soaring economic growth.

The traditional values, Confucianism, and enduring impacts on PR Despite being introduced as a professional field from the West (mainly the United States), public relations can find its archetype in ancient China, one of

DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340-5

64 Jenny Zhengye Hou

the four oldest civilizations in the world. With more than 2,000 years of history encompassing 13 dynasties, China has been deeply influenced by Confucianism, which continuously serves as a secular philosophy to maintain the social order and is being reinterpreted by the Chinese government for contemporary governance. Some of the values and thoughts promoted in Confucianism resemble the modern thinking of PR, such as emphasizing the importance of people, relationship building, and political lobbying. This is exemplified in the old Chinese saying, “Water could carry the imperial boat but also turn it over [shuineng zaizhou, yineng fuzhou].” Here, “water” means people. Therefore, all emperors attached importance to establishing and maintaining good relationships between the ruler and the ruled. For political purposes, ancient strategists adopted lobbying-like activities to travel around different sub-nations within a highly divided society and persuaded their leaders to build strategic alliances. Nevertheless, some distinctive values of Confucianism have informed and shaped the practice of PR in China in different ways from the West. The values reviewed here are not exhaustive but rather provide major indicators of the Chinese culture. Authoritarianism

Confucianism has conventionally been closely associated with authoritarianism, believed to operate in politics as an overarching ideology and as a set of moral codes to regulate political behaviors and to ensure discipline and loyalty. Some scholars (e.g., He, 2010; Zhang et al., 2009) even argue that Chinese political elites have deliberately used Confucianism to maintain authoritarianism through the exertion of authoritarian statecraft, collectivist hierarchical behaviors, and the legitimation of unequal power distribution. Under the guidance of Confucianism, Chinese authoritarianism necessitates high power distance and social hierarchy stemming largely from an imperial tradition. For example, emperors are viewed as sons of God (tianzi), endowed with divine right and supreme authority. They are encouraged to become benevolent leaders, to whom ordinary people are subordinated and obedient. People follow the rulers in exchange for their protection and consideration (Hofstede, 2001). In a Confucian society, government is the heart of civilization. Given its emphasis on order and authority, Chinese authoritarianism is characterized by a patriarchal culture that justifies paternalistic intervention in all major affairs. In other words, since both the state and family have a similar institutional structure (jiaguo tonggou) in China, the government is seen as a parent (often the father) of the family, and as the top decision-maker. All people or citizens are seen as equivalent to the children within a family and have obligations such as loyalty and commitment to the government (the parent) (Chen & Chung, 1994). As reflected in China’s modern institutions, the authoritarian government interferes in the market economy as an invisible hand. The government is the sole judge, manager, and administrator for allocating resources, approving projects, and controlling access to lands, finance, and public funds.

The trajectory of practices and values

65

This authoritarianism, undoubtedly, constitutes a salient institutional difference between China and the West, thus shaping PR in two important ways. First, government becomes the key or even the single public that matters to Chinese PR (Sriramesh & Enxi, 2004). All corporate communication in China must first serve broadly the interests of the Party and the nation, align business goals with government priorities—this orientation allows businesses to earn and retain the right to operate in moments of crisis, political changes, as well as periods of stability (Wolf, 2015). Second, PR, similar to media in China, is used as an instrument for the state to maintain political legitimacy and to resolve the conflicts between the soaring economy and people’s growing concerns about justice, ethics, and sustainable development. At the national level, PR is perceived to play a crucial role in upholding Chinese authoritarianism and strengthening social cohesion while reconciling differing interests and appeals from among stakeholders (Hou, 2018). Guanxi

China is a guanxi society, dating back to the Confucian definition of five guanxi/ relations (wulun): the relationships between sovereign and subordinate, father and son, elder brother and younger brother, husband and wife, and friend and friend (Park & Luo, 2001). Other than the case when friends interact, the other four guanxi follow strict orders, with the sovereign holding the supreme power above all. In other words, guanxi establishes the structural patterns of Chinese society (Chen & Starosta, 1997). Originating from personal connections (e.g., kinship, friendship, co-workers), guanxi can be extended to an organizational level such as the guanxi/relationship between a corporation and a government department. Chinese sociologist and anthropologist Fei (1985, p. 24) coined the term “differential mode of association” (chaxu geju) to describe how a person develops his/her guanxi networks. For the purpose of reciprocity and favor (renqing) exchange, he said, individuals attempt to build close relationships and increase the degree of particularism (shortening distances) with resourceful parties, while having loose connections and decreasing the degree of particularism (lengthening distances) with less resourceful ones (Fei, 1985). It can be argued that the guanxi culture provides a natural soil of Chinese humanism because it emphasizes interdependent, proper, and mutually beneficial social relationships, but also acknowledges the deeply seated inequality and collective interests that loom over close relationships. As Miike (2003) put it, what is significant in the Asian, and especially the Chinese society, is the myriad of people who are interrelated through various ties; the myriad of people become meaningful only in relation to others. The values associated with guanxi, such as mutual trust, affection (ganqing), and commitment, become principles of people’s relational interaction. For example, people tend to believe those within guanxi networks, invest in building sentimental ties through socializing (e.g., gift-giving, attending banquets, etc.), and feel obligated to help each other to maintain the long-term guanxi. It is because of this

66 Jenny Zhengye Hou

mutuality that guanxi forms the social fabric of Chinese humanism and is used by people or organizations for instrumental purposes (e.g., seeking job opportunities or benefits from within guanxi networks). As documented in numerous PR studies (e.g., Chen, 2004, 2009; Huang, 2000), guanxi has become a defining feature of Chinese PR as exemplified in people’s reductionist views of PR as interpersonal guanxi such as guest relations, social etiquette, and the entertainment or extension of hospitality to important individuals. For all kinds of organizations, it is a norm to do guanxi before doing PR to build trust and rapport with target audiences, thus smoothing the obstacles or barriers to communication (Hou & Zhu, 2012). Informed by the aforementioned differential mode of association (chaxu geju), Chinese organizations consciously build guanxi with key, powerful figures such as government officials, media gatekeepers, and policymakers, who can either make final decisions or command a top-down solution. Accordingly, scholar Huang (2000) proposed a personal influence model to describe how Chinese PR employs or sometimes even manipulates guanxi to accomplish specific PR tasks such as gaining media exposure, seeking policy support, or dampening negative coverage in a crisis. Face (mianzi)

If guanxi establishes the structural patterns of Chinese society, face (mianzi)— referred to as one’s dignity, image, and reputation deriving from one’s social status and influence—serves as the operational mechanism of guanxi building (Chen & Starosta, 1997). This means that people in guanxi should show mutual respect and courtesy to preserve each other’s faces. Loss of face, regardless of one’s own fault or other’s offense, is considered to be worse than the loss of a limb (Hofstede, 2001). Also, people tend to raise their faces and accrue social capital through building guanxi with high-profile, influential figures (Yang, 2002). In turn, people who are relatively resourceful and powerful in guanxi networks are supposed to give the disadvantaged a face (gei mianzi) by helping them out. Given the prominence of face, some scholars (e.g., Oetzel & Ting-Toomey, 2003; Ting-Toomey, 2005) use the term “facework” to describe people’s communicative strategies and actions taken to gain, maintain, or restore face in various face-concerning situations (e.g., conflicts, requests, embarrassment). Oetzel et al. (2001) summarize three categories of facework associated with different strategies: 1) dominating facework aims to present a credible image or win a conflict through aggression and self-defense, 2) avoiding facework tends to preserve relations by not directly addressing the conflict, giving in, and involving a third party, and 3) integrating facework resolves conflicts while maintaining relationships through apologies, compromise, private discussion, and consideration of the other. The impacts of the face culture on Chinese PR practices are far-reaching. On the one hand, PR is interpreted or exercised as image work to establish

The trajectory of practices and values

67

or polish an individual or organization’s face for external audiences (Zhang & Cameron, 2003). Many Chinese companies equate PR to designing a new logo, developing a new package, or staging a new event to boost the face and influence of the organization. At the national level, PR is often practiced as one-way promotion of China’s new face toward the world through issuing, disseminating, or launching the country’s publicity films internationally, such as in New York’s Times Square. On the other hand, PR is seen within China as a dirty industry and thus used as a tool to cover up scandals, problems, or, more particularly, the facts so as to save and protect an individual or organization’s face. As exemplified in the 2008 Sanlu melamine crisis, the company preferred to use PR to conceal the situation and preserve face rather than proactively communicate with the public about the truth (Lyu, 2012). It is also because of the face culture that some Chinese organizations choose to divert public attention from a crisis through creating a different issue, avoiding direct conflict but embedding information in broader contexts. Huang et al. (2016) call this strategic ambiguity that characterizes crisis communication in the Chinese culture. Harmony

The genuine face of Chinese PR cannot be demystified until the veil of harmony (he or hexie) is lifted. Harmony is deemed as the core tenet of Confucianism (Chen, 2008). Due to the enduring simplification of harmony as compromise and conflict avoidance, people often mistakenly believe that China is a harmonious society where everyone follows the dictates of the government and lives a peaceful life (Mcelreath et al., 2001). However, as promoted in the Doctrine of the Mean (zhongyong), harmony is “the universal path which they [people] all should pursue … and a happy order will prevail throughout heaven and earth, and all things will be nourished and flourish” (Legge, 2015, p. 259). In other words, harmony guides the way people interact with nature and with each other by acknowledging the co-existence of similarities and differences, consistency and contradiction, and consensus and conflicts. Revolving around harmony, different moral standards, guidelines, social expectations of people’s behaviors are generated. In particular, Confucianism lays a hierarchical foundation for Chinese harmony: harmony is built on a social order that prioritizes national interest and political stability followed by fulfilling collective interests and, lastly, individual interests. In Delury (2008) words, this is to create “consensus within limit” (p. 41). Nevertheless, harmony does not mean a fixed or static state but represents a dynamic equilibrium of power differentials that enables negotiation and changes. In Chinese culture, the idea of changes is referred to as bian. As an important ontological assumption, bian indicates that all kinds of interaction (e.g., between people and nature, or amongst people) is an endless, cyclical, and transforming process in which no substance is eternal (Chen & Chung, 1994). The yin (the amiable force) and yang (the unyielding force) theory,

68 Jenny Zhengye Hou

which illustrates the co-existence and ceaselessly dialectical interplay of the two opposite yet complementary forces, also supports that harmony itself is a liquid process full of tensions and competition (Mcelreath et al., 2001). In this sense, harmony can be seen as both an outcome and a means of reconciling different social conflicts and achieving greater solidarity in China. The harmony value is found to have deeply shaped Chinese PR practices, especially government relations, lobbying, and public affairs (Hou & Zhu, 2012). For example, harmony is used as an overarching framework to guide corporate negotiation with the government for autonomy, flexibility, and support in the policy process. Since harmony allows for both consensus and disagreement, PR people’s policy negotiation involves two aspects. On the one hand, they introduce new policy options to the authoritarian government by presenting a scientific analysis of issues. On the other hand, they are cautious not to challenge the political bottom-line, wary of the government’s supreme leadership status. Such a harmony-informed negotiation strategy can be compared to drawing squares (rules) within a circle (framework) (Hou, 2016). Consequently, harmony becomes a robust and resilient strategy that not only empowers Chinese organizations to initiate changes and experiment with innovations but also to sustain the political legitimacy of leadership and domination exemplified by the state.

The four decades of modern PR development in China With the cultural imprint as illustrated above, modern PR—originating from Western (mainly American) capitalism, democracy, and individualism—was introduced to China in the 1980s in the wake of economic reform and the nation’s opening-up policy. Since then, PR has grown as a cultural practice and booming industry by assuming Chinese characteristics. PR became what it is today through navigating its way within various fissures such as tradition versus modernity, market versus state, and localization versus globalization, and doing so across four decades in China. The first decade (1980–1989): from introduction to a sudden hit

In the first decade after China’s economic reform and opening-up, one of the most compelling institutional features became the transition from a planned economy, where the state monopolized and allocated all resources, to a market-oriented economy, where most organizations unwillingly entered free competition. Shifting from a Maoist focus on class struggle and political ideology, Deng Xiaoping, the general manager of China’s modernization, prioritized economic prosperity, describing this move through a metaphor: “It does not matter if the cat [ideology] is black or white so long as it catches the mouse [economy]” (Tan & Tan, 2004, p. 54). Under the market impetus, PR was initially introduced into China by foreign and joint ventures in the early 1980s (Black, 1990–1991). For example, Hill & Knowlton established its first

The trajectory of practices and values

69

branch in Beijing in 1984, followed by the founding of China Global PR in 1985, which was owned jointly by Burson-Marsteller and the Xinhua News Agency (He & Xie, 2009). The first local PR department originated from a state-owned enterprise (SOE)—Guangzhou Bai-Yunshan Pharmaceutical Factory in 1984 (Chen & Culbertson, 1996). This global introduction and local imitation necessarily led to the Western idea of PR diffused in China both horizontally (across industries) and vertically (across sectors). Chinese scholar Weijian Liao explained the imperative of introducing PR to China: “As can be seen in the West, the development of public relations mirrors the attainment of a level of social and economic development, civilization, and democracy. China in transition was in urgent need of public relations” (Hu et al., 2015, p. 267). However, this new concept of PR encountered challenges from ingrained Chinese cultural attributes and immature institutional development. For example, PR was easily mixed with interpersonal guanxi. Whenever Chinese organizations encounter problems, they will first seek guanxi with powerful people to get things done. Hence, PR is simplified as quick problemsolving through using guanxi, namely, gao guanxi (Huang, 2000). Another typical misperception was to equate PR to hospitality or guest relations. This can be attributed to the misleading TV series Miss Public Relations (gongguan xiaojie), which portrayed a group of young girls hosting and entertaining guests at hotels (Chen & Culbertson, 1996). Also, because most organizations tended to give “red packets” (hongbao, or monetary gifts) to journalists for news coverage, PR was misinterpreted as “pay the reporter.” At the state level, PR practices still largely inherited a strong propagandistic tradition as one-way publicity, top-down information dissemination, and directive ideological education. For example, emphasizing positive news, channeling public opinion, and upholding China Communist Party (CCP) leadership have been the guiding principles of China’s Central Department of Publicity (Zhongxuanbu) since 1984 (Ji, 2004). As the mouthpiece of the CCP government, Chinese media were under rigid control and censorship. Accordingly, corporate PR could only publish soft news (ruanwen), namely, purchasing the advertising edition of state-owned newspapers to publicize organizational information (Chen, 2011). This PR practice led to a Chinese model of charging public relations fees—calculating the number of characters in soft news, rather than charging by the hour as practiced in the West. In so doing, PR became a complement to advertising. By 1989, PR in China experienced a turning point—it began to be questioned and unsupported by the Chinese government mainly because of the Tiananmen “Fourth of June” incident. Given the opening-up policy, Western concepts and thoughts like democracy, liberty, freedom, equality, rationality, and subjectivity prevailed among Chinese intellectuals. College students and other youth organized a pro-democracy movement in Tiananmen Square to appeal for personal liberation and human rights, which, in turn, incurred a government crackdown (Hu et al., 2015). Since this incident, the government started to blame and rethink what it now saw as an evil influence behind

70 Jenny Zhengye Hou

those imported Western ideas and practices, including PR. As a result, the Western style of modern PR considerably slowed in China, although the practice was not entirely banned. A new paradigm of “socialist public relations with Chinese features” (Mcelreath et al., 2001, p. 7) came into the foreground, which disregarded the values embedded in Western PR (e.g., democracy, civil society, and the marketplace of ideas) but strengthened state supervision and guidance of the practices. The second decade (1990–1999): from political rethinking to a regrowth

As mentioned earlier, the shock to the power elite caused by the Tiananmen Square pro-democracy movement alerted the leadership to reconsider all ideas imported from the West. Such political rethinking led to overcautiousness and risk aversion, curtailing the development of Chinese PR. Enterprises, media, and universities remained cautious about the rebound of PR. Some companies even closed PR departments and canceled this function (Tong, 1989). Public relations associations shrank, while the number of publication outlets dedicated to PR dropped significantly from 33 to two in 1989 (Hu et al., 2015). Also, the public, in general, became skeptical about the utility and social value of PR that was seen as self-serving and profit-driven and less caring about social responsibility or professional ethics. Overall, this period— the dawn of the 1990s—was marked by the perception that Western-flavored PR was experiencing a crisis of identity and legitimacy since the Tiananmen Square incident. In response to a government call for constructing socialist public relations with Chinese features, Gang An, the editor-in-chief of Economic Daily, wrote in an article that “China’s public relations practices are socialist in nature, and contribute to national modernization. … We do not object to valuable experiences imported from the West, but we are firmly against copying without localization” (An, 1990, p. 4). The China Public Relations Association also launched a series of forums and campaigns to reestablish the name and legitimacy of PR, such as convening the national conference and issuing the Code of Ethics in 1991. Since then, China has witnessed a regrowth of PR due to increasingly market-oriented reforms and government restructuring. A large number of state-owned enterprises became privatized and medium-smallsized companies also emerged. Parallel to the emerging IT industry in the mid-1990s, both international (e.g., Edelman, Fleishman-Hillard, Ogilvy, and Ruder-Finn) and local PR agencies (e.g., Bluefocus, D&S, Shunya) appeared in the market to help those high-tech companies survive the fierce competition (Chen, 2011). The route toward developing professional PR practice was not smooth. In the early 1990s, there prevailed a trend of labeling PR as so-called strategic planning (cehua) by selling plans or solutions to companies to help resolve their problems. Many PR experts named themselves King of Gold Ideas (jindianzi dawang). As found in Hu’s (2014) study, He Yang was among the earliest to

The trajectory of practices and values

71

reap the profit from pitching PR ideas to help businesses address marketing issues, but he was eventually jailed for swindling. However, with the influence of multinational corporations (MNCs) and international PR agencies in the mid-1990s, Chinese PR started to learn from basic Western practices such as news releases, press conferences, events, product launches, and media relations. Given the tradition of guanxi, PR still, to a large extent, relied on relationships with influential figures to get things done. At this stage, PR was predominantly one-way communication, focusing on building a positive image of an organization. The relationship between PR agencies and the organizations who hired them was hierarchical, with agencies mainly implementing the pre-determined strategies, rather than acting as innovative or change-agent public relations shops. At the state level, the Chinese government started strengthening CCP’s supervision over PR and using it to better present China to the rest of the world after the Tiananmen Square incident (Shao & Wong, 1996). In other words, PR was used as propaganda both domestically and internationally. For example, the government called to “guide the people with correct public opinion” during 1994’s National Working Conference on Propaganda Thought (He & Xie, 2009, p. 3). Chan (2002) translated this guideline into agenda-setting, which meant Chinese PR/propaganda aimed to tell people what to think about, rather than what to think. In 1999, Li Ruihuan, the former chairman of the Chinese Political Consultative Conference, asserted that “the development of China’s public relations is the inexorable trend of China’s opening and reform policy” (He & Xie, 2009, p. 3), which represented a national approval and need of PR more than ever before. In practice, the municipal government of Tianjin was among the first to use modern PR techniques such as public hearings and community consultations to solicit public feedback on policy issues (Chen, 2003). The central government also appointed Chai Zemin, the former ambassador to the United States, as the first president of the China International Public Relations Association (CIPRA) in 1991 (Hu et al., 2015). Ever since, CIPRA has played an important role in leading and monitoring the development of PR in China through such activities as holding biannual national conferences, providing training for PR practitioners, and inviting international PR scholars like Sam Black and James E. Grunig to share and impart their knowledge of PR. The best China PR case study competition, first held by CIPRA in 1993, became a flagship activity for specializing and professionalizing PR (Chen, 2011). The third decade (2000–2010): from nationwide recognition to a surge

Entering the new millennium, PR in China headed into a golden age as a result of China’s entry to the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001. With deepened market reform, gradually commercialized media, and increasing global connectivity, PR in China was widely adopted by organizations

72 Jenny Zhengye Hou

of all kinds and rapidly grew. SOEs like the National Grid of China, China Mobile, and SINOPEC founded their own PR departments, followed by both medium and small-sized companies. On December 3, 2000, CIPRA implemented the first national accreditation exam for PR practitioners and recognized PR as an official occupation (Zhang, 2010). Since 2001, CIPRA issued an annual survey report on the Chinese PR industry and a ranking of the top 20 international and local PR agencies (Chen, 2011). In so doing, the standards of PR practices have been more broadly established, facilitating the field’s professionalization in China. According to the 2010 CIPRA Survey Report, there were 20,000 to 30,000 trained PR professionals and 2,000 PR firms in China. The annual spending within the PR industry was more than 21 billion renminbi (RMB), or approximately $3 billion USD, in 2010 alone, reflecting a growth rate of 25% per annum between 2000 and 2010. Learning from the West, Chinese PR practices ranged from media relations, branding, image building, crisis communication to online PR. Local enterprises became the major client of PR services (56.4%), compared to 43.6% of MNC clients (who initially introduced PR to China). While business organizations reached 81.4% of the entire client pool, non-profits such as government agencies and NGOs also started to hire PR agencies for professional services (18.6%). This number reflected that government bodies began to recognize the value and potential of PR in information (communication) management. Different from the previous use of PR for conventional propaganda and information control, the Chinese government began to actively set the agenda and creatively massage public opinion, which created a bold new version of Chinese PR (Bandurski, 2009). On September 19, 2004, the CPC Central Committee adopted a resolution that called for improving its ability to mobilize all positive factors on the broadest scale and constantly enhance its ability to construct a harmonious socialist society. The government called on PR, as a strategic function, to resolve various social contradictions (He & Xie, 2009). With these changing guidelines and a loosening political environment, market-oriented PR began to penetrate the ideology-driven state propaganda. There are several successful national PR cases that reflected this government endorsement and employment of PR. In 2003, in reaction to the SARS epidemic crisis, the government, led by President Hu Jingtao, attempted to openly and directly communicate with the media and public via the spokesperson system, which has since been institutionalized across all levels of government (Chen, 2009). Afterward, the government unveiled the Emergency Response Law and Government Public Information Regulation to improve the timeliness, accessibility, and availability of public information. With the help of leading global PR agency Burson-Marsteller, China won the opportunity to host the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games, during which the government hired Hill & Knowlton to manage relations with foreign media. In 2009, President Hu’s visit to the United States and the broadcasting of China’s international

The trajectory of practices and values

73

image documentary on electronic billboards in Times Square were another sign of China’s use of international PR. In the following year, during the 2010 Shanghai World Expo, not only SOEs but also provincial pavilions adopted professional services (e.g., publicity, events management) from either international or local PR agencies. As such, Chinese scholars called this decade “The Era of State PR” (Chen, 2011, p. 3). The fourth decade (2011–2019): from internationalization to the next superpower

The fourth decade of PR development in China was remarkably influenced by the advent and proliferation of new media, which significantly changed PR dynamics in China by introducing a multi-layered communication environment. China has become the world’s largest user of the Internet. Specifically, by 2014, out of a total population of approximately 1.3 billion, there were 600 million Chinese Internet users, with approximately 500 million using social media (e.g., Wechat, weibo) (Hu et al., 2015). The three giant Internet companies—Baidu, Alibaba, and Tencent—achieved listings on the New York Stock Exchange, signifying China’s fusion in the global market. The rise of new media and the advancement of digital technologies ranging from AI and big data to machine learning not only proposed opportunities and challenges to organizations, but also allowed publics in China to be better informed, more articulate, and more empowered. Online publics, sometimes called netizens, increasingly voiced their concerns about policy issues, food safety, health care, and environmental sustainability in the course of China’s marketization, urbanization, and modernization. These changes shaped Chinese PR practice development. Due to easy access to social media, many organizations started to practice PR through their own online communication outlets, rather than merely rely on traditional media. In the increasingly complicated media landscape, Chinese corporate communication achieved publicity through earned, paid, owned, and shared media, much like the activities of their Western counterparts (Vercic & Vercic, 2016). Although consumer relations still constituted a major part of Chinese PR, more and more PR efforts were put into addressing social responsibility and holding corporations accountable to the public. NGOs in China, precisely called GNGOs (government-led NGOs) (Yang, 2005), also learned to use PR to promote social causes such as environmental protection, social justice, and migrating labor rights, while aligning with the CCP government framework. The PR industry, as surveyed in the 2018 CIPRA annual report, continued to grow at a rate of 11.9% per annum between 2011 and 2018 and reached a revenue of 62.7 billion RMB, or about $9 billion USD, in 2018. Across the top 30 PR agencies in China, the two core businesses were digital/new media PR and crisis communication. Bluefocus (lanse guangbiao), the largest Chinese PR agency, was ranked number one in the Asia Agency Rankings for 2015 and in the top ten in the Global Agency Rankings for 2015.

74 Jenny Zhengye Hou

China’s continuous fast-growing GDP has made it the second-largest economy in the world and positioned it to be the world’s next superpower. To meet the challenges of internalization and globalization, China gradually shifted from its traditional propaganda to contemporary PR. The country’s PR practitioners learned the Western way, methodology, and techniques of practice to project and communicate China’s international image, cultural identity, and ideological legitimacy (Brady, 2009). The Chinese government, media, universities, SOEs, and public intellectuals realized that China needed to have a dialogue, instead of a monologue, with the global public, and do it in an engaging and efficient manner. PR was seen as the best instrument to help build national soft power through cultivating positive relationships with worldwide stakeholders and reshaping their perceptions and understandings of Chinese culture, tradition, and values. Against this backdrop, the Chinese government became, especially in the 2011–2019 period, a major client of employing professional PR services across a range of international events (e.g., the 2014 Wuzhen World Internet Conference and the 2016 Hangzhou G20 Submit). Apart from international engagement, PR was also used by the Chinese government as an important means to smooth relationships and reconcile conflicts within its social system, although the government may not attribute such efforts to PR. After 40 years of economic reform and opening-up, China’s market became mature—but various conflicts between humans and nature, between interest groups, and between the state and the public also appeared to escalate. In this context, the Chinese government smartly identified the principal contradiction facing CCP as between “unbalanced and inadequate development and the people’s ever-growing needs for a better life” (Tsai, 2019, p. 411). In other words, the government recognized that new and emerging aspirations of the Chinese people, especially the middle class, should take priority over economic growth. As a response, the government under President Xi’s administration embarked in 2012 on a nationwide PR initiative about constructing the “Chinese Dream”. This initiative—still ongoing—served a dual purpose: 1) to re-organize the vision of Chinese past, present, and future, so as to ignite people’s desire to pursue individual prosperity and freedom, and 2) to solidify CCP power within the socialist modernization and national rejuvenation project which, in turn, legitimizes increased authoritarian domination, censorship, and coordination.

Looking forward: a humanistic turn within PR in China This chapter reviewed both the ancient roots and modern development of PR in China, which collectively signify a humanistic turn regarding contemporary Chinese PR. In ancient China, the people-centered norm was highly regarded as a political teaching for emperors. This is reflected in the classic “water and boat” metaphor: water (people/public opinion) can carry but also turn over the boat (emperor/ruling regime). Confucianism, with its core thinking of ren

The trajectory of practices and values

75

(benevolence) and he (harmony), has consistently promoted a political ideal for Chinese dynasties over thousands of years: to achieve a “benevolent authoritarian polity” (Kang, 2006, p. 94) through building and maintaining harmonious relationships with people. Even within ancient political lobbying (youshui), Confucian central tenets such as “people come first [minweizhong], state second [sheji cizhi] and emperor last [jun weiqing],” “loving people as loving your children [aimin ruzi],” “enriching the people first then the state [fuguoxianfumin]” were extensively applied by strategists to build alliances and win people’s minds and hearts. All these humanistic values guided by Confucianism have historically been embedded in the ancient PR-like practices. With the introduction of a West-originating PR to China in the 1980s, this humanism orientation has somewhat given way to economic development, industrialization, and modernization. PR in China, carrying the Western ideas, templates, and ways of doing things, tried to find its own path amid various dialectics within the country’s cultural transitions and tensions such as marketization versus state domination, business privatization versus government regulation, and national revival versus globalization. Mainly used as an economic function, PR in China helps MNCs expand market share in the country and helps local enterprises to survive in the marketplace. The fast-booming PR industry also features a promotional mix of publicity, events, campaigns, and advertising. Due to excessive attention to profit-making, PR is positioned or practiced by most Chinese organizations to generate cash flow instead of emphasizing humane concerns and social responsibility. The ethics of PR have long been under question when it comes to such controversial practices as paid news, astroturfing (shuijun), and covering up scandals. Even emerging corporate social responsibility initiatives in recent years have often been criticized by the public as corporate window dressing (Lin, 2010). The process for the Chinese government to recognize the social value and contribution of PR has not been smooth. Initially viewing PR as a modern face of propaganda, the Chinese government tended to use PR for generating positive coverage or guiding public opinion in line with CCP ideology. After the 1989 Tiananmen Square incident, the CCP became cautious and resistant to Western concepts like democracy, liberty, freedom, and individual rights associated with the West-originating PR. Because of the international question about human rights abuses (especially government crackdowns on student protests), the Chinese government started to acknowledge the strategic importance of PR to build a new national image as open, prosperous, civilized, and contemporary. This explains why PR has been increasingly applied in China’s major international events like the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games, the 2010 Shanghai World Expo, and the 2016 Hangzhou G20 Summit. Efforts to construct socialist public relations with Chinese features (Mcelreath et al., 2001, p. 7) consistently revolve around how to serve China’s ever-changing economic, political, and socio-cultural needs while also upholding the authoritarian government’s legitimacy. In other words, the nuclear Chinese characteristic of PR lies in maintaining the CCP ideology and leadership.

76 Jenny Zhengye Hou

However, recent years have witnessed a growing humanistic turn to Chinese PR, as evidenced in both government discourses and practices. A humanistic turn means that the centricity of people and humanistic values, historically rooted in Confucianism, are reinvigorated as an overarching guideline of China’s deepening reform and modernization. As reviewed earlier, since the government realized the present principal contradiction between the soaring market economy and people’s ever-growing needs for a better life, they have started to address tensions between the two through enabling “well-rounded human development and all-round social progress” (Tsai, 2019, p. 411). This momentum can be captured in the government’s attempts to adjust discourses to address “people orientation [yiren weiben],” “understanding people’s needs [dong renminxuqiu],” “creating a better life for normal citizens [weiputongbaixing chuangzao genghaodeshenghuo],” and “lifting people’s dignity and happiness [tisheng renminde zunyan yu xingfugan].” This humane spirit is further reflected in developing policies that cover issues ranging from legal protection, social participation, access to quality education, working rights, and environmental sustainability. In practice, government PR adopted increasingly consultative and participatory approaches such as public hearings, surveys, polls, and interacting with netizens online to understand what people’s needs are, and how those needs are changing. It is worth noting that this humanistic turn within Chinese PR is not a simple recycling of traditional Confucian values, but a strategic and creative appropriation of ancient wisdom for modern governance. Taking “constructing a harmonious society [goujian hexie shehui]” as an example, it is a typical reinterpretation and reinvention of the harmony philosophy to tackle various social conflicts and contradictions emerging from China’s “large-scale institutional transitions” (Peng, 2003, p. 275). Through addressing people’s needs while adhering to CCP leadership, the harmonious society encourages people to adopt “the way things are [daofa ziran],” rather than blindly copying Western models. Another example is the “Chinese Dream” (zhongguo meng), a reimagined grand vision proposed by President Xi to integrate normal citizens’ desired lifestyles into socialist modernization and national rejuvenation. Through giving the public shared ownership of the “Chinese Dream”, the government has, to a large extent, successfully established its benevolent authority and renewed its political legitimacy. In this sense, the humanism practiced in Chinese PR is not necessarily the one that “denies or slights a Supreme Power, but one that professes the unity of man and Heaven [tianrenheyi]” (Chan, 1963, p. 3)— where once the ancient emperors were seen as “the son of heaven [tianzhi jiaozi],” the authoritarian government assumes that role. Li Ruihuan, the former Standing Committee Member of the China Political Bureau, predicted that “the development of China’s public relations is the inexorable trend” (He & Xie, 2009, p. 3). It can also be argued that the humanistic turn to Chinese PR is inevitable in China’s post-industrialization and post-modernization development. Through constantly learning from the West, reflecting on its own indigenous culture, and creatively transforming the

The trajectory of practices and values

77

ancient philosophy, Chinese PR will dynamically update both the connotation and denotation of humanism within its practice. However, the way that humanism penetrates into every aspect of Chinese PR might be like unseen water, as the metaphor mentioned at the beginning of this chapter suggests. If we say that “the best virtue is as kind as water,” then the most desired humanistic PR in China should be one that pursues and enables the very ethical, virtuous, nourishing, and invisible yet powerful quality of PR, one that advances not only individuals’ life chances but also a sense of social solidarity about helping individuals toward reaching their desire to live a life well lived. Despite carrying nuanced and adapted meanings in the Chinese context, humanism should indeed serve as the global foundation of PR that potentially sparks a worldwide, multi-way dialogue among different cultures, philosophies, and nations.

References An, G. (1990). What is pubic relations with Chinese characteristics? Public Relations, 2(2), 4–5. Bandurski, D. (2009). China and the “crisis” of public opinion. Retrieved from http://cmp .hku.hk/2009/08/17/1706/ Black, S. (1990–1991). Public relations in China today. Public Relations Quarterly, 35(4), 29–30. Brady, A.-M. (2009). Mass persuasion as a means of legitimation and China’s popular authoritarianism. American Behavioral Scientist, 53, 434–457. Chan, A. (2002). From propaganda to hegemony: Jiaodian Fangtan and China’s media policy. Journal of Contemporary China, 11(30), 35–51. Chan, W. (1963). A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Chen, C. J. (2009). The distribution and return of social capital in Taiwan. In R. Hsung, N. Lin, & R. L. Breiger (Eds.), Contexts of Social Capital: Social Networks in Markets, Communities, and Families (pp. 193–227). New York: Routledge. Chen, G. M. (2008). Towards transcultural understanding: A harmony theory of Chinese communication. China Media Research, 4(4), 1–13. Chen, G. M., & Chung, J. (1994). The impact of Confucianism on organizational communication. Communication Quarterly, 42(2), 93–105. Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. (1997). Chinese conflict management and resolution: Overview and implications. Intercultural Communication Studies, 7(1), 1–13. Chen, N., & Culbertson, H. M. (1996). Guest relations: A demanding but constrained role for lady public relations practitioners in Mainland China. Public Relations Review, 22(3), 279–296. Chen, N. (2003). From propangada to public relations: evolutionary change in the Chinese government. Asian Journal of Communication, 13(2), 96–121. Chen, N. (2009). Institutionalizing public relations: A case study of Chinese government crisis communication on the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. Public Relations Review, 35, 187– 198. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.05.010 Chen, X. (2011). PR in China: Witnessing 20 years. International Public Relations Magazine [in Chinese], 3, 3–5. Chen, Y. (2004). Effective public affairs in China: MNC-government bargaining power and corporate strategies for influencing foreign business policy formation. Journal of Communication Management, 8, 395–423.

78 Jenny Zhengye Hou Delury, J. (2008). “Harmonious” in China. Policy Review, 148, 35–44. Fei, X. (1985). Shihui Diaocha Zibao (Statement Regarding Social Investigations). Shanghai: Zhishi Chuban She. He, B. (2010). Four models of the relationship between Confucianism and democracy. Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 37(1), 18–33. He, C., & Xie, J. (2009). Thirty years’ development of public relations in China Mainland. China Media Research, 5(3), 1–6. Hofstede, G. (2001). Cultural Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: California Sage. Hou, J. Z. (2016). The emerging “field” of public relations in China: Multiple interplaying logics and evolving actors’ inter-relations. Public Relations Review, 42, 627–640. Hou, J. Z. (2018). Understanding the public interest puzzle in china’s public relations: The role of balance and counterbalance based on Confucian great harmony. In J. Johnston & M. Pieczka (Eds.), Public Interest Communication: Critical Debates and Global Contexts (pp. 153–171). London: Routledge. Hou, Z., & Zhu, Y. (2012). An institutional perspective of public relations practices in the Chinese cultural contexts. Public Relations Review, 38(5), 916–925. Hu, B. (2014). History of China’s Public Relations. Beijing, China: Communication University of China Press. Hu, B., Huang, Y. H., & Zhang, D. (2015). Public relations and Chinese modernity: A 21st-century perspective. Journal of Public Relations Research, 27(3), 262–279. Huang, Y. H. (2000). The personal influence model and gao guanxi in Taiwan Chinese public relations. Public Relations Review, 26, 216–239. Huang, Y. H., Wu, F., & Cheng, Y. (2016). Crisis communication in context: Cultural and political influences underpinning Chinese public relations practice. Public Relations Review, 42(1), 201–213. Ji, B. X. (2004). To be a good gatekeeper of news propaganda. Press Frontline, 3, 24–26. Kang, X. (2006). Confucianization: A future in the tradition. Social Research, 73(1), 77–120. Legge, J. (2015). Life and Teachings of Confucius. North Charleston, SC: Createspace. Lin, L. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in China: Window dressing or structural change. Berkeley Journal of International Law, 28(1), 64–100. Lyu, J. C. (2012). A comparative study of crisis communication strategies between Mainland China and Taiwan: The melamine-tainted milk powder crisis in the Chinese context. Public Relations Review, 38(5), 779–791. Mcelreath, M., Chen, N., Azarova, L., & Shadrova, V. (2001). The development of public relations in China, Russia, and the United States. In R. L. Heath (Ed.), Handbook of Public Relations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Miike, Y. (2003). Toward an alternative metatheory of human communication: An Asiacentric vision. Intercultural Communication Studies, 12(4), 39–63. Oetzel, J., & Ting-Toomey, S. (2003). Face. Face concerns in interpersonal conflict: A cross-cultural empirical test of the face negotiation theory. Communication Research, 30, 599–624. Oetzel, J., Ting-Toomey, S., Matsumoto, T., Yokochi, Y., Pan, X., Takai, J., & Wilcox, R. (2001). Face and facework in conflict: A cross-cultural comparison of China, Germany, Japan, and the United States. Communication Monographs, 68, 235–258. Park, S. H., & Luo, Y. (2001). Guanxi and organizational dynamics: Organizational networking in Chinese firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22(5), 455–477. Peng, M. W. (2003). Institutional transitions and strategic choices. The Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 275–296.

The trajectory of practices and values

79

Salcedo, N. R. (2008). Public relations before “public relations” in Spain: an early history (1881–1960). Journal of Communication Management, 12, 279–293. Shao, A. T., & Wong, M. Y. (1996). Public relations in China. Journal of Asia-Pacific Business, 1(4), 43–66. Sriramesh, K., & Enxi, L. (2004). Public relations practice and socio-economic factors: A case study of different organizational types in Shanghai. Journal of Communication Studies, 3(4), 44–77. Tan, J., & Tan, D. (2004). Entry, growth, and exit strategies of Chinese technology startups: Choosing between short-term gain or long-term potential. Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(1), 49–54. Ting-Toomey, S. (2005). The matrix of face: An updated face-negotiation theory. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Theorizing about Intercultural Communication (pp. 211–234). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Tong, Z. (1989). Thoughts on the development of China’s public relations. Public Relations Post, 1. Tsai, C. (2019). The construction of the Chinese dream. In P. Baines, N. O’Shaughnessy, & N. Snow (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Propaganda (pp. 405–421). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Vercic, D., & Vercic, A. T. (2016). The new publicity: From reflexive to reflective mediatisation. Public Relations Review, 42, 493–498. Wolf, D. (2015). Public Relations in China: Building and Defending Your Brand in the PRC. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Yang, G. (2005). Environmental NGOs and institutional dynamics in China. The China Quarterly, 181, 46–66. Yang, M. (2002). The resilience of guanxi and its new developments: A critique of some new guanxi scholarship. The China Quarterly, 170, 459–476. Zhang, A. (2010). Understanding Chinese Public Relations Education: A Cultural and Critical Perspective. (PhD), University of Maryland, College Park. Zhang, A., Shen, H. M., & Jiang, H. (2009). Culture and Chinese public relations: A multimethod “inside out” approach. Public Relations Review, 35(3), 226–231. Zhang, J. Y., & Cameron, G. T. (2003). China’s agenda building and image polishing in the US: assessing an international public relations campaign. Public Relations Review, 29, 13–28.

6

Turning to humanism Merchants, guilds, and managed public communication in Medieval Europe and Middle Period China Simon Moore

The business of humanism Today humanism drenches, inspires, and occasionally irritates literate, technologically advanced societies. In medieval Europe, it was almost non-existent at first. By the end of that long epoch, however, holders of political, economic, and religious power absorbed and built on humanist ideas, and many others were exposed to the consequences. In China, humanism appeared earlier, proceeded more or less uninterruptedly, and took a very different direction before colliding with European humanism in the late 19th and 20th centuries. In both Europe and China, the communication work of business affected the turns humanism took in the public sphere. Sweeping assertions like these, however, must adjust to times, places, and people. Humanism’s universal concern with “the humanistic (and existential) perspective” (Lee, 2003, p. 65) is expressed in different ways at different places at different times, since “the way each culture perceives or understands humanism may be specific and different” (Lee, 2003, p. 66). In Western Europe and China’s medieval periods and later, each version of humanism affected or boosted self-promotion by businesspeople and professions. Edward Bernays rightly gave some credit to Europe’s Renaissance humanist thinkers for making possible what, in time, became public relations, describing them as “scholars and writers who specialized in appealing to public opinion” (Bernays, 1952/1980, p. 19). Europe’s medieval businesses must also be credited for what is tempting and not quite accurate to call humanist PR. Like much of PR, humanism’s influence was often indirect, influencing secondary activities that served the main objective of making money. One of those activities was to grow trade and status by managing reputation. This was particularly apparent in Europe. It was part of, we shall see, an increasingly secular manifestation of humanism spread by merchants as much as by poets, artists, and other thinkers, which later reached China itself. China’s own version of humanism served other purposes and achieved different results, which are shown in the public communication of its own merchant class. New ideological, ethical or, political perspectives are checking European humanism’s astonishing spread. It is criticized—among many other things—for DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340-6

Turning to humanism

81

its intellectual and cultural exclusivity (Said, 2007); for disinterest in other, older forms of humanism, the contributions of other less individualistic cultures (Patel, 2015); for disregarding the supernatural (or non-natural) (Molefe, 2015), and deafness to the cries of Mother Earth (Buttimer, 1990; Fesmire, 2001). Alternatively, other perspectives reveal Western humanism in the reputation management activities of what is most convenient to call mercantile public relations (or managed public communication when discussing medieval public relations more generally). Chinese humanism has perhaps attracted less criticism. It has had a more continuous evolution than its Western counterpart and is more interwoven with non-natural and communal ideas. It has been said that “In the East Confucianism holds that a human is most valuable, but Chinese humanism and self are dependent on the society in which people live” (Lee, 2003, p. 66). Mercantile public relations may also, as shall be seen, offer a fresh perspective on these views of Chinese humanism, as it does for Western. We shall explore differences between Chinese and European humanism, the role of mercantile public relations, and its place in understanding what humanism is. What has humanism to do with public relations? What has it done to public relations, and what has public relations done to it?

Differences The first important differences between Western and Chinese humanism are chronological. How to isolate in time a common medieval era for two regions with very different historical experiences? Medieval Europe is conventionally the thousand-year period from the end of Rome and Europe’s first comprehensively recorded intellectual, political, economic, and cultural near-extinction in the 5th century, to the start of the 16th century. That ending point for the medieval era saw European settlement in the Americas, the decisive emergence of public humanism via the rediscovery of much classical Greek and Roman knowledge, the Renaissance, and the Reformation. China’s rough equivalent, if only in time, is the Middle Period from circa 100–1500 AD. The Middle Period covers a large part of China’s Imperial age and contained several intellectual, economic, and political developments analogous to those in medieval Europe, but which affected humanism differently. It is possible to claim that in both locations in this period humanism gathered speed and confidence and filtered into managed public communication. It must be reiterated that China’s experience with humanism was more continuous than Europe’s. By the Middle Period, it had an entrenched institutional presence that European humanism initially lacked because European states lacked China’s administrative reach. In both places, this affected what communication possibilities were open to non-government activities like business. The intellectual origins of China’s humanism are traceable to LaoTzu (regarded as the originator of Daoism/Taoism or the tao) and especially

82

Simon Moore

Confucius in the 6th and 5th centuries BC, roughly parallel with the emergence of Greek philosophy, and later to Mencius (372–289 BC), a Confucian who connected the individual’s capacity for virtue to the influence of society. Moreover, China’s humanist tenets survived times of upheaval. The intellectual influence of classical Greece and Rome on Europe was almost extinguished after a thousand years by upheavals of peoples and downfalls of states. Therefore, humanism was largely kept alive by freethinking poets and philosophers in the Islamic world, reemerging as a force in Europe in the late 14th and early 15th centuries. Nevertheless, all humanism shares a common origin, when thinkers ceased contemplating the Divine with undivided awe and reflected on the related responsibilities of earthly and immortal existence, and what, if anything, one owed the other. It is one reason why Western humanism has been called “the liberation cry of humanity” (Buttimer, 1990, p. 1), a sentiment that could be commercial as much as political. These universal impulses inevitably affected the way business people communicated. A humanism that had expanded in Europe and was carefully managed (and more deeply rooted) in China produced different results for mercantile public relations.

Europe Humanism tentatively reentered Europe at the end of the 13th and the start of the 14th centuries. Involved in this was Dante Alighieri (c. 1265–1321). He believed the individual’s ultimate aspiration was a perfected will within a God-given framework. Dante achieves this in the Divine Comedy, rising from Purgatory to Paradise encouraged by his spiritual and spirit-guide, the classical Roman poet Virgil. wait no further word or sign from me: Your will is free, erect, and whole—to act against that will would be to err: therefore I crown and mitre you over yourself. (Dante, 1995, Purgatory, Canto XXVII, lines 139–142, p. 345) Dante was an exiled Florentine politician when he wrote those lines, fusing the individual’s thirst for fulfillment with a Divine plan. On the other hand, the collector of Latin literature, Petrarch (1304-1374), had taken holy orders and turned his back on business because “I couldn’t face making a merchandise of my mind” (Bishop, 1961/2017, p. 162). One problem facing history is to extract purpose from life’s paradoxes, and it is Dante’s just quoted lines and not Petrarch’s that seem to capture the ambitious medieval merchant. Yet Petrarch is thought of as the first true humanist. He wrote Secretum, three imagined dialogues with St. Augustine not published in his lifetime but which appeared in his letters, books, and sonnets, which were read across Europe. Petrarch’s aim

Turning to humanism

83

was to discover himself as an individual, but not by bathing in Divine light. For this reason, Secretum has been called “the first example of introspective self-analysis of modern times” (Bishop, 1961/2017, p. 165). For the questing individual, said Petrarch, “A thousand ways are open to you to make choice of on every side; a thousand ports are ready to receive you” (Petrarch & Draper, 1911, Dialogue III). That was a language that merchants could understand, along with St. Augustine’s imagined caution to Petrarch, “I will never advise you to live without ambition; but I would always urge you to put virtue before glory” (Petrarch & Draper, 1911, Dialogue III). When humanist ideas devolved upon an energetic business practitioner, they signaled the need to publicize a personal reputation that joined piety and literacy to commercial enterprise and profit. Care for reputation loomed large among successful business people. For many contemporary religious and secular commentators, “sin always wedged itself between buying and selling, and merchants were invariable sinners” (Wood, 2002, p. 112). In an age of strong religious faith, this was an urgent problem for a businessperson seeking prosperity in this world and the next. In their own defense, merchants might encourage a literal understanding of Christ’s parable of the talents as justifying a good return on financial investment rather than its underlying message about returning God’s investment in mortal souls.1 Merchants might draw hope from the opinion of St. Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) that in certain (hard to satisfy) circumstances “usury is not in itself a sin” (Aquinas, 1265–1274, 2.2.77, Article 1, Objection 6). A businessman or woman might even become a saint, or at least saintly, like the former brewer, miller, self-publicist, and 15th-century Christian mystic Marjory Kempe. It was presumably rare to be a saint and in business at the same time, but Kempe was admitted into the influential guild for religious merchants in her town, and paid her dues. More familiar was the path followed in the early 13th century by Saint Francis of Assisi, who renounced worldly goods. He was, in fact, the son of a prosperous silk merchant. The father brought an action to disinherit because of Francis’s liberality with the family’s money. The father’s attitude was not to be approved. The priest who refused to take the young Francis’s coins because they derived from selling cloth received much more credit. Images of Christ driving the moneylenders from the temple were common in churches and chapels. With such prevailing opinions about accumulating wealth, which are not unfamiliar today, it is only to be expected that medieval business was deeply concerned with its reputation. Business was often seeking to explain itself and provide expiation if necessary. Medieval merchants learned they had to publicly communicate a message on these matters, especially those in towns whose liberties depended on the success and rights granted to trade. Then there was the added need for a reputation and status that survived or perhaps defeated defaults, a constant risk amplified by the shaky moral ground merchants stood on. In 1339, for instance, a notable default by the English King Edward III brought down two powerful merchant banking companies in Florence, who

84

Simon Moore

had “advanced loans foolishly and excessively” (Hunt, 2002, p. 1). Usury, as always, was a rod as well as reward, a trouble and a temptation. The successful merchant of Prato, Francesco di Marco Datini (c. 1335–,1410), whose personal and business papers thankfully survive, left 1,500 florins in his will to be distributed after consultation with “doctors of theology and canon law.” “This bequest,” writes his modern biographer, “Must have been intended (as was often the custom) for restitution of profits made unjustly or by usury, but to which Francesco did not wish to refer more specifically” (Origo, 1957, p. 338). Business produced moral quandaries that demanded reputation management by the merchant, and conveyed piety and humility to key audiences in Heaven and Earth. One approach was religious patronage, including the Arena or Scrovegni Chapel in Padua, today considered among the highest achievements of European faith and art. Wealthy moneylender Enrico Scrovegni commissioned it. Tradition says the chapel was an expiation for his father, who had been imprisoned for usury. Humanism allowed the secular to take a more equal place alongside the saintly in mercantile public relations. Money, while not entirely freed from the constraints of morality, might be a source of suitably restrained pride instead of shame. It had a more respectful, more prominent (if morally ambiguous) place in some of the early paintings of richly accoutered business people in the medieval low countries, including the work “A goldsmith in his shop” by Petrus Christus in 1449, and Jan van Eyck’s 1434 portrait of a couple thought to be the Bruges-based Italian merchant Giovanni di Nicolao Arnolfini and his wife. Later, a 1514 portrait of a moneychanger and his wife by the Antwerp painter Quentin Metsys (1465/6–1530) balanced commerce and Christianity: money is weighed by the husband on the left of a green cloth table, souls are weighed in the devotional book held by his wife on the right. Notably, the painting shows her interrupting her devotions to lean over and observe her husband’s business. A 21st-century eye might react to that gesture in a number of ways, but it might contain an unambiguous message for the moneychanger’s 16th-century clients. One could, of course, be a merchant and not a moneychanger, which was the course urged on Datini by a friend: “Several men have said to me, Francesco di Marco will lose his reputation as the best merchant in Florence, by becoming a money-changer; for there is not one of them who practices no usury in his contracts” (quoted in Origo, 1957, p. 149). But the returns from usury were too attractive; reputation might have to be protected by other means. Humanism in Europe’s mercantile public relations was helped by the merchants’ rising sense of their self-worth, and by increasing literacy. It also grew in the cracks opened by public ambiguity about business in society, and by the trading conditions of the 14th and 15th centuries. In that difficult period, Europe suffered many visits from the plague, famine, wars, and revolts. The Mediterranean was infested with pirates. Mercenaries ransacked the continent. “You will know that a man is a dangerous thing, and that danger lies in dealing with him,” Datini wrote to an employee in 1397 (quoted in Origo, 1957, p.

Turning to humanism

85

81). In the words of one economic history, “It is hard to escape the conclusion that these were indeed dismal centuries” (North & Thomas, 1973/2009, p. 88). If Europe’s palimpsest was once more being effaced, humanist content could at least be written into it since day-to-day life still had to be lived, dayto-day needs and beliefs satisfied. What mercantile public relations made with humanism was a form of “selffashioning.” This is a term originally applied by Stephen Greenblatt in 1980 to literary England in the Renaissance. He described it as “The power to impose a shape upon oneself is an aspect of the more general power to control identity” (Greenblatt, 2012, p. 1). Self-fashioning was a full-grown fruit of Renaissance humanism. Its germination is visible in humanism at the end of the medieval period, and the public self-fashioning by successful or ambitious merchants. Datini took much care over his public self-fashioning. Unlike his close friend, the pious notary Ser Lapo, Datini connected his business affairs to the promotion of his public reputation. Public success depended on his reputation with church, city, and guild, and his dedication to work. This was nurtured by giftgiving to an extent that would seem extreme today. Datini gave to the church missals, prayer books, vestments, candlesticks, oranges, and, on one occasion, a mastiff (when a favor was requested of a bishop) (Origo, 1957). To people in need or in prison, he donated money, dowries, or clothing; to hospitals, he gave food, including oranges, figs, and raisins (Origo, 1957). The scale of the proceedings might be better understood when it is recalled that “in the Middle Ages the idea of repute or honorableness was different from that of the present: Loss of reputation was tantamount to loss of social status and personal rights” (Kieser, 1989, p. 551). Personal reputation could be protected, and money made, by collectively managing the face of business through a guild. “The major concern of the guild was to preserve and increase the ‘symbolic value of honor,’” said Kieser (1989, p. 551). Guilds probably appeared in the 11th century (although in a few areas the older Roman trade collegia had somehow lingered on) and were approaching their apogee in the late medieval. They were associations of merchants, crafts, or other occupations, and appeared at different times wherever economic and urban growth flourished. In Germany, for example, craft guilds came relatively late, especially compared to the 103 already in Paris by 1250 (Ogilvie, 2014), and the 15 Artes (guilds) of merchants, bankers, the wool trade, and other professions in Datini’s Florence and Prato. Some represented business activities or crafts, others specific activities in a larger production process. Some guilds were religiously inspired and local; others represented merchants from a particular city that worked and protected their rights at a foreign entrepot. Guilds did not confine themselves to public displays like feasts and processions (Casson, 2016). Like many others, the Florentine Artes enforced religious observances, professional standards, and personal probity. Records in Germany also show reputation management was practiced and enforced there, again to an exacting degree by today’s standards. For instance, noted

86

Simon Moore

Kieser, “Journeymen who worked beside a dishonorable person were themselves claimed to be dishonorable, and they had to pay a penalty in order to regain their honorableness” (1989, p. 552). Other offenses included the killing of dogs, and association with, among other things, executioners, knackers (carcass collectors), watchmen, barbers, shepherds, or jugglers (Kieser, 1989). By the later 15th century, many guilds, like the London Fellowship of Merchant Adventurers, strongly influenced or outright controlled the affairs of cities, with powers in the secular realm comparable to those possessed by the medieval church in the spiritual realm. In London, the Merchant Adventurers had extensive and not atypical powers, including The right to hold a court with power to make ordinances and to enforce them by fines and punishments. The jurisdiction of this court, as in the case of other gilds, was not only supported by the mayor, but, since it was implicitly delegated by him, was exercised strictly in subordination to him. (Carus-Wilson, 1933, p. 160) This idea of business as an assertive, collective, unapologetic and very public activity owed much to the conjunction of humanism and reputation management in the public sphere. The demand for money by warring kings, the concentration of business in small and privileged cities, and the charity, art, religious patronage, and networks of great trading and banking houses and of guilds had played their part in projecting a powerful, secular, humanist identity for Europe’s merchants, business people, and craftsmen (at least to those that mattered: the church, the monarchy, customers, and fellow-traders). Guilds developed and closely managed their own personalities, a benefit for business practitioners and perhaps too for their towns. The two groups might work together to secure local monopolies, regulating but not entirely excluding competitors (Richardson, 2001). That might be done by the right to set local professional standards which controlled membership as well as trade. Guilds, traders, and merchants had discovered the real advantages of managing their secular public identities with as much if not more care than the church or a ruler. For its social impact alone reputation management by merchants and guilds is as significant to humanism as Petrarch’s writings. Humanism needed cities. Cities needed trade, banks, and crafts. Church and state needed money, artifacts, and trade. Business needed a good earthly and heavenly reputation. Mercantile PR in later medieval Europe was stimulated by these intersections and stimulated humanism in the process.

China Middle Period China experienced urbanization on a huge scale compared with later medieval Bruges or Ghent, or Florence and Siena. Its version of humanism had been established much earlier and integrated into state policy. This was

Turning to humanism

87

unlike the classical literature that inspired humanism in Europe, where society was approaching the view of Protagoras (c.490–420 BC), repeated by Plato’s Socrates, that knowledge is a matter of human perception. “Man is the measure of all things,” said Plato in Theaetetus, “of the things which are, that they are, and of the things which are not, that they are not” (Plato, 1997/c. 367 BC, p. 169, l. 152a). Middle Period China was in a different position. Several conditions for a dramatic merchant-assisted humanist turn were in place. Confucius and LaoTzu had helped lay the intellectual foundations for humanism in the 6th and 5th centuries BC. In the Middle Period, they could be supported by an urban, economic expansion large and sophisticated enough to absorb and spread forms of humanism. In the late 13th century, Marco Polo (1254–1324) witnessed the immense scale of China’s economy and civic life and described it to doubtful Europeans in the book of his travels across Kublai Khan’s China. As a merchant’s son, and later a successful merchant in his own right, Polo saw Middle Period Chinese cities with the eyes of a businessman as well as a traveler. He was constantly astonished by cities with so many houses and people, and suburbs, “that no man could count the number,” he said (Polo, 2016/c. 1310, p. 85). He remarked on Suzhou, “about 40 miles around,” where there was “a good 6,000 stone bridges,” “rich merchants,” and “wise merchants and subtle men of all the arts, and they have great philosophers and natural physicians” (Polo, 2016/c. 1310, p. 132). He found Quinsai (modern Hangzhou), “without a doubt the best and the noblest city in the world” which was “about 100 miles around and had 12,000 stone bridges,” divided into 12 immense districts for each craft (Polo, 2016/c. 1310, p. 133). Quinsai was wealthy from salt, sugar, spices; “silk renders 10 percent and this adds up to money beyond measure,” he said (Polo, 2016/c. 1310, p. 137). These scenes were already old in China. Three centuries earlier, for instance, Kaifeng was a capital of the Northern Song dynasty. It contained about 1.2–1.3 million inhabitants, like its more planned urban predecessor Chang’an. Again, reports from that time reveal a place filled with markets, canals, merchants, and administrators (Ebrey, 2014). Fourteenth- and 15th-century medieval Europe had nothing comparable to China’s 10th-century economies and cities. Nothing in Europe matched China’s power to generate either slight or great superfluities of wealth that gave such ample opportunitites for leisure and philosophic reflection, and that could encourage individual self-regard. Nor had Europe knowledge of the contributions to humanism made by Lao-Tzu’s (if he existed) naturalist philosophy, or his contemporary Confucius (c. 551–479 BC) and their followers. What both Europe and China did have in common was a long tradition of social skepticism about business. As already described, Medieval Europe’s wariness originated in Holy Writ. China’s originated in a social class structure sometime in the first millennia BC, perhaps through the Confucian emphasis on ritual and leadership by the gentry, or the influence of the more bureaucratically inclined Legalist scholars. The structure defined four categories of the

88 Simon Moore

people. These came after the ruling nobles and were in descending order; (1) the gentry and scholars (shi), (2) farmers (nong), (3) artisans (gong) and last, (4) the merchants (shang) who profited from others and lacked morals. During the Western Han dynasty (c. 2nd century BC to 3rd century AD) attempts were made to restrict the merchant’s activities to luxury goods. Said Deng (2003, p. 502), “As a part of routine physiocratic [i.e., giving priority to agriculture’s economic contribution] ‘house-keeping,’ the state was committed to confining merchants, a policy called ‘looking after farmers and confining merchants’ [zhongnong yishang].” The 6th century BC Analects of Confucius, and particularly book four, contain many cautions about pursuing profit too greedily. “The gentleman understands rightness, whereas the petty person understands profit,” it says (quoted in Slingerland, 2003, p. 35, 4.16). It further added, “If wealth were something worth pursuing, then I would pursue it” (quoted in Slingerland, 2003, p. 67, 7.12). The gentleman, it noted, is governed by duty and, at different stages of life, he guards against female beauty, contentiousness, and acquisitiveness (Slingerland, 2003). The Tao te ching describes profit as a “false adornment” (the other two groups subject to criticism are sages and the wise, for their public benevolence and rectitude) Exterminate ingenuity, discard profit, And there will be no more thieves and bandits. (Lao-Tzu, 2012/6th century BC, p. 23, XIX.43) Lao-Tzu does not encourage public communication of personal virtues, saying that “To be overbearing when one has wealth and position/Is to bring calamity upon oneself” (Tzu, 2012, IX.23). Nevertheless, “the people must have something to which they can attach themselves” (Lao-Tzu, 2012/6th century BC, p. 23, XIX.43a). Therefore, it says, Exhibit the unadorned and embrace the uncarved block Have little thought of self and as few desires as possible. (Lao-Tzu, 2012, p. 23, XIX.43a) Lao-Tzu’s Taoism did not place faith in governments. Lao-Tzu himself is supposed to have become a hermit because he was sick of state wars and rivalries. The tao advocated inner rectitude, but, except as an inner guide for a ruler or sage, it appears to have had no connections to any other occupations. For that reason, it stood apart from expressing itself in work, retaining a spiritual dimension that was not collectively managed in the same way as Confucian or European humanism and was not an economic and political power in its own right. It has been defined by “the use of Nothing as an indication of the nature of the tao” (Lao-Tzu, 2012, p. xix). Taoism’s operating principle of wu-wei stresses setting an example of personal virtue by “acting effortlessly and spontaneously in perfect harmony with a normative standard

Turning to humanism

89

and thereby acquiring an almost magical efficaciousness” (Slingerland, 2000, p. 296). It was not doctrine sympathetic to individual publicity: “The best of all rulers is but a shadowy presence to his subjects” (Lao-Tzu, 2012, p. 21, XVII.39): Hesitant, he does not utter words lightly. When his task is accomplished and his work done the people all say, “It happened to us naturally.” (Lao-Tzu, 2012, p. 21, XVII.41) Moral conduct mattered more than the state and much more than money or self-promotion, but it could not altogether replace them. There was space for business to manage its reputation according to the tenets of China’s humanism, much as the Christian Church allowed a moral space for business in Europe. The Analects records an exchange between Confucius and a wealthy follower: Zigong said, “Poor without being obsequious, rich without being arrogant—what would you say about someone like that?” The Master answered, “That is acceptable, but it is still not as good as being poor and yet joyful, rich and yet loving ritual.” (Slingerland, 2003, p. 6, 1.15) In a similar vein, Tackett said, “the epitaph for the merchant Sun Sui 孫綏 (798–878) observes that ‘although he traveled back and forth to trade, he never cherished objects’” (2006, p. 36). Still more confidently, Tackett noted, “A limited number of epitaphs confirm that, among merchants, the possession and accumulation of money was a praiseworthy activity” (2006, p. 36.). The facts of geography might also have made merchant status hard to discount altogether, and, moreover, gave mercantilism a noteworthy presence in the cities Marco Polo had visited. Its position at the crossroads between three important kingdoms, said Rubin (1965, p. 11), may well, for example, have been the reason in the time of Confucius for “The relatively honourable status of merchants in Cheng (in comparison to that in the other states of ancient China).” Time and social changes brought additional leeway, albeit slowly. By the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644), more gentry were turning to trade (Elman, 1989), and, in the late 14th century, civil service examinations were opened to merchants’ sons (Elman, 1989). Furthermore, the merchants could form associations, initially known as hang, in the T’ang period from 618–907 (Twitchett, 1966; Liu, 1988). Many conditions appeared to be in place for humanism in Middle Period China, and on a scale that Europe could not match. Merchant self-promotion and reputation might seem ready for a humanist exercise in “self-fashioning,” albeit adjusted to China’s culture, making a case for business that could outgrow custom, law, and religious practice. But, self-fashioning did not flourish in China until much later. Instead, reputation management required modesty and humility. Why?

90 Simon Moore

An obvious reason was the nature of humanism in China explained by Confucius and Lao-Tzu. Greek thought was ready to see man as the measure of all things, which later attracted medieval humanists. This was not the case in China. Confucian thought saw the person as a crucible and a prism—a crucible for harmoniously blending the traditions, beliefs, and customs needed for social harmony, a prism for reflecting it by respect for ritual and social order. The bureaucracy was well equipped to manage this system, which showed itself in a tendency to tightly order and categorize people by applying philosophy as policy. The Four Occupations were one expression of this. Another was the Three Bonds, “namely the authority of the ruler over the minister, the father over the son, and the husband over the wife” (Tiu, 1998, p. 122). This was a humanism designed to sustain large, organized, and bureaucratic states. The human subjects were categorized by a socially defined place and a function. They were officially valued to a greater or lesser extent and had social responsibilities to perform that required a collective philosophy. Medieval Europe’s unstable, small, more fragmented, and frequently competing institutions could not do the same. Accordingly, European humanism has had a vital impact on the dynamic elements of modernization, breaking and remaking orders and ideas. Confucian humanism became a tool of conservative, stable, static, and centralized societies, used to avoid social chaos and disorder (Tiu, 1998). European and Chinese humanism served different purposes. The former loosed the individual and prompted a dynamic, unruly autonomy that encouraged the promotion of the identity of people or their professions. The latter restrained unruly individuality by using rituals, social cooperation, and conformity regulated by comparatively centralized states, or an inward-dwelling Taoist spirituality that had no immediate practical dependence on professional policy. The difference with Europe appears in the limited reputation management activities of Chinese guilds and merchants that were naturally made to fit the secular, civic, and urban world they dealt with. As mentioned earlier, the first known Chinese associations of trades were the hang. They were not guilds. From at least the Song Period (960–1279) the hang had control over prices of certain merchandise and acted as extensions of the government, “although their headmen would make the best of their opportunity to bargain with the functionaries” (Liu, 1988, p. 5). In this period, when guilds in Europe were promoting their reputations and expanding their influence, Chinese humanism was owned by the state and could not be independently adopted, expanded, and adapted by businesses. This closely managed system limited any reputation management by merchants that would have allowed their own relationship with humanism to evolve. Obedience to a “NeoConfucian self-cultivation reminiscent of Buddhist ideals” (Liu, 1988, p. 6) that put merchants at the foot of the social order, mattered more than self-fashioning. China’s humanism required the Emperor’s subjects to set a public example of pious respect for ritual and ruler. It was these displays of conformity that became the way in which merchants were able to work with Chinese humanism, and gradually communicate their secular identity until the great disruptions to ideas,

Turning to humanism

91

economies, and institutions caused by contact with the expanding industrial West. Merchants were therefore among those who “tended to exhibit a world view in which ritual played a substantially greater role” (Tackett, 2006, p. 33). This form of public communication marked by “ideological constraint” (Zelin, 2013, p. 769) yielded some secular fruit. It may have helped some merchants or their children rise to influential positions as civil servants or landowners, but overall restraint in communication seemed to be predominant. What is known of the lives of merchants is often limited to epitaphs, not lavish patronage, processions, or confidently expressed self-worth like the self-promotion humanism encouraged among businesspeople in much of Western Europe. Something a little like Europe’s merchant guilds eventually appeared in the 16th-century late Ming and early Qing period. A slightly more concerted form of publicity began to appear with them, using a respectful medium to present the organization’s reputation as distinct, lasting, and legitimate. These huiguan (clubhouses) began as hostels for “an association of persons of common geographic background in a place away from their home territory” (Liu, 1988, p. 9), and grew into business associations. Their public face was shown in displays of piety. Temples and stone stele2 were inscribed by government officials testifying the virtues of the organization and to the continuing fact that it was “depending on officials for legitimacy” (Liu, 1988, p. 9). Bureaucratic oversight meant huiguan temples could only be devoted to local folk deities, but a mildly more prominent public presence helped huiguan influence price regulation and, later on, tax negotiations. Chinese humanism was also embodied in the huiguan’s public social and religious functions, which were “a place to eat, an institutional structure for burying and mourning the dead, and a sacred space for sacrificing to patron deities and ancestors” (Mann, 1987, p. 24). In the case of merchants, “The most important function played by huiguan in the market place was informational,” said Zelin (2013, p. 782), not in terms of reputational publicity, but as places where merchants from a particular often distant region could ask one another about local taxes, reliable workers, possible partners, sources of capital, and other business-related issues. Over the 18th and 19th centuries, the huiguan multiplied. Members formed committees for negotiations with the authorities and experienced a slow-advancing civic authority more publicly visible and more comparable to Europe’s humanism. Still the huiguan was checked by the moral constraints of Confucianism humanism and the state’s superior resources that were communicated through rules and complex public rituals. Differences between Chinese and European humanism are clearly visible in the communicated priorities of the huiguan and Europe’s guilds, which both used reputation management to grow their civic authority and commercial power.

Two humanisms, two communications, one future? Mercantile humanism in Europe expanded the scope of what is now known as public relations. China’s humanism largely confined managed public

92 Simon Moore

communication to rulers and officials, or was supervised by them. Innovation and personal initiative in communication were contained in China but expanded in Western Europe, although not all of it. For example, compared with Italy, Germany, England, and the low countries, France and Spain tried to centralize economic policies and to some extent succeeded in confining the mercantile public relations that was advancing elsewhere. Mercantile public relations showed the ambitious creative possibilities open to one form of humanism (European), and the wider societal concerns that confined its activities in the other form of humanism (Chinese). Humanism “turned” in medieval Europe partly because the secular force of merchant reputation management was released. China’s version of humanism was concerned with aligning the individual to social harmony, order, and virtue. Humanism there served stability and was embedded in society and the higher echelons of the Empire. In the Middle Period, the expansion of cities, trade, and business increased the state’s need to ensure Chinese humanism continued on this pre-set, stabilizing course. On the other hand, Europe’s changing treatment of the individual released commercial and intellectual energies that together, long after the medieval period had ended, encountered, changed, but did not altogether overthrow China’s own humanist tradition. What have these two strands of humanism done to public relations? The humanist turns were different in China and Western Europe, yet both created the opportunity and need for merchants to manage public reputation more closely. Humanism took the public communication function beyond religion and politics. Another section of society—business—could create a public face that presented its own distinct civic and personal virtues. Humanism therefore expanded the possibilities of what became known as public relations. What has public relations done to humanism? The answer appears to be that humanist influences were spread by what we have here called mercantile PR. Humanism expanded with global trade and the role of business. Finally, as businesses in Medieval Europe and Middle Period China learned how to manage public communication, the two forms of humanism could help both societies navigate connections between governments, commerce, and faith. As for public relations today, Western interest in what are essentially Taoist and Confucian principles for establishing social harmony means public relations is now infused by sometimes-conflicting humanist principles from both traditions. The infusion is deep and it is easy to overlook the fact that, without both approaches, public relations could not originally have been as influential, innovative, and eventually as essential to institutions that try to manage our unpredictable individuality by grouping us into larger, more conformable audiences. Perhaps a form of public relations that blends both humanisms would be especially constructive. It could create ways to promote and challenge individual creative and intellectual expression and support civil and economic stability by restraining some of humanism’s more debatable features—aggressive individual hubris at one extreme, uncritical conformity to sanctioned opinion

Turning to humanism

93

at the other. These are both caricatures of humanism that the media currently at our disposal is, too often, harnessed to encourage.

Notes 1 See for instance Matthew 25:14–30; Luke 19:21–27. 2 A stele is an upright stone slab engraved or inscribed for commemorative purposes.

References Aquinas, Saint Thomas. (1265–1274). Summa Theologica. Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province. Retrieved from http://www.documentacatholicaomnia. eu/03d/1225-1274,_Thomas_Aquinas,_Summa_Theologiae_%5B1%5D,_EN.pdf Bernays, E. L. (1952/1980). Public Relations. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Bishop, M. (1961/2017). Petrarch. In J.H. Plumb (Ed). The Italian Renaissance. eBook. New York: New World City. Buttimer, A. (1990). Geography, Humanism, and global concern. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 80(1), 1–33. Carus-Wilson, E. M. (1933). The origins and early development of the Merchant Adventurers’ Organization in London as shown in their own Mediaeval records. The Economic History Review, 4(2), 147–176. Casson, C. (2016). The art of solidarity in the middle ages: Guilds in England 1250–1550. Economic History Review, 69(1), 362–363. doi:10.1111/ehr.12293 Dante, A., Mandelbaum, A., & Armour, P. (1995). The Divine Comedy. New York: Knopf. Deng, K. (2003). Development and its deadlock in Imperial China, 221 B.C.–1840 A.D. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 51(2), 479–522. doi:10.1086/345732 Ebrey, P. B. (2014). Emperor Huizong. Cambridge, MA: Harvard. Elman, B. (1989). Imperial politics and Confucian societies in Late Imperial China: The Hanlin and Donglin academies. Modern China, 15(4), 379–418. Retrieved from http:// www.jstor.org/stable/189239 Fesmire, S. (2001). Ecological humanism. Humanist, 61(1), 27. Greenblatt, S. (2012). Renaissance Self-Fashioning: from More to Shakespeare. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hunt, E. S. (2002). The Medieval Super-Companies: A Study of Peruzzi Company of Florence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kieser, A. (1989). Organizational, institutional, and societal evolution: Medieval craft guilds and the genesis of formal organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34(4), 540–564. Lao-Tzu, & Lau, D. C. (2012). Tao te ching. eBook. London: Penguin Books. Lee, Y-T. (2003). Daoistic humanism in ancient china: Broadening personality and counselling theories in the 21st century. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 43(1), 64–85. Liu, K. (1988). Chinese merchant guilds: An historical inquiry. Pacific Historical Review, 57(1), 1–23. doi:10.2307/3639672 Mann, S. (1987). Local Merchants and the Chinese Bureaucracy, 1750–1950. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Molefe, M. (2015). A rejection of Humanism in African moral tradition. Theoria: A Journal of Social & Political Theory, 62(143), 59–77. doi:10.3169/th.2015.6214304 North, D. C., & Thomas, R. P. (1973/2009). The Rise of the Western World: A New Economic History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

94 Simon Moore Ogilvie, S. (2014). The economics of guilds. Journal Of Economic Perspectives, 28(4), 169–192. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jep.28.4.169 Origo, I. (1957). The Merchant of Prato. London: The Reprint Society. Patel, A. (2015). The trajectory of Arab Islamic Humanism: The Dehumanization of a Tradition. American Historical Review, 120(4), 1343–1353. Petrarch, F., & Draper, W. H. (1911). Petrarch’s Secret; or, the Soul’s Conflict with Passion: Three Dialogues between Himself and S. Augustine. (William H. Draper, Trans.). London: Chatto & Windus. Ebook. Retrieved from http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/49450 ?msg=welcome_stranger Plato. (1997). “Theaetetus.” (M.J. Levett, rev. Myles Burnyeat, Trans.). In J. M. Cooper and D. S. Hutchinson (Eds.) Complete Works. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company, 157–234. Polo, M., Kinoshita, S., & Mladjov, I. (2016). The description of the world. eBook. Indianapolis: Hackett. Richardson, G. (2001). A tale of two theories: monopolies and craft guilds in medieval England and modern imagination. Journal of the history of economic thought, 23(2), 217–242. doi:10.1080/10427710120049237 Rubin, V. A. (1965). Tzu-ch’an and the City-State of Ancient China. T’oung Pao, 52(1/3), second series, 8–34. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4527623 Said, E. W. (2007). Humanism and Democratic Criticism. New York: Columbia University Press. Slingerland, E. (2000). Effortless action: The Chinese spiritual ideal of Wu-wei. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 68(2), 293–327. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org /stable/1465924 Slingerland, E. (2003). Confucius Analects. eBook. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company. Tackett, N. O. (2006). The Transformation of Medieval Chinese Elites (850–1000 C.E.). (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Columbia University, USA. Tiu, W.-M. (1998). “Probing the ‘Three Bonds’ or ‘Five Relationships’ in Confucian humanism.” In Slote, W. H., & De Vos, G. A. (Eds.), Confucianism and the family (pp. 121–136). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Twitchett, D. (1966). Chinese social history from the seventh to the tenth centuries. The Tunhuang Documents and their implications. Past & Present, 35, 28–53. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/649965 Wood, D. (2002). Medieval Economic Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zelin, M. (2013). Chinese business practice in the late imperial period. Enterprise And Society, 14(4), 769–793.

7

Toward a new dawn of public relations With charity toward all Donn James Tilson

Public relations, as defined and conceptualized, has too often advanced an asymmetrical worldview with presuppositions, values, and models of practice antithetical to the common good. In an increasingly interconnected, fragile world, organization-centric behavior at the expense of society is no longer sustainable, much less justifiable. Further, radical anthropocentrism disconnects humankind from its relationships with others and with nature and, ultimately, from its humanity (Francis, 2015; Crutzen, 2002). Even symmetrical worldviews that foster “value-based relationships” (Wilson, 1996, p. 75) do so “[within] an expectation of reciprocity” (Guth & Marsh, 2005, p. 142) to the exclusion of “publics” unable to participate (Hutton, 1999). All of this leads to the inevitable question: of what value is public relations? What is the most that can be expected of it? Is there a non-normative rationale for its existence? What is needed instead is a new interpretation of public relations that reflects a worldview beyond the standard formulations and that values a larger sense of relationships. Within a worldview of caritas, public relations practice framed as a covenantal model of public relations (Baker, 2002; Tilson, 2011) and as covenantal stewardship (Tilson, 2017) with an expanded definition of “publics” is preferable. Research suggests governments, ancient civilizations, indigenous peoples, and NGOs reflect a “naturalistic” worldview (Haviland, 1978) that guides public relations behavior as stewardship-guardianship in a pro-social manner for the benefit of all, whether human, nonhuman, living, ancestral, or unborn. Such practice of administrative and communicative authority—in particular, a caritas approach to relationship-building that seeks the greater good of others without reciprocity—challenges traditional public relations thinking and underscores the imperative to reformulate the discipline’s body of knowledge.

Origins and evolution Over the years, organizational public relations behavior has been influenced by “the most widely respected authority on public relations in the world [who] helped set standards for its ethics and approaches for the remainder of the 20th century” (Fry, 1991, p. 31), Edward L. DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340-7

96 Donn James Tilson

Bernays referred to the practice “in a slightly Orwellian coinage, as ‘the engineering of consent’” (Chronicles, 1995, p. 23). As a nephew of Sigmund Freud, a graduate of the United States’ World War II Creel Committee propaganda office, and “deeply influenced by the writings and philosophy of Walter Lippman, who first coined the phrase ‘the manufacturing of consent’” (Olsen, 2005, p. 28) and “felt the public is often misinformed, ill-formed, and poor judges of great issues” (Simon, 1984, p. 34), it was not surprising that Bernays “made psychological manipulation a kind of inheritance” (Gabler, 1995, p. 28). His writings reflect a “deep contempt for the average person” (Olsen, 2005, p. 28). His “utterly frank … praise of propaganda” (Olsen, 2005, p. 28) in a 1935 journal article, “Molding Public Opinion,” is unmistakable as he uses “the propagandist” and “the methods of propaganda” interchangeably for “counsel on public relations” and “public relations campaign,” contending the “public’s interest” is important only “in so far as this coincides with the industry’s own private interest” (Bernays, 1935, p. 86). His corporate clients—American Tobacco and General Motors, among others—followed his counsel as the “The Public Be Damned” era developed. As railroad tycoon William Henry Vanderbilt bellowed, “I don’t take any stock in this silly nonsense about working for anybody’s good but our own” (quoted in Cutlip, 1995, pp. 188–189). Recent events make for cynicism about Bernays’ attempts to align the public interest with a corporation’s private interests. In particular, the failure of GM to alert consumers about defective ignition switches in millions of vehicles causing scores of injuries and deaths (Tilson, 2015) reveals the problematic nature of such an alignment of private imperatives with the larger societal good. Internal GM memos concluded that fixing the switches “would take too long and cost too much” (Durbin, 2014, p. 3a); so much for a synergy between what is good for the public and the corporation. Asymmetrical, “exploitative” (Haviland, 1978) worldviews based on assumptions about “morality, ethics, human nature, religion, politics, free enterprise, or gender” (Grunig & White, 1992, p. 32) find expression in various definitions of public relations. The “most common definitional components” include “management” (Hutton, 1999, p. 201), with variations as a “management function,” “managing strategic relationships,” and “relationship management.” Still, there has been “a growing discontent with the managerial, corporation-focused kind of research … that has dominated PR scholarship” and a “unanimous criticism of what is referred to as the ‘Grunigian Paradigm’ … the form of PR research … that only examine[s] one side of PR—the functional, corporate one” to the exclusion of diverse publics, “long neglected fields and topics like gender, race, culture, colonialism, inequality or ecology,” and “the role that PR plays as a discursive force in society” (Dühring, 2015, p. 7, 12). For example, a review of public relations definitions underscores a framing that excludes a diverse world of “publics” and confirms an organizationally anthropocentric worldview. Bernays refers to the “publics” that need “molding” as “people,” “individuals,” “contributors,” and “customers” (Bernays,

Toward a new dawn of public relations

97

1935). A mid-1970s survey of public relations leaders confirmed their publics included “customers, stockholders, employees, suppliers” (Harlow, 1977, p. 36). A 1981 Public Relations Society of America task force concluded that “public relations is an organization’s efforts to win the cooperation of groups of people” (Kendall, Baxter, & Pessolano, 1989, p. 23). Scholarship continues to define “publics” as “the people with which they [practitioners] engage,” and “[the goal of PR] to influence the behavior of groups of people” (Heath, 2001; Cutlip et al., 2000, quoted in Edwards, 2012, p. 12). As Guth and Marsh (2012) observed, “one area of agreement among public relations practitioners is the definition of the term public: any group of people who share common interests or values in a particular situation” (p. 5). Some argue public relations should include other “publics” in society to include those living entities that do not necessarily offer the potential for beneficial relationships with the clients who use public relations. For example, in Western societies on today’s college campuses, there appear to be two roiling centers of reformation and discontent surrounding questions and definitions of gender and race. In non-Western societies, tensions between traditional culture and modernity are of concern. As early as the 1950s organizations began to shift to “open” systems, adapting to their “ecology” through boundary spanning and “eco-systems” or networks of organizational social relationships (McElreath, 1997). If organizations are “living organisms” with “enough feedback … [to] make appropriate adjustments … to keep on living” (McElreath, 1997, p. 13), then “practitioners must consider … their environmental constituencies, that is, all entities potentially affected by [their efforts]” (Starck & Kruckeberg, 2001; cited in Molleda & Ferguson, 2004, pp. 333–334, emphasis added). This is a view that stands “in opposition to the … literature that predominantly suggests that only those publics that have direct consequences for the organization are publics with whom … practitioners should deal” (Vujnovic & Kruckeberg, 2005, p. 338) even inactive publics “who are impacted by the actions of an organization” and have “importance” (Hallahan, 2000, p. 499, 501). In particular, as Reeves noted, the “science known as ecology … adds an entirely new dimension to public relations … and will require the consideration of relationships with species of life other than human, and the relationship of all life to its natural environment” (Harlow, 1977, p. 58).

New worldviews, models of practice Voices in public relations, some as early as the 19th century, have recognized the practice must “mean relations for the general good” (Goldman, 1965, p. 3), and definitions—i.e., PRSA’s “a strategic communication process that builds mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and their publics” (Corbett, 2012)—have underscored the importance of a social dimension of behavior in the best interests of all. Nonetheless, a worldview that provides for the common good with a motivation/expectation of symmetry and mutual benefit argues against a key component in assessing the quality of public

98 Donn James Tilson

relations relationships—“the extent to which both parties provide benefits to the other because they are concerned for the welfare of the other—even when they get nothing in return” (Hon & Grunig, 1999, quoted in Guth & Marsh, 2005, p. 197). And, definitions of the practice still characterize “publics” within the confines of people and organizations. Embracing caritas (charity, benevolence) as a worldview—agape in the Greek, caritas in the Latin, which falters as “charity” with its Dickensian overtones in English—clearly argues against the exploitative nature of asymmetry but also rejects symmetry inasmuch as caritas represents a commitment to the greater good with no obligation demanded from the recipient in return, contending that compassionate social behavior can be its own reward (Tilson, 2014a) and can be considered an “excellent worldview” as “it helps organizations build caring—even loving—relationships” (Grunig & White, 1992, p. 38) . The presuppositions or dimensions of caritas—inclusiveness, covenantal stewardship, forgiveness, peace-making, and cultivation (Benedict, 2009)— supplant those traditionally presented as part of asymmetrical-symmetrical worldviews (Grunig, 1989). Instead, they relate to public relations as the presuppositions of caritas, representing dimensions that sociologists and public relations scholars have endorsed as essential to creating humane, effective institutions and societies (Oliner & Oliner, 1995; Oestreicher, 2011). Studies indicate that “creating a culture of inclusion” is necessary as institutions engage a world of diversity (Sala, 2015, p. 5), which, some suggest, includes “relationships with species of life other than human” (Harlow, 1977, p. 58). While this may seem to be just Grungian normative ethics in romantic, pastel coloration, it can be argued that if inclusiveness is indeed an essential element of a caritas worldview in which Creation is viewed not only holistically, but with each part considered of equal value in and of itself, then acting in an ethical manner toward all living things (sentient beings) is not merely a nicety but is life itself. In counseling management, public relations professionals are to be “the keeper of the corporate conscience” (Gorelick, 2004, p. 8), guiding the institution to good stewardship with empathy and compassion, (“For managers,” 2015, p. Table 7.1 Worldviews—presuppositions Asymmetrical worldview

Symmetrical worldview

Internal orientation Closed system Efficiency Elitism Conservatism Tradition Central authority

Interdependence Open system Moving equilibrium Equity Autonomy Innovation Decentralization of management Responsibility Conflict resolution Interest group liberalism

Toward a new dawn of public relations

99

5), which is “the essence of an organization’s cultural environment” (Pincus, et al., 1991, p. 25). In fostering the building of relationships, public relations professionals often play a critical role as peacemakers where conflict separates the community or the wider society; in “bringing together disparate—and sometimes contentious—groups … PR pros [will help] solve discrete and universal challenges” (Fernandez, quoted in Daniels, 2014, p. 7) as was the case in Rwanda, where the global public relations firm Ruder Finn assisted in the process of forgiveness and peace-building following the 1994 civil war (Merriam & Glauber, 2004). Ultimately, for caritas to take root as an integral part of culture requires the cultivation of its essential dimensions through practice and education. In so doing, public relations professionals not only will serve as change agents personally but, more importantly, foster pro-social behavior in others and future generations . In a classification system of dominant values of culture, two instrumental values– helpful and loving—are dimensions of caritas and “relate to modes of conduct, and represent beliefs that are socially and personally preferable in all situations” (Rokeach, 1973, quoted in Mueller, 2004, pp. 132–133). Caritas encompasses qualities such as tolerance (respect of others, practice of justice, reciprocity), empathy, and one of its “fruits,” mercy or compassion, is expressed in works of social responsibility. Studies of communication and institutional Table 7.2 Terminal and instrumental values Terminal values

Instrumental values

A comfortable life (a prosperous life) An exciting life (a stimulating, active life) A sense of accomplishment (lasting contribution) A world at peace (free of war and conflict) A world of beauty (beauty of nature and the arts) Equality (brotherhood, equal opportunity for all)

Ambitious (hardworking, aspiring) Broadminded (open-minded) Capable (competent, effective) Cheerful (lighthearted, joyful) Clean (neat, tidy) Courageous (standing up for your beliefs) Forgiving (willing to pardon others) Helpful (working for the welfare of others) Honest (sincere, truthful) Imaginative (daring, creative) Independent (self-reliant, self-sufficient) Intellectual (intelligent, reflective) Logical (consistent, rational) Loving (affectionate, tender) Obedient (dutiful, respectful) Polite (courteous, well-mannered) Responsible (dependent, reliable) Self-controlled (restrained, self-disciplined)

Family security (taking care of loved ones) Freedom (independence, free choice) Happiness (contentedness) Inner harmony (freedom from inner conflict) Mature love (sexual and spiritual intimacy) National security (protection from attack) Pleasure (an enjoyable leisurely life) Salvation (saved, eternal life) Self-respect (respect, admiration) Social recognition (respect, admiration) True friendship (close companionship) Wisdom (a mature understanding of life)

100 Donn James Tilson

culture contend that acting with compassion and fostering a caring environment is essential to building “trust, credibility and respect” (Oestreicher, 2011, p. 17). Caritas underlies much of socially responsible behavior both modern and ancient, and, in the worldview of non-Western societies—for example, traditional African cultures—compassion “is greatly admired and to be … cultivated” (Tutu, 1981, quoted in Allen, 2006, p. 347). For example, in South Africa, following independence in 1994, revenge against those who had brutalized the black majority under apartheid could have been justified. However, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and other leaders of the elected African National Congress called for the nation to forgive past wrongs and for both sides to be reconciled (Tutu, 1981). The call to mercy was a necessary first step in healing and building a new society, and compassion part and parcel of the African philosophy of Ubuntuism—“the idea of being one’s brother/sister’s keeper— [which] runs deeply throughout African thought and action” (de Beer & Mersham, 2004, p. 338). Ubuntuism “translates to ‘I am because of others’ … [stressing] community interconnections and collectivity” (Blankenberg, 1999, quoted in Worthington, 2011, p. 611). Caritas further suggests a covenantal model of public relations as a theoretical ground. With a covenantal model, “professional practices qualify as morally legitimate because, and to the extent that, they are structures to merit the trust of clients” (Koehn, 1994, quoted in Baker, 2002, p. 193). Within this model, professionals establish their authority “because they are experts … or service providers” who make “a public promise to serve … a particular (client) good” and “dedicate their lives” to promoting that interest (Baker, 2002, pp. 194, 196, 197). However, the public promise must be “to furthering an end which is genuinely good” and “desirable in its own right”—“health, salvation, or justice”—inasmuch as “the pledge would not ground authority if the promised good were actually an evil” (Baker, 2002, pp. 198, 197, 199). As such, then, public relations not only must foster “real and substantive relationships” (Baker, 2002, p. 201) but ensure that it “does not sacrifice the good of others for the good of the client” (Baker, 2002, p. 204). In this sense, practitioners exercise a far broader notion of traditional counselor–client relationships—“a kind of ‘lawyer’ representing … clients in the court of public opinion” (Hutton, 1999, p. 200), as Ivy Lee envisioned himself, or as a “legal-like” “councillor in (or on) public relations” as coined by Bernays (Bernays, 1944, quoted in Mencken, 1945, p. 578). Such practice can be considered covenantal stewardship, with the practitioner holding in trust the client’s welfare and the public good. This parallels the understanding of social responsibility as “stewardship” (Tilson, 2014a, p. 114; Tilson, 2017) with resources distributed wisely among a broader sense of “publics.”

Apostle of caritas On the Indian subcontinent, the Mauryan (322–183 BC) was among the most notable indigenous dynasties, which at the time occupied a substantial portion

Toward a new dawn of public relations

101

of India (King, 1964), including the Punjab and Indus Valley. According to Lensen (1960), the first Indian empire was established by Chandragupta Maurya in the 4th century BC, shortly following Alexander the Great’s invasion and subsequent withdrawal from the region. As a military ruler turned emperor, Chandragupta, nevertheless, “devoted himself to public business and the public good … and worked unstintingly for his subjects’ happiness and welfare” (Schulberg, 1968, p. 78). A manual of politics, the Arthashastra, attributed to his chief minister, Kautilya, a Hindu brahman, speaks clearly of the king’s philosophy of good government: In the happiness of his subjects lies a king’s happiness, In the welfare of his subjects, his welfare. A king’s good is not that which pleases him, But that which pleases his subjects. (quoted in Schulberg, 1968, p. 78) Under his rule, “the empire enjoyed a time of general prosperity and busy trade … [and] to Indians of later times, the reign of Chandragupta Maurya came to represent the beginning of a golden age” (Schulberg, 1968, p. 78). Toward the end of his life, according to one tradition, he embraced Jainism, abdicated his throne to become a monk, and entered the temple of Shravana Belgola, a still-existent monastery in Mysore (Schulberg, 1968, p. 78.).

Forgiveness—mercy and compassion His grandson, Asoka (Ashoka), considered “one of the truly great leaders of world history, tempering politics with idealism,” became “the Constantine of Buddhism,” extending the Mauryan realm from northern India to the Deccan plateau (Lensen, 1960, p. 17). After ascending the throne (274 BC) and his coronation (270 BC), he led his first and only military campaign—the Kalinga war—in which he conquered a neighboring people on the east coast of India in 262 BC in a particularly brutal fashion. His “profound emotion in reaction to the cruelties of this war” brought about a “change of heart,” as he later recorded, and moved him to reform “his personal life … the operation of the royal household, and … the organization of governmental administration” (Nikam & McKeon, 1966, p. 18). For example, prior to the final battle against the Kalinga, Asoka, after having visited a prison north of the capital—“still remembered in Hindu tradition as ‘Ashoka’s Hell’—used in the punishment of criminals … gave instructions that the prison should be demolished and that the penal code should be made more lenient” (Durant, 1954, p. 446). When he learned of the great number of casualties on the battlefield and prisoners separated “‘from those whom they love’ … he ordered the prisoners freed, restored their lands … and sent them a message of apology, which had no

102 Donn James Tilson

precedents, and has had few imitations … and then … joined the Buddhist Order” (Durant, 1954, p. 446). Later, in one of his edicts, he promised that “If anyone does him wrong it will be forgiven so far as it can be forgiven” (Schulberg, 1968, p. 79). Having converted to Buddhism before the war, Asoka now became increasingly devoted to the faith, which rejects superiority and domination and instead invites all “toward loving kindness and compassion for their earth and its people” (Hill, 2013, p. 131), an inclusive view of Creation. His commitment to a rule of covenantal stewardship as guided by his faith was not particular, however, to Asoka. Buddhist kings and emperors in Central Asia and especially in China—the Tang (618–907), Jin (1121–1234), and Qing (1636–1912) dynasties most notably—embraced a “Buddhist imperial ideology” that a ruler had a “particular spiritual mission” and a “particular spiritual condition” (Crossley & Garthwaite, 2016, p. 303). As “‘a wheel (or center)— turning king’ … a Buddhist monarch was to effect change in human destiny by spreading the doctrines of enlightenment … and to aid in the salvation of mankind” (Crossley & Garthwaite, 2016, pp. 302–303). In essence, their faith charged them with a sacred responsibility to administer their realm for the common good. Qing rulers, for example, became “generous patrons of many Buddhist sects” (Crossley & Garthwaite, 2016, p. 303), as were Tang emperors, in particular T‘ai Tsong, a 7th-century ruler, who also was renowned for his charity to his subjects. Ultimately, Asoka was to become Buddhism’s royal patron and apostle as he sent representatives to evangelize the kings of Egypt, Macedonia, and the Near East (Schulberg, 1968), gathered and distributed relics of the Buddha among some 84,000 stupas or burial mounds (many of which he built), went on pilgrimage to the sacred sites associated with Gautama Buddha’s life, and, most important, in “promoting the faith … establish[ed] the ideals of Buddhist kingship” by benevolent rule (Barnes & Branfoot, 2006, p. 110); a 2nd-century AD Sanskrit text of the Legend of Asoka recounts his devotion and pilgrimages (Barnes & Branfoot, 2006) and accounts of his reign “are found in legends recorded by Buddhist chroniclers in Ceylon and India” and those of Chinese Buddhist pilgrims—Fa Hien and Hiuen Tsang—who visited India in the 5th and 7th centuries respectively (Nikam & McKeon, 1966, p. 1). It was “the first time in Indian history [when] a great state was led by a man who preached goodness, gentleness and nonviolence and who based his policies on a high ethical code” (Schulberg, 1968, p. 78).

Peace-making—nonviolence and tolerance It was his commitment to nonviolence and to peace-making in particular, however, that distinguished Asoka from the age in which he ruled and that defined his administration in history. Described as the “emperor of peace” (Schulberg, 1968, p. 78) and the “apostle of peace” (King, 1964, p. 571), he “renounced war as an instrument of policy and taught his own soldiers that the golden

Toward a new dawn of public relations

103

rule, the precept that a man should behave toward others as he would wish them to behave toward himself, was the basic law of life” (Schulberg, 1968, p. 80) and “seems to have ruled his vast empire in peace” (Wells, 1956, p. 322). His edicts “enjoin religious tolerance” and prescribe “penalties for those who weaken it … with schism” (Durant, 1954, p. 447). Further, he attempted to cultivate—certainly to educate if nothing else—other rulers to his philosophy of peace attempting “to form a league of brotherhood with Western, or at least Near Eastern, Hellenistic kings” (King, 1964, p. 572). Drawn to moral reform, Asoka sought to inspire others, however, “not by prescriptions and imperatives” but by his rule and personal practice of faith, representing “two interdependent obligations—to respect others and to perform good deeds” (Nikam & McKeon, 1966, p. xx). Guided by the Buddhist “call to see life holistically and to live in harmony with nature” (Hill, 2013, p. 130), which envisions “a sense of kinship of all men and a respect for all living creatures,” he appointed “Officers of Righteousness” to oversee local officials and ensure they “promoted ‘welfare and happiness … among servants and masters, brahmans and rich, the needy and the aged’ … prevent[ed] all ‘wrongful imprisonment or chastisement,’ and ensur[ed] special consideration for ‘cases where a man … has been smitten by calamity, or is advanced in years’” (Schulberg, 1968, pp. 79–80). Such royal care extended not only to his subjects but also to prisoners and their families and peoples of bordering regions.

Cultivation—fostering caritas Asoka’s compassion and covenantal stewardship became his edicts, disseminated by scribes and carved on rocks and pillars (ancient billboards, perhaps?) throughout the empire as far north as the Hindu Kush and east as the Bay of Bengal, entreating “abstention from cruelty to living beings” (Schulberg, 1968, p. 31) and “courtesy to slaves … servants … elders, and gentleness to animals” (Gokhale, 1966, p. 118). The pillars may have been erected “to commemorate the various places of [Asoka’s] pilgrimages,” or some may already have been in place before his reign and re-inscribed with his edicts (Gokhale, 1966, p. 142). The rock edicts are “placed along the borders of the empire … and cover a very large scope” while the pillar edicts “were erected in important cities and along roads within the empire,” for example, on the way from Asoka’s capital to Buddhist shrines at the foot of the Himalayas including one in Nepal near Rummindei, the birthplace of the Buddha; yet other rock edicts—often referred to as Minor Edicts—are located in the south and central parts of the empire while still other edicts were carved in caves in the Barābar Hills in Bihar (Nikam & McKeon, 1966, p. 8). The various edicts were erected over a period of about seven years, from as early as 259 B. (three years after the Kalinga war) to about 242 BC, six or seven years prior to Asoka’s death (Nikam & McKeon, 1966). Some have characterized the edicts as an attempt by Asoka to communicate with his subjects (Wilcox & Cameron, 2012), “to inform the people about [his]

104 Donn James Tilson

policies … to persuade [them] to carry about certain tasks” and “to create goodwill amongst them” (Kaul, 1988, p. 1). In their entirety, the edicts indeed reflect a political philosopher who expressed himself in proclamations and laws, bounding his country with Rock Edicts to publish his ideals and aims to his neighbors and to his subjects along the frontiers, erecting Pillar Edicts in the important places of his empire to express his moral and social objectives. (Nikam & McKeon, 1966, p. ix) But, more importantly, the edicts “make it clear that he conceived his mission to consist in defining, publishing, and propagating Dharma … the insights and precepts of religion and piety … the principles and prescriptions of ethics and morality” that Asoka had personally embraced and that were intended “to provide inspiration and guidance to his descendants and to the people” for their spiritual development (Nikam & McKeon, 1966, pp. ix, 1).

Covenantal stewardship—sanctity of all life The compassionate nature of Asoka was most remarkably expressed in his treatment of living creatures, providing for their well-being and protecting them from harm. As Gokhale (1966) noted, “Asoka constantly thought of the welfare not only of men but also of animals and toward the end of his reign declared a number of quadrupeds, fish, and birds inviolable” (p. 91). For example, he ordered “a drastic reduction in the use of meat in his royal kitchen … [and] published a long list of names of birds and animals that were not to be slaughtered on certain days of the year and month” in keeping with the tenets of Buddhism that one “must not destroy life and should practice the policy of non-violence toward all living beings” (Gokhale, 1966, p. 115). As Nikam and McKeon noted (1966), such prohibitory orders are inscribed in certain of his edicts: Rock Edict I

No living creature shall be slaughtered here [at Pātaliputra, Aśoka’s capital city] … Many hundreds of thousand living creatures were formerly slaughtered every day for curries in the kitchens of His Majesty. At present … only three living creatures are killed daily, two peacocks and a deer … In the future, not even these animals shall be slaughtered. (p. 55) Pillar Edict V

Husks which contain living creatures must not be burned. Forests must not be burned without reason or in order to kill living creatures. Living animals must not be fed to other animals. (p. 56)

Toward a new dawn of public relations

105

But beyond injunctions, Asoka desired that “living creatures” be well-treated not only by his “Officers of Righteousness” but by all his subjects and planned various projects accordingly. To this end, his officers had wells dug at regular intervals along roads, set up watering places for men and animals on the highways, had shadegiving Banyan trees and mango groves planted … established hospitals for men and animals, and had medicinal herbs and plants brought and cultivated for the welfare and health of all beings. (Gokhale, 1966, p. 91) The construction of hospitals, in particular, was “a unique activity and marks Asoka as perhaps the world’s first philanthropic ruler” (Gokhale, 1966, p. 91). Less than a generation after Asoka’s death, the empire collapsed as descendants fought for control, governors reasserted their independence, and “Buddhist ideals no longer inspired government policy” (Schulberg, 1968, p. 80). Forgotten were Buddhist ethics “rightly … admired for the total demand which they make upon the faithful” (Bradley, 1963, p. 113). In particular, lost was the notion of Mahayana Buddhism that calls a believer to “devote himself to helping others” (King, 1964, p. 578), as was Asoka’s “golden rule”—“the precept that a man should behave toward others as he would wish them to behave toward himself” (Schulberg, 1968, p. 80). While Buddhism was to fade from prominence in its native land with the ascendency of Hinduism, it never completely disappeared from India’s collective consciousness. Asoka’s passionate concern is reflected in the Indian government’s decades-long mai-baap “tradition of expanding subsidies” and social programs (Nilekani, 2009, p. 280). That litany of socially responsible actions, as Nadan Nilekani, co-founder, and co-chairman of Infosys Technologies—“India’s first truly global company”—notes in his best-seller, Imaging India, is at the “core entrepreneurial insight” of his company. It is a belief that “spectacular success can be achieved through innovative, ethical and transparent business-management practices” and “civic-minded individual[s] keen to shape public policy” (Swarup, 2009, p. 68).

Asoka, his legacy, and China While Buddhism may have diminished in its native India, the memory—and legacy—of Asoka lives on beyond those borders. “From the Volga to Japan [Asoka’s] name is still honoured,” said Wells (1956, p. 322). “China, Tibet, and even India … preserve the tradition of his greatness. More living men cherish his memory today than have ever heard the names of Constantine or Charlemagne.” In particular, “the vast benefactions of Asoka … [to] … Buddhism … attract[ed] to its Order great numbers of adherents … [and] there

106 Donn James Tilson

can be no doubt that its extension throughout Asia was very largely due to his stimulus” (Wells, 1956, pp. 322–323). Indeed, “the Chinese speak of Buddhism and the doctrines of Lao Tse and Confucius as the Three Teachings … [which] constitute the basis and departure of all later Chinese thought” (Wells, 1956, p. 325). The Tang dynasty (618-905) marked the golden age of Buddhism in China, and T’ai Tsung—considered the Chinese Asoka—was its guiding light. As Twitchett (2018, para. 1) noted, “his image would be revered for more than a millennium, not only by Chinese monarchs but by Japanese and Korean statesmen and by the rulers of China’s neighbouring peoples to the north.” While officially professed to Confucius, Tsung was deeply influenced by Buddhist spirituality. Shortly after Asoka’s death, his Buddhist missionaries went to China—as well as to Tibet, Mongolia, and Japan (Durant, 1954)—and began the evangelization of the country. This effort broadened to mainstream society with the arrival of Pandit Kasyapa in 64 AD—the “Apostle of China” (Wells, 1956, p. 323)—followed by a host of missionary Indian Buddhist monks, Chinese Buddhist pilgrims, and traders traveling to India. They all followed the Silk Road, an early Internet of sorts where ideas, goods, and services were exchanged (Eno, 2008). By the time of Tsung, Buddhism had become “a sweeping force in China, and for a number of centuries was far more dominant as a religious and intellectual force than either Confucianism or the emerging traditions of religious Daoism” (Eno, 2008, p. 1). In declaring Buddhism as the official state religion, various Chinese kingdoms may have simply acknowledged the obvious (Eno, 2008) but in welcoming Buddhist monks “in great numbers from India” (Durant, 1954, p. 702), Tsung may have done so given the faith’s influence on his worldview—caritas—which so closely paralleled that of Asoka. During his administration, Tsung “sent a series of embassies” to King Harsha Vardhana (606–648) in India, who modeled himself after Asoka (Eliot, 1921). Most certainly, Harsha, a devoted Buddhist—“wise in statesmanship and rich in spirituality” (Schulberg, 1968, p. 98)—shared his faith with Tsung by his example of Asokan rule if not in various channels of communication (a playwright, Harsha wrote lovingly about Buddhist thought) (Alam & Allchin, 2018). Tolerant of other religions, dedicated to peace—Tsung’s realm enjoyed some 42 years of security and prosperity—and devoted to good works, he established hospitals, travelers’ rest houses and hosted a “great festival of charity” every five years that donated the surplus in the state treasury to the poor, including Buddhist monks (Durant, 1954, p. 453).

Model for all nations As emperor, Tsung took an inclusive approach to governing, dealing with his ministers “as ‘first among equals’ … and with outspoken criticism from advisers … responsive to their outspoken exhortations and remonstrance” (Twitchett, 2018, paras. 8, 1). And, practicing good covenantal stewardship, he

Toward a new dawn of public relations

107

was “empathetic toward the feelings of his people” (Twitchett, 2018, para. 1), telling his ministers once that, instead of enacting tougher laws on crime, taxes should be decreased so that people could better support themselves and their families (Durant, 1954). While Tsung inherited from his father “the basic laws, institutions, and structure of government … He continued to perfect them” (Twitchett, 2018, para. 8)—so much so that they “were to provide models for all of East Asia” (Twitchett, 2018, para. 3). He was guided by a sense of personal obligation to the common good of his subjects rooted in his spirituality, a blend of Confucian and Buddhist. As Saunders (1934) observed, Asoka and T‘ai-tsung built a strong state upon the foundation of justice and tenderness … [and taught] that all men are the children of the Buddha … [they] welcomed the exchange of truth and … sought to make religion a great power for peace and order. (p. 244) Indeed, Tsung’s mercy and forgiveness were legendary. Sending 290 prisoners condemned to die to work in the fields on their word of honor that they would return, he freed all of them, so pleased was he when they did (Durant, 1954). Equally, his dedication to peace-making and to the cultivation of governing with caritas was renowned. Much as Asoka had done, after reconquering neighboring territories at the start of his administration, he “grew tired of war … and gave himself to the ways of peace,” blessing his people with “fifty years of comparative peace and stable government” (Durant, 1954, pp. 702–703). This golden age was reflected in the astonishing creativity of Tang dynasty poets—some 2,300 who composed nearly 50,000 poems that extolled and cultivated the glories and virtues of the realm and the spirituality that guided the ship of state (Durant, 1954).

A legacy of caritas The greater legacy of Asoka—and Tsong, Harsha, and other rulers like them who governed with charity and benevolence guided by a personal sense of responsibility for the common good rooted in faith—is perhaps the worldview of caritas, which through the ages has inspired those in positions of authority. In China, for example, Buddhism and Confucianism have prompted socially conscious behavior that has spanned the ages and that continues into the 21st century (Tilson, 2010). In China “the word ‘charity’ didn’t exist until it was introduced to China with Buddhism from India in the late Han Dynasty (2 B.C.),” noted Lin (2006, p. 11). Buddhism, which flourished during the Tang dynasty (618–907 AD), as noted earlier, “fostered philanthropic giving and social action that are relevant to the charity concept that has evolved in Chinese society for thousands of years” (Meng, 2006, quoted in Lin, 2006, p. 11). Buddhist monasteries and temples provided “hospitals and dispensaries for the sick, feeding stations for the hungry, and havens for the aged and decrepit”

108 Donn James Tilson

(Ch’en, 1964, quoted in Smith, 1987, p. 310). During the Sung Dynasty (960– 1279), these support efforts were supplemented by local granaries that served general welfare and famine relief needs in the wake of natural disasters and war (von Glahn, 1986, and Wang, 1960, cited in Smith, 1987). For example, Lin Tsai (1165–1238), a noted philanthropist in the Southern Song Dynasty, combined government and Buddhist temple resources to establish a kitchen that fed 15,000 people daily—a level of “generosity [that] set an impressive example for later generations” (Smith, 1987, pp. 309–310; Lin, 2006). Under the administration of Fan Zhongyan (989–1052 AD), prime minister of the Southern Song Dynasty, charitable estates—farmlands called yi tian— were purchased and given to 300 poor families. Zhongyan also “donated land to build schools for those who could not afford education” (Lin, 2006, p. 17). Such practices continued during the Ming and early Ch’ing dynasties (1580–1750), which saw the rise of benevolent societies that “aided impoverished widows, buried the unclaimed dead, set up soup kitchens, and provided capital to merchants and doctors” and the ascent of foundling homes, which, by 1740, numbered over 40 in the Kiangnan area alone (Smith, 1987, p. 309). Complementing the societies were state-sponsored poorhouses and medical bureaus to serve the “poor, sick, disabled, and lonely” (Smith, 1987, p. 310). The ethical principles of Confucius—who “emphasized personal and governmental morality, correctness of social relationships, justice and sincerity”— similarly has influenced a sense of social responsibility in China. Adopted as the official ideology of the realm in 140 BC during the reign of Emperor Wu, Confucianism moved officials and judges alike to emphasize “magnanimity … avoidance of the death penalty … limitation of land ownership in order to curb the oppression of the poor by the rich and powerful” in an effort to establish the Confucian ideal of a perfect social order (Smith & Weng, 1979, p. 80). The benevolent societies “expressed widespread public beliefs that wealth could serve noble causes and a spirit of civic pride” (Smith, 1987, p. 331), which speaks to the heart of Confucian philosophy. Today, Buddhism and Confucianism in China have “the most influence on motivations that drive companies to devote resources to philanthropy and CSR,” in particular “disaster relief, poverty alleviation, education and assisting the elderly,” works that Chinese business focuses on the most. The Confucian business model, Ru Shang, stresses traditional moral values in financial transactions, a “business philosophy [that] echoes the idea of corporate social responsibility” (Lin, 2006, pp. 11–13). A review of Forbes’s Top 100 Corporate Philanthropists confirms a “significant number of companies implementing CSR in their business operations,” said Lin (2006, p. 41).

China and India—cultivating caritas Recent developments have continued the Asokan legacy with the promise of international cooperation between China and India and the cultivation of Asoka’s worldview of caritas. In 2015, a Buddhist stupa close to the border of

Toward a new dawn of public relations

109

the Tibet Autonomous Region, one of 19 commissioned by Asoka in China but had fallen into ruin, was restored by Chinese authorities and consecrated by the spiritual head of a Buddhist sect based in Tibet. A replica of the Asokan pillar that once accompanied the stupa and a statue of Buddha also were added (Patranobis, 2015). The restoration not only will “spread the light of Buddha’s message globally” but has enhanced efforts by India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi and China’s President Xi Jinping “to strengthen cultural and informal bonds … with cultural exchanges … and tourism” and is the kind of informal engagement that can help to diffuse tensions over trade and other issues that have divided the two nations (Patranobis, 2015, para. 10). Additionally, in January 2018, the second of three conferences organized by the Los Angelesbased Berggruen Institute brought together Chinese and Indian scholars to discuss contemporary international issues in the context of Chinese historical thought and classical traditions of India, “focusing on the thinking and statecraft of … Asoka” and others (Bourne, 2018, para. 1). In particular, the gathering emphasized Asoka’s political ideologies and policies with their focus on fostering peace-making at home and cultivating Buddhist-inspired social harmony in other nations (Bourne, 2018, para. 6). Through its website, social media platforms, and academic publications, the Institute plans to disseminate conference information and proceedings to interested scholars and the general public.

Toward a new interpretation Worldviews and conceptualizations of public relations based on an appreciation of the interconnectedness of the world can sooner guide managers and their public relations counsel toward socially responsible behavior than those that place humans “in a position of inherent superiority over other species” (Jurmain et al., 2014, p. 6) and situate their organizations at the center of a universe that uses communication to manipulate publics. Indigenous peoples have long cherished a community-of-beings worldview with “no separation between nature and cultures,” where “plants and animals … rivers, mountains, and glaciers are alive” and acted as stewards in a “sacred, personal relationship between humans and other living beings” (Berkes, 2008, pp. 11, 115). Humans are a “component of a vast biological continuum … [and] each species is unique” as sentient beings with their own needs (Jurmain et al., 2014, pp. 6, 22). Social relationships place “a high value on the community concern for the well-being of the individual … and the individual … for the whole community” (White, 2009, p. 220). According to Pope Francis (2015), an “integral ecology” “has no place for a tyrannical anthropocentrism” but recognizes “the natural environment as a collective good, the patrimony of all humanity … [and a] responsible stewardship” grounded in a covenantal relationship “with God … our neighbor … and the earth itself” (pp. 93, 44, 62, 78, 42). Emerging views of public relations as “engendering community, common purpose” (L’Etang, 2008, quoted in Galloway, 2013, p. 153) and dialogic models that call for finding common

110 Donn James Tilson

ground through “listening, empathy” (Wilcox & Cameron, 2009, p. 59) approximate a caritas worldview and a covenantal model of public relations and can be considered “aspects of spirituality,” with practitioners “clearly involved in work that connects to spiritual practice” (Galloway, op. cit.). Inasmuch as “faith communities have immense potential to provide the value structures to change consciousness and behavior” (Kaplan, 2010, p. 266), it is not surprising the role that spirituality played in guiding Asoka toward a practice of covenantal stewardship. Environmental and animal welfare organizations that care for and represent their “client-publics” reflect a caritas worldview and covenantal stewardship in their efforts, and such advocacy has a long public relations history often with “traces … of pure altruism … initiatives undertaken … without an apparent agenda” (Lamme & Russell, 2010, p. 341). For such organizations, nonhuman, kindred species of the natural world are “publics” not unlike any others and deserve equal consideration even though they are passive or inactive publics. The RSPCA, for example, represents “animals who have no voice … [each of which] has the right to be counted as an individual” (“What we do,” 2015, paras. 3, 7). Stretching the definition of “publics” is not unprecedented. Corporations are considered “public figures” by courts and referred to as “individuals” in public relations literature (Wilcox et al., 2000, p. 266; Heath, 2001, p. 6; St. John, 2017). In 2013 New Zealand’s Whanganui River, sacred to the Maori people, was granted “personhood” with full legal rights (Stone, 2013, p. 24). According species of the natural world dignity and respect as any client or public is right, said Singer, and proper, as the basic moral principle of equal consideration of interests … whatever those interests may be must, according to the principle of equality, be extended to all beings … human or nonhuman … as the capacity for suffering [is] the vital characteristic that gives a being the right to equal consideration. (1975, pp. ix, 6, 8) As science confirms animals and even plants are “intelligent life-forms” that solve complex problems, communicate, “act altruistically toward … relatives,” and feel pain, an ethos of compassion calls for their inclusion in a caritas worldview that maintains all life “should be treated with respect and not as passive resources” (Marinelli, 2015, pp. 36, 40). Efforts “to ensure that all animals can live … free from pain and suffering” (“What we do,” 2015, para. 1), or to exercise “an urgent responsibility to be its [the Arctic tern] steward” “for the sake of its own environment” (Leonard, 2015, p. 1; Greenpeace, 2015, p. 5) ultimately reflect the work of those “who … cherish the earth and all the creatures in it” (Schweiger, 2014, p. 4).

Final observations The late British theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking warned that aggression “threatens to destroy us all” and calls for humanity “to replace aggression with

Toward a new dawn of public relations

111

empathy, which ‘brings us together in a peaceful loving state’” (Mazza, 2015, p. 1). Reconceptualizing world views, definitions, and models of public relations in a more biocentric manner is a step in that direction, given the critical role the discipline plays in society. Inasmuch as studies show biodiversity is important ecologically, culturally, and economically, expanding the theoretical universe of public relations to include nonhuman species of the natural world makes practical as well as moral sense. More importantly, framing public relations as covenantal stewardship within a caritas worldview can transform human behavior from dominion to guardianship guided by an ethos of compassion rather than self-centeredness. In opposing slavery, Wilberforce, the member of Parliament largely credited for rallying support to abolish the slave trade in 19th-century England, not only put an end to a great injustice, he “vanquished the very mind-set that made slavery acceptable … [and] destroyed an entire way of seeing the world … it was nothing less than a fundamental … shift in human consciousness”; humanity “would never again ask whether it was our responsibility as a society to help the poor and suffering … That had been settled” (Metaxas, 2007, pp. xv, xvi).1

Note 1 Chapter excerpts from Brunner, B. (2017). The Moral Compass of Public Relations, pp. 206–221, by permission of Routledge.

References About TCB. (n.d.). Thimpu: Tourism Council of Bhutan. Retrieved February 12, 2009 from http://www.tourism.gov.bt/about-tcb About Us. (2015). Southwater: Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Retrieved September 29, 2015 from http://www.rspca.or.uk Allen, J. (2006). Rabble-rouser for peace. New York, NY: Free Press. Baker (2002). The theoretical ground for public relations practice and ethics: A Koehnian analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 35(3), 191–205. BBC History. (2015). William Wilberforce. Retrieved June 25, 2015 from http://www .bbc.co.uk/history_figures/wilberforce_william.shtml Benedict, Pope (2009, June 29). Encyclical Letter Caritas in veritate. The Vatican: The Holy See. Berkes, F. (2008). Sacred ecology (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. Bernays, E. (1935). Molding public opinion. Annuals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 179, 82–87. Bhutan. (n.d.). London: BBC News. Retrieved July 16, 2010 from http://www.news.bbc. co.uk/2/hi/1166513.stm#media Bhutan plans ‘happiness centre’. (2010, May 26). London: BBC News. Retrieved July 15, 2010 from http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/8703690.stm Chronicles (1995, March 20). Time, 23. Corbett, G. (2012). Letter to membership. New York, NY: Public Relations Society of America. Country profile: Bhutan. (n.d.). London, England: BBC News. Retrieved July 15, 2010 from http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/country_profiles/11665

112 Donn James Tilson Crutzen, P. (2002). Geology of mankind. Nature, 415, 23. Cutlip, S. (1995). Public relations history: From the 17th to the 20th century. The antecedents. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Daniels, C. (2014). Marks of excellence. PRWeek CareerGuide, pp. 4–9. de Beer, A., & Mersham, G. (2004). Public relations in Africa: A communication tool for change. In D. Tilson & E. Alozie (Eds.), Toward the Common Good: Perspectives in International Public Relations (pp. 320–340). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Dühring, L. (2015). Lost in translation? On the disciplinary status of public relations. Public Relations inquiry, 4(1), 5–23. Durbin, D. (2014, March 31). House: GM refused to fix defect for millions of cars. The Miami Herald, pp. 3a. Edwards, L. (2012). Defining the ‘object’ of public relations research: A new starting point. Public Relations inquiry, 1(1), 7–30. Eno, R. (2008, Spring). Buddhism and Buddhism in China. Indiana University EALC E232. Retrieved July 10, 2020 from http://anyflip.com/skys/aqta Facts and figures. (2015). Southwater: Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Retrieved September 29, 2015 from http://www.rspca.or.uk For managers, compassion beats anger. (2015, Summer). The Strategist, 21(2), 5. Francis, P. (2015). On care for our common home: Laudato si′. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media. Fry, S. (1991). A conversation with Edward L. Bernays, Fellow PRSA. Public Relations Journal, 47(11), 31–33. Gabler, N. (1995, December 31). The fathers of P.R. The New Times Magazine, 28–29. Galloway, C. (2013). Deliver us from definitions: A fresh way of looking at public relations. Public Relations inquiry, 2(2), 147–159. Gokhale, B. (1966). Asoka Maurya. New York, NY: Twayne Publishers, Inc. Goldman, E. (1965, November 19). Public relations and the progressive surge: 1898–1917. Address to the annual meeting of the assembly of the Public Relations Society of America, New York, New York. Gorelick, J. (2004, October 14). Keepers of the corporate conscience: The role of the board in ethical oversight. Address to the Center for Business Ethics, Waltham, Massachusetts. Greenpeace. (2015). Project Arctic Tern: A proposal to Greenpeace supporters. Washington, DC: Greenpeace. Grunig, J. (1989). Symmetrical presuppositions as a framework for public relations theory. In C. Botan & V. Hazelton, Jr. (Eds.), Public relations theory (pp. 3–15). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Grunig, J., & White, J. (1992). The effects of world views on public relations theory and practice. In Grunig, J. (Ed.), Excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 31–64). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Gunther, J. (1955). Inside Africa. New York, NY: Harper & Brothers. Guth, D., & Marsh, C. (2005). Adventures in public relations: case studies and critical thinking. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Guth, D., & Marsh, C. (2012). Public relations: a values-driven approach (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Hallahan, K. (2000). Inactive publics: The forgotten publics in public relations. Public Relations Review, 26(4), 499–515. Harlow, R. (1977). Public relations definitions through the years. Public Relations Review, 3, 49–63.

Toward a new dawn of public relations

113

Haviland, W. (1978). Cultural anthropology (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Heath, R. (2001). Defining the discipline. In R. Heath & G. Vasquez (Eds.), Handbook of public relations (pp. 1–9). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Hill, B. (2013). World religions and contemporary issues. New London, CT: Twenty-Third Publications. Hutton, J. (1999). The definition, dimensions, and domain of public relations. Public Relations Review, 25(2), 199–214. Isichei, E. (1997). A history of African societies to 1870. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jurmain, R., Kilgore, L., Trevathan, W., & Ciochon, R. (2014). Introduction to physical anthropology. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Kaplan, M. (2010). Will religions guide us on our dangerous journey? In K. Moore & M. Nelson (Eds.), Moral ground: Ethical action for a planet in peril (pp. 263–266). San Antonio, TX: Trinity University Press. Kendall, R., Baxter, B., & Pessolano, F. (1989). Accreditation primer (4th ed.). New York, NY: Public Relations Society of America. Lamme, M., & Russell, K. (2010). Removing the spin: Toward a new theory of public relations history. Journalism Communication Monographs, 11(4), 281–362. Lensen, G. (1960). The world beyond Europe: An introduction to the history of Africa, India, Southeast Asia, and the Far East. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co. Leonard, A. (2015, June 15). Letter to membership. Washington, DC: Greenpeace. Lubow, A. (2008, March). The changing face of Bhutan. Smithsonian, 38(12), 72–79. Mapaure, C. (2008). Fishing among the Topnaar: An expropriated tradition. In M. Hinz & O. Ruppel (Eds.), Biodiversity and the ancestors: Challenges to customary and environmental law—case studies from Namibia (pp. 151–174). Windhoek, Namibia: University of Namibia. Marinelli, J. (2015). Smarty plants. National Wildlife, 53(3), 36–40. Mazza, E. (2015, February 23). Stephen Hawking warns that aggression could ‘destroy us all’. The Huffington Post. Retrieved February 23, 2015 from http://www.huffingtonpost .com/2015/02/23/stephen-hawking- aggression_n_6733584.html McElreath, M. (1997). Managing systematic and ethical public relations campaigns (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Brown & Benchmark. Mencken, H. (1945). The American language: An inquiry into the development of English in the United States (Supplement I). New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf. Merriam, D., & Glauber, A. (2004, Winter). Public relations can aid peace-building efforts. The Strategist, 10(1), 25–27. Metaxas, E. (2007). Amazing grace: William Wilberforce and the heroic campaign to end slavery. New York, NY: HarperCollins. Molleda, J., & Ferguson, M. (2004). Public relations roles in Brazil: Hierarchy eclipses gender differences. Journal of Public Relations Research, 16(4), 327–351. More Room to Roam in Bhutan. (2009, May/June). WWF Focus, 31(3), 3. Mueller, B. (2004). Dynamics of international advertising: Theoretical and practical perspectives. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc. Nikam, N., & McKeon, R. (Eds.). (1966). The edicts of Asoka. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Oestreicher, P. (2011, Winter). Arthur: King, leader, PR professional. The Strategist, 17, 17–19.

114 Donn James Tilson Oliner, P., & Oliner, S. (1995). Toward a caring society. Westport, CT: Praeger. Olsen, C. (2005, July). Bernays vs. Ellul: Two views of propaganda. Public Relations Tactics, p. 28. Our international work. (2015). Southwater: Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Retrieved September 29, 2015 from http://www.rspca.or.uk Our mission. (2015). Southwater: Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Retrieved September 29, 2015 from http://www.rspca.or.uk Pincus, J., Rayfield, R., & DeBonis, J. (1991, November). Transforming CEOs into chief communications officers. Public Relations Journal, 23–27. Reaching new summits: Tackling climate change on the roof of the world. (2012, January/ February). WWF Focus, 34(1), 8. Roberts, C. (2011, September/October). Innovation for Africa. WWF Focus, 33, 2. Sala, R. (2015). A real difference. PRWeek CareerGuide, pp. 4–9. Schulberg, L. (1968). Historic India. New York, NY: Time-Life Books. Schweiger, L. (2014). Letter to membership. Reston, VA: National Wildlife Federation. Segy, L. (1976). Masks of Black Africa. New York, NY: Dover Publications, Inc. Simon, R. (1984). Public relations concepts and practices (3rd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Singer, P. (1975). Animal liberation: A new ethics for our treatment of animals. New York, NY: The New York Review. Steel, L. (2015, Spring). Inside track. World Wildlife, 3(1), 56. Stone, D. (2013). Rivers are people too. National Geographic, 223(5), 24. Sundkler, B., & Steed, C. (2000). A history of the church in Africa [electronic resource]. Port Chester, NY: Cambridge University Press. Tilson, D. (2009). Current research in public relations: A critique and questioning of global trends. African Communication Research, 2(3), 367–396. Tilson, D. (2010). Corporate social responsibility—A new imperative? A view of the social dimension of public relations through the rearview mirror of time (pp. 436–450). The Proceedings of the First International History of Public Relations Conference. Bournemouth: Bournemouth University. Tilson, D. (2011). The promotion of devotion: Saints, celebrities and shrines. Champaign, IL: Common Ground. Tilson, D. (2014a). Public relations and religious diversity: Toward the common good. In I. Nahon-Serfaty and R. Ahmed (Eds.), New media and communication across religions and cultures (pp. 110–128). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Tilson, D. (2014b). An alternative view of social responsibility: The ancient and global footprint of caritas and public relations. In B. St. John, M. Lamme, & J. L’Etang (Eds.), Pathways to public relations: Histories of practice and profession (pp. 56–73). London: Routledge. Tilson, D. (2015). Public relations and social responsibility: An imperative for the profession. In K. Vaidya (Ed.), Public relations and social media for the curious: Why study public relations and social media. Canberra: Curious Academic Publishing. Tilson, D. (2017). From the natural world to artificial intelligence: Public relations as covenantal stewardship. In B. Brunner (Ed.), The moral compass of public relations (pp. 206–221). New York, NY: Routledge. Tomkins, S. (2007). William Wilberforce: A biography. Grand Rapids, MI: Willima B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Trevelyan, G. (1953). History of England (Vol. 3). Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, Inc.

Toward a new dawn of public relations

115

Vujnovic, M., & Kruckeberg, D. (2005). Imperative for an Arab model of public relations as a framework for diplomatic, corporate and nongovernmental organization relationships. Public Relations Review, 31(4), 338–343. Weaver, C. (2013, July 15). Namibian communities take the lead on conservation. Retrieved October 2, 2015 from http://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/namibian-communities -take-the-lead-on-conservation?enews=enews1307c&utm_source=enews-wwf&utm _medium=email&utm_campaign=wwf-marketing&utm_content=july2013 What we do. (2015). Southwater: Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Retrieved September 29, 2015 from http://www.rspca.or.uk White, R. (2009). Research on communication for development in Africa: current debates. African Communication Research, 2(2), 203–252. Who’s who and what’s what? (2006). Amazing grace study guide. Boston, MA: Walden Media LLC. Wilcox, D., Ault, P., Agee, W., & Cameron, G. (2000). Public relations strategies and tactics (6th ed.). New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. Wilcox, D., & Cameron, G. (2009). Public relations strategies and tactics (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. William Wilberforce. (2008).Carol Stream, IL: Christian History Today. Retrieved June 25, 2015, from http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/131christians/activists/Wilbe rforce/html Wilson, L. (1996). Strategic cooperative communities: A synthesis of strategic, issue management, and relationship-building approaches in public relations. In H. Culbertson & N. Chen (Eds.). International public relations: a comparative analysis (pp. 67–80). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Wooldridge, J. (2006, August 13). Bhutan—So exotic, and strangely familiar. The Miami Herald, p. 1J. World Wildlife Fund. s(2012). Namibia: Empowering communities to manage their natural resources. Retrieved May 21, 2012 from http://www.worldwildlife.org/what/wherew ework/namibia World Wildlife Fund. (2015, Fall). Carter Roberts talks with Bhutan’s Prime Minister, Tshering Tobgay. World Wildlife, 14–15. Worthington, N. (2011). Gender Discourse and Ubuntu philosophy: News framing of rape in Sowetan Online. Journalism Studies, 12(5), 608–623.

8

Crisis communication in China Joanne Chen Lyu and Peiyi Huang

Cultural, political, and media variables are among the most important factors that can explain crisis communication differences among countries (García, 2011; Huang, 2012). In contextualizing crisis studies in non-Western contexts, more and more scholars began to place importance on the impact of sociocultural factors (Hu & Pang, 2018) and many advocated the necessity to “revise the cultural and institutional assumptions adopted by the majority of current theories developed in Western democratic societies” (Huang & Lyu, 2017, p. 100). For instance, the US, where the majority of crisis communication theories originated, is a democratic society with a market-oriented media system. When corporate crises occur, corporations are subject to minimal governmental interference (Curran et al., 2009; Iyengar & McGrady, 2007). In contrast, democratic preconditions manifest themselves in a different matter within Chinese societies, if not absent altogether (Wu, Huang, & Kao, 2016), and the roles of government and media in crisis communication are different from those in the US (Xue & Li, 2010; Yu & Wen, 2003; Zhao, 1998). Due to the significant sociocultural difference, it seems reasonable to infer that crisis communication in China and the US are destined to be distinct from each other. Accordingly, Western-based crisis communication theories need to be reconsidered and made relevant when used to understand crisis communication in China. Taking a culture-sensitive and context-sensitive approach, this chapter examines the influence of culture, government, media systems, and the rise of new media on crisis communication in today’s China, and sheds further light on why and how Chinese crisis communication converges with that in the Western societies on the one hand and diverges from it on the other hand.

Culture Culture affects all kinds of social interactions (Pratt & Carr, 2017). Crisis communication is no exception. Among the major Chinese philosophies, Confucianism is the value system that runs most deeply in Chinese culture and exerts “a much stronger impact than other religious, philosophical systems of East Asia” (Yum, 1997, p. 76). Collectivist culture and the values of Confucianism, such as saving face, avoiding risky communication, and DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340-8

Crisis communication in China

117

emphasis on harmony and respect for authority not only shape the characteristics of Chinese communication but also greatly influence Chinese crisis communication in terms of both its content and its form (Huang, Lin, & Su, 2005; Ye & Pang, 2011; Yu & Wen, 2003). Cultural influence on crisis communication content

According to Hofstede’s (1980) individualism–collectivism framework, China is a paradigmatic society of collectivist culture (Bond, 1991), in which people emphasize the context of communication. In contrast to low-context communication, where information is exchanged and delivered during communication, high-context communication is highly context dependent, which means “most of the information is either in the physical context or internalized in the person, while very little is in the coded, explicit, transmitted part of the message” (Hall, 1976, p. 79). To understand the real meaning, one needs to pay attention to the implied meanings, nonverbal cues, indirect statements, and symbolic language used. This style of communication exerts an impact on Chinese communication in times of crisis. A survey of public relations/affair managers (Huang et al., 2005) that examined their crisis-handling experience found a new crisis communication strategy (CCS) that was not mentioned by Western crisis communication literature: diversion, which consists of three specific sub-strategies: (1) differentiation, which refers to “statements that attempt to distinguish the act from other similar but more offensive actions. In comparison, the act performed by the rhetor may not seem so bad”; (2) building a new agenda, which refers to “statements that create a new issue in order to switch or distract the media focus or public attention”; and (3) showing regard/sympathy, which refers to the “statements that show regards and/or sympathy without apologizing, e.g., ‘I feel a pity that … ’” (Huang et al., 2005, p. 235). Diversion manifests the Chinese culture that favors avoidance of direct confrontation (Ting-Toomey, 2005) with an orientation to the future and eternity, and high-context communication (Gao & Ting-Toomey, 1998). Its existence also demonstrates the importance of strategic ambiguity in Chinese crisis communication (Huang, Wu, & Cheng, 2016). Further, based on the finding of the new strategy, Huang et al. (2005) added the dimension of ambiguity-specificity to the existing defense-accommodation continuum (Coombs, 1998) to categorize CCSs within Chinese crisis communication. The diversion strategy has since been identified in many Chinese crisis cases, such as the Sanlu melamine-tainted infant formula crisis (Lyu, 2012), the Syntruna infant milk powder precocious puberty crisis (Huang, 2012), and Bausch & Lomb’s withdrawal of contact lens solution from China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan (Hsiang et al., 2011). One famous Chinese maxim goes, “The ugly things in our family should not go public,” reflecting an emphasis on saving face. Chinese people apply this family metaphor to group and organizational relations. They are found “attempt[ing] to save face for their affiliated groups whenever possible” (Yu

118 Joanne Chen Lyu and Peiyi Huang

& Wen, 2003, p. 53). Consequently, saving face for oneself and giving face to others contribute to the Chinese tendency to cover up crises (Huang et al., 2016) and make up a common strategy in Chinese crisis communication (Hu & Pang, 2018). Chen (2008) found that in the 2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) crisis, local government officials in Guangdong province hid the SARS outbreak merely because they were attempting to save face (p. 47). Similarly, in a corporate crisis, Sanlu tried to cover up its melaminecontaminated infant formula (Lyu, 2012) and even sought to reduce negative coverage by purchasing media advertisements (Veil & Yang, 2012). Proverbs such as “trouble is born out of the words you speak” and “speech is silver, but silence is gold” illustrate how much the Chinese value silence. In addition, influenced by Confucian philosophy, the Chinese believe unnecessary communication can only lead to unnecessary risks (Yu & Wen, 2003). Therefore, when conditions become highly uncertain, such as during crises, crisis managers’ aversion to risky communication is significantly intensified. Many studies found that Chinese organizations “keep their mouths shut” when difficult situations arise (Yu & Wen, 2003). Though against the Western suggestion of providing information to the public in the first moments of a crisis (e.g., Coombs, 2007; Sturges, 1994), the strategy of keeping silent or disappearing is not unusual in crisis cases in China, especially in the early phases of a crisis (Lyu, 2012). Respect for hierarchy and authority is another value in the traditional Chinese culture that impacts Chinese crisis communication. LeVine (2010) held that Chinese obedience to authority reflects the carrying forward of ancient China’s patriarchal system and autocratic monarchy. In modern China, the highest authority in the hierarchical power structure is the central government. Research on Chinese crisis communication (e.g., Hu & Pang, 2018; Huang, 2012; Pang, Hu & Woon, 2018) found that depending on governments to solve crises is a unique strategy used by Chinese corporations. Hu and Pang (2018) called it a “barnacle strategy,” explaining that the barnacle effect “takes place when one relies on a higher authority to help it smooth matters over” (p. 117). Studying state-owned enterprises (SOCs) in China, they found that the central government often took over the management of SOEs’ crises, with the SOEs willing to accept the assistance (Hu & Pang, 2018). In a series of infant milk powder safety crises, Huang (2012) and Lyu (2012) also found that the crisis-ridden companies highly relied on the government to respond to the public and the media, though the reliance did not necessarily lead to a positive crisis management result or allow the companies to get through crises smoothly. Another mindset that is valued by the traditional Chinese and advocated by Confucianism is Zhong Yong. The phrase, usually translated as “golden mean,” is defined as “halfway between two extremes” (Ma, 1988, p. 203). In the Zhong Yong culture, people would like to behave in line with the opinion of the majority (Ma, 1988) and take a relatively softer and more tolerant attitude toward contradictions found when comparing Chinese society to the West

Crisis communication in China

119

(Peng & Nisbett, 1999). This attitude was well demonstrated in one Chinese maxim da shi hua xiao, xiao shi hua liao, which means “reducing the big conflicts into small ones and turning the small conflicts into nothing.” This mindset and philosophy also influence the Chinese usage of CCSs. Huang (2006) found that extreme CCSs, such as public apology, were seldom employed, especially at the governmental level (Chen, 2008; Chen, 2009); nor was the most defensive CCS, attacking accusers, regularly used. Huang, Wu, and Cheng (2016) further explained that avoiding a direct attack on the accusers was not only shaped by Zhong Yong philosophy but also the values of saving face and harmony, even if only at the surface level. Cultural influence on crisis communication form

In addition to what CCSs are used, traditional Chinese culture also helps explain how CCSs are presented and communicated in Chinese crises, which is named as a “form of crisis response” (Huang, 2008, p. 298). The most prominent difference between China and the West lies in their views on “being timely to respond to crises.” Crises consist of high degrees of uncertainty. Therefore, when organizations find themselves in crises, they face pressures from the outside to provide information to address uncertainties (Wilcox, Ault, & Agee, 1995). The Western suggestion is to respond as fast as you can in order to meet the information needs and expectations of stakeholders (Augustine, 1995). To protect the physical safety of the public, organizations are urged to promptly provide instructive information to the public, such as which batch of products is problematic and how to seek help if you have bought or consumed the possibly problematic products (Coombs, 2007; Sturges, 1994). In addition to being quick, organizations should show that they are listening and willing to respond to stakeholder concerns. This kind of posture indicates that the crisis-ridden organization cares about its stakeholders and has control over the crisis (Huang & Lyu, 2017). Responding to crises in these ways will help foster trust and enhance satisfaction across stakeholder groups (Strong, Ringer, & Taylor, 2001). Despite the positive effects of timely and active responses to crises, traditional culture in China, to no small extent, inhibits its execution (Huang & Lyu, 2017). Confucianism holds that both the universe and human societies are hierarchically structured: five classes of roles (heaven, earth, the emperor, parents, and teachers) exist in descending order. A lower-level role should not challenge the roles above it. This philosophy has greatly shaped Chinese society, where people respect and accept the rigid order of authority, which, in turn, leads to one-sided power relationships among and between people and their social and natural environments (Shih, 1988). This mindset also explains why in many crisis cases the crisis-ridden organizations responded so late: they waited for commands from superior authorities and did not want to transgress the power structure and hierarchy. The lower levels of organizational autonomy and responsiveness constrained by this hierarchy have been observed in

120 Joanne Chen Lyu and Peiyi Huang

several studies. For example, when Sanlu found its infant formula problematic, the first thing they did was to report the crisis to the local government and wait for a governmental response—they did not promptly disseminate the information to the public or tell them how to avoid the possible harm as Western crisis theories suggest (Lyu, 2012). Fan (2010) found that when Chinese corporations are involved in a crisis, especially state-owned companies, the top management often use an “ostrich policy,” which means they do not deal with the crisis proactively but instead seek help and protection from the government. Similarly, Pang, Hu, and Woon (2018) found that when confronting crises, Chinese corporations tend to mute their own autonomy and follow the government’s lead closely. Though the culture influences greatly what organizations say and how they respond after crises, Chinese crisis communication cannot be fully explained by the culture only. Political and media systems, along with the rise of new media, also exert impacts on crisis communication, strengthening or diluting the features shaped by traditional Chinese culture.

Government The government in China is an omnipotent government. The government is so powerful that organizations have to rely on it to deal with crises (Ye & Pang, 2011). Huang et al. (2016, p. 209) held that, among all the potential actors, the government is “the strongest political force shaping the practice of crisis communication, not only at the levels of central and local government but at the corporate level as well.” The government is also widely believed to be the most important public for organizations in China as regards both daily public relations practice and crisis communication specifically (Taylor & Kent, 1999). The influential role the Chinese government plays in Chinese crisis communication is, to a large extent, determined by Chinese tradition and current political needs. Chinese tradition and history placed the government at the top of the hierarchy in terms of social status, resource possession, and power (Qian & Shi, 2012). As mentioned earlier about Confucianism, the superior roles play the role of “father figure” for the roles beneath them. Pang, Hu, and Woon (2018) found that, when state-owned corporations face crises, the government usually comes forward to solve the problem. It is like children making mistakes, and the parents helping their children. Correspondingly, what strengthens the paternal role of the Chinese government in crisis communication is the political need for social stability. According to Huang and Leung (2005), in the 21st century the top priorities for Chinese governments, both the central one and the local ones, are economic development and social stability—and social stability is the foundation of economic development. This helps explain why the Chinese government, more often than not, plays a pivotal role in crisis communication in both the public and the private sectors. To guarantee a sound environment for economic growth, the government wants to intervene in crisis management, especially the large-scale crises that may threaten

Crisis communication in China

121

social stability. The forms of governmental participation in organizational crises include releasing information, holding press conferences, and sometimes even apologizing to the public (Pang, Hu, & Woon, 2018). While the government, like parents, provides a warm and safe harbor for corporations, from the perspective of corporations, they, like children, respect and willingly turn to the government to get through crises. Through a series of interviews, Pang, Hu, and Woon (2018) found that, in comparison with their less serious attitude towards the public, consumers, and other parties, corporations place great emphasis on the state and many of them believe that, when handling crises (especially large-scale crises), they must rely on “the government to provide manpower and material resources to survive” (pp. 12–13). Protected under the umbrella of the powerful government, companies usually respond to crises in a low-profile manner or even keep silent. In recent years, however, criticism of this organizational silence during crises has resulted in some corporations responding to crises by accepting media interviews and releasing information through online platforms. In most cases, however, what the organizations with close relationships with the state tend to do is to follow the central government’s position. These organizations do not bother to pursue building media relations, because governments will tell the media not to sensationalize the crisis but instead report positive news (Pang, Hu, & Woon, 2018). This dependency on governments reminds people of a Chinese proverb: great trees are good for shade (da shu di xia hao cheng liang). Under the shade of the great tree of government, all the suffering will be kept outside. Private companies, realizing the importance of the state in crisis management, usually seek ways to share the government’s shade. A common way to solicit help from governments is to ask for an official endorsement from relevant government authorities (Hu & Pang, 2016; Huang, 2012). For instance, companies involved in food safety crises usually use a report from the Ministry of Health to demonstrate their innocence, and companies accused of environmental pollution tend to resort to China’s national environmental protection agency. This kind of strategy usually is not used as a sole crisis response, but the use of a state endorsement is likely to create a synergy that can help the organization move through the crisis (Hu & Pang, 2018). While the Chinese government is a possible force to help organizations overcome crises, attention should be paid to the fact that the concerns of the central government and those of the local ones are different. A common worry of local government officials is that reporting crises that happened in their administrative regions to the upper governments would threaten their political careers; thus they try to hide the crises or minimize their negative impacts (Huang & Leung, 2005). A typical example is the Sanlu melamine-tainted milk crisis. The company said that they reported to the local government (e.g., the Hebei provincial government) immediately after identifying melamine in their infant formula, but, when asked by foreign media, the Hebei province officials claimed that they were not clear about the situation, distancing themselves from responsibility. Waiting for the local government to deal with the crisis

122 Joanne Chen Lyu and Peiyi Huang

led to Sanlu responding slowly and passively, placing itself in a very adverse position. Another similar case is the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic. The Guangdong province learned about the disease at the beginning of 2003, but they followed “the conventional practice of minimizing exposure of negative information,” not dealing with the situation efficiently (Chen, 2008, p. 39). When the central government found out about the disease, it was one month later, well past the window of time for best controlling the epidemic. Therefore, when organizations seek to effectively manage crises through governments, they should take the different interests of central and local governments into consideration to avoid making crisis situations even more complicated than they already are. In addition to influencing crisis communication through specific actions during a crisis, the Chinese governments also indirectly influence the way an organization handles a crisis through changes in crisis communication policies. Historically, the Chinese governments strictly controlled communication during a crisis or an emergency. They believed that responsible governments “should not release information before finding out what actually happened” because unverified information is likely to cause social panic and chaos (Chen, 2008, p. 45). This rationale led to crisis communication that did not follow general principles of timeliness and openness, all in an effort to avoid spreading possibly wrong information. Through a series of public crises in the early 21st century, especially the SARS crisis, which developed from a small-scale local disease to a global epidemic, the Chinese central government began to change its mindset. That is, they gradually embraced concepts like meeting the public’s information need, respecting their right to know, and providing timely and truthful information. Furthermore, as this open information system developed, in June 2007, the Emergency Response Law was passed (Chen, 2008). Under this change, organizations both in the public and private sectors tended to take a more active way to deal with crises than before, leading to a gradual reversal of practices like covering up crises or keeping silent. Instead, many of the crisisridden organizations attempted to respond in some way.

Media The important role of media in Chinese crisis communication has been widely accepted (Huang, 2006; Lyu, 2012), and the specialty of media contributes to distinctive features of crisis communication in China. In mainland China, the trend of globalization and marketization, coupled with the rise of new media technology in the past decades, has transformed the Chinese media from the government-controlled mouthpiece to a dual press system. That is, official news media are still directly controlled by national and local governments, while commercial media outlets vitalize the market by challenging and resisting government control through tactics like puns and historical allusions (Meng, 2018a, 2018b; Wang, 2016). However, Meng (2018b) argued that, though the media’s use of radical propaganda has given way to the attempt

Crisis communication in China

123

to maintain social stability, mainstream media institutions still succumb to the party lines and policies. Therefore, understanding the influence of the government on media in times of crisis, and the factors that may impact this influence, allows for a more in-depth understanding of the role of Chinese media played in crisis communication. First, whether the government exerts direct control or moderate surveillance over media largely depends on the nature and scale of the crises as perceived by the state. Large-scale public crises are more likely to threaten social stability, which, as mentioned above, is the primary concern of the central government. So, if a large-scale public crisis occurs, the media and communication will be centralized and controlled by the governments by, for example, preventing journalists from reporting the full details of an event (Chen, 2008). For example, during the riot crisis in Urumqi, Xinjiang province in July 2009, the governments instructed the telecommunication companies to shut down their service (Denis-Remis, Lebraty, & Philippe, 2013). Wang’s (2016) study of the Tianjin chemical warehouse explosion in 2015 also affirmed the mouthpiece role of official media in crisis situations. Commercial media, despite their attempts to disclose the truth in the time of crises, finally followed the official state-sanctioned media reports most of the time. They could not deviate from this discourse. However, if a corporate crisis is commonplace, and the scale of the crisis is constrained at the organizational or local level—such as car recalls, product problems, service dissatisfaction, and celebrity scandals—media usually enjoy a loose reporting environment. Overall, when potential threats to social stability are perceived by the local and central governments in a crisis, they tend to implement stringent control over media. Second, media performance during a crisis is often influenced by the connection between the crisis-ridden organizations and governments. Pang, Hu, and Woon (2018) found that, in crisis situations, the SOEs tend to seek shelter from the government, as the government can help structure a positive media frame of the crisis through its control over media. In some circumstances, the central government would even take over managing the crisis. Moreover, SOEs may bribe journalists to conceal negative news (Pang, Hu, & Woon, 2018; Veil & Yang, 2012). Different from the SOEs, the privately-owned enterprises (POEs) do not have an innately tight linkage with the government. To remove negative stories, they sometimes solicit political connections; more often than not, they achieve the removal of negative coverage by exerting economic pressure on the media (e.g., increasing or terminating advertisements). POEs may also bribe the media, attack the media, and intentionally divert the media attention by offering publicity stunts (Pang, Hu, & Woon, 2018). Pressured by the governments, tempted with financial inducements offered by crisis-ridden organizations, and struggling with their own professionalism and ethics, different media react in different ways (e.g., succumbing to political power or economic benefit, or holding their own stance), resulting in various media performance during a crisis.

124 Joanne Chen Lyu and Peiyi Huang

Last, local governments may interpret and implement the central government’s orders in different ways, which leads to possibly different media coverage of the same crisis between the national level and the local level. Based on different political calculations, some local officers take a repressive approach towards the media while others treat it in a mild or even friendly manner. Correspondingly, the provincial media are more likely to operate contingently upon the local regulatory environment (Meng, 2018b). The different local political and economic environments could allow local media to take different angles when they report the same crisis. For example, in the Sanlu melamine-tainted infant formula crisis, while local media did not offer any criticism of the Hebei province officials (where Sanlu was located), the media outlets outside Hebei province questioned and challenged the conduct of the Hebei government (Lyu, 2012).

Challenges from new media The rising significance of digital technologies has changed the media landscape and the way information is produced, processed, and interpreted. Though many international websites and social media such as YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook are inaccessible in mainland China due to stringent censorship (Wang, 2016), mainland Chinese have developed their own comparable online and social media tools (e.g., Sina Weibo, WeChat, Renren, Tencent QQ, Douban, Zhihu, Tianya, Bilibili, Youku, iQIYI, and various live broadcasting platforms). Additionally, netizen culture is widespread in China, exemplified by danmu (user-generated comments flying on video screens), gailou (users generating comments to push up the posts), and doutu (commenters using competing kuso emoji and video in an online conversation). By December 2017, mainland China had 772 million netizens, of which 753 million are mobile netizens (CNNIC, 2018). The convergence of professional news production and user-generated content reveals a trendy information production model at work. Social media such as Weibo and WeChat have become both sources and incubation hubs of hot issues, inviting follow-ups from news websites and traditional media while also shaping public opinion on a larger scale (CNNIC, 2017). One significant influence of new media on Chinese crisis communication is that it provides an effective alternative source for the Chinese to obtain information, especially when no or little reliable information from official media and authorities is available (Seeger, Sellnow, & Ulmer, 2003). In such a case, online crisis information sharing, distributing, and discussing would possibly increase the public attention on the crisis event, and sometimes set the mass media agenda (Zhou & Moy, 2007). However, one needs to be aware that online platforms (especially social media) embrace several predominant features: anonymity, rapid information diffusion, and information dispersion and fragmentation, which means the information is scattered in different places online and divided into short pieces. These features can easily make information spread through new media, but in a way that can be fabricated, unverified, and misinterpreted (Oh, Agrawal, & Raghav Rao, 2013). As Li

Crisis communication in China

125

and Boersma (2017) pointed out, new media information makers, almost without any costs or previous investments, can disseminate low-quality information, and, if such low-quality information is widely spread, a crisis can be accelerated. In a study on the Tianjin explosion in 2015, Li and Boersma (2017) found that, in the absence of reliable news from the formal authorities, social media in China started to function as a rumor mill through the echoeffect (i.e., the dissemination of previous unverified social media messages). Therefore, the most challenging things that organizations face in the new media era are two-fold: 1) messages can be quickly developed in any format (e.g., picture, word, video, sticker) as information bombs with a fatal destroying energy; and 2) anyone can be the detonator of these bombs, especially key opinion leaders (KOLs). In China, opinions expressed by people held in high esteem, such as influential bloggers, can galvanize public opinion swiftly and strongly (Zhu, Anagondahalli, & Zhang, 2017). The power of KOLs could be destructive during a crisis by disseminating negative information and shaping the public sentiments in a negative way. For example, in 2018 a famous author, Liuliu, posted an article on Weibo, describing her friend’s unpleasant shopping experience in Jingdong (JD), a large cross-border e-commerce platform in China. Liuliu said that JD gave free rein to third-party stores to sell fake products on its platform and complained that JD’s customer service was non-responsive and rude. Liuliu’s post triggered numerous likes, comments, and reshares from other social media users and JD customers, and fostered debates online and offline. JD was placed in the center of public criticism within a short time. New media is a double-edged sword. While the new media raise new challenges for organizations to cope with crises, it also brings at least potentially positive changes for PR practitioners when it comes to executing crisis communication in China. The decentralization and rapid dissemination of information make hiding crises almost impossible in the new media era, which leads more and more Chinese organizations to face crises and take measures to deal with them. That is, the new media allow organizations to respond in a more timely and direct manner and to conduct two-way communication with the public during crises (Chen, 2013; Ngai & Jin, 2016). Ngai and Jin (2016) suggested that organizations should disseminate their crisis information to the public directly through social media. Otherwise, they said, the publics’ negative emotions such as anger, contempt, and disgust are more likely to be intensified, especially if the organization is found responsible for the crisis (Jin, Liu, & Austin, 2014). Further, incorporating netizen culture into crisis communication may be conducive for extending organizations’ CCS within the context of Chinese crisis communication. Wang (2016) analyzed the Weibo messages by Jia Duo Bao (JDB) during the brand crisis initiated by the trademark dispute between Jia Duo Bao and Wang Lao Ji and found that the crisis had been successfully turned into an advertising campaign by JDB, which received favorable responses from consumers. The new technique “acting cute” (mai meng in netizen culture) incorporated in its CCSs

126 Joanne Chen Lyu and Peiyi Huang

was effective in diminishing the negative impact of the brand crisis and winning public sympathy and support. In addition, the online KOLs, if leveraged by organizations appropriately, can be an influential power to moderate any negative emotions from stakeholders, especially through helping set straight the facts, defusing misconceptions, and defending crisis-ridden organizations. Therefore, in crisis situations, organizations may need to pay attention to the expressed viewpoints of the KOLs, which could be an important force in influencing the effectiveness of crisis communication in China, especially among the new media users. In sum, to a certain extent, traditional Chinese culture shaped Chinese crisis communication; however, how the Chinese organizations communicate in crises is far from being influenced solely by culture. The governments and media—and their interplay—together with the rise of new media have greatly changed the information environment and exert significant impacts on today’s crisis communication in China. In particular, it should be noted that what was discussed in this chapter is crisis communication in mainland China. When it comes to crisis communication in other Chinese societies with different political systems, media systems, and new media environments, findings would be definitely different. Also, crisis communication is a dynamic communication process in a certain context at a specific time point. What this chapter shed light on is crisis communication in mainland China in this era.

References Augustine, N. R. (1995). Managing the crisis you tried to prevent. Harvard Business Review, November-December 1995, 147–158. Bond, M. H. (1991). Beyond the Chinese face. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Chen, L. (2008). Open information system and crisis communication in China. Chinese Journal of Communication, 1, 38–54. Chen, N. (2009). Institutionalizing public relations: A case study of Chinese government crisis communication on the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. Public Relations Review, 35, 187–198. Chen, Z. (2013). How publics in the United States and China respond to crisis communication strategies via social media: A cross-cultural comparative study. Dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, US. China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC). (2017, January 11). China’s Internet News Market Research Report in 2016 (2016 Nian Zhongguo Hulianwang Xinwen Shichang Yanjiu Baogao). Retrieved April 2, 2018, from http://www.cnnic .net.cn/hlwfzyj/hlwxzbg/mtbg/201701/P020170112309068736023.pdf China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC). (2018, March 5). The 41st Statistics Report on China’s Internet Development (Di 41 Ci Zhongguo Hulianwangluo Fazhan Zhuangkuang Tongji Baogao). Retrieved April 2, 2018, from http://www.cnnic.net.cn /hlwfzyj/hlwxzbg/hlwtjbg/201803/P020180305409870339136.pdf Coombs, W. T. (1998). An analytic framework for crisis situations: Better responses from a better understanding of situation. Journal of Public Relations Research, 10(3), 177–191. Coombs, T. W. (2007). Ongoing crisis communication: Planning, managing, and responding. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Crisis communication in China

127

Curran, J., Iyengar, S., Lund, A. B., & Salovaara-Moring, I. (2009). Media system, public knowledge and democracy a comparative study. European Journal of Communication, 24(1), 5–26. Denis-Remis, C., Lebraty, J.-F., & Phillippe, H. (2013). The 2008 anti-French demonstrations in China: Learning from a social media crisis. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 21(1), 45–55. Fan, Z. W. (2010, August 13). The “ostrich policy” is not acceptable for managing crises in urban areas. Beijing Times. Retrieved from https://news.ifeng.com/opinion/society/ detail_2010_08/13/1943689_0.shtml Gao, G., & Ting-Toomey, S. (1998). Communicating effectively with the Chinese. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. García, C. (2011). Sex scandals: A cross-cultural analysis of image repair strategies in the cases of Bill Clinton and Silvio Berlusconi. Public Relations Review, 37, 292–296. Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture. New York, NY: Doubleday. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Hsiang, C., Huang, C., Hsu, J., Chiang, T., Chen, Y., & Su, H. (2011). Crisis communicative strategies for multinational corporations: The case of Bausch & Lomb’s contact lens solution withdrawal. Communication and Society, 16, 123–162 (in Chinese). Hu, Y., & Pang, A. (2016). Public relations practitioners’ perceptions of the use of crisis response strategies in China. Public Relations Review, 42, 333–335. Hu, Y., & Pang, A. (2018). The indigenization of crisis response strategies in the context of China. Chinese Journal of Communication, 11(1), 105–128. Huang, P. (2012). Organization failure in denial? A comparative case study of infant milk powder product safety crises in commission situation in mainland China (Master’s Thesis). The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China. Huang, Y., & Leung, C. C. M. (2005). Western-led press coverage of mainland China and Vietnam during the SARS crisis: reassessing the concept of media representation of the other. Asian Journal of Communication, 15(3), 302–318. Huang, Y. H. (2006). Crisis situations, communication strategies, and media coverage: A multi-case study revisiting the communicative response model. Communication Research, 33(3), 180–205. Huang, Y. H. (2008). Trust and relational commitment in corporate crises: The effects of crisis communicative strategy and form of crisis response. Journal of Public Relations Research, 20(3), 297–327. Huang, Y. H., Lin, Y. H, & Su, S. S. (2005). Crisis communicative strategies in Taiwan: Category, continuum, and cultural implication. Public Relations Review, 31, 229–238. Huang, Y. H. C., & Lyu, J. C. (2017). One crisis, two responses: A transboundary analysis of the Melamine-Tainted milk powder crisis in China and Taiwan. In A. M. George & K. Kwansah-Aidoo (Eds.) Culture and crisis communication: Transboundary cases from nonwestern perspectives (pp. 99–118). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-IEEE Press. Huang, Y. H. C., Wu, F., & Cheng, Y. (2016). Crisis communication in context: Cultural and political influences underpinning Chinese public relations practice. Public Relations Review, 42(1), 201–213. Iyengar, S., & McGrady, J. (2007). Media politics. New York, NY: Norton. Jin, Y., Liu, B. F., & Austin, L. L. (2014). Examining the role of social media in effective crisis management: The effects of crisis origin, information form, and source on publics’ crisis responses. Communication Research, 41, 74–94.

128 Joanne Chen Lyu and Peiyi Huang LeVine, R. A. (2010). Psychological anthropology: A reader on self in culture. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Li, X., & Boersma, K. (2017). The role of social media in providing crisis information in China: A critical evaluation of the Tianjin Fire incident. Journal of Systems Science and Information, 5(6), 556–570. Lyu, J. C. (2012). A comparative study of crisis communication strategies between Mainland China and Taiwan: The Melamine-tainted milk powder crisis in the Chinese context. Public Relations Review, 38(5), 779–791. Ma, H. K. (1988). The Chinese perspectives on moral judgment development. International Journal of Psychology, 23(2), 201–227. Meng, B. (2018a). Introduction: Understanding the politics of Chinese media. In B. Meng (Ed.) The politics of Chinese media. China in Transformation (pp. 1–23). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Meng, B. (2018b). Looking beyond the liberal lens: News media as contested discursive space. In B. Meng (Ed.) The politics of Chinese media. China in Transformation (pp. 57–90). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Ngai, C. S. B., & Jin, Y. (2016). The effectiveness of crisis communication strategies on Sina Weibo in relation to Chinese publics’ acceptance of these strategies. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 30(4), 451–494. Oh, O., Agrawal, M., Raghav Rao, H. (2013). Community intelligence and social media services: A rumor theoretic analysis of tweets during social crises. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 407–426. Pang, A., Hu, Y., & Woon, E. (2018). A broad stroke or different strokes for different folks? Examining the subtleties in crisis management approaches in state-owned enterprises and privately owned enterprises in China. Chinese Journal of Communication, 11(1), 5–25. Peng, K., & Nisbett, R. E. (1999). Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist, 54(9), 741–754. Pratt, C. B., & Carr, R. L. (2017). Culture as crisis communication: Tokyo Electric Power Company and the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Disaster. In A. M. George & K. Kwansah-Aidoo (Eds.) Culture and crisis communication: Transboundary cases from nonwestern perspectives (pp. 153–166). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-IEEE Press. Qian, J., & Shi, A. (2012). Government crisis communication in a Chinese context: a case study of the Wukan incident. Journalism Bimonthly, 4, 92–97 (in Chinese). Seeger, M. W., Sellnow, T. L., & Ulmer, R. R. (2003). Communication and organizational crisis. Portsmouth, NH: Greenwood Publishing Group. Shih, C. Y. (1988). National role conception as foreign policy motivation: The psychocultural bases of Chinese diplomacy. Political Psychology, 9(4), 599–631. Strong, K. C., Ringer, R. C., & Taylor, S. A. (2001). The rules of stakeholder satisfaction (timelines, honesty, empathy). Journal of Business Ethics, 32(3), 219–230. Sturges, D. L. (1994). Communicating through crisis. Management Communication Quarterly, 7, 297–316. Taylor, M., & Kent, M. L. (1999). Challenging assumptions of international public relations: When the government is the most important public. Public Relations Review, 25, 131–144. Ting-Toomey, S. (2005). The matrix of face: An updated face-negotiation theory. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.) Theorizing about intercultural communication (pp. 71–92). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Veil, S. R., & Yang, A. (2012). Media manipulation in the Sanlu milk contamination crisis. Public Relations Review, 38, 935–937.

Crisis communication in China

129

Wang, Q. (2016). A comparative case study: Network agenda setting in crisis and non-crisis news. Global Media and China, 1(3) 208–233. Wang, Y. (2016). Brand crisis communication through social media: A dialogue between brand competitors on Sina Weibo. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 21(1), 56–72. Wilcox, D. L., Ault, P. H., & Agee, W. K. (1995). Public relations: Strategies and tactics. New York, NY: Harper Collins. Wu, F., Huang, Y. H. C., & Kao, L. (2016). East meets west: A new contextual perspective for crisis communication theory. Asian Journal of Communication, 26(4), 350–370. Xue, G., & Li, Z. (2010). Keeping balance between the country and the society: The identity crisis of Chinese media. Modern Communication, 9, 11–15. (in Chinese). Ye, L., & Pang, A. (2011). Examining the Chinese approach to crisis management: Coverups, saving face, and taking the “upper level line”. Journal of Marketing Channels, 18, 247–278. Yu, T. H., & Wen, W. C. (2003). Crisis communication in Chinese culture: A case study in Taiwan. Asian Journal of Communication, 13(2), 50–64. Yum, J. O. (1997). The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communication patterns in East Asia. In L. A. Samovar & R. E. Porter (Eds.) Intercultural communication: A reader (8th ed., pp. 78–88). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Zhao, Y. (1998). Media, market, and democracy in China: Between the party line and the bottom line. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Zhou, Y., & Moy, P. (2007). Parsing framing processes: The interplay between online public opinion and media coverage. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 79–98. Zhu, L., Anagondahalli, D., & Zhang, A. (2017). Social media and culture in crisis communication: McDonald’s and KFC crises management in China. Public Relations Review, 43, 487–492.

9

Crisis communication and humanism in Nigeria Challenges and opportunities Amiso M. George

Introduction Myriad definitions of crisis abound. A crisis is usually unexpected and disruptive. Coombs defines it as “the perception of an unpredictable event that threatens important expectancies of stakeholders and can seriously impact an organization’s performance and generate negative outcomes” (Coombs, 2007, p. 5). Fearn-Banks notes that crisis is “a major occurrence with a potentially negative outcome affecting an organization, company, industry, as well as its publics, products, services, or good name” (Fearn-Banks, 1996, p. 1). Crisis management is “a set of factors designed to combat crises and to lessen the actual damages inflicted” (Raupp, 2019). While some organizations treat crisis management as an afterthought, the best crisis management is that in which a potential crisis is prevented (Coombs, 2012). Crisis communication, a key component of crisis management, is the gathering, managing and dissemination of information necessary to respond to a crisis situation. Such communication occurs before, during and after the crisis. Crisis management has become an increasingly important occurrence in most countries as we see a rise in a variety of crises ranging from environmental disasters, wars, terrorist attacks, technological disasters and health pandemics, among others. Early crisis management in Nigeria consisted of various communities responding to natural disasters, communal, ethnic, religious and political crises, as well as routine crises, such as fires and flooding. In 1960, Nigeria’s parliament passed the Nigerian Red Cross Act, whose goal is to “alleviate the situation of the vulnerable people which include those affected by disaster, epidemics, armed conflicts in the poorest communities” (Nigerian Red Cross, n.d.). While the Red Cross responded to major disasters, its services did not reach every community in Nigeria. The first documentation of a systematic government approach to managing crisis in modern Nigeria occurred in 1999 with the establishment of NEMA— the National Emergency Management Agency (Rohwerder, 2015). Previously, each disaster exposed the inadequate planning of many Nigerian cities and rural communities, which ultimately affected the speed with which emergency services could reach victims. Additionally, government communication during DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340-9

Crisis communication and humanism

131

and after a crisis provided an insight into the level of preparedness. In the case of Nigeria, the country’s effort to protect its citizens against the impact of disasters has been minimal; rather, most crisis management efforts come after the crisis (Human Rights Watch, 2001). Most of such efforts focus on public information campaigns, temporary relocation of victims, which in some cases become permanent, and promises of fixing the damage caused by the disaster. Oftentimes, the fixes never occur. However, the Nigerian Communications Act of 2003 and a draft guideline of disaster recovery for the Nigerian Telecommunications Industry Act of 2018 sought to remedy that. They mandated the development and simulation of a disaster recovery plan (NCC ACT, 2003). While not flawless, there has been immense progress in how the country has handled crises, ranging from polio outbreaks in Northern Nigeria and Ebola to the COVID-19 pandemic. Crisis communication has always existed in Nigeria, but not in the way most assume it is practiced in the west. In traditional Nigerian society, the true nature of a crisis was never fully disclosed so as to minimize the potential impact of the crisis; thus, rumor played an important role in how crisis information is communicated to the public. However, when rumor is combined with culture, ethnicity and religious differences, the result can be dangerous, as illustrated by the myriad of crises Nigeria has faced. When people perceive authorities as not caring for their well-being in a crisis situation, the outcome can be explosive. Hence, crisis communicators or organizations are very careful to counter rumors by how they word crisis messages, the channels they choose to communicate the crisis information and the messengers they use. Before the onset of social media, which has democratized communication, messages, especially those communicated in a crisis situation in traditional Nigerian society, were often coded in parables in order to avoid actions that could cause havoc within the community. Gwamna (personal communication, August 15, 2020) stated, “The messengers through whom the message is disseminated are usually respected members of the community who convey the message with compassion.” In addition to the message, it is equally important to provide support for those affected by the crisis. Such support could be in the form of monetary or in-kind compensation, counseling that incorporates rituals like songs and prayer and parables to help victims cope with the aftermath of the crisis. This support and care of crisis victims illustrate a humanistic nature of crisis management, whereby authorities prioritize the well-being of the human victims and find ways of resolving their problems. The Nigerian government’s response to the avian flu supports this assertion. Poultry farmers were partially compensated for killing their birds to stem the spread of the deadly flu that had spread rapidly across many states in the country (Kanamori & Jimba, 2007; Oladokun et al., 2012). While there were complaints from some farmers, the government’s primary concern was to protect the health and socio-economic well-being of its citizens. Studies have shown that people respond positively or negatively in situations where they believe the authorities care or do not care for them (Rainie, Ketter & Perrin, 2019). However, the government and

132 Amiso M. George

voluntary organizations’ quest to provide help, especially mental help, to crisis victims internally displaced or attacked by the Boko Haram terrorist organization has proven to be a challenge. Humanistic actions that were considered the norm in traditional Nigerian society have been upended. While the victims may be provided with basic necessities, psychological counseling, compensation and the possibility of rebuilding their lives are not guaranteed as the security situation is still fluid and the country lacks an adequate number of trauma counselors (Adeshokan, 2019). In this chapter, I use two crises to provide insights into how crisis communication is understood in Nigeria. First, a brief background of Nigeria provides a context for understanding humanism and crisis communication in the country.

Background: Nigeria Named for the River Niger that flows through the country as well as other West African countries, Nigeria was a collection of tribes and city-states with distinct cultural practices and belief systems prior to becoming a nation. With British colonial incursion in the 1800s, colonial administrators divided and occupied existing territories they called the Northern Nigeria Protectorate and the Colony and Protectorate of Southern Nigeria, presided over by Lord Frederick Lugard as governor-general. In 1914, the name Nigeria was adopted and a new nation, consisting of the amalgamation of the northern (mostly Muslims) and southern (mostly Christian converts and animists) protectorates, was born (About Nigeria, 2016). Situated on the west coast of Africa with a 2019 population of nearly 206.39 million, Nigeria is Africa’s largest country (Nigeria Population, 2019). It is a multi-ethnic society with over 250 ethnicities, with Hausa/Fulani (29 percent), Yoruba (21 percent) and Igbo (18 percent) being the largest. The country has a nearly equal number of Muslims (50 percent) and Christians (40 percent), while the rest identify themselves as animists (the belief that all objects, natural phenomena and the universe are spiritual beings). As a former colony of Britain, Nigeria adopted English as its official language, with Hausa spoken widely in the north, Yoruba in the west and Igbo in the east. Multiple other indigenous languages are spoken in many different parts of the country (Nigeria Demographics, 2019). Nigeria is sub-Saharan Africa’s largest economy with an oil-rich economy; yet, 40 percent of its over 200 million people live in poverty (Akwagyram, 2020). The country is beset by inadequate infrastructure, inconsistent power supply, persistent political corruption and a contracting economy partly caused by lower oil prices and mismanagement. Seven years after Nigeria gained independence from Great Britain it experienced a bloody civil war from 1967 to 1970, after the old eastern region broke away and named itself the Republic of Biafra. Since then, several military coups and military governments, with one civilian government, which was subsequently overthrown by the military, have dominated the landscape of the country. A return to civilian rule and the adoption of a constitution in

Crisis communication and humanism

133

1999 presented great hope for the country. However, echoes of religion, ethnic politics and angst over the perceived uneven distribution of resources have created a plethora of crises, some of which have evolved over time. Since its independence in 1960, Nigeria has experienced major crises on many fronts: economic crises, military coups, the 1967 civil war, major plane crashes, religious and ethnic clashes, insecurity posed by the Islamic terrorist group, Boko Haram, in parts of northern Nigeria, resistance groups in the Niger Delta and the western region, deadly clashes between ethnic and religious groups in the middle belt, floods, landslides, oil spillage and other man-made disasters, all of which have devastated lives, destroyed property and left many homeless. These crises have led to a surge in the number of internally displaced persons in the country. An estimated 2.4 million Nigerians are now refugees in their own country (Nigerian Emergency, 2019). While Nigeria has faced a myriad of crises, its responses to them have been uneven. The government appears, in some cases, unprepared for crises and tends to deal with them on an ad hoc basis. While culture, politics and religion and lack of adequate preparation combine to make effective communication during a crisis more challenging, Nigeria learned important crisis communication lessons from its successful response to the avian (swine) flu in 2006/2007 and the Ebola crisis of 2014. The focus was always on the well-being of the population. In the Ebola response, the Nigerian government mobilized traditional rulers, who are opinion leaders in their communities, religious leaders, who have large followings, and popular Nollywood (movie) actors to help communicate the health message. This approach was necessary because the government wanted to assure Nigerians that their health and safety were important. By using these “actors” who were political, religious, community and cultural leaders to disseminate a multipronged message, the government humanized the campaign against Ebola. It showed the Nigerians that the government cared about their well-being.

Humanism and crisis communication The American Humanist Association defines humanism as “a progressive philosophy of life that, without theism or other supernatural beliefs, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good.” It recognizes the values, needs and freedoms of humans as more important than even firmly held religious or political beliefs and takes a rational approach to solving their problems (Walter, 1997). In nearly every crisis situation that involves the destruction of physical structures, services and human life, ordinary people have responded with immense resilience. While people often experience fear, anxiety and confusion in the aftermath of a crisis, their first priority is their physical safety and welfare. As news reports have illustrated, some crisis victims may even join volunteers and designated authorities to help others. The Cajun Navy Relief and Rescue, a group of volunteer boat owners who participate in rescue operations since the Louisiana floods of 2016, exemplify such an unofficial relief group. In fact, the

134 Amiso M. George

group’s mission is to assimilate civilian volunteers into their structure to help victims of all kinds of disasters (Cajun Navy Relief, 2016). The coordinated official help, such as the Red Cross, FEMA and other volunteer agencies, plays a crucial role in helping crisis victims take the steps towards some level of normalcy. The actions of these entities illustrate the essence of humanism—prioritizing the values and needs of human beings (victims). Actions rendered by these organizations include physically removing crisis victims from the scene of the crisis, providing shelter, food, or vouchers for both, information on what actions to take, counseling resources or, if needed, medical help. In crisis cases where families are separated, the volunteer organizations provide a means for reuniting families and loved ones. In cases where there are massive casualties, the organizations arrange for memorial remembrances. These actions telegraph to the crisis victims that someone cares about them as human beings. In a high-context culture like Nigeria, with its attendant power distance, such acts, especially when provided by persons of a perceived higher social class, are not only valued but are remembered with gratitude.

Culture The many broad definitions of culture include the beliefs, behaviors, objects and other characteristics shared by members of a particular group or society. Culture helps people and groups to define themselves and adhere to their society’s shared values. “Culture … is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society” (Tylor, 1871); “Culture consists of patterns, explicit and implicit, of and for behaviour acquired and transmitted by symbols, constituting the distinctive achievements of human groups” (Kroeber & Kluckhohn, 1952). Culture is also “the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one human group from another” (Hofstede, 1980, p. 25). Hofstede’s (1980, 1983) seminal work on culture established the criteria for describing different cultural characteristics. From research he gathered from 50 countries, he described five dimensions of cultural variability: power distance, individualism/ collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, Confucian dynamism and masculinity/ femininity. Power distance is the extent to which members of organizations and society accept an unequal distribution of power. Hofstede notes that people in cultures with large power distance relationships tend to accept the inequality between superiors and subordinates, whereas those in cultures with small power distance do not. Individualism/collectivism are opposite sides of the same coin. Individualism refers to societies in which people cater for themselves and their immediate families, whereas collectivism is a society where people are fully integrated into groups such as extended families and clans. These groups reciprocate loyalty by providing protection (Hofstede, 2009).

Crisis communication and humanism

135

Uncertainty avoidance refers to a society’s tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity. In such societies, according to Hofstede, laws and regulations are often used to reduce uncertainty. On the other hand, uncertainty-accepting cultures operate with fewer and more flexible rules and also tend to be more tolerant of varied opinions (Hofstede, 2009). Masculinity/femininity (MAS) deals with the delegation of male and female roles; whereas societies that are deemed feminine tend to be more caring and modest, those that are considered masculine tend to be more competitive and aggressive. Hofstede notes that both men and women can have those qualities in either of these societies albeit not as “assertive and competitive, as the men” (Hofstede, 2009). Confucian dynamism based on Confucian teachings distinguishes between societies that emphasize long-term orientation (LTO), which focuses on thrift and perseverance, and short-term orientation, which focuses on respect for tradition (Francesco, 2015). Hofstede’s dimensions of culture, particularly power distance and collectivism, are useful in describing the cultural dynamics of a multiethnic and multireligious country such as Nigeria. They are also useful in understanding how humanism is woven into the fabric of crisis management in Nigeria.

Ethnicity and religion impact how people perceive crisis information in Nigeria Crisis communication in Nigerian culture is complicated by politics, ethnicity and religion. Crisis communicators must tread carefully as to how they deliver information to Nigerians, who they chose to deliver the information and the channel they use. People see themselves as part of an ethnic group first before nationality. With over 250 ethnic groups, 500 spoken languages, distinct regions broken into states and a weak central government, Nigerians tend to see their ethnic groupings as a safe haven, then their extended clan and extended family. That means they are less likely to trust persons or leaders outside their ethnic group or clan. That, in turn, has profound consequences on many grounds, including trust in sources of information. Crisis information, even with the best of intention, may be deemed suspicious because it was delivered by a Hausa, a Yoruba, an Ibo. Hence, the “federal character” principle (which is enshrined in Nigeria’s constitution and ensures that appointments to government institutions reflect the linguistic, ethnic, religious and geographic diversity of the country) prevails in decisions made about campaigns targeting the entire country (FCC, Nigeria). While some have compared the federal character to an ineffective and inefficient quota system (Adamolekun, Erero & Oshionebo, 1991), Nigerians see a benefit in it. For them, it is about representation and access. Thus, it is not unusual for someone in a prominent position to be besieged by people from his or her ethnic group to help them get a job or a contract. Sometimes, the paramount or traditional ruler from that ethnic group intervenes directly or indirectly. An indirect intervention might be conferring the “big oga” or “big madam” (a term used to describe a rich, powerful and

136 Amiso M. George

well-connected person in a high public office or company) a chieftaincy title, or hosting a reception for the person to celebrate his or her elevation. A direct approach may include sending a delegation to the person. When such courtesy is extended to a person in a high position, the person is expected to reciprocate through a variety of means—placing community members in jobs, making a cash donation to a community project, even making a cash gift to the traditional ruler. In the case of a disaster, it is not unusual for the “big oga” or “big madam” to direct assistance or other benefits to his or her people and area. Some analysts have criticized this selective humanism. They say Nigeria has an ethnicity problem. It is evident in high-profile cases of sometimes violent tensions. But perhaps most damagingly, it is also demonstrated in the low-profile everyday mistrust and prejudices with which many Nigerians view fellow citizens of ethnicities other than their own. (Soyemi, 2016) However, average Nigerians perceive the attachment to their ethnicity as a survival mechanism in times of crisis where they help and are helped by members of the same ethnic group. Religious identity

Nigeria has three major religions: Christianity, Islam and traditional religions or animism (Osaghae & Suberu, 2005, p. 11). Within the Christian religion are many denominations, ranging from Anglican (Episcopal), Catholic and Seventh Day Adventist to homegrown ones like Cherubim and Seraphim (Aladura) and Celestial Church. However, the non-denominational evangelical churches, mostly influenced by the American conservative evangelical movement, dominate the Christianity landscape in Nigeria (Osaghae & Suberu, 2005, p. 11). The evangelical churches’ appeal to traditional Nigerian beliefs in magic cures for whatever ails people, the infusion of music and dancing with a wide variety of instruments, charismatic preachers and a retinue of assistants with appealing and powerful messages filled with biblical references that are broadcast globally via electronic media, appeals for “love offerings” (donations) and no denominational hierarchy all combine to make modern-day Christianity in Nigeria attractive to persons who see the orthodox churches as a western idea filled with many rules. Nigerian Muslims comprise about 50 percent of the Nigerian population. A majority of them are Sunni Muslims and a sizeable minority (12 percent) are Shia (Kettani, 2010). Traditional religions, animism or belief in supernatural powers or deities are found in every part of Nigeria and in every ethnic group. It is not unusual to find some Nigerians who practice the majority religion turn to their traditional religion during challenging times in their lives (Osaghae & Suberu, 2005, p. 11), because the leaders are seen as the divine representations of their followers’ health and wellness. Nigerians’ attachment to their religious groupings illustrates Hofstede’s power distance and collectivism. In

Crisis communication and humanism

137

the evangelical realm in Nigeria, it is not unusual for parishioners to call their pastors “daddy” or “mummy,” and to see themselves as part of a collective that is loyal to their spiritual parents. They look up to these “parents” on not only religious but, in some cases, personal matters. Thus, in a crisis situation, these “parents” serve as effective providers of not just spiritual encouragement but tangible assistance, for which the recipients (parishioners) are grateful. The following two cases illustrate how the Nigerian government applied or did not apply humanism in its response to two different crises.

From terrorism to health crisis Boko Haram

The insurgency of Boko Haram, the militant Islamist group, literarily translated as “western education is forbidden,” has plagued Nigeria since 2002. The insurgency and other communal violence and security issues have displaced approximately 2.4 million Nigerians (Nigerian Emergency, 2019). The government’s inability to counter Boko Haram’s surge has been attributed to issues such as decades-long government corruption and lack of employment opportunities (Obasi, 2016). The first known atrocity by Boko Haram was in February 2004 in Yelwa, Kebbi State, in the northern part of Nigeria, where 78 Christians were killed. Since then, Boko Haram has kidnapped and killed secondary-school students from their boarding houses or exam halls, worshippers in churches, their fellow Muslims at mosques, soldiers and members of entire villages (Ahemba, 2004). One of the most audacious attacks occurred in 2011 when the terrorists attacked the UN regional headquarters in the capital, Abuja (Mshelizza, 2011), and several churches near the border with the Niger Republic during Christmas services, killing dozens (Onuah & Eboh, 2011). Then-President Goodluck Jonathan declared a state of emergency in the areas directly affected by the Boko Haram attacks. He also shut the borders with Cameroon, Chad and Niger in the northeast, all bordering the affected areas (Foyou et al., 2018). In April 2014, Boko Haram garnered international attention when its members abducted more than 250 secondary school girls in the small town of Chibok. President Jonathan, a southerner from the Niger Delta, who had vowed to defeat Boko Haram, admitted that taking on the terrorists was complicated. He waited three weeks before addressing the kidnapping of the girls. He also canceled a scheduled visit to Chibok, ostensibly for security reasons (Dugan, 2014). The abduction and delayed response by the government to the crisis attracted a UN sanction and spurred an international protest outside Nigerian embassies and a Twitter campaign with the hashtag #BringBackOurGirls (Howard, 2014). It was not until Nobel Laureate, Malala Yusufzai, visited Nigeria to draw additional attention to the Chibok girls’ case that President Jonathan met with the

138 Amiso M. George

families of the girls. As he faced more criticism, he hired the US-based public relations firm, Levick & Co, to burnish the government’s image. The effort did not help as counter-narratives emerged from media reports (Okolosie, 2014). Boko Haram continues to wreak havoc on Nigerians to this day. No one is immune to the carnage, whether they are civilians and military personnel, Christians, Muslims, students or inhabitants of entire villages. Although current president, Muhammadu Buhari, a northern Muslim, vowed to wipe the group out, its attacks have been more deadly, more daring and have crossed international borders (Borger, 2015). The government’s response has been reactionary and this has not only emboldened the terrorist group but added to the increase in internally displaced persons in Nigeria and a general feeling of insecurity in the country. Both the Jonathan and now the Buhari governments have declared military victory over Boko Haram and communicated such to Nigerians, but the reality is that Boko Haram members are part and parcel of the communities in which they operate. While Nigerians initially saw the group as a “northern” problem, the group’s foray to the south and the capital of Abuja means the federal government has to find nonmilitary ways to stem the havoc and communicate the same to the public. Former President Jonathan’s response coupled with current President Buhari’s tepid response with multiple blunders and the deplorable plight of the tens of thousands of internally displaced persons (IDP) in Nigeria have combined to disillusion weary Nigerians (UN News, 2016). They believe the government does not care about their safety and security. Some accused the Jonathan administration of not caring because a majority of Boko Haram’s victims were northerners (Jonathan is a southerner and Christian). Some of his advisors claimed that Boko Haram is a political creation of the northern political elite (Ogbu, 2012). Others have accused President Buhari of the inability to stem Boko Haram’s atrocity. Overall, Nigerians do not believe that their government is capable of protecting them from these terrorist acts in spite of Buhari’s promise to defeat Boko Haram. This belief by Nigerians based on the security vulnerability of the IDP camp residents and the overall insecurity in the country impacts the confidence Nigerians have in their government communication about crisis situations in Nigeria. Even those in the IDP camps are not safe. There is no additional assistance, beyond food and shelter, that is provided for the crisis victims in the camp. However, the government’s response to the Ebola virus disease (EVD) was swift, effective and widely praised by Nigerians and international organizations. The response illustrates humanism done right. Ebola in Nigeria

When an ill Liberian-American, Patrick Sawyer, flew into Lagos, Nigeria’s most populous city and commercial capital, on July 20, 2014, no one could have predicted that he would become Nigeria’s first Ebola case—the index

Crisis communication and humanism

139

patient. Upon disembarking, Sawyer, who had left Liberia against medical advice, became gravely ill at the airport and died five days later at a local hospital. The Nigerian federal government and the Lagos state government responded swiftly following Sawyer’s death in Lagos. Officials traced all of Sawyer’s direct and indirect contacts, tested them for evidence of infection and isolated them. Health officials also monitored them to ensure noncontact with the wider population. The federal government intensified surveillance at all points of entry, closed schools, mobilized and repurposed facilities and infrastructures developed for previous health epidemics, retrained frontline health workers and provided attractive incentives for them, worked with partner organizations to repurpose emergency operations centers and secured technology to assist in the efforts and executed a massive multi-media health communication campaign (BBC, 2014). The Nigerian Government’s quick and aggressive response to the Ebola crisis prevented what would have been a catastrophe for a heavily populated megacity like Lagos, and indeed, for the entire country. By October 20, 2014, exactly three months after Sawyer brought the virus to the country, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared Nigeria free of Ebola and praised the Nigerian government for “strong leadership and effective coordination of the response.” What was evident was the government’s intent to prevent the virus from devastating Nigerians. The former president of the country, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, in an editorial attributed the success of the Ebola public health campaign to a coordinated but flexible plan, aggressive borders and ports control and monitoring of potential victims entering the country, transparency and technology and international partnerships and cooperation (Jonathan, 2015). The government showed its concerns for the safety of Nigerians in tangible ways. •• •• ••

••

By closing schools, mobilizing and retraining health workers and repurposing health facilities to accommodate Ebola patients By contact tracing all affected persons to ensure that they received treatment and did not infect others and enforcing quarantine of infected persons, the government showed concern for its citizens’ health By collaborating with local and international organizations to research and provide care, as well as local religious and traditional rulers and celebrities in a multi-pronged multi-media public health campaign, it sought ways to involve others to help Nigerians to educate the public on how to prevent getting the virus and what to do if they contracted it By using social media and technology to communicate and counter rumors in real time, and being transparent with the public by communicating often with accurate information in multiple local languages and English, it showed Nigerians that it was always working in their best interest

140 Amiso M. George

Nigeria’s response to Ebola has been cited as worthy of emulation because of the preparation, collaboration, transparency, speed and communication deployed to stop the virus from spreading in the country (Courage, 2014). Most important was the impression people had that the government wanted to keep them safe from Ebola, given the deadly toll in neighboring countries. People cooperated with government directives and communities helped each other, and in some cases, reported lawbreakers to authorities. Their goal was to help each other stay alive. Equally important was the inherent power distance in the multimedia health campaign. The key players in the campaigns were individuals that had different ranges of power—acquired, conferred and otherwise. Given that people in cultures with large power distance relationships, such as Nigeria, tend to accept the inequality between superiors and subordinates; it was inevitable that those “powerful” people urging citizens to adhere to the government health mandate on Ebola were more successful than if they had not been used in the campaign. The intrinsic benefits were safeguarding the lives and health of every citizen from the scourge of the deadly Ebola virus. In spite of the success of the response to the Ebola virus, the Nigerian Government continues to face challenges in its crisis communication efforts and its effort to incorporate a humanistic approach to crisis response for a number of reasons: lack of trust, corrupt or ineffective leadership and selective application of laws, among others.

Challenges for the government Lack of trust in the government, where political allegiance is connected to religious and ethnic affiliation, as well as battling rumors, misinformation and disinformation interwoven with religious, ethnic and political divides all predate Nigeria’s current crises. Most Nigerians believe the government has programs that benefit the elite, not the poor, or that benefit people with the right political, ethnic or religious association (Adekoya, 2019). To further affirm this, the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index ranked Nigerian among the lowest in the world (130 out of 137 countries) for trust in politicians (WEF, 2017–2018). There is also long-term pervasive dissatisfaction with the government over ineffective leadership and corruption (Wike et al., 2016). When government does not communicate accurate information to its citizens during a crisis, rumors and misinformation take over, as in the case of President Jonathan’s delayed response to the abduction of the Chibok school girls.

Conclusion Nigeria has experienced and continues to grapple with a myriad of crises; however, its response has been uneven. From the poor response to Boko Haram and the swift and successful response to the Ebola crisis, Nigerians need to

Crisis communication and humanism

141

see their government as one that is humane and responds to their needs by building trust through action (not just slogans), transparency, leading by example, making public service about service (not about enrichment or based on one’s ethnicity, religion or political affiliation) and building on the success of Ebola—with quick action, collaboration and cooperation with partners and great empathy and compassion for its citizens. While these may not be achieved overnight, it is imperative that the government makes effective crisis communication an important part of its overall strategic plan as a way to build trust with the public. The government must also make collaboration and cooperation with civic, community groups and others the norm and not seek a relationship with them only during a crisis. NEMA, which has been commended for its work, should continue educating Nigerians on how to respond to a crisis before a crisis occurs. At the same time, the Nigerian government must acknowledge the role that ethnicity and religion play in the acceptance of messages disseminated by the government. The government must also understand how rumors, misinformation and disinformation fill the gap when there is a lack of accurate and timely messages during a crisis. Nigerians would like to believe communications from their government during a crisis, but the leaders must be willing to lead by example, ensuring that what they are communicating is accurate, timely, transparent and benefits everyone. They must also approach crisis management from a more humanistic position.

References About Nigeria. (2016). The Federal Republic of Nigeria. http://www.nigeria.gov.ng/inde x.php/2016-04-06-08-38-30/history-of-nigeria/32-about-nigeria Adamolekun, L., Erero, J., & Oshionebo, B. (1991). “Federal Character” and Management of the Federal Civil Service and the Military. Publius, 21(4), 75–88. Retrieved September 11, 2020, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3330312 Adekoya, R. (2019, March 1). Democracy has failed in Nigeria when voters no longer care who wins. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/01 /democracy-failed-nigeria-turnout-presidential-election Adeshokan, O. (2019, June 19). In Nigeria, Twitter therapists and ‘tuk-tuk’ counselors make up for a gap in mental health care. Global Post. https://www.pri.org/stories/2019-06-10/ nigeria-twitter-therapists-and-tuk-tuk-counselors-make-gap-mental-health-care Ahemba, T. (2004, May 7) Nigerian Muslims struggle to cope after village massacre. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/may/08/2 Akwagyram, A. (2020, May 4). Forty percent of Nigerians live in poverty: Stats office. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nigeria-economy-poverty/forty-percent -of-nigerians-live-in-poverty-stats-office-idUSKBN22G19A Borger, J. (2015, February 26). Nigerian election: Muhammadu Buhari pledges to defeat Boko Haram. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/26/nige rian-election-muhammadu-buhari-pledges-defeat-boko-haram

142 Amiso M. George British Broadcasting Corporation (2014, July 26). “Nigeria ‘on red alert’ over Ebola death in Lagos”. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-28498665 Cajun Navy Relief, (2016). LinkedIn. https://www.facebook.com/CajunNavyRelief/ about/?ref=page_internal Coombs, W. T. (2007). Ongoing crisis communication: Planning, managing, and responding, Los Angeles: Sage. Coombs, W. T. (2012). Parameters for crisis communication. In The handbook of crisis communication. T. Coombs & S. J. Holladay (Eds.), West Sussex, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 17–53. Courage, K.C. (2014, October 18). How did Nigeria quash its Ebola outbreak so quickly? Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-did-nigeria-q uash-its-ebola-outbreak-so-quickly/. Dugan, E. (2014, May 16). Nigeria schoolgirls kidnap: Anger as President Goodluck Jonathan snubs grieving families. The Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/ news/world/africa/nigeria-schoolgirls-kidnap-anger-as-president-goodluck-jonathan -snubs-grieving-families-9387914.html Fearn-Banks, K. (1996). Crisis communications: A casebook approach. LEA Communication Series. Foyou, V. E., Ngwafu, P., Santoyo, M., and Ortiz, A. (2018). The Boko Haram insurgency and its impact on border security, trade and economic collaboration between Nigeria and Cameroon: An exploratory study. African Social Science Review 9 (1)7, 66–77. https://digitalscholarship.tsu.edu/assr/vol9/iss1/7 Francesco, A. M. (2015, January 21). Confucian dynamism. International Management. (6). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118785317.weom060032) Hofstede, G. (1980). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw Hill. Hofstede, G. (1983). National cultures revisited. Behavior Science Research, 18(4), 285–305. doi:10.1177/106939718301800403 Hofstede, G. (2009, June). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online readings in psychology and culture. (Unit 17, Chapter 14). International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology. Howard, E. (2014, May 7). Bring back our girls: Global protests over abduction of Nigerian schoolgirls. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/07/bring -back-our-girls-global-protests-abduction-nigerian-schoolgirls Humans Rights Watch. Response to the violence of September 2001. Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/nigeria/nigeria1201-08.htm) Jonathan, G. (2015, January 23). Nigeria president: How we beat Ebola. USAToday. https ://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/01/23/eradicating-ebola-nigeria-president -jonathan/22056513/ Kanamori, S., & Jimba, M. (2007). Compensation for Avian Influenza Cleanup. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 13(2), 341. https://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid1302.061391. Kettani, H. (2010, June). Muslim population in Africa: 1950–2020. (PDF). International Journal of Environmental Science and Development. 10 (2): 4. doi:10.7763/IJESD.2010. V1.27.ISSN 2010–0264. Kroeber, A. L., & Kluckhohn, C. (1952). Culture: a critical review of concepts and definitions. Papers. Peabody Museum of Archaeology & Ethnology, Harvard University, 47(1), viii, 223. Mshelizza, I. (2011, August 29). Islamist sect Boko Haram claims Nigerian U.N. bombing. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nigeria-bombing-claim-idUSTRE7 7S3ZO20110829

Crisis communication and humanism

143

NCC ACT, 2003. (2018). Guidelines on disaster recovery for the Nigerian telecommunications industry. https://www.ncc.gov.ng/documents/822-draft-guideli nes-on-disaster-recovery/file. Nigeria Demographics, 2019. https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/nigeria-de mographics/) Nigerian Emergency (2019, October 31). UNHCR. https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/ni geria-emergency.html) Nigeria Population, 2019. https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/nigeria-demo graphics/ Obasi, N. (2016, May 30). Buhari’s Nigeria: Boko haram off balance, but other troubles surge. International Crisis Group. https://www.crisisgroup.org/africa/west-africa/nig eria/buhari-s-nigeria-boko-haram-balance-other-troubles-surge Ogbu, A. (2012, January 8). Jonathan: Boko Haram in Government, Threat Worse Than Civil War, This Day. http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/jonathan-boko-haram-in-g ovt-threat-worse-than-civil-war/106713/ Okolosie, L. (2014, Jul 20). Nigerians seethe at the government’s failure to rescue abducted schoolgirls. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/22 /nigerians-goodluck-jonathan-boko-haram Oladokun, A. T. et al. (2012). Effect of intervention on the control of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza in Nigeria. Pan African Medical Journal. 2012;13:14. [doi: 10.11604/ pamj.2012.13.14.1106]. Onuah, F. & Eboh, C (2011, December 25). Islamists kill dozens in Nigeria Christmas bombs. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nigeria-blast/islamists-kill-dozens -in-nigeria-christmas-bombs-idUSTRE7BO03020111225 Osaghae, E. E. & Suberu, R.T. ( 2005). A history of identities, violence, and stability in Nigeria. CRISE working paper no. 6. Oxford: Centre for Research on Inequality, Human Security and Ethnicity. http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/PDF/Outputs/Inequality/wp6. pdf> Rainie, L., Keeter, S., & Perrin, A. (2019). Trust and Distrust in America. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2019/07/22/trust-and-distrust-inamerica/ Raupp, J. (2019, November 1). “Crisis communication in the rhetorical arena”. Public Relations Review. 45 (4): 101768. Rohwerder, B. (2015, February). Crisis management models in Africa. Helpdesk Report. GSRDC Applied Knowledge Services https://gsdrc.org/publications/crisis-managem ent-models-in-africa/ Soyemi, E.A. (2016, August 25). “Failures of a weak state are to blame for Nigeria’s ethnicity problem”. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/failures-of-a-weak-state-are -to-blame-for-nigerias-ethnicity-problem-64186) The crisis in Nigeria. The international coalition for the responsibility to protect (ICRtoP) (http://www.responsibilitytoprotect.org/index.php/crises/crisis-in-nigeria). The Nigerian Red Cross. (n.d.). https://www.redcrossnigeria.org/ Tylor, E.B. (1871). Primitive culture: Researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, art, and custom, vol. 1. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons Tylor, E. B. (1958) Primitive culture. New York, NY: Harper. (Original work published 1871). UN News. (2016, June) Women in displacement camps in Nigeria resort to transactional sex for survival. https://www.un.org/africarenewal/news/women-displacement-camps -nigeria-resort-transactional-sex-survival Walter, N. (1997). Humanism—What’s in the Word. London: Rationalist Press Association.

144 Amiso M. George WEF, 2017–2018 Scorecard. Public trust in politicians—World Economic Forum. http: //reports.weforum.org/pdf/gci-2017-2018-scorecard/WEF_GCI_2017_2018_Scoreca rd_EOSQ041.pdf WHO declares end of Ebola outbreak in Nigeria (2014, October 20) https://www.who .int/mediacentre/news/statements/2014/nigeria-ends-ebola/en/ Wike, R, Simmons, K, Vice, M. & Bishop, C. (2016, Nov. 14). Key African nations, widespread discontent with economy, corruption. Pew Research Center: Global Attitudes & Trends https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2016/11/14/in-key-african-nations-w idespread-discontent-with-economy-corruption/

10 Public relations and the performance of everything Johanna Fawkes

Introduction Public relations is inherently a performance practice, invoking the multiple connotations of that word. Practitioners perform their professional identities, managing the line between conforming to and disrupting role expectations. They also stage the performances of others, through media events and training, and through the creation of appearances in text and image. This chapter explores public relations through the lenses of performance and performativity and questions the impact these stagings of self and others have on society in general. As such, this work asks, “to what extent has public relations contributed to the creation of a society where attention is the key commodity, where we are never ‘off stage?’” This examination draws on the work of Goffman (1959), Butler (1997), Alexander (2017), and Brown (2015). It starts with a discussion of terms and key authors, distinguishing between Butler’s notions of performed identities, Goffman’s workplace theatrics, and Alexander’s cultural pragmatics. This provides the foundation for exploring how public relations practitioners construct and perform their professional identities. The chapter then considers public relations as a form of dramaturgy: the arrangement of events and experiences for consumption by others (Brown, 2015). It concludes with reflections on the contribution of what Boorstin (2012 [1961]) termed “pseudo-events” on 21stcentury culture, asking if we have all become such accomplished performers that we forget to look behind the mask. The terms “performance” and “performativity” are widely used and widely interpreted across a range of academic disciplines, including anthropology, sociology, linguistics, and theatre studies (Albu & Flyverbom, 2019). Both terms are used to mean (1) the execution of a task or (2) a role where performance involves the presentation of material to an audience (Velten, 2012). Performativity is a neologism coined by John L. Austin (1962) to encapsulate his sense of words as actions, with particular emphasis on context. Its application in linguistics (e.g., Chomsky) has been extended by Judith Butler (1990/2015) to describe gender as a kind of speech act or utterance, designed to reflect or challenge social norms. As Edwards (2018) suggests, her work is DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340-10

146 Johanna Fawkes

useful in understanding how power structures may be internalized, with particular reference to marginalized and minority public relations practitioners. The term performance originates in studies of theatre and dramaturgy. Velten (2012, pp. 250–251) describes performance as consisting of “(1) people (or animals or even things) who perform and (2) people who witness the performance.” He says this applies even if the roles are reversed and regardless of media, platforms, or synchronicity. If these elements are constant, everything else is in flux, echoing the importance of context introduced by Austin (1962). Contextual variables form the focus of much performance research. One of the founders of performance studies, Richard Schechner (2003), argues that it is inherently interdisciplinary and transgressive; this aspect of performance theory has been strongly influential in drama schools, theatrical practice, and scholarship. However, theatrical performances are not explored here. I am more interested in sociological approaches, such as Erving Goffman’s (1959) idea of everyday life as a series of performances—with costumes, props, and scripts assembled as appropriate—and Victor Turner’s (1969) ideas on ritual as social drama. Here the focus is not on new ways to enliven theatrical performance but rather the powerful use of theatre as a dynamic metaphor for social engagement of all kinds. Alexander (2017) suggests Goffman and Turner were both influenced by Durkheim’s late work, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1995) which explored the interplay of social and religious rituals, both sacred and profane. From this base, Alexander theorizes “the cultural pragmatics of social performance” by looking at the “continuity and tension between ritual and performance” (2017, p. 3). Goffman is often cited in public relations literature (Brown, 2015; Fawkes, 2015a; Johansson, 2009), and Edwards (2018 ) devotes a chapter to the performativity of race and gender, drawing strongly on Butler. Indeed, Brown (2015) re-envisages public relations as PRe, or the public relations of everything, locating the practice firmly within a dramaturgical tradition. This chapter draws on these sources, introduces others, such as Alexander’s cultural pragmatics, and links this literature to recent writing on promotional culture (e.g., Edwards, 2018; Davis, 2013). Building connections between performance theory and promotional culture suggests new avenues for exploration. The concluding section considers one: the effects of performance/promotion on society as identified through the texts of those who have been critiquing such developments for the past half-century (Boorstin, 2012 [1961]; Debord & Knabb, 2005; Hedges, 2010; Lasch, 1979). But first: how do practitioners construct and perform their professional identities?

Identity issues for public relations practitioners There is a wide range of writing on the formation and maintenance of professional identity from the fields of social psychology and organizational theory. For example, Dent and Whitehead’s (2002) discussion of performativity,

PR and the performance of everything

147

drawing on Goffman (1959) and Lyotard (1984), emphasizes the hollowness at the heart of performing a professional identity. They go on to explore how professional self and identity (including gender and professionalism) are constructed and maintained across different work sites and in a variety of professional cultures. They find that professionalism has become managerialized and embedded in the employing organization, just as management has become professionalized so that the boundaries of what constitutes a profession are now blurred beyond recognition. A review of literature on teachers’ professional identity concludes: identity is not a fixed attribute of a person, but a relational phenomenon. Identity development occurs in an intersubjective field and can be best characterised as an ongoing process, a process of interpreting oneself as a certain kind of person and being recognised as such in a given context. (Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004, p. 108) This socially constructed identity of teachers, strongly influenced by a Butlerian perspective, is applicable across other disciplines, including public relations and communication managers (Tsetsura, 2010). The formation of professional identity in public relations is less explored than in, for example, teaching, though there are notable exceptions. Daymon and Surma (2012) draw on the work of Wenger (1998), who rejects the dichotomy between individual and society, suggesting identity is socially constructed through an engagement with the practices, routines, and stories of each social milieu. Their description resonates with Bourdieu’s concept of “habitus” which Edwards (2010) uses to understand how professional identity is built, particularly among black and ethnic minority entrants to the profession. The professional habitus plays a significant role in defining what it is to be “a professional” and, like the other processes that define professional jurisdiction, its character is linked to the political, social and economic circumstances from which the profession has emerged. (Edwards, 2010, p. 206) Edwards cites Bourdieu’s (2000) observation that new entrants to a profession “fall into line with the role … try to put the group on one’s side by declaring one’s recognition of the rule of the group and therefore of the group itself” (2010, p. 206). This is particularly salient in observing how race and gender become institutionalized in professional identities, welcoming some and excluding others (Edwards, 2018, p. 155). Edwards applies insights from Butler’s (1990) Gender Trouble regarding the performativity of gender and race to the experience of women and black and minority ethnic practitioners. Concepts of intersectionality from black feminist theory help reduce the risk of “limiting analysis of discrimination to gender” (Edwards, 2018, p. 186); Edwards cites a range of literature exploring how public relations is constructed

148 Johanna Fawkes

along gender and racial axes, including her own (Edwards, 2014b) study into diversity in the UK public relations industry. Fitch (2017, p. 58) provides a useful overview of writing on women and public relations, which includes (1) liberal-feminist approaches, which study individual female pioneers in PR, salary gaps, and roles research, but tend to ignore structural power issues; (2) critical approaches which interrogate patriarchal and capitalist barriers to women in general and women of color in particular; and (3) post-feminist approaches which are more individualistic than (1) and emphasize personal responsibility over other factors. Edwards (2018, p. 193) notes that much writing about women in public relations is framed within normative theoretical approaches, and she deploys performativity, black feminist theory, and post-feminism to open up different avenues for research. I have written elsewhere (Fawkes, 2012; 2015a) of the effect of public relations practitioners’ internalized images on the practice of ethics, arguing that the same mechanisms for constructing appropriate gendered behavior for a particular workplace or sector operate for the construction of situationally acceptable ethical practice. For example, Fawkes (2012) explores the tension between the dominant image of the practitioner as ethical guardian/corporate conscience and the views of many practitioners who follow the counsel-for-hire model. Academic discourse and professional bodies stress the legitimacy of the strategic advisor role over that of advocate (Bowen, 2008, 2009, 2010), but this exalted image is not widely shared by critics from inside the field (Edwards, 2018; Holtzhausen, 2012; L’Etang, 2003; St. John, & Pearson, 2016) or those outside the sector (Jansen, 2017; Sussman, 2011). My analysis was informed by Goffman’s (1959) dramaturgical approach to professional identity—that is, how individual and team performances are constructed, maintained, and, importantly, disrupted. Goffman talks about impression management in professions as a “rhetoric of training” (1959, p. 46), and explores the gulf between impressions “given” or consciously intended, and those “given off,” that is, received by the audience, often very different from those intended. Importantly, while most strive to close that gap, disruptions or failures are what expose the artifice, revealing those who shift the scenes and the flimsiness of the cupboard that holds the props. This is not to necessarily suggest a manipulative intent but, instead, signify the importance of the mechanisms by which cultural norms are observed and reproduced in professional and other settings. Goffman noted that When an individual appears before others, he knowingly and unwittingly projects a definition of the situation, of which a conception of himself is an important part. When an event occurs which is expressively incompatible with this fostered impression, significant consequences are simultaneously felt in three levels of social reality. (1959, p. 242)

PR and the performance of everything

149

These three levels are social structure, interaction, and personality (Goffman, 1959). The first affects teams which may become confused by role disruption which, in turn, may lead to audiences questioning the individual’s projected performance and legitimacy. Finally, in the third level, the person may reflect on what the disruption reveals about their own self-understanding. Goffman’s dramaturgical language, such as “front/back stage,” “face,” and scripts, will resonate with any entrant to a social or professional setting. It helps illustrate the process by which a culture is constructed in the workplace. It also raises issues way beyond the office. Finkelstein (2007), for example, places Goffman within a long tradition of questioning the self, citing Descartes, Montaigne, and Williams James as explorers of the borders between the inner subjective and outer social self. She suggests Goffman’s main contribution was positioning this negotiation as one prompted by anxiety (p. 102), rather than a relationship to God, a fitting response to Goffman’s times. Wernick (1991) also finds continuing relevance in Goffman’s questioning of personal and interpersonal authenticity when “social survival … depends on continual, audienceorientated, self-staging” (p. 193). This view is echoed by Bauman (2015) in a chapter called “Performing Selves,” where he and Raud discuss the routine labor of constructing the audience to which to present the constructed self, particularly within the digital space. “I may be the one who posts but I become what is posted,” he said (Bauman, 2015, p. 45). Marshall and Barbour (2015) reinforce the continuing relevance of Goffman’s insights for contemporary communication scholarship: Goffman’s conceptualization of the performance of self … translates easily from physical to digital spaces—a core necessity as the performance of self becomes increasingly visible through online platforms such as social and professional networking sites. (p. 4) Many of the issues public relations practitioners face in constructing their professional identity through the presentation of self are common to all professionals, but the content of their work differs from most. The performative elements are core: public relations work involves the staging of events, the scripting of statements, and the creation of the presentation of others.

Public relations, performance, and promotional culture The UK professional body for practitioners, the Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR), describes PR work as “reputation, what you do and what people say you do” (CIPR, n.d.). This emphasis on appearance is in contrast to the generally preferred definitions of offering strategic counsel to management (Bowen, 2009). The influence of the Excellence project (Grunig et al., 1992) has tended to marginalize promotion and persuasion as less creditable aspects of the field. However, critical and rhetorical scholars have argued that

150 Johanna Fawkes

this approach idealizes public relations and distorts the reality, in which persuasion is a central element that need not be characterized as inherently unethical (Brown, 2015; Fawkes, 2015; Pearson, 1989a; Pfau & Wan, 2006; Porter, 2010). For example, Kevin Moloney (2006) coined the term “the persuasive sphere” to describe the shift from an idealized Habermasian public sphere to a more ideologically driven domain of markets and consumers. The connection is strongly made by McKevitt (2018), who links the expansion of the persuasive industries—including public relations—to the global explosion of consumer marketing, an intrinsic aspect of global capitalism. Sociologist Anne Cronin (2018) calls this public relations capitalism. In this process, appearance has become the dominant mode of relationship, as Finkelstein (2007) noted, pointing out the long-established importance of manners in, for example, the French 18th-century court. Market forces require constant competition for consumer approval. Wernick (1991) observed that promotion has culturally generalised as commodification has spread, as consumer goods production has industrialised, leading to the massive expansion of the sphere of circulation, and as competitive exchange relations have generally established themselves as an axial principle of social life. (p. 186) He noted that most research has concentrated on the receiver’s experience but that the role of production deserves greater scrutiny. Accordingly, the part that public relations plays in the production of culture has received increased attention in recent years. Indeed, scholarship around promotional culture and public relations can be seen as clearly linking to the concepts of staging and spectacle that derive from Goffman’s dramaturgical theory. Public relations practitioners engage with performance at two levels: the performativity of identity, as discussed above, and the staging of events, corporeal or digital, for the attention of others. This is what Brown (2015) called the theatre of public relations. His universalized notion of public relations—the public relations of everything (PRe)—is described as follows: “In PRe, the compelling trope is not functionalism or mechanism or balance: it is drama” (2015, p. 5). Both Brown and Johansson (2009) relate Goffman’s notion of face to the practice of public relations, particularly the management of impressions and relationships. The question of appearance is central to the public relations industry. Media and political media relations are concerned about the optics, the impressions formed in the minds of viewers and readers. Narratives and counter-narratives must be built and maintained to secure public or shareholder approval. This is where the strategist and the publicist aspects of communication management come together. However, the promotional work undertaken in public relations has received less attention from PR scholars than the management functions promoted

PR and the performance of everything

151

by the Excellence project. Until recently, reflections on the management of appearances, particularly in political communication and corporate promotion, were primarily scrutinized by scholars in cultural and media studies, from which a strand of promotional culture literature has emerged over the last several decades. Here, the impact of managed performances on political and social life is presented as largely pernicious, following in the footsteps of the Frankfurt School and Herman and Chomsky’s (1988) propaganda model (Miller & Dinan, 2008; Stauber & Rampton, 2004; Sussman, 2011). Where public relations is identified as a contributor to promotional culture, it is seen as wholly malign in regard to its effect on democracy, consumer choice, and collective welfare. Scholars tend to focus on public relations operating as political and corporate propaganda, often in the context of electoral manipulation, and its association with lobbying for fossil fuel companies and pharmaceuticals to advance their interests against societal well-being (e.g., Sussman, 2011). Other scholars of the promotional aspects of culture, including Wernick’s (1991) Promotional Culture and Marshall’s (2014) Celebrity and Power, interrogate what Fairchild (2007) calls the “attention economy.” This view conceptualizes society, and particularly digital society, as a ceaseless competition for the consumer’s glance, click, or credit card (Wu, 2017). It argues that the commodification of goods, services, and institutions is a requirement of neoliberal market economics where every provider must compete by performing to market standards (or at least appearing to), making promotion “an axial principle of social life” (Wernick, 1991, p. 186). Institutions, including hospitals and universities, not only have to operate as sites of healthcare or education but also have to “perform” these roles to secure funding and approval. All entities can be seen as inherently performative because they are in a permanent state of self-advocacy. P. David Marshall has developed the dramatic image of the mask or persona to describe the celebrification of the cultural sphere. He co-wrote an introduction to Persona Studies Journal (Marshall & Barbour, 2015) that highlights the different foci between cultural and persona studies: Where much of Cultural Studies has focused on collective configurations of meaning—for example, subculture—Persona Studies looks at how the individual moves into the social spaces and presents the self. As we have identified, Persona Studies is turning the approach of cultural studies on its head—not in some negation, but rather in a refocussing of critical examination of how the individual gains or articulates agency. (Marshall & Barbour, 2015, p. 2) They summarize concepts from Goffman, Butler, and other commentators on the performed self, particularly in a digital age, including Jung’s idea of persona, which they found useful to both analyse and read the contemporary condition … Persona can be seen as something that needs to be managed and, from this perspective,

152 Johanna Fawkes

to be understood as a personal practice that is performed in order to enter the social world in some particular way. (Marshall & Barbour, 2015, p. 4) They conclude that Persona-making as a practice, in short, is pandemic. And persona studies must necessarily be a discipline that is transdisciplinary, drawing on and cultivating a series of new connections to reveal insights into the contemporary self and the volatile world of the fabricated publics these collective selves conjure. (p. 9) The concept of persona has been applied to public relations corporations by St. John (2017 ) and public relations’ professionalism and ethics (Fawkes, 2015) but deserves closer scrutiny by PR scholars, particularly in times of deep change. As St John (2017, p.6 ) puts it, “One of the overriding reasons that a corporate persona construct would be offered by an organisation is that the entity is striving to provide some semblance of grounding in the midst of turbulent times.” Persona can be seen as a humanizing effort from otherwise faceless organizations, though the Jungian sense emphasizes the desire to please, to be acceptable in the public arena, a quality which underpins much of public relations’ work (Fawkes, 2015). Persona as a concept offers a bridge between the often mechanistic analysis of much PR practice and the rich, but highly abstract, critiques offered by cultural critics. On the whole, Wernick’s (1991) observation that cultural scholars prefer examining outcomes to process is still relevant. There are exceptions to this generalization, such as Davis (2013), who carefully distinguishes between the processes, history, and ethos of promotional industries, which include “public relations, lobbying, advertising, marketing and branding—and related professions (pollsters, speechwriters etc.)” (p. 1). That is, promotional industries employ “promotional intermediaries” who share the following characteristics: “Their products may be ideas or objects; They access communication media; [and] They are self-organized in professions” (Davis, 2013, p. 2). This perspective is similar to the critics cited above but demonstrates much closer attention to public relations as work. Sue Curry Jansen (2017) also recognizes that non-profit and socially responsible enterprises require professional communication services. She also recognizes the critical scholarship undertaken by PR academics, whom she terms “insider” critics. Nevertheless, her explorations of PR as propaganda (Jansen, 2017) frame the field wholly in corporate terms. This has the effect of disallowing advocacy as a legitimate practice. Additionally, from a practitioner perspective, McKevitt (2018) traces the rise of public relations and, separately, advertising in the late twentieth century, linking persuasion to brand identity and consumerism. However, he offers little theoretical insight into the effects of such practices.

PR and the performance of everything

153

The most comprehensive examination of public relations as a “circulatory mechanism for culture” (Edwards, 2018, p. 46) is Lee Edwards’ book, Understanding Public Relations: Theory, Culture and Society. As she says, “Arguing that circulation processes deserve critical examination challenges the representation of public relations as a channel for communication that simply carries, rather than shapes, meaning” (Edwards, 2018, p. 32). Edwards explores issues of power, discourse, democracy, race, and class as they operate within and through public relations as a social actor, using a vast range of theoretical frameworks, including Bourdieu, Foucault, and Du Gay, with an appreciation of Latour and Habermas. “Paying attention to the promotional culture in which public relations thrives prompts ethical questions about the kind of world that we want to live in and public relations’ role in constructing (or obstructing) it,” she says (Edwards, 2018, pp. 211–212). The relocation of public relations as a contributor to promotional culture is broadly located in socio-cultural and political economy theories. Public relations thus acts as an agent of capital in generating effects that benefit its specific paymasters and neoliberal, free-market ideologies in general. There is a connection to the critical scholarship cited above, but as Cronin (2018) argues, a more nuanced and complex portrait of the field is needed in order to understand its social actions more clearly. All the above scholars stress the impact of public relations and allied persuasive industries on consumers and society generally. Some focus on the political capital of the persuaders and the use of communication to achieve the ends of global capitalism—others examine the internal processes by which such influences are internalized, at both individual and collective levels. The latter tend to refer to performance theories, such as Goffman’s, to explore the operation of the self in contemporary culture. The persona studies approach, in particular, appears to be a fruitful third route as it neither overemphasizes mechanistic ends-seeking of the persuaders or the internal processes of the message receivers. Therefore, it has much to offer public relations students and scholars interested in the construction of identities for corporations, individuals, and nations. Discussion around the nature of publics might also be expanded by the use of dramaturgical metaphors, both in the formal theatrical sense of an audience found in Schechner and in the more contingent, everyday usage of Goffman. It is this space I wish to explore in the final section.

All the world’s a stage: public relations and the performance society Alexander (2017), building on Goffman and others, argues that society can be understood as the “cultural pragmatics of social performance” and that “social theorists must use the tools of dramaturgy, drama theory and theatre criticism to develop a cultural sociology of social performance and, with it, a new sociology of modernity” (p. 3). If the links between promotional culture discourse and performance theory are as robust as I suggest above, public relations has

154 Johanna Fawkes

a key role to play in understanding this approach to performance and culture. Despite explicit engagement with the struggle for control of symbolic communication in case studies from Black Lives Matter to the Arab Spring to US President Obama’s communication strategies, public relations is not mentioned in Alexander’s book, suggesting there is plenty of room for introducing the pragmatics of public relations to this debate. Public relations is, as outlined in the previous section, centrally involved in the generation of text and image which shape the priorities and choices within a culture. Gambetti (2009) develops performance theory to argue that the creation of a text summons an audience into being: the opening of a space of appearance transforms otherwise unconnected people into a “commun-ity.” Without the appearance, to heterogeneous publics, of conflicts and identities, differences, commonalities and power structures, neither the designation of a given problem as a common problem that prompts action, nor proper “commun-ication” (rendering common) is possible. (p. 106) Gambetti distinguishes between “mere appearance,” in which the spectator is a passive receiver, and the construction of a communicative space through performed texts and images which encourage a “reflexive-critical public” (2009, p. 106). However, most writing on spectacle and illusion tends to emphasize the former category, from the Frankfurt school’s pessimism about mass culture to recent commentators such as Hedges (2010). The icon for this approach to performance culture is the theatrical impresario P. T. Barnum. Frequently cited in public relations texts, usually as a historical embarrassment, Barnum has received renewed attention in the era of Trump. Writing at the start of mass consumerism, Boorstin (1961/2012) references both Barnum and PR “father” Edward Bernays as foundational to American culture. Boorstin recognizes Barnum’s genius in understanding not just that people could be fooled, but that, in fact, they wanted to be fooled: “Contrary to popular belief, Barnum’s great discovery was not how easy it was to deceive the public but rather how much the public enjoyed being deceived,” (1961/2012, p. 209). Boorstin is most well-known for his identification of the manufacture, by public relations personnel, of events primarily for media consumption, which he defined as “pseudo-events.” As he noted, their relationship “to the underlying reality of the situation is ambiguous” (1961/2012, p. 11). The consequences, for Boorstin, are profound. “We risk being the first people in history to have been able to make their illusions too vivid, so persuasive, so ‘realistic’ that they can live in them,” he said (1961/2012, p. 240). He sees PR activity as part of the machinery for the generation of illusion but notes that “illusory solutions will not cure our illusions … Each of us must disenchant himself, must moderate his expectations, must prepare himself to receive

PR and the performance of everything

155

messages coming in from outside” (1961/2012, p. 260). In a pre-smartphone era, Boorstin talked of Narcissus and described a dystopian society saturated with manufactured images and distractions, adrift in a sea of promotional communication. The situation had not improved when Lasch wrote his book on the narcissistic tendencies in American culture in 1979. He too is intrigued by the power of promotional industries across the social sphere. “Madison Avenue packages politicians and markets them as if there were cereals or deodorants; but the art of public relations penetrates even more deeply into political life, transforming policymaking itself,” he said (Lasch, 1979, p. 60). Like Boorstin, Lasch cites Barnum as precedence, as a pioneer of the monetization of self-promotion. “Barnum valued the good opinion of others not as a sign of one’s usefulness but as a means of getting credit,” he noted (Lasch, 1979, p. 56). Discussion of Barnum raises issues of false claims and intentional deception, practices which were amplified in the 20th century with the growth of mass communication, but Lasch (p. 74) sees this as misguided: “the rise of mass media makes the categories of truth and falsehood irrelevant to an evaluation of their influence. Truth has given way to credibility, facts to statements.” Concern about illusion and self-illusion is brought into the 21st century by journalist Chris Hedges’ 2010 book Empire of Illusion. He studies a range of cultural institutions, including wrestling, pornography, education, and corporations, as not merely service providers of various types but performers of service provision and generators of false narratives. As he puts it (2010, p. 45), “The culture of illusion thrives by robbing us of the intellectual and linguistic tools to separate illusion from truth … Pseudo-events destabilize truth.” Hedges identifies the engines of this collapse: Pseudo events, dramatic productions orchestrated by publicists, political machines, television, Hollywood or advertisers … have the capacity to appear real, even though we know they are staged. They are capable because they can evoke a powerful emotional response of overwhelming reality and replace it with a fictional narrative that often becomes accepted as truth. (2010, p. 50) The dramaturgical metaphors explored throughout this chapter are prevalent in the discourse of Boorstin, Lasch, and Hedges. But this theatre is a place of deception, not truth. Hedges observes that A public that can no longer distinguish between truth and fiction is left to interpret reality through illusion … when the most important skill is the ability to entertain, the world becomes a place where lies become true, where people can believe what they want to believe. (2010, p. 5)

156 Johanna Fawkes

To different degrees, these writers see the receivers of promotional messages as somewhat passive audiences, despite Boorstin’s acute observation that Barnum understood public complicity in the generation of illusion. In this, they echo the Frankfurt School’s sense of mass media and entertainment in general as existentially corrupt and corrupting. A more nuanced view would reflect the agency of consumers who, like audiences in theatrical events, contribute to the creation of culture. Moreover, it is worth noting Debord’s (1967/2005) critique of Boorstin, which can also be applied to Lasch and Hedges, namely that pseudo-events are treated as infestations, not manifestations, of culture. “He [Boorstin] thinks he can treat private life and ‘honest commodities’ as separate from the ‘excesses’ he deplores,” notes Debord, arguing that this is to miss the nature of spectacle, offering “no way of comprehending the true extent of the present society’s domination by images” (1967/2005, p. 106). For Debord, like Baudrillard, the image constitutes the reality. In effect, Debord explodes Goffman’s conceptualization of public and private space as front and back stage, instead positing a culture saturated with image and presentation, as suggested more recently by Wu (2017). His conclusions, however, are as dire as Boorstin’s. “The spectacle obliterates the boundaries between self and world by crushing the self,” he says. “It also obliterates the boundaries between true and false by repressing all directly lived truth beneath the real presence of the falsehood maintained by the organisation of appearances” (Debord, 1967/2005, p. 116, emphasis in original). Given Edwards’ (2018) discussion of public relations as a cultural circulatory mechanism that shapes as well as transmits meaning, it would seem that public relations has amplified and institutionalized a culture of illusion, filling the stage with smoke and mirrors in a professional drive to organize appearances. Unlike some of the writers cited earlier, I don’t want to demonize public relations or overstate its power: successful campaigns and promotions depend upon the responsiveness of receivers, whether in mass promotional effort or small-scale business briefings. The performance metaphor demands an engaged audience as well as committed actors. Indeed, it is worth remembering the ancient Greek sense of performance as a form of communication designed to convey deep social, political, and psychological truths. The mask is intended to reveal as well as conceal. For example, Schechner (2003/1977, p. 40) refers to tribal rituals where all, performers and spectators, understand that the drama operates on two levels; that of the masks—which embody the spirits—and that of the men wearing the masks. There is the reality of the mask world and the reality of the mask wearer’s world; the transcendent and the mundane brought together in performance. The rituals Schechner describes include elaborate procedures for separating these functions at the end of ceremony, to put away or destroy the “god” role to return to ordinary life. If we have, collectively, adopted some of the charisma or glamour from the mask world, what happens if we continue to strut

PR and the performance of everything

157

about in feathers, intoxicated by the illusion of supremacy, and forget to be vulnerable, to be human? This tension echoes Jung’s notion of persona and shadow: the shiny version individuals and groups present in the social world and the unexpressed elements that lurk in the shadow. Jung believed the latter contained truths that could help the troubled soul heal themselves if they find the courage to look into hidden corners. For Jung, this is A process not of dissolution but of construction, in which thesis and antithesis both play their part … The standstill is overcome and life can flow on with renewed power towards new goals. (CW6/827) A Jungian approach always sees the possibility of change, redemption even, if one is prepared to understand shadow dynamics. I suggest the increasingly fixed, rictus mask that represents social, commercial, professional, and political engagement in society may conceal much deeper human needs, unmanifest in the outer world, desperate to be heard. Note: I wrote most of this chapter before the Time of Corona; the following remarks are written from lockdown as every social, political, and economic structure crumbles around the world in the face of mass death. The current COVID-19 pandemic offers what some have called the Great Pause. Paul Kingsnorth (2020) reflects on the opportunities that appear when normality is in lockdown. This is not to minimize the immense and continuing suffering, but to point out that not to reflect on these times, as many are now doing, would be reprehensible. The mask has slipped—what lies beneath? I believe we have been caught in what Hedges calls the “culture of illusion” and that public relations has been instrumental in amplifying and globalizing qualities of display, distraction, and deceit with the skills and glamour of snakeoil salesmen. Who, of course, left town before their remedies were exposed as inefficacious. Right now, we are witnessing the non-delivery of impossible promises. The promotion of limitless growth, fuelled by rampant consumption offers no protection in a pandemic. It feels as if a veil of illusion has just been ripped away, revealing “reality” to be a well-lit studio set. Now the scenery is being dismantled, what emerges? A deeply human drama, naturally, not only of death and loss but of connection and communication. Italians sing to each other from their locked-in balconies; Spaniards take to theirs each night to applaud the medical workers trying to keep them safe. In our isolation, we are reaching out to celebrate our human community, aware of our local, grounded vulnerability and our collective global potential. Simultaneously, of course, there is profiteering and piracy, incompetence and evasion, at corporate and state levels. Behind the mask we are just vulnerable humans, after all, who need to eat, breathe and talk to each other. If public relations is to survive these changes, it will have to start there.

158 Johanna Fawkes

This is a pivotal moment: public relations has the capacity to be an agent in the emerging order. Will we rush to return to the old normal or use our listening and communication skills to help create something new?

Conclusion This chapter has explored the notion of performance as applied to public relations, in the creation of identity, and, further, in the creation of culture. The role of public relations in performance culture has been largely marginalized by cultural scholars who either demonize the practice or fail to distinguish between promotional industries. This chapter has attempted a more nuanced approach, which faces up to the responsibilities inherent in generating a culture predicated on consumption and display but finally offers a Jungian path for moving forward. The emerging fields of promotional culture, persona studies, and celebrity studies outlined above need input from public relations scholars to understand more deeply and with more subtlety how these shows are staged. In the post-symmetry era, a new generation of PR scholars have found fertile ground in the ideas of cultural anthropologists like Schechner and dramaturgical sociologists like Goffman to shine a klieg light on the performative, ritualistic, social rule–bound, strategic, and staged nature of public relations. At the same time, PR theorists have found intellectual relevance to PR in exploring the personal and social cost of performativity. Carl Jung’s insights elucidate the price paid for maintaining a public persona, at the corporate, political, or individual level, as well as suggesting means for lightening the load. The inclusion of this range of literature is further evidence that PR theory has, from its beginnings, had a voracious appetite for new ideas from the sciences, the arts, and the humanities, and the ambition to import and integrate them. The time of writing these words suggests a collective exhaustion with the labor of daily performance and a sense of re-engagement with the natural world. A call for deeper communication: time will tell if we choose to hear it.

References Albu, O. B., & Flyverbom, M. (2019). Organizational Transparency: Conceptualizations, Conditions, and Consequences. Business & Society Business & Society, 58(2), 268–297. Alexander, J. C. (2017). The drama of social life. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Austin, J. L., & Urmson, J. O. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon. Bauman, Z., & Raud, R. (2015). Practices of selfhood. Cambridge: Polity Press. Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and teacher education, 20(2), 107–128. Boorstin, D. J. (2012 [1961]). The image: a guide to pseudo-events in America. New York: Vintage Books. Bourdieu, P. (2000). Pascalian meditations. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press. Bowen, S. A. (2008). A State of Neglect: Public Relations as ‘Corporate Conscience’ or Ethics Counsel. Journal of Public Relations Research, 20(3), 271–296. doi:10.1080/10627260801962749

PR and the performance of everything

159

Bowen, S. A. (2009). All glamour, no substance? How public relations majors and potential majors in an exemplar program view the industry and function. PUBREL Public Relations Review, 35(4), 402–410. Bowen, S. A. (2010). The nature of good in public relations: what should be its normative ethic? In R. L. Heath (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Public Relations (pp. 569–583). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE publications. Brown, R. E. (2015). The public relations of everything: the ancient, modern and postmodern dramatic history of an idea. Butler, J. (1997). Excitable speech: a politics of the performative. New York: Routledge. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: feminism and the subversion of identity. New York; London: Routledge. Cronin, A. M. (2018). Public Relations Capitalism: Promotional Culture, Publics And Commercial Democracy. Palgrave Macmillan. Davis, A. (2013). Promotional cultures: the rise and spread of advertising, public relations, marketing and branding. Cambridge; Malden: Polity. Daymon, C., & Surma, A. (2012). The mutable identities of women in public relations. Public Relations Inquiry Public Relations Inquiry, 1(2), 177–196. Debord, G., & Knabb, K. (2005). The society of the spectacle. London: Rebel Press. Dent, M., & Whitehead, S. (2002). Configuring the new professional In M. Dent & S. Whitehead (Eds.), Managing Professional Identities: Knowledge, performativity and the ‘new’ professional (pp. 1–18). London Routledge Durkheim, É., & Fields, K. E. (1995). The elementary forms of religious life. New York: Free Press. Edwards, L. (2010). ‘Race‘ in public relations. In R. L. Heath (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Public Relations (pp. 205–222). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE publications. Edwards, L. (2018). Understanding public relations: theory, culture and society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Fairchild, C. (2007). Building the Authentic Celebrity: The Idol Phenomenon in the Attention Economy. Popular Music and Society, 30(3), 355–375. Fawkes, J. (2012). Saints and sinners: Competing identities in public relations ethics. Public Relations Review, 38(5), 865–872. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.07.004 Fawkes, J. (2015). Public relations ethics and professionalism: the shadow of excellence. London: New York: Routledge. Fawkes, J. (2015a). Performance and Persona: Goffman and Jung’s approaches to professional identity applied to public relations. Public Relations Review, 41(0), 675–680. doi:http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.02.011 Finkelstein, J. (2007). The art of self invention: image and identity in popular visual culture. London: I. B. Tauris. Fitch, K. (2017). Seeing the unseen hand: Celebrity, promotion and public relations. Public Relations Inquiry Public Relations Inquiry, 6(2), 157–169. Gambetti, R. (2009). Conflict, ‘commun-ication’ and the role of collective action in the formation of public spheres. In S. Shai (Ed.), Publics, Politics and Participation: Locating the Public Sphere in the Middle East and North Africa: SSRC Publications. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday Anchor. Grunig, J. E., Dozier, D. M., Ehling, W. P., Grunig, L. A., Repper, F. C., & White, J. (1992). Excellence in public relations and communication management. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Hedges, C. (2010). Empire of illusion: the end of literacy and the triumph of spectacle. Toronto: Vintage Canada.

160 Johanna Fawkes Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing consent: the political economy of the mass media. New York: Pantheon Books. Holtzhausen, D. R. (2012). Public relations as activism: postmodern approaches to theory & practice. New York: Routledge. Jansen, S. C. (2017). Stealth communications: the spectacular rise of public relations. Cambridge: Polity Press. Johansson, C. (2009). On Goffman: researching relations with Erving Goffman as pathfinder. In O. Ihlen, B. van Ruler, & M. Fredriksson (Eds.), Public Relations and Social Theory, key figures and concepts (pp. 119–140). New York, NY: Routledge. Jung, C. G. Psychological types (R. F. C. Hull & H. Baynes, Trans. Vol. 6). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Kingsnorth, P. (2020). Finnegas. Emergence Magazine. Retrieved from https://emergen cemagazine.org/story/finnegas/ L’Etang, J. (2003). The myth of the ‘ethical guardian’: an examination of its origins, potency and illusions. Journal of Communication Management, 8(1), 53–67. Lasch, C. (1979). The culture of narcissism: American life in an age of diminishing expectations / Christopher Lasch. New York, NY: Warner Books Ed. Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Manchester Manchester University Press Marshall, P. D. (2014). Celebrity and power: fame in contemporary culture; with a new introduction. Minneapolis [u.a.]: University of Minnesota Press. Marshall, P. D., & Barbour, K. (2015). Making Intellectual Room for Persona Studies: a New Consciousness and a Shifted Perspective. Online Journal. Deakin University. Retrieved from https://digital.library.adelaide.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/2440/95362/3/hdl_95362.pdf McKevitt, S. (2018). The persuasion industries: the making of modern Britain. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Miller, D., & Dinan, W. (2008). A century of spin: how public relations became the cutting edge of corporate power. London: Pluto. Moloney, K. (2006). Rethinking public relations : PR propaganda and democracy (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. Neumann, B., & Nünning, A. (2012). Travelling concepts for the study of culture. Retrieved from http://www.myilibrary.com?id=416901 Pearson, R. (1989a). Beyond Ethical Relativism in public relations: co orientation, rules and the ideal of communication symmetry. In J. E. Grunig & L. A. Grunig (Eds.), Public Relations research annual, vol 1 (Vol. 1, pp. 67–87). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Pfau, M., & Wan, H. (2006). Persuasion: an intrinsic function in public relations. In C. H. Botan & V. Hazleton (Eds.), Public relations theory II (pp. 101–136). Mahweh NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Porter, L. (2010). Communicating for the good of the state: A post-symmetrical polemic on persuasion in ethical public relations. Public Relations Review, 36, 127–133. Schechner, R. (2003). Performance theory. London: Routledge. St. John, B. (2017). Public relations and the corporate persona the rise of the affinitive organization. London; New York: Routledge. St. John, I., Burton, & Pearson, Y., E. (2016). Crisis Management and Ethics: Moving Beyond the Public-Relations-Person-as-Corporate-Conscience Construct. Journal of Media Ethics, 31(1), 18–34. Stauber, J. C., & Rampton, S. (2004). Toxic sludge is good for you : lies, damn lies and the public relations industry. London: Robinson.

PR and the performance of everything

161

Sussman, G. (2011). The propaganda society : Promotional culture and politics in global context. New York: Peter Lang. Tsetsura, K. (2010). Social construction and public relations. In R.L.Heath (Ed.), SAGE Handbook of public relations (pp. 163–175). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE publications. Turner, V. (1969). The ritual process: structure and anti-structure. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Velten, H. R. (2012). Performance and Performativity. In B. Nuemann & A. Nunning (Eds.), Travelling Concepts for the Study of Culture (pp. 249 –266). Berlin: de Gruyter. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Wernick, A. (1991). Promotional culture: advertising, ideology and symbolic expression: Sage Publications. Wu, T. (2017). The attention merchants: how our time and attention are gathered and sold. London: Atlantic Books.

11 Humanistic turn A new home for public diplomacy? Efe Sevin

Public diplomacy is a well-established practice and study without a stable home. The short yet turbulent history of the term makes it even more difficult to place public diplomacy within a discipline. This chapter evaluates whether the humanistic turn in public relations and public relations of everything (PRe) idea (see Brown, 2015 for an in-depth discussion) can establish an intellectual home for public diplomacy. Thus far, public diplomacy has enjoyed a semi-nomadic lifecycle, notable in the United States for its shift from a post–World War II emphasis on resisting communism to, by the advent of the 21st century, its shift toward preventing violent extremism. Scholars and practitioners all agreed on a need for public diplomacy, but the details—such as why/when/how we need public diplomacy or even what public diplomacy is—have been based on different answers. For the sake of parsimony, public diplomacy can be seen as public relations for nation-states. I should note that I am employing this concise definition to benefit from the protean and humanistic nature of public relations (Brown, 2015, p. 170). In other words, public diplomacy is not a subset of public relations understood through traditional theories. Rather, just like public relations, it has enjoyed many different definitions, forms, priorities, tools, and objectives. The initial uses of the term “public diplomacy” barely had anything to do with contemporary practice. The earliest known accounts were found by Nick Cull, a public diplomacy scholar and historian, in newspapers dating back to mid-19th century. Those uses ranged from using public diplomacy as a synonym for civility (Cull, 2009) to an antonym for closed-door diplomacy (Hart, 1907, p. 637). It was not until 1965 when a process-based definition was shared. Edmund Gullion, the dean of Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, argued that public diplomacy encompasses dimensions of international relations beyond traditional diplomacy; the cultivation by governments of public opinion in other countries; the interaction of private groups and interests in one country with those of another; the reporting of foreign affairs and its impact on policy; communication between those whose job is communication, as between diplomats and foreign correspondents; and the processes of inter-cultural communications. (Edward R. Murrow Center for Public Diplomacy, 2010) DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340-11

Humanistic turn

163

This comprehensive definition was the beginning of more structured (yet still untethered) academic debates. For example, we looked at all the peer-reviewed articles that contained the concept of public diplomacy in their titles or abstracts from 1965 to mid-2017 (Sevin, Metzgar, & Hayden, 2019). We were able to identify a total of 2,124 such manuscripts published by 843 different journals (Sevin et al., 2019). When we further questioned the home disciplines of these journals, we were no closer to finding a home for public diplomacy as we observed international relations, cultural studies, history, and communications journals all housing articles on public diplomacy (Sevin et al., 2019). Practitioners give similarly confusing views on the details of public diplomacy. It is virtually impossible to point to when the practice started or what it entails. For instance, Walter R. Roberts (2009) famously said that public diplomacy “was born on February 1st, 1942 at 270 Madison Avenue in New York City,” referring to the time and place Voice of America (VoA) started, thus making public diplomacy an international broadcasting experience helping tell America’s story. Yet, Benjamin Franklin has also been labeled as the first public diplomat because of his efforts in influencing British public opinion to increase support for the American cause (Cull, 2008b), bringing the practice closer to political science, international relations, and lobbying. Currently, the US practice involves over a dozen institutions, helping public diplomacy claim lineage from development organizations, cultural institutions, and even military operations, and entails practices ranging from digital communications to student exchanges. As I will unpack in the following section, the current practice is even more complicated: the contemporary political landscape is more crowded, communication platforms more numerous, and practitioner countries are more diverse. Will, or rather should, the humanistic turn in public relations affect public diplomacy? I present an answer on the possible convergence between these two fields of practice across four sections in this chapter. First, I summarize the existing debates on the boundaries of public diplomacy. Second, I discuss how practices have helped public diplomacy evolve. Third, I highlight the scholarly debates concerning the placement of public diplomacy within different disciplinary camps. I conclude this chapter by unpacking the potential of public diplomacy to change political discourse through a holistic approach.

Boundaries: defning public diplomacy The particular debate on the definition of public diplomacy is convoluted, to say the least. I find the first few weeks of any public diplomacy course, for instance, the most challenging as I need to convey clear definitions to students in a field where there are no explicit definitions. In its essence, however, public diplomacy is a communication process (Gilboa, 2008). Yet, moving beyond this argument is difficult. Even the answer to the question of who has the right to communicate on behalf of a nation-state is not clear. Inspired by the frustration of his students who kept running into conflicting answers to this question,

164 Efe Sevin

Kadir Jun Ayhan of Ewha Womans University in South Korea has created a taxonomy of answers to this question. His findings demonstrate the diversity in the field as the answers given by scholarly works range from only governments to primarily non-state actors (Ayhan, 2019, pp. 64–66). Articulating who are the receivers of public diplomacy messaging is similarly contentious, with answers ranging from the public in general (Ayhan, 2019) to political decision-makers (Rana, 2007). Furthermore, the public diplomacy communication process is understood as assuming many different forms, including mass media broadcasting (Cull, 2008a), student exchanges (Åkerlund, 2014), aid programs (Alexander, 2018), cultural programs (Arndt, 2005), and even chatter on social media (Christensen, 2013). Despite its relatively short history and lack of agreement on what it actually is, public diplomacy managed to incorporate several waves of thinking. For instance, as early as 2005, scholars conveyed there was a “new public diplomacy” (Melissen, 2005b). This break from the past was needed as the practice of public diplomacy was becoming more global and communication strategies were becoming more diverse (Melissen, 2005a, pp. 11–15). The existing scholarship provides a plethora of concepts to explain what has changed. For instance, public diplomacy 2.0, as one of the many terms marking the break from old traditions, highlights the role of the Internet and other communication technologies in influencing the practice (Arsenault, 2009; Ross, 2011). Collaborative diplomacy posits that the most important change is the move towards project-based cooperation among nations (Cowan & Arsenault, 2008). Open source public diplomacy stresses a transparency, community, and engagement understanding of open source software development (Fisher, 2008). Within the contours of this chapter, the existence of such a breaking point is more important than the details. Within four decades, public diplomacy scholarship found itself in a position to devise new terms to better explain the contemporary practice. It should be noted that the changes in the American practice were critical in this move towards a new public diplomacy. As the most active—and, at times, the only active—public diplomacy practitioner for decades, the US experience shaped the field of study. It is even argued that public diplomacy, as a term, was coined as the country needed a more benign phrase than the word “propaganda” to describe its communication activities in the mid-20th century (van Ham, 2010). Thus, a change in American practice—more or less—meant a change in the study, including the definitions and boundaries of the concept. The terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, in New York City triggered such a change. That is, from a scholarly point of view, the attacks had two major implications. First, diplomatic presence did not necessarily mean appreciation. In her congressional testimony, R. S. Zaharna of American University argued that anti-American sentiment in the Middle East was not caused by a lack of American public diplomacy but rather by ineffective strategies (Senate Hearing 108-21, 2003). Existing projects were focusing on broadcasting and disseminating messages among target publics, but they were failing as they were not taking cultural differences or audience

Humanistic turn

165

preferences into consideration (Senate Hearing 108-21, 2003, pp. 72–73). Zaharna’s argument on how “[r]elationship-building strategies may be more effective than message and image-building strategies” (Senate Hearing 10821, 2003, p.75) encouraged a new debate on the communication processes. Second, the popularity of American pop culture did not translate into a dampening of anti-American political ideologies (Hoffman, 2002). Foreign audiences could appreciate American music yet dislike American foreign policy. The initial public diplomacy communication response to the 9/11 attacks was to disseminate more information in the Middle East about the United States through mass media (Fullerton & Kendrick, 2006). Charlotte Beers, a well-known advertising professional, was appointed as the Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs (known as “R” within the State Department) in October 2001. Colin Powell, who was the Secretary of State at the time of Beers’ appointment, was enthusiastic and showed his support by saying, “Well, guess what? She [Beers] got me [Powell] to buy Uncle Ben’s rice and so there is nothing wrong with getting somebody who knows how to sell something” (as quoted in Carlson, 2001, para. 1). The cornerstone of Beers’ tenure in R was the Shared Values Initiative, launched to create a more favorable public opinion towards the United States among Middle Eastern audiences (Fullerton & Kendrick, 2006) by dismissing rumors about the mistreatment of Muslims in the country. The campaign included several short videos that showed Muslim-Americans talking about religious tolerance in the United States and the opportunities they enjoyed (Rampton, 2007). The objectives were to counter the claims that the American government was waging war against Muslims and to argue that the American military presence in the region was combating terrorism. The messages, however, were not welcomed by target audiences in the Middle East and were mostly dismissed as propaganda (Zaharna, 2007). The campaign was stopped abruptly (Fullerton & Kendrick, 2006), and Beers resigned after less than two years in the office. As argued by Zaharna (2010), the United States did not need more public diplomacy, but a new public diplomacy that moved beyond solely sending out messages. These instances of neologism (and attempts to practice them in, for example, the Middle East) have common points that are beneficial in situating public diplomacy in the larger realm of knowledge production and practice. In my previous works, I consistently used relational public diplomacy to distinguish contemporary practice as I argued the concept better summarizes the changes in overall thinking (see Sevin, 2017b for a longer discussion). The concept argues that relationship building and management should be seen as the communication aspect of public diplomacy, rather than audience exposure to messages. In the case of post-9/11 American public diplomacy, hypothetically a campaign that focused on understanding and engaging with local Muslim communities in the region would have been more effective than one disseminating messages about the lives of Muslims in the United States. These attempts to define public diplomacy, fueled by changes in practice, are based on a plethora of new concepts and names. Drawing ironclad

166 Efe Sevin

conclusions from such a convoluted area of discussion is neither easy nor necessary. It is important, however, to point out the parallels between public relations and public diplomacy. Whether it be through information dissemination or relationship building, public diplomacy is a country’s attempt to establish itself as an actor in a communication environment. These actors employ public diplomacy to craft and project their views, ideas, and identities to audiences in the international arena. Without such efforts, the actors run the risk of being forgotten or dismissed. Borrowing words from Brown’s (2015, inside cover) definition of public relations—it is “an act of self-creation, self-expression, and self-protection.” The next section presents a select number of cases to describe how public diplomacy practice has changed over the last few decades and what these changes mean for the present and future concerning the study of public diplomacy.

Practitioners: breaking the message monopoly It is not possible to overemphasize the role of American practice in the invention and spread of public diplomacy. As discussed earlier, the term was basically coined after World War II to fulfill American foreign policy needs and practices (van Ham, 2010). This long history also means that American public diplomacy is the benchmark for the study and practice in other countries, as no other country can claim similar expertise. Even in instances where countries engaged in projects that resembled public diplomacy in nature, the concept was not explicitly used. Turkish public diplomacy, as an example, predates the country’s declaration of independence as it established an international news agency in 1920 to “acquaint […] the whole world with the struggle for independence” (Berik, 1964, p. 37). Yet, the earliest reference to public diplomacy in Turkish documents is in a 2006 speech given by a foreign scholar to underline the need for public diplomacy in that country (Melissen, 2006). The first institution responsible for public diplomacy in Turkey was established even later, in 2010 (Başbakanlık, 2010). Similarly, the United Kingdom has been working on educational and cultural exchange projects since the 1930s, yet had avoided using the term public diplomacy until the early 21st century (Pamment, 2013). Gullion’s definition belongs to an era in which the US was the dominant— virtually the only—practitioner of public diplomacy. After World War II, the country was ready to leave the isolationist foreign policy understanding of the 1930s behind and undertake a more influential role in global affairs (Nordlinger, 1995). Public diplomacy was presented as a foreign policy tool— one that helped the country to move beyond traditional diplomacy and communicate directly with more actors/stakeholders within nation-states (Edward R. Murrow Center for Public Diplomacy, 2010). Most legacy programs and institutions can trace their lineage to these post–World War II developments. The 1948 United States Information and Educational Act, or the Smith-Mundt Act, authorized and funded various government agencies to communicate

Humanistic turn

167

with foreign audiences (Metzgar, 2012). The Fulbright program, the country’s flagship student exchange initiative, was launched shortly after World War II to promote international goodwill through students (ECA, 2014). VoA was created to “enable the Government of the United States to promote a better understanding of the United States in other countries” (BBG, 2013). Additionally, the United States Information Service (USIS) was established to respond to requests for information coming from the public about new policies and acted as part of the Office of War Information throughout World War II (M. Lee, 2007). These changes are remarkable in the sense that they influence the communication process within public diplomacy. Earlier practice was about exposure. “Telling America’s Story” to specific international audiences served as the tagline for public diplomats for decades (Duffey, 1999). However, with today’s communication technology, a program designed for broadcast in one country can make its way all around the world and even come back home. Moreover, the actions of a country became also a part of the communication process. Prior to the modernization of the Smith-Mundt Act in 2012, broadcasts from VoA and other material prepared for foreign audiences were banned from distribution among domestic audiences. Foreign audiences saw this policy as censorship that delegitimized American messages promoting free journalism (Garland, 2009). Public diplomacy moved toward two-way communication; practitioners are expected to talk with their target audiences and build relationships with them, as opposed to the old public diplomacy approach of solely sending messages to these actors (Cull, 2008a). Accordingly, the Fulbright program evolved from Americans sending and receiving students and became more about Americans working together with national commissions. Additionally, VoA and other broadcasting outlets are paying, or are at least are encouraged to pay, attention to the expectations of audiences to be successful (Youmans & Powers, 2012). Finally, the establishment of R brought public diplomacy closer to the resources of the Department of State, marking it as a foreign policy apparatus (Sevin, 2017b). Overall, we are witnessing an American practice that is based on relationship building with the objective of helping achieve foreign policy goals (Sevin, 2017b). The changing landscape of foreign policy changed the objectives of public diplomacy projects. For instance, the Cold War practice was used to combat misinformation originating from the Soviet Union. Contemporary practice is part of the global war on terrorism and emphasizes the de-radicalization of non-state groups (Manor, 2019). This particular change in objectives is due to the rising threat of radicalization of religious and political groups (Aistrope, 2016). Tools used for communication have also changed, introducing new platforms such as social media and other computer-based communications (Kampf, Manor, & Segev, 2015). These technologies, in turn, embraced emerging and relevant concepts such as big data and artificial intelligence (Robertson, 2018). A recent report by the US Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy includes

168 Efe Sevin

references to computational propaganda and social media bots. The former refers to “the coordinated use of social media platforms, autonomous agents, and big data directed towards the manipulation of public opinion,” while the latter (bots) are the computer programs used “to automate political engagement in an attempt to manipulate public opinion” (Powers & Kounalakis, 2017, p. 3). In the span of six decades, American practice went from a radio announcer saying “Hier spricht eine Stimme aus Amerika”1 to a system comprising a myriad of agencies, tools, people, and even artificial intelligence. Additionally, public diplomacy practice witnessed another wave of change—it was no longer an exclusively American idea. The monopoly was broken. Wally Olins (2000) argued that this change was partially supported by countries acting like corporations. Governments, he said, have been working towards promoting their “individual personality, culture, history, and values, [and] projecting what may be an idealized but immediately recognizable idea of [themselves]” (Olins, 2000, p. 255). Similar to the security threat realization in the United States, other countries started to realize that the perceptions of foreign audiences might have adverse social, political, cultural, and financial outcomes (Andehn, 2012). Not surprisingly, in the last 20 years, there has been a surge of interest in managing the reputation of countries. The practice, also known as nation branding (Anholt, 1998), pushed more and more countries to communicate with foreign audiences. From the Confucius Institutes of China to the Mexican Cultural Institutes, and from Russia Today to Australia Now, American sensibilities about diplomacy no longer dominate; there is now a global practice helping countries engage with foreign audiences across the world. The new practitioners had overlapping aspects with the American practice, yet an inclusive definition can be elusive. Cultural institutes, international broadcasting, and branding were greatly influenced by the American experience. But despite these overlapping aspects, the new practices are not solely repetitions of American ideals as countries have different assets and objectives (Melissen, 2007). China, for instance, relies on public diplomacy to increase its economic relations with the rest of the world (Björner, 2013). The strategy is to alter its image and move it from being perceived as a threat to being seen as a potential ally (Kurlantzick, 2007). The United Kingdom has been using its prominence in educational and cultural works to engage with the rest of the world (Pamment, 2013). Based on his study of Canadian and Norwegian public diplomacy, Jozef Bátora (2005) argues that the public diplomacy conduct of smaller countries is also likely to be different. Canada, for example, relies on interagency partnerships to increase its outreach (Vickers, 2004) whereas Norway limits itself predominantly to human rights issues (Leonard, 2002). Similarly, Australia engages with foreign audiences to influence global debates, such as introducing gender equality as part of development discussions (Sevin, 2017a). In an earlier study (Sevin, 2017b), I carried out a comparative study of American, Turkish, and Swedish public diplomacy practices to demonstrate

Humanistic turn

169

how they help achieve foreign policy objectives. My case selection was partially influenced by the globalization of public diplomacy. I argued that any comparative study would eventually be influenced by the American practice but would also be incomplete if solely focused on that one experience. I positioned Turkey and Sweden as two contrasting cases, as the countries had different objectives and assets. Sweden sees public diplomacy as a tool for establishing state-to-non-state relationships with the objective of promoting the Swedish contributions to the world, or the “Swedish Model” (SI & United Minds, 2012). The projects are executed mainly through embassies and consulates and aim to build up long-lasting partnerships between Sweden and foreign publics. Turkish public diplomacy, however, is born—or rather is revitalized after decades of a relatively low volume of activity—out of the necessity to increase the country’s regional profile and to gain political power. The projects are designed and coordinated from Turkey through broadcasting and development agencies and aim to position the country as an influential actor in world politics. What, then, does the contemporary public diplomacy practice entail? The examples shared here almost point to a public diplomacy of everything in the sense that it comprises of “everything, everyone, everywhere and every time” (Brown, 2015, p. 3, emphasis in the original). Public diplomacy is about broadcasting; it is about warfare, reputation, words, actions, images, experiences, relationships, networks, and many more. The next section discusses the scholarly attempts to catalog the omnipresent concept within academic institutions.

Scholars: academic works and debates The “new” public diplomacy practice and the volume of scholarship seem to be parallel. The late 1990s and early 2000s constitute a breaking point for scholarship. Earlier works in public diplomacy almost exclusively discussed the American experience, predominantly through the works of the USIS and United States Information Agency (USIA). More than 80% of the articles published prior to 2001 focused on American public diplomacy (Sevin et al., 2019). However, after 2001, a more global understanding of public diplomacy became apparent (Sevin et al., 2019). To uncover which countries were studied by public diplomacy scholars, we carried out two separate analyses across the scholarly literature. In our first analysis, we looked at countries or regions named in peer-reviewed article titles. China had the highest number of occurrences, while the United States was ranked sixth after Africa, Europe, Russia, and Japan (Sevin et al., 2019). Yet, this particular analysis did not differentiate between the practitioner and the target audience. While China was most frequently mentioned, we did not assess whether the titles were talking about Chinese public diplomacy practices or practices of other countries directed towards China. Our second analysis was based on the findings of our topic modeling study which categorized nine different topics of study for public diplomacy

170  Efe Sevin

scholarship. Four out of those nine were based on locations: Asia, China, Europe, and the United States (Sevin et al., 2019). Figure 11.1 shows the number of articles in each group since 2000.2 All three non-American locations generated larger volumes of output than the American studies. This comparison needs to be treated with caution as the topics include two regions (Europe and Asia) and two countries. For instance, a European public diplomacy article might be about any European country or the European Union, for instance. More studies are focusing on China than on the United States; since 2009, the gap between studies on these two countries is increasing. Placing public diplomacy within the contemporary structure of academic disciplines is problematic. It has not been acknowledged as a stand-alone discipline given its relatively short history and lack of theoretical backgrounds (Gilboa, 2008; Gregory, 2008; Hayden, 2009; Sevin, 2015). As a result, scholars have been pushing for a move beyond disciplinary boundaries to better explain public diplomacy (Kennedy & Lucas, 2005; Sun, 2008). If the practice relies on competencies that fall within the purview of different disciplines— such as diplomacy, branding, and broadcasting—it is only logical to have inputs coming from all those disciplines. There have been works incorporating library studies (Richards, 2001), music studies (Toynbee & Vis, 2010), and security studies (Mansdorf, 2015) into public diplomacy. In 2009, a working group meeting during the annual convention of the International Studies Association—the largest academic convention dealing with international relations—brought scholars together to discuss interdisciplinary approaches to public diplomacy.3 There has been an increasing awareness within academic circles that public diplomacy scholarship belongs to an array of disciplines (see Sevin, 2017b). Yet, the interdisciplinarity comes with its disadvantages, especially in academe, where disciplinary borders are still influential. Apart from a handful of 50 Topics PD and Asia PD and China PD and Europe US Studies

10

13 11

11

6

6

26 18

17 16 8

24 20

20 16

22 17

14

12 8

8

2017

15

18

19

2016

3 2

2007

2

8 6 7 4 4 2

2006

4

1

2005

4

2002

4

2001

2000

2 1

5

2004

10 0

13

10

2008

15

16

19 19

31 27

2015

18

2009

20

27

2014

22

2013

22

25

2012

30

36

2011

35

2003

Number of articles

40

2010

45

5

51

47

Year

Figure 11.1 Number of peer-reviewed articles published since 2000, grouped by topics

Humanistic turn

171

exceptions, public diplomacy does not exist as a degree program in higher education institutes. Similarly, there is no “department” of public diplomacy. Scholars need to affiliate with other disciplines. In our study of public diplomacy literature, we looked at the most prolific authors. Out of the 13 scholars who held the top ten spots, only one had the title “Professor of Public Diplomacy,” while the remaining 12 belonged to communication studies (including mass communication, public relations, and strategic communication), political science, business, history, and international relations. Similarly, as of 2020, there is only one journal—or rather half a journal— that explicitly declares public diplomacy as its main area of focus: Place Branding and Public Diplomacy. Out of over more than 800 journals that published articles on public diplomacy, this particular journal ranked top in terms of volume with 124 articles since its inaugural issue in 2004 (Sevin et al., 2019). We further looked at the main disciplines of the top journals and, unsurprisingly, found international relations and communications to be the main contributors. Fifteen different international relations journals, mostly focusing on diplomacy, such as Diplomacy and Statecraft and Diplomatic History, hosted 234 articles (Sevin et al., 2019). The interest of international relations scholars was based on three arguments: the proliferation of non-state actors, the power of public opinion, and soft power. Given the fact that interstate relations “do not take place in a vacuum” (Nye & Keohane, 1971, p. 329), public diplomacy could be seen as a tool to manipulate the context in which these relations take place. Foreign affairs and politics are influenced by non-state transnational actors (Keohane & Nye, 1972). Earlier studies focused on how these actors play a role in relatively low-level topics such as finance, and transportation (Nye & Keohane, 1971, p. 332). More recent works argue these actors currently have the capacity to influence international negotiations and policies across a larger set of functions (Keck & Sikkink, 1999; Ruggie, 2004). Public diplomacy is seen as a platform to interact with the new non-state actors. Second, the Almond-Lippman consensus4 which had argued that public opinion does not have a considerable impact on foreign policy because public opinion is highly volatile and unstructured was refuted. Studies carried out after the Cold War demonstrated correlational evidence between policy changes and public attitudes (Holsti, 1992, p. 459). Therefore, states could change each other’s behavior by influencing the opinions of individuals. Public diplomacy, within this aspect, is a tool to influence the perceptions and ideas of target audiences. Last, Joseph Nye introduced a novel approach to power called soft power. International relations scholars, traditionally, are interested in material power assets—such as the military and the economy—and in the ability of states to use such resources to achieve results (Barnett & Duvall, 2005). Nye (1990, 2004, 2011) argues that a country’s values, culture, and foreign policy should be seen as power assets as they might be instrumental in inducing behavioral change within the international arena. Through these assets, countries can achieve behavioral change by attracting and co-opting as opposed to using coercion through hard power. It is even

172 Efe Sevin

argued that, as more and more countries are moving towards shared economic and political norms, hard power assets are losing their importance (Goldgeier & McFaul, 1992, p. 491) to the ability to affect these norms. International relations scholars value public diplomacy as a tool to project a country’s immaterial power assets (Nye, 2011) and increase its attractiveness in the eyes of foreign publics (Goldsmith & Horiuchi, 2009). The communication field, the second-largest contributor to the studies of public diplomacy, had a total of 116 articles. Public Relations Review, a prominent journal in the field of public relations, had 52 articles since 1975, putting it right behind Place Branding and Public Diplomacy as the second-largest publisher of public diplomacy works and the largest among communication journals. An additional four journals—the International Journal of Communication, the International Communication Gazette, the Journal of International Communication, and the Middle East Journal of Culture and Communication—were also ranked within the top t0 journals, demonstrating at least a favorable stance toward incorporating public diplomacy into communication studies in general and public relations in specific. Communication scholars, naturally, are interested in the communicative characteristics of public diplomacy. Seeing the practice as a transnational communicative engagement (Hayden, 2012, p. 2), communication studies that explore public diplomacy focus on the participants and the places of engagement. For instance, participation in traditional diplomacy is clearly defined and open only to accredited representatives—diplomats—of countries (Sharp, 2003). Yet, a student exchange program includes virtually anyone, ranging from the students traveling to the residents they are interacting with. Public diplomacy might include a combination of state and non-state participants. Gregory Payne (2009) argues such communication should take place between people, while Nancy Snow (2009) sees individuals, corporations, civil society, or other non-governmental actors from different countries as main actors. Meanwhile, Gifford Malone (1985) only considers direct communication between countries and foreign peoples as the topic of study. Communication scholars also study the impacts of different media platforms. Most recently, there has been an increased interest in the role of digital communication platforms as game-changers (Manor, 2019). These new platforms make it possible for practitioners to circulate messages as well as to build relations with target audiences (Arsenault, 2009). As these technologies make communication more affordable and faster, a greater number of actors can practice public diplomacy (Riordan, 2004). Yet, neither international relations nor communication studies established a home for public diplomacy scholars. Rather, since public diplomacy was not its own discipline and welcomed contributions from a variety of practices, communication scholarship pushed the concept in different directions. The brief descriptions of these approaches provided here exemplify such divergence among disciplines. International relations contributed to the studies of public diplomacy by positioning the practice as a way to achieve foreign policy

Humanistic turn

173

objectives in interstate relations. Communication scholars debated the role of media and type of audiences, while public relations scholars highlighted the similarities between corporate practices and public diplomacy. These studies indeed enrich the discussions and expand the contours of public diplomacy as a field of study and practice. Public relations has been a long-term fellow for public diplomacy. Signitzer and Coombs (1992, p. 146) pointed out the similarities between these two concepts and argued that, as they both use similar tools while seeking similar objectives, they are “in a natural process of convergence.” They concluded, however, that a “series of theory-based empirical studies” will be needed to facilitate the convergence. Consequently, many scholars tested models and theories coming from the particular field in public diplomacy. Vanc (2010) utilized relationship management to describe public diplomacy. Aimei Yang et al. (2012, p. 653) saw the practice as the process through which countries “cultivate a certain image of their nation for international publics.” Yun (2006) imported the excellence theory to distill the important dimensions of public diplomacy, while Wang (2006) looked at public diplomacy through a reputation management lens. Others brought in tools and strategies used in public relations practice. For instance, Guy Golan and Terrance Carroll (2012) discussed how op-ed pieces have been used to frame events during the 2011 Arab Spring uprising. Others have incorporated media coverage (Lee & Hong, 2012), corporate social responsibility (Golan & Viatchaninova, 2013), and strategic communication frameworks (Dimitriu, 2012) into scholarship that engages with public diplomacy. The convergence between public relations and public diplomacy, however, is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it is useful for public diplomacy scholars and practitioners alike to benefit from an affiliation with the established field of communication scholarship, and public relations in particular. The affiliation might translate, for the public diplomacy field, into more publication outlets and jobs for scholars, and access to more frameworks and ideas for practitioners. As Brown (2015, p. 184) argues, public relations “exists in a world of convergences [where the] practitioners of ‘distinctive’ advertising, marketing, politics, and PR are having to learn a common set of skills, tools, tactics and technologies.” In other words, public relations is not necessarily a stable home even if it is an appropriate one. But what about the humanistic turn? The next section concludes this chapter by discussing a plausible humanistic turn in public diplomacy.

Conclusion: fnding a home for public diplomacy I started this chapter by stating public diplomacy could be seen as public relations for countries. However, such a link does not necessarily address the contentions, inconsistencies, and disorientation that can come with attempting to better ground the field of public diplomacy within a scholarly frame., Given this, it is only appropriate to conclude with a quote from Matthew Armstrong, a scholar of public diplomacy with a long tenure as a public diplomat. Armstrong (2009) was not subtle when he declared “public diplomacy

174 Efe Sevin

was not public relations.” He argued getting closer to public relations might deprioritize public diplomacy in overall national security and foreign policy discussions. Public diplomacy should not be “about changing public opinion unilaterally, but the proactive engagement of global audiences in support of a foreign policy that will stand alone and influence public opinion positively” (Armstrong, 2009, para. 9). Throughout the chapter, I argued that neither practitioners nor scholars were ever able to articulate what is being done when it comes to adequately articulating a trajectory for defining and theorizing public diplomacy. I presented arguments and evidence to point out not only that there have been twists and turns in its journey, but there have been multiple parallel accounts of public diplomacy. Despite its short history, public diplomacy practice has been called to solve a variety of problems ranging from containing the spread of communism in Central Europe to fighting disinformation and bots on Twitter. The rising diversity among and within diplomacy practitioners requires an agile structure. Earlier days of practice were predominantly limited to USIA and VoA working within the political framework of the Cold War. The contemporary Swedish, Turkish, Chinese, or even American contexts are more complicated than the bipolar power calculations and ideological clashes of the last century. Many scholars wanted to bring the topic closer to their main disciplines, all of which came with their own proverbial baggage. Yet, the concept proved to be too multi-faceted to be situated under a single discipline. It simply lacks the institutional and theoretical infrastructure to stand on its own. Therefore, the story presented in this chapter is likely to continue. As the new waves of thinking, different practices, and disciplinary contributions demonstrate, we need a more comprehensive approach. How does one understand these publics? How does one follow the changes in these publics? What about communication technologies? What happens when countries entering the diplomatic arena—all embracing the concept of public diplomacy and using projects to engage with foreign publics—employ vastly different tactics to accomplish competing objectives? A humanistic approach, within this perspective, provides a better toolkit to tackle such modern problems. That is, public diplomacy can learn from public relations’ humanistic aspects that debates and dialogue can, and should, include “broader scholarly and ideological communities—historians, artists, political scientists, journalists, and social scientists” (Brown, 2015, p. 170). Relying on single disciplines or issues is likely to cause myopia. For instance, the last few years witnessed a plethora of reports and frameworks on disinformation, especially on the Internet. Various practitioners like the United States (Powers & Kounalakis, 2017), the United Kingdom (GCS, 2018), and Sweden (The Local, 2018) have established task forces and procedures to combat this phenomenon. Albeit important, disinformation is not the only imminent threat. If we are to define public diplomacy as a foreign policy and communication tool, we cannot be limited to solely the most pressing issues. In the last half a century or so,

Humanistic turn

175

we have witnessed how public diplomacy has generated new functions. The neologisms that filled the scholarly agenda in the 21st century also discusses how and what to do under the umbrella of public diplomacy—which also takes place in almost “a multiverse of objects drawn into a phenomenal space, moving together rather than flying apart” (Brown, 2015, p. 184). In contrast, 20th-century public diplomacy was comparatively limited in its functions. Projects were based on disseminating messages through specialized organizations. During those Cold War years, and until the approach of the 21st century, it was, to an extent, possible to see public diplomacy as a “distinctive management function” of the state just as public relations was of a corporation (Brown, 2015, p. 184). Today, however, public diplomacy practitioners are also expected to “focus their efforts on engagement, sharing and conversation” (Brown, 2015, p. 190). The humanistic turn in public relations, at this point, is both instrumental in, and detrimental to, positioning public diplomacy as a viable field of practice and study. PRe presents the danger of taking over public diplomacy completely. Brown (2015) relays that, in his conversations with Gregory Payne of Emerson College, Payne argues for the political nature of public relations which lead naturally to the convergence of public relations with other relevant political terms, including public diplomacy. I appreciate the practicality of encouraging students to have a more inclusionary approach towards communication and to observe how similar processes take place in different industries. However, overextending such an understanding of the PRe causes nuances to disappear. If public relations is in everything, including public diplomacy, then nothing is really public diplomacy. On the other hand, the PRe encourages a holistic take on the practice—one that is not limited by methodologies or conventional histories (Brown, 2015). Gullion’s definition of public diplomacy delimits participation to interest groups and those whose jobs are communication. Subsequent public diplomacy practices, both within and outside the United States, have all been unnecessarily limited by policy objectives, disciplinary boundaries, and organizational structures. J. William Fulbright famously summarized the objectives of his namesake student exchange program as to “bring a little bit more knowledge, a little more reason, and a little bit more compassion into world affairs” (ECA, 2019b). Thus, public diplomacy is not solely a calculated foreign policy tool. It is not the performance of a heavily scripted play. It is rather about people, ideas, and feelings. This humanistic understanding, however, is unlikely to help public diplomacy find a new academic home. On the contrary, it might even further complicate the semi-nomadic status of the field by removing the few concrete layers the practice has. Yet, in exchange, public diplomacy scholars and practitioners will benefit from touching the “emotional, performative, aesthetic, and social core of public relations” (Brown, 2015, p. 191). The humanistic approach gives us new insights—it reveals public diplomacy as an elaborate process, almost a performance, that is enriched by many traditions.

176 Efe Sevin

Notes 1 The sentence translates into “This is a voice speaking from America” which was the opener for the first ever broadcast of VoA.The script can be found at http://www.chri skern.net/essay/voaFirstBroadcast_files/1942-02-03-voaScript.pdf. The audio can be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-k3bkvDDfgU (last accessed June 2019). 2 The figure is limited to post-2000 as only 80 articles were published before that year. Out of those 80 articles, only four were categorized in regional topics, three belonging to the US and one to China. 3 The full program of the pre-conference working group can be found at http://www .isanet.org/Portals/0/Media/Conferences/Montreal2011/DPLST%20WG%20Summ ary.pdf (last accessed February 25, 2019). 4 Almond-Lippmann consensus is a prominent framework based on the combination of Gabriel Almond’s and Walter Lippmann’s works and ideas, and argues that public opinion cannot be seen as a factor in policy-making.

References Aistrope, T. (2016). Conspiracy theory and American foreign policy. Retrieved from http://pub lic.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=4706404 Åkerlund, A. (2014). The impact of foreign policy on educational exchange: The Swedish state scholarship programme 1938–1990. Paedagogica Historica, 50(3), 390–409. Retrieved from a9h. Alexander, C. (2018). The Soft Power of Development: Aid and Assistance as Public Diplomacy Activities. In J. Servaes (Ed.), Handbook of Communication for Development and Social Change (pp. 1–14). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7035-8_74-1 Andehn, M. (2012, January 20). The concept of origin equity—A means of bridging place branding and country-of-origin effect research? Presented at the Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media, Utrecht, the Netherlands. Anholt, S. (1998). Nation-brands of the Twenty-First Century. Brand Management, 5(6), 395–417. Armstrong, M. (2009, January 23). Public Diplomacy is not Public Relations. Retrieved July 19, 2019, from MountainRunner.us website: https://mountainrunner.us/2009/01 /public_diplomacy_is_not_public_relations/ Arndt, R. T. (2005). The first resort of kings: American cultural diplomacy in the twentieth century (1st ed). Dulles, VA: Potomac Books. Arsenault, A. (2009). Public diplomacy 2.0. In P. Seib (Ed.), Toward a new public diplomacy: Redirecting U.S. foreign policy (pp. 135–154). New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan. Ayhan, K. J. (2019). The Boundaries of Public Diplomacy and Nonstate Actors: A Taxonomy of Perspectives. International Studies Perspectives, 20(1), 63–83. https://doi.org /10.1093/isp/eky010 Barnett, M., & Duvall, R. (2005). Power in International Politics. International Organization, 59(01), 39–75. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818305050010 Başbakanlık. (2010). Kamu Diplomasisi Koordinatörlüğü. Retrieved from http://kdk.gov.tr/ kurumsal/kdk-genelgesi/5 Bátora, J. (2005). Public Diplomacy in Small and Medium-Sized States: Norway and Canada. Discussion Papers in Diplomacy. Retrieved from http://www.peacepalacelibrary. nl/ebooks/files/Clingendael_20050300_cli_paper_dip_issue97.pdf BBG. (2013). Fact Sheet: VoA. Retrieved from http://www.bbg.gov/wp-content/media /2013/05/VOA-Fact-Sheet-March-2013.pdf

Humanistic turn

177

Berik, M. (1964). Anatolia Agency (A.A.) Turkey’s Oldest News Agency. Gazette (Leiden, Netherlands), 10(1), 37–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/001654926401000106 Björner, E. (2013). International positioning through online city branding: The case of Chengdu. Journal of Place Management and Development, 6(3), 203–226. https://doi.org /10.1108/JPMD-03-2013-0006 Brown, R. E. (2015). The public relations of everything: The ancient, modern and postmodern dramatic history of an idea. New York, NY: Routledge. Carlson, M. (2001). Can Charlotte Beers Sell Uncle Sam? Time. Retrieved from http:// www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,184536,00.html Christensen, C. (2013). @Sweden: Curating a Nation on Twitter. Popular Communication, 11(1), 30–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2013.751855 Cowan, G., & Arsenault, A. (2008). Moving from Monologue to Dialogue to Collaboration: The Three Layers of Public Diplomacy. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 10–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716207311863 Cull, N. J. (2008a). Public Diplomacy: Taxonomies and Histories. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 31–54. https://doi.org/10.1177 /0002716207311952 Cull, N. J. (2008b). The Cold War and the United States Information Agency: American propaganda and public diplomacy, 1945–1989. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Dimitriu, G. R. (2012). Winning the story war: Strategic communication and the conflict in Afghanistan. Public Relations Review, 38(2), 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubr ev.2011.11.011 Cull, N. J. (2009). Public Diplomacy Before Gullion: The Evolution of a Phrase. In N. Snow & P. M. Taylor (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy (pp. 19–23). Routledge. Duffey, J. (1999). Interview with Former USIA Director. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 29(1), 54–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632929909597286 ECA. (2014). Fulbright. Retrieved September 29, 2016, from ECA website: http://eca .state.gov/fulbright ECA. (2019a). Fulbright Commissions | Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. Retrieved from https://eca.state.gov/fulbright/about-fulbright/funding-and-administra tion/fulbright-commissions ECA. (2019b). J. William Fulbright Quotes | Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. Retrieved from https://eca.state.gov/fulbright/about-fulbright/history/j-william-fulb right/j-william-fulbright-quotes Edward R. Murrow Center for Public Diplomacy. (2010). What is Public Diplomacy? [Http://fletcher.tufts.edu/Murrow/Diplomacy]. Fisher, A. (2008). Music for the jilted generation: Open-source public diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 3(2), 129–152. https://doi.org/10.1163/187119108X323655 Fullerton, J. A., & Kendrick, A. (2006). Advertising’s war on terrorism: The story of the U.S. State Department’s Shared Values Initiative. Spokane, WA: Marquette Books. Garland, G. (2009). Smith-Mundt: Censorship American Style? Retrieved from American Diplomacy website: http://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2009/03/smith-mundt -censorship-american-style/ GCS. (2018). RESIST Counter-Disinformation Toolkit launched today. Retrieved from GCS—Government Communication Service website: https://gcs.civilservice.gov.uk/ news/resist-counter-disinformation-toolkit-launched-today/ Gilboa, E. (2008). Searching for a Theory of Public Diplomacy. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 55–77. https://doi.org/10.1177 /0002716207312142

178 Efe Sevin Golan, G., & Carroll, T. R. (2012). The op-ed as a strategic tool of public diplomacy: Framing of the 2011 Egyptian revolution. Public Relations Review, 38(4), 630–632. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.06.005 Golan, G., & Viatchaninova, E. (2013). Government Social Responsibility in Public Diplomacy: Russia’s strategic use of advertorials. Public Relations Review, 39(4), 403–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.09.011 Goldgeier, J. M., & McFaul, M. (1992). A tale of two worlds: Core and periphery in the post-cold war era. International Organization, 46(02), 467. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0020818300027788 Goldsmith, B. E., & Horiuchi, Y. (2009). Spinning the Globe? U.S. Public Diplomacy and Foreign Public Opinion. The Journal of Politics, 71(03), 863. https://doi.org/10.1017/S 0022381609090768 Gregory, B. (2008). Public Diplomacy: Sunrise of an Academic Field. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 274–290. https://doi.org/10.1177 /0002716207311723 Hart, A. B. (1907). American Ideals of International Relations. The American Journal of International Law, 1(3), 624–635. Hayden, C. (2009, May 19). Public Diplomacy and the Phantom Menace of Theory. Retrieved March 3, 2011, from Intermap blog website: http://intermap.org/2009/05 /19/public-diplomacy-and-the-phantom-menace-of-theory/ Hayden, C. (2012). The rhetoric of soft power: Public diplomacy in global contexts. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Hoffman, D. (2002). Beyond public diplomacy. Foreign Affairs, 83–95. Holsti, O. (1992). Public Opinion and Foreign Policy: Challenges to the AlmondLippmann Consensus Mershon Series: Research Programs and Debates. International Studies Quarterly, 36(4), 439–466. Kampf, R., Manor, I., & Segev, E. (2015). Digital Diplomacy 2.0? A Cross-national Comparison of Public Engagement in Facebook and Twitter. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 10(4), 331–362. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-12341318 Keck, M. E., & Sikkink, K. (1999). Transnational advocacy networks in international and regional politics. International Social Science Journal, 51(159), 89–101. https://doi.org/10 .1111/1468-2451.00179 Kennedy, L., & Lucas, S. (2005). Enduring Freedom: Public Diplomacy and U.S. Foreign Policy. American Quarterly, 57(2), 309–333. https://doi.org/10.1353/aq.2005.0029 Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. (1972). Transnational relations and world politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Kurlantzick, J. (2007). Charm offensive: How China’s soft power is transforming the world. New Haven: Yale University Press. Lee, M. (2007). Clara M. Edmunds and the Library of the United States Information Service, 1934–1948. Libraries & the Cultural Record, 42(3), 213–230. https://doi.org/10 .2307/25549418 Lee, S., & Hong, H. (2012). International public relations’ influence on media coverage and public perceptions of foreign countries. Public Relations Review, 38(3), 491–493. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.03.007 Leonard, M. (2002). Public Diplomacy. London: The Foreign Policy Center. Malone, G. D. (1985). Managing public diplomacy. Washington Quarterly, 8(3), 199–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/01636608509450301 Manor, I. (2019). The Digitalization of Public Diplomacy. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-03 0-04405-3

Humanistic turn

179

Mansdorf, I. J. (2015). The evolution of Arab psychological warfare: Towards ‘nonviolence’ as a political strategy. Israel Affairs, 21(4), 648–667. Retrieved from a9h. Melissen, J. (2005a). The New Public Diplomacy: Between Theory and Practice. In J. Melissen (Ed.), The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations (pp. 3–27). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Melissen, J. (Ed.). (2005b). The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Melissen, J. (2006). Reflections on Public Diplomacy Today. Presented at the “Public Diplomacy” Conference, Ankara. Retrieved from http://www.clingendael.nl/sites/def ault/files/20060206_cdsp_online_melissen.pdf Melissen, J. (2007). The new public diplomacy: Soft power in international relations. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Metzgar, E. T. (2012). Public diplomacy, Smith-Mundt and the American public. Communication Law and Policy, 17(1), 67–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/10811680.2012 .633807 Nordlinger, E. A. (1995). Isolationism reconfigured American foreign policy for a new century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Nye, J. (1990). Soft power. Foreign Policy, (80), 153–171. Nye, J. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics (1st ed.). New York, NY: Public Affairs. Nye, J. (2011). The future of power (1st ed.). New York, NY: PublicAffairs. Nye, J., & Keohane, R. O. (1971). Transnational Relations and World Politics: An Introduction. International Organization, 25(3), 329–349. https://doi.org/10.2307 /2706043 Olins, W. (2000). Why companies and countries are taking on each other’s roles. Corporate Reputation Review, 3(3), 254–265. Pamment, James. (2013). New public diplomacy in the 21st century: A comparative study of policy and practice. New York, NY: Routledge. Payne, G. (2009). Reflections on Public Diplomacy: People-to-People Communication. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(4), 579–606. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764209347632 Powers, S., & Kounalakis, M. (2017). Can Public Diplomacy Survive the Internet?: Bots, Echo Chambers, and Disinformation. Washington, DC: Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy. Rampton, S. (2007, October 17). Shared Values Revisited. Retrieved February 15, 2015, from PR Watch website: https://www.prwatch.org/news/2007/10/6465/shared-v alues-revisited Rana, K. (2007). Multistakeholder Diplomacy: Challenges and Opportunities. DiploFoundation. Richards, P. S. (2001). Cold War Librarianship: Soviet and American Library Activities in Support of National Foreign Policy, 1946-1991. Libraries & the Cultural Record, 36(1), 183–203. https://doi.org/10.1353/lac.2001.0020 Riordan, S. (2004). Dialogue-based Public Diplomacy: A New Foreign Policy Paradigm? (Discussion Papers in Diplomacy No. 95). The Hague, Netherlands: Clingendael. Roberts, W. (2009). The Voice of America, Origins and Recollections. American Diplomacy. Retrieved from http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/item/2009/1012/fsl/roberts _voice.html Robertson, J. (2018). Organizational culture and public diplomacy in the digital sphere: The case of South Korea. Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies, 5(3), 672–682. https://doi.org /10.1002/app5.256

180 Efe Sevin Ross, A. (2011). Digital Diplomacy and US Foreign Policy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 6(3), 451–455. https://doi.org/10.1163/187119111X590556 Ruggie, J. G. (2004). Reconstituting the Global Public Domain: Issues, Actors, and Practices. European Journal of International Relations, 10(4), 499–531. https://doi.org/10 .1177/1354066104047847 Sevin, E. (2015). Pathways of connection: An analytical approach to the impacts of public diplomacy. Public Relations Review, 41(4), 562–568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev .2015.07.003 Sevin, E. (2017a). A Multilayered Approach to Public Diplomacy Evaluation: Pathways of Connection. Politics & Policy, 45(5), 879–901. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12227 Sevin, E. (2017b). Public Diplomacy and the Implementation of Foreign Policy in the US, Sweden and Turkey. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Sevin, E., Metzgar, E. T., & Hayden, C. (2019). The Scholarship of Public Diplomacy: Analysis of a Growing Field. International Journal of Communication, 13, 4814–4837. Sharp, P. (2003). Herbert Butterfield, the English School and the Civilizing Virtues of Diplomacy. International Affairs, 79(4), 855–878. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346 .00340 SI, & United Minds. (2012). Den svenska modellenâ”Synen på den svenska samhällsmodellens relevans i omvärlden [The Swedish modelâ”The view of the Swedish social model’s relevance in the world]. Stockholm: Swedish Institute. Signitzer, B., & Coombs, T. (1992). Public relations and public diplomacy: Conceptual covergences. Public Relations Review, 18(2), 137–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/0363-8 111(92)90005-J Snow, N. (2009). Persuader-in-chief: Global opinion and public diplomacy in the age of Obama. Ann Arbor, MI: Nimble Books LLC. Sun, H. H. (2008). International political marketing: A case study of United States soft power and public diplomacy. Journal of Public Affairs, 8(3), 165–183. https://doi.org/10 .1002/pa.301 The Local. (2018, January 15). Sweden to create new authority tasked with countering disinformation. Retrieved from https://www.thelocal.se/20180115/sweden-to-createnew-authority-tasked-with-countering-disinformation Toynbee, J., & Vis, F. (2010). World music at the BBC world service, 1942–2008: Public diplomacy, cosmopolitanism, contradiction. Media, Culture and Society, 32(4), 547–564. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443710367691 van Ham, P. (2010). Social power in international politics. New York, NY: Routledge. Vanc, A. (2010). The relationship management process of public diplomacy: US public diplomacy in Romania. Vickers, R. (2004). The New Public Diplomacy: Britain and Canada Compared. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 6(2), 182–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j .1467-856X.2004.00133.x Wang, J. (2006). Managing national reputation and international relations in the global era: Public diplomacy revisited. Public Relations Review, 32(2), 91–96. https://doi.org/10.1 016/j.pubrev.2005.12.001 Yang, A., Klyueva, A., & Taylor, M. (2012). Beyond a dyadic approach to public diplomacy: Understanding relationships in multipolar world. Public Relations Review, 38(5), 652–664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.07.005 Youmans, W. L., & Powers, S. (2012). Remote Negotiations: International Broadcasting as Bargaining in the Information Age. International Journal of Communication; Vol 6 (2012). Retrieved from http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/1490

Humanistic turn

181

Yun, S.-H. (2006). Toward Public Relations Theory-Based Study of Public Diplomacy: Testing the Applicability of the Excellence Study. Journal of Public Relations Research, 18(4), 287–312. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr1804_1 Zaharna, R. S. (2007). The Soft Power Differential: Network Communication and Mass Communication in Public Diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 2(3), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1163/187119007X240505 Zaharna, R. S. (2010). Battles to bridges: U.S. strategic communication and public diplomacy after 9 11. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

12 A humanistic turn of place branding in public relations From marketing to a social science and sustainability perspective Chung-Shing Chan Introduction: place branding and public relations as evolving and connected areas of knowledge Since the appearance of entrepreneurial governance and urban boosterism in the 1970s, place branding has been gradually developed and then widely applied to many geographical locations worldwide, either as part of destination marketing strategies (Gartner, 2014; Gartner & Ruzzier, 2011; Konecnik & Gartner, 2007), or, later on, a distinctive approach to connect local identity with stakeholders (Hankinson, 2010; Pike, 2009). Until the recent decade, the concept of place branding had evolved in two parallel trajectories of theoretical development, one from a marketing perspective and another one from the discipline of urban studies (Giovanardi, 2012; Govers & Go, 2009). This process of evolution has been particularly apparent when place brands are constructed upon the characteristics that are believed to be strong or positive by decision-makers (O’Shaughnessy & O’Shaughnessy, 2000), who often followed a top-down decision-making process of image creation, positioning, and brand management. Public relations, another distinguishing but related concept of place branding (Dolea, 2017; Florek, Herezniak, & Augustyn, 2019; Mikáčová & Gavlaková, 2014), has also evolved theoretically for decades. Specifically, it has branched beyond an organization–public relationship perspective to include critical theory that stresses a more humanistic and people-oriented approach (Arvidsson, 2006; L’Etang et al., 2016). This increasingly humanistic perspective is important since policymakers who are responsible for place governance are simultaneously the decision-makers of how a place like a city should be branded and, indeed, publicly recognized and connected (Hankinson, 2004). When urban policy research came across a rapid development of place competition, an emerging school of thought criticized treating places as commercial products and neglecting social and cultural realities (Philo & Kearns, 1993; Zukin, 2009). This multi-layered interpretation of place branding offered a wider and complex structure of place and place branding than what was promulgated from a pure business or marketing angle (Anholt, 2005; Hankinson, 2010). This argument further pointed to the critique of promotional activities DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340-12

A humanistic turn of place branding in PR

183

alone in the formulation of place branding strategies (Anholt, 2008; Ashworth & Kavaratzis, 2009; Kavaratzis, 2009). Unsurprisingly, the two fields of knowledge tend to merge as the scholarly understanding and theoretical development of place branding continues to advance (Boisen et al., 2018; Florek et al., 2019; Govers, 2013), and public relations conceptualizations and practices become more humanistic (L’Etang et al., 2016; Pieczka, 2017). This chapter first aims to discuss how a more humanistic place branding and PR amplifies inhabitants’ visions—in particular, their need for a more legitimate and sustainable city. In other words, this work examines how place branding appears similar to PR by going beyond utilitarian desires that the city should be presented in a certain way but, instead, translates human ideals into a form that people perceive as reality. Based on this humanistic turn in place branding, this chapter further explores the potential of developing a people-centered green-smart brand through the example of Hong Kong.

The humanistic evolution of place branding: critical observations from a public relations perspective Public relations (PR) is the practice of deliberate information management and dissemination between one side (an individual or a public or private organization) and the public (Grunig & Hunt, 1984). In the past decades, PR scholars have established solid theoretical evolution, such as the theory of symmetry or excellence, which developed the strategies of organization–public relations to achieve mutual benefits, negative publicity reduction, and long-term stakeholder relationships (Grunig & Grunig, 2008; Heath, 2010). The theory of symmetry or excellence identifies that the characteristics of effective PR should include the empowerment of the PR function in organization management and administration, the clear distinguishment between the roles of marketing and PR, and effective relationship-building with both internal and external audience (Grunig, 1992; Seitel, 2012). PR is closely related to branding since the two concepts are, first, intertwined with marketing practices and non-monetary values (Hutton, 2010). Second, there is often a gap between theory and practice within PR and branding paradigms (Pohl & Vandeventer, 2001). Third, both PR and branding for places deal with conflict and crisis management that requires recognition and support of local identities and understanding the characteristics of human attachment to place (Brown, 2004, 2006b, 2012; Plowman, Briggs & Huang, 2001). These aspects are all linked to a humanistic turn in both theory and practice of communication to the public (Arvidsson, 2006; L’Etang et al., 2016), which focuses more on the balancing of interests among relevant or competing parties (Ashworth & Kavaratzis, 2009; Brown, 2010). Recently, criticism of the excellence or symmetry theory has emerged in PR studies (Coombs & Holladay, 2012; Moffitt, 2011), stressing that there be more humanistic ways to measure PR and its effects across different parties (Brown, 2006a), for example, in the geographical or place

184 Chung-Shing Chan

context. In this vein, some PR scholars observed that the connection between PR and place branding is apparent within crisis management and the recovery of a place. For example, Brown (2004) examines a religious crisis that featured the Catholic Church’s use of the power of arts to engage, motivate, and persuade or, in marketing terms, to brand or re-brand itself (Brown, 2004). Similarly, a Mexican city tackled a major loss of tourism due to violence by local riots (Brown, 2012). These PR cases were similar to a process called brand positioning (Nobili, 2005), which aims to, for example, transform a location’s brand identity by managing stakeholder relations and networks (Hankinson, 2004). Two observations can be drawn from the above trendlines in the literature. First, there is a critical and essential humanistic turn in the field of place branding. The movement is from a business or customer orientation toward a growing understanding of the importance of multi-stakeholder interest and involvement (Anker, 2014). Place branding or place brand management is a process of continuous development that involves “a number of activities and sub-processes” (Hanna & Rowley, 2012, p. 105) which encompass stakeholder engagement, marketing communications, experience in places by visitors and locals, and the development of place infrastructure. Second, Hanna and Rowley (2012) highlighted a holistic view of place branding as “(the application) of brand strategy and other marketing techniques and disciplines to the economic, social, political and cultural development of cities, regions and countries” (p. 104). As a result, there is a critical need for understanding the expectations and experiences of people, and the presence of gaps of experiences among stakeholders in the process of place branding (Govers & Go, 2009). Informed by humanistic public relations, which emphasizes the ethic of relations and the empowerment of different parties (Brown, 2006a), place branding is moving toward engaging existing and potential place users.

Green and smart city as more human-centered city themes Based on the growing connection between urban quality of life and place branding, the recognition of the idea and pursuit of sustainability has become increasingly visible. This became evident when scholars started to assert that place brand equity can have influence within a wider political agenda— Including social, cultural, and environmental dimensions—and will ultimately shed new lights on sustainable place development (Florek & Kavaratzis, 2014; Maheshwari, Vandewalle, & Bamber, 2011; Ryan & Mizerski, 2010). Some scholarship also maintains that measuring place brand equity and sustainable development involves similar processes (Gartner, 2014). This has led to more discussion about branding some themes that are relevant to sustainable development (e.g., green city and smart city), which can be wisely used to establish and reinforce positive networks and relations between city governments and the public (Chan & Marafa, 2018; Chan, 2019). The concept of a green city has flourished, alongside the concepts of a sustainable city and an eco-city, after decades of environmental and sustainability

A humanistic turn of place branding in PR

185

movements (Birch & Wachter, 2008; Krishan, 2009; Low et al., 2005; Register, 2006). A green city is generally accepted as one that has attained or is moving towards long-term environmental sustainability in all areas of urban development (Lindfield & Steinberg, 2012). The term “greenness” has been extended from a purely environmental concept to one with a holistic emphasis on the synergy, interdependence, and mutual reinforcement of environmental and economic sustainability within an urban context (Kearns, 2012; The World Bank, 2011). This is the reason for a large volume of research papers on the topic of the green city (see Table 12.1). The potential of green branding has been further supported, conceptualized, and empirically realized in many recent studies (Chan, Peters & Marafa, 2015; Chan & Marafa, 2016a, 2016b; Chan et al., 2018; Gulsrud, Gooding, & Konijnendijk van den Bosch, 2013), and is even extending to research on fostering sustainable urban development (Chan & Marafa, 2018; Chan, 2019; Gramon-Suba & Holt, 2012). More importantly, greenness also contributes to urban attractiveness (Chan et al., 2015; Hammer et al., 2011), which corresponds to improving and enhancing place image, brand creation (Forristal & Lehto, 2009), and, subsequently, connecting people together (Benedict & McMahon, 2006). A smart city is a form of urban development that strategically utilizes information and communication technologies (ICTs) and connects them to quality of life concerns, the efficiency of urban operation and services in an intergenerational and sustainable manner (ITU, 2014). In addition to optimizing ICT assets and efficiently deploying urban resources (de Jong et al., 2015; Kolotouchkina & Seisdedos, 2018; Lindfield & Steinberg, 2012; Neirotti et al., 2014), decision-makers within a smart city must initiate and facilitate inter- and intra-generational interaction and direct the resulting human capital towards achieving human-technology urban integration (Deakin, 2014). As a result, the smart city initiative has been studied from a number of dimensions, as shown in Table 12.2. There are many scholarly discussions and empirical studies that have shown an overlap and an integration of “green” and “smart” in various aspects of city development (Luvisi & Lorenzini, 2014; Ferrara, 2015) (Table 12.3), especially in the context of energy supply and consumption (e.g., Kim et al., 2012) or other innovative uses of technology (e.g., Angelidou, 2014; Vojnovic, 2014; Busch & Anderberg, 2015; Calzada & Cobo, 2015). This overlap between city themes is a major focus of any policy on branding. Additionally, the above descriptions of green and smart city dimensions and aspects show that humanistic factors are integral, especially in areas like institutions/governance and infrastructure. Although theory provides a holistic frame that allows for integrating the green, creative, and smart attributes of cities (Parnell, 2016; Romão et al., 2017), there is still a need to consider the input of local residents through, for example, their levels of social activism, their capacity to engage in placemaking and how residents can therefore affect the human-scale essence of new smart urbanism (Kolotouchkina & Seisdedos, 2018).

186 Chung-Shing Chan Table 12.1 Publications on areas related to green city research Green city aspect

Source

1. Air quality

2.

3. 4.

5.

6.

7. 8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

Newman & Kenworthy (1999); Kahn (2006); Roberts, Ravetz, & George (2009); EIU (2011); Hammer, KamalChaoui, Robert, & Plouin (2011); White (2011); Beatley (2000, 2012); EC (2017) Water quality Roley (1992); Newman & Kenworthy (1999); Kahn (2006); Roberts et al. (2009); EIU (2011); Hammer et al. (2011); Head & Lam (2011); White (2011); Beatley (2000, 2012); OECD (2014); EC (2017) Food production by White (2011); Beatley (2000, 2012) urban agriculture Public Siembab & Walter (1992); Snyder (1992); Woodhill (1992); transportation Newman & Kenworthy (1999); Devuyst (2001); Head & Lam (2011); Low et al. (2005); Kahn (2006); Kenworthy (2006); Roberts et al. (2009); EIU (2011); Hammer et al. (2011); White (2011); Beatley (2000, 2012); OECD (2014); Roumboutsos, Kapros, & Vanelslander (2014); EC (2017) Roseland (2001); Low et al. (2005); EIU (2011); Hammer Architecture and et al. (2011); Head & Lam (2011); Lehmann (2011); White buildings and (2011); Beatley (2000, 2012); OECD (2014); Rehan (2016) urban acoustic environment Parks and green Lipkis (1992); Newman & Kenworthy (1999); Low et al. spaces (2005); Kahn (2006); Newman (2010); Beatley (2000, 2012); EC (2017) Biodiversity Newman & Kenworthy (1999); Low et al. (2005); Beatley (2000, 2012); EC (2017) Overall city Devuyst (2001); Roseland (2001); Low et al. (2005); Roberts governance, equity, et al.(2009); EIU (2011); Beatley (2000, 2012); de Jong, and participation Wang, & Yu (2013); Meijering, Kern, & Tobi (2014); University of Washington (2016); EC (2017) Waste management Westley (1992); Newman & Kenworthy (1999); Devuyst (2001); Kahn (2006); Roberts et al. (2009); EIU (2011); Hammer et al. (2011); Head & Lam (2011); Beatley (2012); OECD (2014); EC (2017) Green energy Crenshaw (1992); Walter (1992); Newman & Kenworthy supply and (1999); Beatley (2000, 2012); Devuyst (2001); Roberts management et al. (2009); Hammer et al. (2011); Kim et al. (2012); OECD (2014); Yigitcanlar & Lee (2014); de Jong (2015); EC (2017) Population Newman & Kenworthy (1999); Kahn (2006); Roberts et al. density and land (2009); OECD (2014); EC (2017) management Citizens’ Newman & Kenworthy (1999); Kahn (2006); Roberts et al. consumption (2009); OECD (2014); Schoolman, Shriberg, Schwimmer, pattern & Tysman (2016) (Continued)

A humanistic turn of place branding in PR

187

Table 12.1 (Continued) Publications on areas related to green city research Green city aspect

Source

13. Overall quality of citizens and education 14. CO2 emission as a green city 15. Prevention and treatment of environmentally linked diseases and other health and safety issues 16. Land price

Newman & Kenworthy (1999); Kahn (2006); Roberts et al. (2009); OECD (2014); Schoolman et al. (2016) Kahn (2006); Roberts et al. (2009); EIU (2011); Head & Lam (2011) Newman & Kenworthy (1999); Kahn (2006); van Dijk (2011); WHO (2012); University of Washington (2016)

Kahn (2006); Roberts et al. (2009); EC (2017)

Source: Chan & Marafa, 2018.

All these notions clearly show that there should not be a discrete and rigid form of city theme, and it is necessary to understand how the more familiar group of place users (e.g., local residents) perceive the two areas of knowledge and attributes. This idea is what has been argued by some critical PR scholars or ethicists as the need for social empowerment and sustainable citizenship (Munshi & Kurian, 2005, 2007, 2015, 2017), especially when societies are facing ecological degradation and social injustice (McKie & Xifra, 2017). Based on the observation of green-smart integration in the city-branding process, we argue that such a human-centered theme or brand for urban development should suit the unique condition of the city. The flexibility and continuous dialogue between policymakers and the public must be based on recognizable, legitimate, and sustainable forms of relationship and brand building (Hankinson, 2004), and symmetric communication and knowledge-formation goals (Pieczka, 2017). Reaching out to community concerns—and large societal interests—must be placed above top-down planning and the concerns of industrial interests (Moloney & McKie, 2017).

Sustainable urban development and place branding: Hong Kong In Hong Kong, the government has led the urban development process through a number of policy agendas and planning studies known as Policy Addresses. Although there were public consultation exercises in most of the urban development and planning initiatives, there was no common platform that allowed relevant stakeholders or the general public to share views on the integration of green city and smart city concepts and practices. There was also no study done on citizens’ understandings and interpretations of these concepts. This might

188 Chung-Shing Chan Table 12.2 Publications on areas related to smart city research Smart dimension Economic (a smart economy) •• The overall economic development is based on a smart city initiative

Land (a smart environment) •• The importance of the environment for the quality of life in the urban space •• CO2 emission reduction as the main goal of the smart city People (smart people) •• Citizens seen as targets for the smart initiatives

Smart city aspect (dimensions of a smart city by the IESE Center for Globalization and Strategy, 2017 [132]) 1. Smart city leads overall economic development (economy; international outreach) 2. Standard of living (economy; international outreach) 3. Employment opportunities (economy; human capital) 4. Smart development of manufacturing sectors (economy) 5. Quality of life (environment) 6. Urban environmental quality (environment) 7. CO2 emission as a smart city (environment)

•• Subjects involved are local and central governments, universities, businesses

8. Attitudes of citizens toward smart cities (human capital; social cohesion) 9. Quality of individual citizens (human capital) 10. Education opportunities for citizens (human capital) 11. Quality of local communities (social cohesion) 12. Quality of government (governance) 13. Quality of universities (human capital) 14. Quality of business sector (human capital)

Infrastructure (smart living) •• Better use of energy •• Renewable energy source •• Buildings efficiency •• Efficient services (like transport) (smart mobility)

15. 16. 17. 18.

Government (smart governance) •• Defines the rules and priorities for smart initiatives •• Is itself the owner of smart processes •• Gains efficiency and effectiveness in delivering smarter public services •• Gains consensus thanks to the better quality of life

Source: Chan & Marafa, 2018.

Energy use efficiency in the city (technology) Use of renewable energy (technology) Energy use efficiency of buildings (technology) Internet and telecommunication connection (technology) 19. General condition of residence (environment; public administration) 20. Smart transport services (mobility and transportation) 21. Water supply (public administration) 22. Overall city governance towards a smart city (governance) 23. Government as smart city initiator (urban planning) 24. Provision of public services (public administration) 25. Public and private medical care (public administration) 26. Consensus among stakeholders (governance; international outreach) 27. Social welfare (public administration) 28. Physical safety (public administration)

A humanistic turn of place branding in PR

189

Table 12.3 Examples of overlapping ideas in green and smart city initiatives Areas of green–smart overlapping

Source

•• Green spaces as an important dimension of smartness •• Smart city initiatives rely on a more developed infrastructure than polluted cities with limited green areas Smart city encompasses different socio-environmental aspects and ICT applications Smart city is an engine of economic opportunity, e.g., the case of Vancouver to improve its “green city” brand Smart city shares or integrates elements from both creative industries and environmental sustainability The overarching conceptualization of sustainable development, ecological modernization, and regenerative sustainability implies a major overlap in various city categories

Neirotti et al., 2014 Shaw, 2013 Rosol, 2013 Deakin, 2014 de Jong et al., 2015

Source: Chan & Marafa, 2018.

have caused the problem of shifting paths or multi-nuclei thematization strategies over the years. The city government’s decision to brand Hong Kong as “Asia’s World City” in 2001 was met with both positive and negative responses from citizens (ISD, 2013). Since then, the Hong Kong government initiated, in its Policy Addresses, a number of directions for urban development, including green city, creative economy, creative capital, cultural and creative industries, smart city, and digital city approaches. In recent years, tension has arisen between the diversity and the distinctiveness of Hong Kong’s city-branding strategy (Chu, 2010; Shen, 2010). Consequently, the support of local residents will determine the likelihood that a given theme will become a successful brand (Insch & Florek, 2010; Merrilees, Miller, & Herington, 2009; Xu, Hui, & Chan, 2015). Chan and Marafa (2018) investigated city residents’ perception of Hong Kong as a green and smart city through a sample of 243 residents across different districts in the city. The study identified residents’ views of the factors that contributed to a combined green-smart city theme for Hong Kong. The factor analysis extracted seven items from the entire list of green city and smart city variables as presented in Tables 12.1 and 12.2, respectively. These factors include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Physical and organic green-smart infrastructure Governance and livelihood of a smart city Quality of smart society Water quality Employment opportunities ICT and transport services of green or smart city Smart transport services

190 Chung-Shing Chan

The extraction of a number of single-element factors suggests that local people in Hong Kong tend to perceive several outstanding or individual elements that are clear-cut from other attributes. Multi- and inter-disciplinary criteria may indeed complicate the identification and interpretation of greenness and smartness concepts (Nijkamp, 2014). It is therefore the responsibility of the policy and brand management organization to examine how local citizens have experienced such green-smart attributes of Hong Kong. An assessment of the effects of the green and smart city attributes (using two Likert statements as independent variables) on the recognition of a successful green or smart city theme for Hong Kong (all the green and smart attributes as dependent variable) was performed (Chan & Marafa, 2018). The resultant regression models show some degree of overlapping in green-smart urban development as suggested in the literature (Ahvenniemi et al., 2017; Chan & Marafa, 2018; Ferrara, 2015; Luvisi & Lorenzini, 2014; Nijkamp, 2014; Romão et al., 2017). However, only a few determinants were extracted in each regression analysis (Chan & Marafa, 2018). This noticeable weak connection between a successful city theme and its underlying determinants may be due to a knowledge–perception gap of green and smart urban governance across community members (Gibbs & Jonas, 2000; Raco, 2005; Ahvenniemi et al., 2017).

Conclusion and implications The humanistic turn has moved place branding beyond the level of transaction, appearance, and perception to ground the concept in the post-symmetric conceptualization of PR (e.g., L’Etang & Pieczka, 2006; L’Etang et al., 2016; McKie & Xifra, 2017; Moloney & McKie, 2017; Pieczka, 2017). Place branding should not be considered as a purely policymaking process but should be about what is experienced and relational since it is about living communities and societies, the multi-layered nature of places, and the uniqueness of each place (Hankinson, 2004, 2010). This chapter started with an introduction of how place branding has emerged and evolved from a parallel conceptualization of marketing-urban studies, and similar to PR theoretical development, moved toward a more social sciencebased and human-centered field of study. A humanistic turn of place branding is observed within the literature discussion (Bianchini & Ghilardi, 2007). In an era of keen place competition and crisis management, a mix of public relations strategic theory and practice coupled with place branding should lead to considering places as reflecting a diversity of stakeholders and who prioritize a variety of place-related themes. Place branding is well-positioned to embrace such a human-centered focus as place brand equity has increasingly pursued measurement of social, cultural, and environmental attributes (Maheshwari et al., 2011; Florek & Kavaratzis, 2014; Gartner, 2014). This resonates with theoretical movements and paradigm shifts in PR knowledge and research over the past decades as the field becomes more inclined toward humanistic, ethical,

A humanistic turn of place branding in PR

191

people-centered, and community-oriented concerns (Brown, 2006a, 2010; Grunig, 1992; Seitel, 2012). Looking ahead, one crucial area of exploration could involve examining what city themes are most meaningful to residents and how these themes connect with their values. In-depth analysis should be conducted among sociodemographic sub-groups in a place so as to deepen researchers’ understanding of citizens’ perceived brand equity across social classes, or as Zenker (2011) proposed, conducting citizen-centricity measurement of place brand effectiveness. A city brand carries a promising value to each person, both internal (e.g., local residents) and external (potential immigrants or investors). City leaders, upon verifying what themes have the most impact, should divert resources to these themes as a diplomatic approach to brand communications (Anker, 2014). As Bianchini and Ghilardi (2007, p. 284) argued, “place branding and marketing strategies should be more people-centred and humanistic, by celebrating and giving voice to the imagination and the desires of different individuals and communities of interest within the city.” More importantly, an understanding of the similarities and discrepancies of themes—and the values associated with them—influences the sustainability of urban development in the long run. One recommendation for policy and decision-makers is to look at the overlapped attributes of the potential themes, particularly the attributes that catch the attention of, and exhibit attractiveness to, most stakeholder groups. Local people have an important role in shaping their own experiences and those of outsiders. Residents’ perceptions must therefore deserve a higher level of attention. As Harvey (2008, p. 23) highlighted, “[t] he right to the city is far more than a right of individual access to the resources that the city embodies: it is a right to change ourselves by changing the city more after our heart’s desire.”

Acknowledgment Part of the content in this chapter is published in Chan and Marafa (2018) and Chan (2019), which are cited in text and provided in the list of references. (This chapter was adapted from, substantially revised, and is no longer similar to a previously published article titled “Knowledge-perception bridge of green-smart integration of cities: An empirical study of Hong Kong” (2018) by Chung-Shing Chan and Lawal M. Marafa. This article was published in the open-access journal Sustainability, 10(1), 107–126.)

References Ahvenniemi, H., Huovila, A., Pinto-Seppä, I., & Airaksinen, M. (2017). What are the differences between sustainable and smart cities? Cities, 60, 234–245. Angelidou, M. (2014). Smart city policies: A spatial approach. Cities, 41(Supplement 1), S3–S11.

192 Chung-Shing Chan Anholt, S. (2005). Some important distinctions in place branding. Place Branding, 1(2), 116–121. Anholt, S. (2008). Place branding: Is it marketing, or isn’t it? Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 4(1), 1–6. Anker, T. B. (2014). Power to the people: essay on branding and global democracy. In: R. Varey, & M. Pirson (Eds), Humanistic marketing, humanism in business series, pp. 204–215. UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Arvidsson, A. (2006). Brands: Meaning and value in media culture. New York, The United States. Ashworth, G., & Kavaratzis, M. (2009). Beyond the logo: Brand management for cities. Journal of Brand Management, 16(8), 520–531. Beatley, T. (2000). Green urbanism: Learning from European cities. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. Beatley, T. (Ed.) (2012). Green cities of Europe. Washington; Covelo; London: Island Press. Benedict, M. A., & McMahon, E. T. (2006). Green infrastructure linking landscapes and communities. Washington, DC: Island Press. Bianchini, F., & Ghilardi, L. (2007). Thinking culturally about place. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 3(4), 280–286. Birch, E. L., & Wachter, S. M. (2008). Introduction: Urban greening and the green city ideal. In E. L. Birch & S. M. Wachter (Eds.), Growing greener cities: Urban sustainability in the twenty-first century (pp. 1–8). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Boisen, M., Terlouw, K., & van Gorp, B. (2011). The selective nature of place branding and the layering of spatial identities. Journal of Place Management and Development, 4(2), 135–147. Boisen, M., Terlouw, K., Groote, P., & Couwenberg, O. (2018). Reframing place promotion, place marketing, and place branding—moving beyond conceptual confusion. Cities, 80, 4–11. Brown, R. E. (2004). The propagation of awe: public relations, art, and belief in Reformation Europe. Public Relations Review, 30, 381–389. Brown, R. E. (2006a). Myth of symmetry: Public relations as cultural styles. Public Relations Review, 32(3), 206–212. Brown, R. E. (2006b). Sea change: Santa Barbara and the eruption of corporate social responsibility. Public Relations Review, 34(1), 1–8. Brown, R. E. (2010). Symmetry and its critics: Antecedents, prospects, and implications for symmetry in a post-symmetry era. In R. L. Heath, (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of public relations (pp. 277–306). Thousand Oaks, CA, The United States: Sage. Brown, R. E. (2012). The crisis of Rosarito Beach: Mediated reality and the campaign to rebrand a Mexican border city. In A. M. George & C. B. PrattCase (Eds), Studies in crisis communication: International perspectives on hits and misses (pp. 419–436). New York, The United States: Wiley. Busch, H. & Anderberg, S. (2015). Green attraction: Transnational municipal climate networks and green city branding. Journal of Management and Sustainability, 5(4), 1–16. Calzada, I. & Cobo, C. (2015). Unplugging: Deconstructing the smart city. Journal of Urban Technology, 22(1), 23–43. Chan, C. S., Peters, M., & Marafa, L. M. (2015). Public parks in city branding: Perceptions of visitors vis-à-vis residents in Hong Kong. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 14(4), 1157–1165. Chan, C. S., & Marafa, L. M. (2016a). How a green city brand determines the willingness to stay in a city? The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 34(6), 719–731.

A humanistic turn of place branding in PR

193

Chan, C. S., & Marafa, L. M. (2016b). The green branding of Hong Kong: Visitors’ and residents’ perceptions. Journal of Place Management and Development, 9(3), 289–312. Chan, C. S., & Marafa, L. M. (2018). Knowledge-perception bridge of green-smart integration of cities: An empirical study of Hong Kong. Sustainability, 10(1), 107–126. Chan, C. S., Marafa, L. M., Konijnendijk van den Bosch, C. C., & Randrup, T. B. (2018). Starting conditions for the green branding of a city. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 10, 10–24. Chan, C. S. (2019). Which city theme has the strongest local brand equity for Hong Kong: Green, creative or smart city? Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 15(1), 12–27. Cheng, I. (2015). What is a “smart city”? Retrieved from http://www.legco.gov.hk/resear ch-publications/english/essentials-1415ise08-what-is-a-smart-city.htm Chu, S. Y. (2010). Brand Hong Kong: Asia’s World City as method? Visual Anthropology, 24(1–2), 46–58. Coca-Stefaniak, J. A. (2014). Place branding and city centre management: Exploring international parallels in research and practice. Journal of Urban Regeneration and Renewal, 7(4), 363–369. Coca-Stefaniak, J. A., & Carroll, S. (2015). Traditional or experiential places?—Exploring research needs and practitioner challenges in the management of town centres beyond the economic crisis. Journal of Urban Regeneration and Renewal, 9(1), 38–45. Cohen, B. (2014). The smartest cities in the world 2015: Methodology. Retrieved from http: //www.fastcoexist.com/3038818/the-smartest-cities-in-the-world-2015-methodology Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J. (2012). Fringe public relations: How activism moves critical PR toward the mainstream. Public Relations Review, 38(5), 880–887. Crenshaw, R. (1992). Minimizing mechanical heating and cooling. In B. Walter, L. Arkin, & R. Crenshaw (Eds), Sustainable cities: concepts and strategies for eco-city development (pp. 90–98). Los Angeles, CA: EHM Eco-Home Media. Dameri, R. P., & Rosenthal-Sabroux, C. (Eds.). (2014). Smart city: How to create public and economic value with high technology in urban space. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Datta, A. (2015). A 100 smart cities, a 100 utopias. Dialogues in Human Geography, 5(1), 49–53. Deakin, M. (Ed.). (2014). Smart cities: Governing, modelling and analysing the transition. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Devuyst, D. (2001). Sustainability assessment at the local level. In D. Devuyst, L. Hens, & W. de Lannoy (Eds.), How green is the city? sustainability assessment and the management of urban environments (pp. 175–206). New York: Columbia University Press. van Dijk, M. P. (2011). Three ecological cities, examples of different approaches in Asia and Europe. In T-C. Wong & B. Yuen (Eds.), Eco-city planning: Policies, practice and design (pp. 31–50). Dordrecht: Springer. Dolea, A. (2017). The need for critical thinking in country promotion: Public diplomacy, nation branding, and public relations. In J. L’Etang, D. Mckie, N. Snow, & J. Xifra (Eds.), Routledge handbook of critical public relations (pp. 274–287). London, The United Kingdom: Routledge. European Commission (EC). (2017). Evaluation process. Retrieved from http://ec.europ a.eu/environment/europeangreencapital/applying-for-the-award/evaluation-process/ (accessed on 1 October 2017). The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). (2011). Asian Green City Index. Siemens AG: Corporate Communications and Government Affairs: Munich: Germany. Ferrara, R. (2015). The smart city and the green economy in Europe: A critical approach. Energies, 8(6), 4724–4734.

194 Chung-Shing Chan Florek, M., & Kavaratzis, M. (2014). Editorial: From brand equity to place brand equity and from there to the place brand. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 10(2), 103–107. Florek, M., Herezniak, M., & Augustyn, A. (2019). You can’t govern if you don’t measure: Experts’ insights into place branding effectiveness assessment. Journal of Place Management and Development, 12(4), 545–565. Forristal, L. J., & Lehto, X. Y. (2009). Place branding with native species: Personality as a criterion. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 5(3), 213–225. Gartner, W. C. (2014). Brand equity in a tourism destination. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 10(2), 108–116. Gartner, W. C., & Ruzzier, M. K. (2011). Tourism destination brand equity dimensions: Renewal versus repeat market. Journal of Travel Research, 50(5), 471–481. Gibbs, D. & Jonas, A. E. G. (2000). Governance and regulation in local environmental policy: The utility of a regime approach. Geoforum, 31(3), 299–313. Giovanardi, M. (2012). Haft and sord factors in place branding: Between functionalism and representationalism. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 8(1), 30–45. Govers, R. (2013). Why place branding is not about logos and slogans. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 9(2), 71–75. Govers, R., & Go, F. (2009). Place branding: Global, virtual and physical identities, constructed, imagined and experienced. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Gramon-Suba, I., & Holt, C. (2012). Turning a gemstone into a diamond: A green design and branding strategy for the city of Bucharest. In F. Go & R. Govers (Eds.), International place branding yearbook 2012: Managing smart growth and sustainability (pp. 132–144). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Grunig, J. E., & Hunt, T. (1984). Managing public relations (6th ed.). Orlando, FL, The United States: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Grunig, J. (Ed.) (1992). Excellence in public relations. Mahwah, NJ, The United States: Erlbaum Associates. Grunig, J. E., & Grunig, L. A. (2008). Excellence theory in public relations: Past, present, and future. In A. Zerfass, B. V. Ruler & K. Sriramesh (Eds.), Public relations research: European and international perspectives and innovations (pp. 327–347). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag. Gulsrud, N. M., Gooding, S., & Konijnendijk van den Bosch, C. C. (2013). Green space branding in Denmark in an era of neoliberal governance. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 12(3), 330–337. Hanna, S., & Rowley, J. (2008). An analysis of terminology use in place branding. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 4(1), 61–75. Hall, R. E., Bowerman, B., Braverman, J., Taylor, J., Todosow, H., Von Wimmersperg, U. (2000, September 28). The vision of a smart city. Paper presented at 2nd International Life Extension Technology Workshop, Paris, France. Hammer, S., Kamal-Chaoui, L., Robert, A., & Plouin, M. (2011). Cities and green growth: A conceptual framework. OECD Regional Development Working Papers 2011/08. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/governance/ cities-and-green-growth_5kg0tflmzx34-en Hankinson, G. (2004). Relational network brands: Towards a conceptual model of place brands. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 10(2), 109–121. Hankinson, G. (2010). Place branding research: A cross-disciplinary agenda and the views of practitioners. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 6(4), 300–315. Harvey, D. (2008). The right to the city. The City Reader, 6, 23–40. He, Y, Stojmenovic, I., Liu, Y., & Gu, Y. (2014). Smart city. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 2014.

A humanistic turn of place branding in PR

195

Head, P., & Lam, D. (2011). How cities can enter the ecological age. In T.-C. Wong & B. Yuen (Eds.), Eco-city planning: Policies, practice and design (pp. 17–30). Dordrecht: Springer. Heath, R. L. (Ed.) (2010). The SAGE handbook of public relations. Thousand Oaks, CA, The United States: Sage. Hutton, J. G. (2010). Defining the relationship between public relations and marketing: Public relations’ most important challenge. In R. L. Heath, (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of public relations (pp. 509–522). Thousand Oaks, CA, The United States: Sage. Information Services Department (ISD), The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government. (2013). About Brand Hong Kong. Retrieved from www.brandh k.gov.hk/en/#/en/about/overview.html Insch, A., & Florek, M. (2010). Place satisfaction of city residents: Findings and implications for city branding. In G. Ashworth & M. Kavaratzis (Eds.), Towards effective place branding management: Branding European cities and regions (pp. 191–204). The United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. International Telecommunication Union (ITU). (2014). Smart sustainable cities: An analysis of definitions. Retrieved from www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/focusgroups/ssc/.../TR-Defini tions.docx de Jong, M., Wang, D., & Yu, C. (2013). Exploring the relevance of the eco-city concept in China: The case of Shenzhen Sino-Dutch low carbon city. Journal of Urban Technology, 20(1), 95–113. de Jong, M., Joss, S., Schraven, D., Zhan, C., & Weijnen, M. (2015). Sustainable–smart– resilient–low carbon–eco–knowledge cities; making sense of a multitude of concepts promoting sustainable urbanization. Journal of Cleaner Production, 109, 25–38. Kahn, M. E. (2006). Green cities: Urban growth and the environment. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press. Kavaratzis, M. (2009). Cities and their brands: Lessons from corporate branding. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 5(1), 26–37. Kearns, P. (2012). Learning cities as healthy green cities: Building sustainable opportunity cities. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 52(2), 369–391. Kenworthy, J. R. (2006). The eco-city: Ten key transport and planning dimensions for sustainable city development. Environment and Urbanization, 18(1), 67–85. doi:10.1177/0956247806063947 Kim, S. A., Shin, D., Choe, Y., Seibert, T., & Walz, S. P. (2012). Integrated energy monitoring and visualization system for Smart Green City development: Designing a spatial information integrated energy monitoring model in the context of massive data management on a web based platform. Automation in Construction, 22, 51–59. Kitchin, R. (2015). Making sense of smart cities: Addressing present shortcomings. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 8(1), 131–136. Kolotouchkina, O., & Seisdedos, G. (2018). Place branding strategies in the context of new smart cities: Songdo IBD, Masdar and Skolkovo. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 14(2), 115–124. Konecnik, M., & Gartner, W. C. (2007). Customer-based brand equity for a destination. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(2), 400–421. Kourtit, K. (2015). The ‘new urban world’: Economic-geographical studies on the performance of urban systems (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland. Krishan, A. (2009). Eco-city? Eco-urbanity? In: D. Radović (Eds.), Eco-urbanity: Towards well-mannered built environments (pp. 141–160). London; New York: Routledge.

196 Chung-Shing Chan Kurian, P., Munshi, D., & Bartlett, R. V. (2014). Sustainable citizenship for a technological world: Negotiating deliberative dialects. Citizenship Studies, 18(3–4), 393–409. Laurini, R. (2017). Geographic knowledge infrastructure: Applications to territorial intelligence and smart cities. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier. Lehmann, S. (2011). Green urbanism: Holistic pathways to the rejuvenation of mature housing estates in Singapore. In T. Wong & B. Yuen (Eds.), Eco-city planning: Policies, practice and design (pp. 151–179). Dordrecht: Springer. Lindfield, M. & Steinberg, F. (Eds.) (2012). Green cities. Manila, Philippines: Asian Development Bank. Lipkis, A. (edited by K. Lipkis). (1992). Urban forests: The lifeblood of an eco-city. In B. Walter, L. Arkin, & R. Crenshaw (Eds), Sustainable cities: Concepts and strategies for eco-city development (pp. 128–132). Los Angeles, CA: EHM Eco-Home Media. Low, N., Gleeson, B., Green, R., & Radovic, D. (2005). The green city: Sustainable homes, sustainable suburbs. Sydney: UNSW Press; Abingdon, Oxfordshire; New York: Routledge. Luque-Ayala, A., & Marvin, S. (2015). Developing a critical understanding of smart urbanism? Urban Studies, 52(12), 2105–2116. Luvisi, A. & Lorenzini, G. (2014). RFID-plants in the smart city: Applications and outlook for urban green management. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 13(4), 630–637. L’Etang, J., & Pieczka, M. (Eds.) (2006). Public relations: Critical debates and contemporary practice. Mahwah, NJ, The United States: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. L’Etang, J., McKie, D., Snow, N., & Xifra, J. (2016). The Routledge handbook of critical public relations (1st ed.) New York, The United States, Routledge. Maheshwari, V., Vandewalle, I., & Bamber, D. (2011). Place branding’s role in sustainable development. Journal of Place Management and Development, 4(2), 198–213. McFarlane, C., & Söderström, O. (2017). On alternative smart cities: From a technologyintensive to a knowledge-intensive smart urbanism. City, 21(3–4), 312–328. McKie, D., & Xifra, J. (2017). Expanding critical space: public intellectuals, public relations, and an “outsider” contribution. In J. L’Etang, D. Mckie, N. Snow, & J. Xifra (Eds.), Routledge handbook of critical public relations (pp. 349–359). London, The United Kingdom: Routledge. Meijering, J. V., Kern, K., & Tobi, H. (2014). Identifying the methodological characteristics of European green city rankings. Ecological Indicators, 43, 132–142. Merrilees, B., Miller, D., & Herington, C. (2009). Antecedents of residents’ city brand attitudes. Journal of Business Research, 62(3), 362–367. Mickey, T. J. (2003). Deconstructing public relations: Public relations criticism. Mahwah, NJ, The United States: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Mikáčová, L., & Gavlaková, P. (2014). The role of public relations in branding. Procedia— Social and Behavioral Sciences, 110, 832–840. Moffitt, M. A. (2011). Critical theoretical considerations of public relations messaging around the globe: Tools for creating and evaluating campaign messages. Journal of Promotion Management, 17(1), 21–41. Moloney, K., & McKie, D. (2017). Changes to be encouraged: Radical turns in PR theorisation and small-step evolutions in PR practice. In J. L’Etang, D. Mckie, N. Snow, & J. Xifra (Eds.), Routledge handbook of critical public relations (pp. 151–161). London, The United Kingdom: Routledge. Munshi, D., & Kurian, P. (2005). Imperializing spin cycles: A postcolonial look at public relations, green-washing, and the separation of publics. Public Relations Review, 31(4), 513–520.

A humanistic turn of place branding in PR

197

Munshi, D., & Kurian, P. (2007). The case of subaltern public: A postcolonial investigation of CSR’s (o) missions. In S. May, G. Cheney, & J. Roper (Eds.), The debate over corporate social responsibility (pp. 438–447). New York, NY, The United States: Oxford University Press. Munshi, D., & Kurian, P. (2015). Imagining organizational communication as sustainable citizenship. Management Communication Quarterly, 29(1), 153–159. Munshi, D., & Kurian, P. (2017). Public relations and sustainable citizenship: Towards a goal of representing the unrepresentable. In J. L’Etang, D. Mckie, N. Snow, & J. Xifra (Eds.), Routledge handbook of critical public relations (pp. 405–414). London, The United Kingdom: Routledge. Neirotti, P., de Marco, A., Cagliano, A. C., Mangano, G., & Scorrano, F. (2014). Current trends in smart city initiatives: Some stylised facts. Cities, 38, 25–36. Newman, P. (2010). Resilient infrastructure cities. InS. Kallidaikurichi, & B. Yuen (Eds.), Developing living cities: From analysis to action (pp. 77–106). Singapore: World Scientific Pub. ISBN 978-981-430-449-8 Newman, P., & Kenworthy, J. (1999). Sustainability and cities: Overcoming automobile dependence. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. Nijkamp, P. (2014). Smart cities in Europe. In M. Deakin (Ed.), Smart cities: Governing, modelling and analysing the transition (pp. 173–195). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Nobili, V. (2005). The role of European capital of culture events within genoa’s and Liverpool’s branding and positioning efforts. Place Branding, 1(3), 316–328. O’Shaughnessy, J. & O’Shaughnessy, N. J. (2000). Treating the nation as a brand: Some neglected issues. Journal of Macromarketing, 20(1), 56–64. Parkerson, B. & Saunders, J. (2005). City branding: Can goods and services branding models be used to brand cities? Place Branding, 1(3), 242–264. Parnell, S. (2016). Defining a global urban development agenda. World Development, 78, 529–540. Philo, C., & Kearns, G. (1993). Culture, history, capital: A critical introduction to the selling of places. In G. Kearns & C. Philo (Eds.), Selling places: The city as cultural capital, past and present (pp. 1–32). Oxford; New York: Pergamon Press. Pickett, S. T. A., Mcgrath, B., Cadenasso, M. L., & Felson, A. J. (2014). Ecological resilience and resilient cities. Building Research & Information, 42(2), 143–157. Pike, S. (2009). Destination brand positions of a competitive set of near-home destinations. Tourism Management, 30(6), 857–866. Pieczka, M. (2017). Dialogue and critical public relations. In J. L’Etang, D. Mckie, N. Snow, & J. Xifra (Eds.), Routledge handbook of critical public relations (pp. 76–89). London, The United Kingdom: Routledge. Plowman, K. D., Briggs, W. G., & Huang, Y.-H. (2001). Public relations and conflict resolution. In R. L. Heath, (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of public relations (pp. 301–310). Thousand Oaks, CA, The United States: Sage. Pohl, G. M., & Vandeventer, D. (2001). In R. L. Heath, (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of public relations (pp. 357–368). Thousand Oaks, CA, The United States: Sage. Rehan, R. M. (2016). The phonic identity of the city urban soundscape for sustainable spaces. HBRC Journal, 12(3), 337–349. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.12.0 05 Qin H, Li H, & Zhao X. (2010). Development status of domestic and foreign smart city. Global Presence, 9: 50–52. Raco, M. (2005). Sustainable development, rolled-out neoliberalism and sustainable communities. Antipode, 37, 324–347.

198 Chung-Shing Chan Register, R. (2006). Rebuilding cities in balance with nature. Gabriola, BC: New Society Publishers. Richards, G. & Wilson, J. (2006). Developing creativity in tourist experiences: A solution to the serial reproduction of culture? Tourism Management, 27, 1209–1223. Roberts, P., Ravetz, J., & George, C. (2009). Environment and the city. London and New York: Routledge. Roley, B. (1992). Home and community water management. In B. Walter, L. Arkin, & R. Crenshaw (Eds), Sustainable cities: Concepts and strategies for eco-city development (pp. 101–112). Los Angeles, CA: EHM Eco-Home Media. Romão, J., Kourtit, K., Neuts, B., & Nijkamp, P. (2017). The smart city as a common place for tourists and residents: A structural analysis of the determinants of urban attractiveness. Cities, 78, 67–75. Roseland, M. (2001). The eco-city approach to sustainable development in urban areas. In D. Devuyst, L. Hens, & W. De Lannoy (Eds.), How green is the city? Sustainability assessment and the management of urban environments (pp. 85–103). New York: Columbia University Press. Rosol, M. (2013). Vancouver’s “EcoDensity” planning initiatives: A struggle over hegemony? Urban Studies, 50(11), 2238–2255. Roumboutsos, A., Kapros, S., & Vanelslander, T. (2014). Green city logistics: Systems of Innovation to assess the potential of E-vehicles. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 11, 43–52. Ryan, M. M., & Mizerski, K. (2010). Place branding for sustainable futures: A case study. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 6(1), 49–57. Schoolman, E. D., Shriberg, M., Schwimmer, S., & Tysman, M. (2016). Green cities and ivory towers: how do higher education sustainability initiatives shape millennials’ consumption practices? Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 6(3), 490–502. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-014-0190-z Shaw, K. (2013). Docklands dreamings: Illusions of sustainability in the Melbourne docks redevelopment. Urban Studies, 50(11), 2158–2177. Shen, S. (2010). Re-branding without re-developing: Constraints of Hong Kong’s ‘Asia’s World City’ brand (1997–2007). The Pacific Review, 23(2), 203–224. Seitel, F. P. (2012). The practice of public relations (12th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ, The United States: Pearson Prentice Hall. Siembab, W., & Walter, B. (1992). A Telecommunications strategy for sustainable cities. In B. Walter, L. Arkin, & R. Crenshaw (Eds), Sustainable cities: Concepts and strategies for eco-city development (pp. 204–206). Los Angeles, CA: EHM Eco-Home Media. Snyder, R. (1992). The role of bicycles in ecological cities. In B. Walter, L. Arkin, & R. Crenshaw (Eds), Sustainable cities: Concepts and strategies for eco-city development (pp. 178–180). Los Angeles, CA: EHM Eco-Home Media. Taylor, M., & Kent, M. (2006). Public relations theory and practice in national building. In C. Botan, & V. Hazleton (Eds.), Public relations theory II (pp. 299–315). Mahwah, NJ, The United States: Lawrence Erlbaum. The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). (2011). Asian Green City Index. Germany; Munich: Siemens AG: Corporate Communications and Government Affairs. The Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2014). Urban green growth in dynamic Asia: A conceptual framework. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/regional/regional-policy/Urban-GG-Dynamic-Asiareport.pdf

A humanistic turn of place branding in PR

199

University of Washington. (2016). Green cities and good health. Retrieved from http:// depts.washington.edu/hhwb/ (accessed on 1 October 2017). Vojnovic, I. (2014). Urban sustainability: Research, politics, policy and practice. Cities, 41(Supplement 1), S30–S44. Walter, B. (1992). Sustainable energy overview. In B. Walter, L. Arkin, & R. Crenshaw (Eds), Sustainable cities: concepts and strategies for eco-city development (pp. 190–203). Los Angeles, CA: EHM Eco-Home Media. Ward, S. V. (1998). Place marketing: A historical comparison of Britain and North America. In T. Hall & P. Hubbard (Eds.), The entrepreneurial city: Geographies of politics, regime and representation (pp. 31–53). Chicester, England; New York: Wiley. White, T. (2011). Green cities: An overview. In R. D. Lankford (Ed.), Green cities (pp. 11–18). Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press/Gale, Cengage Learning. Whitman, D. (2008). “Stakeholders” and the politics of environmental policymaking. In J. Park, K. Conca, & M. Finger (Eds.), The crisis of global environmental governance: Towards a new political economy of sustainability (pp. 163–192). New York, NY, The United States: Routledge. Wilcox, D. L., Ault, P. H., Agee, W. K., & Cameron, G. T. (2001). The essentials of public relations. New York, The United States: Allyn & Bacon Woodhill, J. (1992). How alternative forms of development can reduce traffic congestion. In B. Walter, L. Arkin, & R. Crenshaw (Eds), Sustainable cities: Concepts and strategies for eco-city development (pp. 167–177). Los Angeles, CA: EHM Eco-Home Media. Wong, T. C. & Yuen, B. (2011). Understanding the origins and evolution of eco-city development: An introduction. In T. Wong & B. Yuen (Eds.), Eco-city planning: Policies, practice and design (pp. 1–14). Dordrecht: Springer. World Bank. (2011). Eco2 cities: Ecological cities as economic cities. Retrieved from www .worldbank.org/eco2 Xu, J., Hui, C. K. T., & Chan, E. A. (2015). Hong Kong’s destination image in the eyes of residents. Journal of China Tourism Research, 11(4), 440–460. Yigitcanlar, T., & Lee, S. H. (2014). Korean ubiquitous-eco-city: A smart-sustainable urban form or a branding hoax?. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 89, 100–114. Zenker, S. (2011). How to catch a city? The concept and measurement of place brands. Journal of Place Management and Development, 4(1), 40–52. Zukin, S. (2009). Changing landscapes of power: Opulence and the urge for authenticity. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33(2), 543–553.

13 A new model of humanistic PR The social business A conversation with Robin Low

A global sample of PR scholars has contributed their reflections to this collection on the putative existence of a humanistic turn in the public relations industry, offering observations about the industry’s organizational strategies across a wide range of its institutional practices and disciplines. Given this book’s thematic focus on the humanistic turn in PR and, indeed, humanism’s ancient roots, the editors were interested in looking to the future of humanism in public relations. We reached out to the veteran humanitarian, Robin Low. Robin’s resume of humanistic communication and on-the-ground disaster relief speaks to his credibility for such a conversation. He is an entrepreneur (he started Greenyarn, LLC, a manufacturer of eco-friendly clothing), an author (Good Intentions Are Not Enough: Why We Fail At Helping Others), a social media trainer, and a political activist in his native Singapore, where he has not infrequently been surveilled and detained by the Singapore authorities. He has traveled by himself, and at his own expense, to some of the globe’s crises and disaster hot spots, among them New York City shortly after the 9-11 attacks and to Haiti in the aftermath of the devastating January 12, 2010 earthquake that cost more than 100,000 lives. In 2011, he made his way to Japan following that country’s apocalyptic triple disaster on March 11, 2011. In Fukashima, an earthquake, a nuclear reactor meltdown, and a tsunami devastated the area around that city and far afield, causing panic, injury, property loss, and fatalities of an almost unimaginable level. Robin has traveled to every continent but Antarctica to conduct his training workshops in entrepreneurship for local indigenous communities. In Indonesia, he created a sandals-making business for lepers, who are the target of brutal harassment and abuse. In Haiti, he taught a community how to develop a business raising and selling chickens. His Civil Innovation Lab trained prisoners in a Dominican Republic prison, creating templates that they could use to start businesses that could sustain them upon their release. What was of particular interest to the editors was Robin’s conception of the humanistic turn in public relations, offering a vision of the field that is clearly beyond organizational programs such as corporate social responsibility and cause branding. Robin offers a paradigmatic reinvention that he calls a DOI: 10.4324/9781351245340-13

A new model of humanistic PR

201

“social business” that marries a variety of communication outreach strategies to a range of business strategies. The explicit purpose and the implicit mission of the social business are both humanistic and economically and financially sustainable, clearly intended for the good of social entrepreneurs, the customers, and the community. In a series of email conversations with Robin, the editors probed his idea of this visionary and complex construction and implementation of the social business. Editors: You discuss in your book the importance of “doing good.” What does this mean—specifically, whose “good” is being served? RL: Many people do good by offering donations, volunteering, and pursuing other activities that may be considered charitable. The “doing good” discussed in my book is the act which businesses consider charitable and realizepositive outcomes . Editors: What is challenging for a business model that focuses on doing good? RL: Traditionally, a business that focuses on doing good is not looking at profits. Without donations, volunteers, and subsidies, this kind of business cannot be sustained. The problem comes from the outside funding sources for these organizations. Some of this funding comes with an agenda that may not benefit the beneficiaries in the long run. When funding comes from a community, unless the funding is a lot of money, fundraising activities have to continue constantly and can distract the organization from reaching its impact. Editors: What is social business? RL: Professor Muhammad Yunus created the term social business. It is defined as a non-dividend company that is created to address and solve a societal problem. The investors/owners can recoup the money invested but cannot take any dividends.. Editors: What is sustainability? RL: Sustainability focuses on meeting the needs of the present without compromising future generations’ abilities to meet their needs. Editors: Why should businesses care about sustainability? RL: Being sustainable can improve health, increase safety, and save money in the long run. Sustainable principles serve to maximize opportunities and to minimize the negative impact businesses’ core operations can have on the environment, communities, and economies in places where they operate. Editors: You’re an advocate for stakeholder capitalism. Tell us how that kind of capitalism is different than, for example, what we see in developed nations like the US, the UK, and Germany. RL: Stakeholder capitalism is a system which orients corporations toward serving the interests of all their stakeholders: customers, employees, vendors, shareholders, and their local communities. These corporations make sure that everyone in their ecosystem benefits from their business activities.

202 A conversation with Robin Low

In contrast, in shareholder capitalism wealth is used as an investment in businesses with a single goal—to generate more wealth. The businesses funded have a single focus, which is their bottom line—profit. Investors focus on continual exponential growth to increase valuation to maximize profits when they finally sell their shares to the public. Editors: Modern capitalism has been greatly criticized for being “extractive”—that is, it prioritizes harvesting profits from whatever business model it can overlay on areas such as health care andthe use of natural resources, while caring little about societal costs. How does stakeholder capitalism operate differently from the extractive model? RL: In stakeholder capitalism, I am part of a program that offers cow- and goat-sharing/adoption in Switzerland. City dwellers can adopt farm animals like cows or goats. So, the city dweller pays a fee, which covers the cow’s cost, and the farmer will take care of the cow. Under this program, the farmers do not worry about the cost of the cows and goats. Instead of focusing on profits and returns, the farmers look for jobs for the animals that mainly eat the grass on the lawns and the side of the roads. So, the city dweller pays for the services provided by the cows and goats. The profits go into a fund that pays the farmer a fee, and eventually, I, as the city dweller, get the initial adoption fees back after the cow made enough money “working.” There is no hurry to, for example, get the cow pregnant to produce milk and have calves. The farmers do not have any financial pressure to pay the banks and can work on their organic farms and manage their cows. As a bonus, when the cow is lactating, the farmer gets milk and cheese, which can provide an extra revenue stream for the farmer. This creates a beautiful ecosystem where the community can support farmers by adopting cows and goats. There is no need for an industrial farming complex that requires a lot of resources to grow feed for the cows and goats, nor is there a need for constant attempts to extract value by getting the cows continually pregnant, so that the farmer can extract milk to sell. Editors: You founded a for-profit business with factories in Taiwan and Japan. So you see profits as a public good? RL: I own Greenyarn, a Boston-based nanotech company that embeds nanoparticles of bamboo charcoal into the yarn. Products made with the yarn act as deodorizers and antibacterials without using chemicals. We focus on sustainable solutions in manufacturing. We do not dye or bleach our fabric, and we use a water wheel and solar energy to power our 200-needle-count socks and underwear machines. The profits are plowed back into the factories to keep us off the grid. We do not discharge waste in our manufacturing process. For 15 years now, all the profits have been used to explore new technologies and green processes.

A new model of humanistic PR

203

Profits are essential in this line of business; they help companies continue to operate and do what they are doing. No one else will fund companies to research green solutions and manufacturing processes. Editors: Following up on this idea of a “public good,” the US’s Business Roundtable, in late 2019, indicated that shareholder value should no longer be the prime objective of profit-making companies. Instead, they said, multiple stakeholders should also be prioritized. Tell us how this kind of move may, or may not, be in line with your concepts of capitalism. RL: I am usually quite skeptical of some of these organizations that are filled with large corporations Still, I feel that the concept of focusing on the “public good” is fine, and prioritizing multiple stakeholders is a significant move. However, I can see that most of these people in an organization like the Business Roundtable come from big companies and draw millions of dollars in salaries. In contrast, many of their employees in their own companies may not even earn a living wage. Let me give you an example of how prioritizing stakeholder concerns about the environment is likely easier said than actually done. I am part of the sustainable industry, and I do see many others in the industry use the word “sustainable” freely. Anyone that claims “sustainable fashion” by using organic cotton and producing white t-shirts or fluorescent colored fabrics is simply greenwashing. In particular, closed-loop bleaching, where bleach is reused and not discarded, is expensive and rare. Most factories that make white fabric will have to bleach the fabric and vent bleach vapors into the environment. These toxic gases kill all plant life and insects in the area. Fluorescent fabrics also need to be dyed, but they require toxic fluorescent dyes, which are usually improperly discarded. So, using organic cotton does not automatically make the company and its products green. The low-cost “fast-fashion” companies make affordable apparel at a low price. However, they are generally not durable, leading to the generation of more waste. From my experience, I feel that the public good claimed by many of these large corporations is just a marketing gimmick to improve their brand image to the public. Editors: How does the concept of a social business differ from the concept of corporate social responsibility? RL: Social business is a proactive approach to social change. It addresses and solves societal problems. A corporate social responsibility (CSR) program is how corporations create positive social impact through their existing practices. Editors: CSR has received its fair share of criticism around the world. What’s your take on its potential and where it falls short?

204 A conversation with Robin Low

RL: The good news is that it is more common for bigger corporations to have CSR programs. With more competition, consumers have more choices, and for businesses to be more competitive, they need to show that they contribute back to society. There is potential for well-funded corporations to support ground-up groups who wish to solve local problems. These corporations do have all the resources that these local groups need to grow and continue with their impact. As CSR is getting more mainstream, there are many potentials for these corporations to develop more empathy so that they can understand the community and create solutions for some of the problems they are interested in solving. However, many of these companies have a small CSR department that runs under the marketing department. This department plans an annual event where they get employees involved in doing charity for a day, using the photos for the event as a marketing opportunity. From that example, it’s clear that some businesses are using CSR as an opportunity to whitewash their brands instead of reviewing bad business practices. Such resistance to self-examination can be disastrous, resulting in, for example, an oil spill. A CSR mentality to such a problem would be to sponsor a beach cleanup day and hope the problems associated with the spill will go away. Editors: You have worked with Nobel Laureate economist Muhammad Yunus. What lessons did you take from that relationship? RL: I was a skeptic of micro-finance and thought that charging 20% interest was exploiting the poorest people. However, after working with him at the Grameen Creative Lab and Social Business Forum Asia, I realized that the business model behind Grameen bank trains clients in financial literacy. Their classes emphasize that clients can only borrow money to run a small business to earn more money. They use the interest generated to run the classes. Most of the profits made at the end of the year are given back to the community as they are shareholders of that fund once they become a client. Editors: You wrote a book titled Good Intentions Are Not Enough. Why aren’t they? RL: I have volunteered for many NGOs and been in many disasters. I mentored numerous students and companies on creating social impact. Over the years, I have seen many impactful projects which benefited various communities. However, when the founders decided to leave the project, it fell apart. One of the projects was an award-winning initiative where students rescued 50 prostitutes and hired them to make pouches and cases. The students found 50 sewing machines and brought in trainers to train everyone to make these products, with the students selling the products.

A new model of humanistic PR

205

Once the students got their grades after six months, they left the project to the women. Within the following six months, only two women were remaining, and the other 48 women returned to prostitution. The students had good intentions but did not anticipate that the donated sewing machines could not be locally serviced. They also did not train the women to sell the products. The women were interested in the work but did not want to run a company. All the $250,000 raised from donations to start the project was wasted. Eventually, the factory was abandoned, and the women left. Nothing had changed in the end. Editors: You describe yourself as a “serial entrepreneur.” What does that mean? What, in your experience, does that look like? RL: I have started a few businesses. I’ve written a few books. I’ve been displaying my photos and art in various international art exhibitions. I have been to many major disasters, running the last mile of disaster relief. I don’t think labels are fair, but if it is an easy way to describe me, what it means is that I do what needs to be done when I see that no one else is doing it—taking action where it is needed. Editors: Entrepreneurs are often so busy with making their vision a reality that public relations may not be at the top of their list. What’s your take on where PR might be of more use to entrepreneurs and what entrepreneurs may need to do to prioritize using it? RL: I think communication is one of the most important skills an entrepreneur can have. A well-executed public relations campaign can put an entrepreneur’sproduct or services in front of many consumers for free. I have seen excellent products and ideas get no attention, and, eventually, only have a minimal market. They didn’t have a good communication plan. Of course, many companies who get the right funding and are good at engaging media are also at risk of getting too much attention and getting stakeholders too excited. If the company fails to deliver, the impact would be much worse than if the company had no media at all. I would advise that the entrepreneur focus on the prototype and customers he can get and some free media he has access to at first. While working on solving the problems encountered, he should understand his customers’ needs and make sure his solution addresses those needs, through iterations of his solution. Editors: How does public relations fall short? RL: Public relations is changing. Companies and organizations do not just rely on media channels to manage their brand’s reputation—they need to engage on every other medium they can get their hands on to keep themselves on the map, especially when there is a crisis.

206 A conversation with Robin Low

Today, there are so many new ways for companies to engage their stakeholders. Companies need to build and maintain trust with their audiences and the media outlets. Hence public relations is now just one of the channels to speak to the audience, customers, and potential clients. However, it too often falls short when the stakeholders directly engage with the company on their social media channels. Editors: So, is PR dead? If so, what’s replaced it? RL: PR is changing —the market has various channels to engage the brand. I don’t think it is completely replaced. However, businesses are now engaging with their stakeholders more on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, various online forums/portals, and their websites. With the help of search engines, stakeholders that want to reach organizations can access the various channels more efficiently. Editors: Is there any business strategy that’s “good enough”? What are the communication strategies you teach businesspeople? RL: I worked with many entrepreneurs on personal branding. One of the most critical pieces of advice that I offer is to be always real. Sadly, many people now like to do one thing—Facebrag. They like to appear better online than in real life to the extent that some will post fake photos to live a “fake life” online. Being real is one of the most significant currencies because you are building trust online. Trust takes years to earn, and once you are found out to have “cheated” online your reputation can be destroyed by just one post. Editors: Would you see PR as an essential empowerment tool to creating and maintaining a social business? If yes, in what ways? RL: I think that the skill that public relations brings is to engage influencers. Suppose you understand PR’s principles and can engage some influencers online to help promote your messages and cause. In that case, it can be a big bonus for them to be associated with social business as they can help spread awareness when promoting your business and cause. There is much social capital in social business. Suppose you learn how to leverage it and attract influencers with similar goals and values. In that case, the relationship can benefit everyone and add value. Editors: PR has been often seen as helping generate cash flow for businesses. How do you think PR should be humanized so that it can create a better society? RL: I think businesses with more resources can help social businesses or charities generate more awareness for their activities. Most of the time, social

A new model of humanistic PR

207

businesses or charities rely on volunteers and may not have the resources to promote themselves. Businesses can support these organizations by promoting their causes, and this is much more efficient and effective than a simple donation by a one-person CSR department that looks for charities to donate to. Editors: Where do you see the opportunities or challenges to create a social business in authoritarian regimes (e.g., Singapore) compared to Western democracies (e.g., the US)? RL: Many authoritarian regimes have their social welfare department to show the public that the government is doing good. Any social business in these countries may look like competition or make it look like the government is not doing enough to solve some of the problems. When the social business is trying to solve a problem that the government is suppressing (for example, if a company were to try to house homeless people in Singapore and find them jobs), the government will make it hard for them to operate or even register such a business because the government does not even acknowledge that there are homeless people in Singapore. Authoritarian regimes control the media. Once you are not on the right side of the government, any news of the organization will be suppressed. In contrast, Western democracies have free media to publish organizations’ news. Editors: Stakeholder capitalism sounds like an exciting concept and a self-help approach to, for example, help others escape grinding poverty. In this process, what do you see as the fundamental PR and marketing skills that need to be taught to poor people (e.g., what public relations literacy needs to be promoted)? RL: I think proper social media training to leverage all the available free social media platforms is key. With social media, many of these marginalized communities can share their stories to allow people to empathize with their situation. Poor people are not lazy; poor people are not stupid. They lack money, and they don’t need pity. I believe that more stories need to be disseminated that allows others to understand the real situation instead of the sob stories which focus on poverty and attempt to make others take pity on them. Editors: In this increasingly digitalized world, how do you think digital technologies would interplay with the need of humanizing public relations and sustaining social business? RL: Digital media is a double-sided sword. On the one hand, digital media reduces the cost of engaging stakeholders. Public relations can be collaborative and used to promote worthy causes. Corporations can use their

208 A conversation with Robin Low

resources to support social businesses by promoting them in a win-win for branding purposes. Engagements on digital platforms are getting cheaper, and companies can seemingly create a person-to-person relationship using digital technologies. Sharing personal experiences can build relationships and make social business more relatable. However, digital technologies also allow people to create fake news and make it go viral. With the increased use of artificial intelligence within digital platforms, there are and will be many challenges ahead. Hence, online trust is essential, and building a good reputation is crucial for public relations and social business. Editors: Why does your cat have 25,000 followers on Twitter? RL: My cat, Satsugaicat, has more than 3,000 followers on Facebook and over 10,000 post engagements a month. One of the reasons is because I have been sharing cat posts at least once a day for more than ten years. Consistency is key. Editors: Thank you, Robin, for this conversation.

Index

9/11 attacks 164–165 1961 Code of Venice 49 2008 Beijing Olympic Games 72 2010 Shanghai World Expo 73 activism rationale 10, 14–16 advertising 50 aesthetical processes 59 aesthetics 50; cinematic aesthetics 54–56; implications for public relations 59–60; social aesthetics 57–59 Alexander, J. C. 145–146, 153–154 Alibaba 73 Almond-Lippman consensus 171 Analects 25, 28, 30–31, 33–35, 40, 88–89 anti-American sentiment 164–165 anti-humanistic communication 50 Aquinas, St. Thomas 83 Armstrong, M. 173–174 Arthashastra 101 Asoka 101–102, 105–106; caritas (charity, benevolence) 103–104, 108–109; forgiveness 101–102; peace-making 102–103; sanctity of life 104–105 asymmetrical worldviews 98 attention economy 151 Austin, J. L. 145 Australia 168 authoritarianism 64–65 avian flu, Nigeria 131 avoiding facework 66 Ayhan, K. J. 164 Baidu 73 Bains, G. 24, 36 Barbour, K. 149 barnacle strategy 118 Barnum, P. T. 154–156 Batchelor, B. 1–8 Bátora, J. 168

Bauman, Z. 149 Bausch & Lomb 117 beauty, laws of 59 Beers, C. 165 Bernays, E. 3, 1–8, 11–12, 20, 80, 95–96; activism rationale 14–16; consensus rationale 12–13; defined end rationale 10–11; engineering of consent 16 bian 67 Bianchini, F. 191 “big madam” 135–136 “big oga” 135–136 Black, S. 71 Bodart, D. H. 56 Boko Haram, Nigeria 132–133, 137–138 Boorstin, D. J. 145, 154–156 Bourdieu, P. 147 brand positioning 184 breaking the message monopoly 166–169 Brown, R. E. 39–42, 145–146, 150, 184 Buddhism 102, 105–108 Buñuel, L. 54–57 Burke, E. 13 Burson-Marsteller 69, 72 Butler, J. 145 Cajun Navy Relief and Rescue 133–134 capitalism 15–16, 59; public relations capitalism 150; shareholder capitalism 202; stakeholder capitalism 201, 207 caritas (charity, benevolence) 95, 98–101, 107–110; Asoka see Asoka Carnevali, B. 59 Carroll, T. 173 CCSs (crisis communication strategies) 117, 119, 125 centrality 36 Certeris paribus 53 CH (Corpus Hippocraticum) 50–51 Chai, Z. 71

210 Index Chan, C. S. 71, 189 Chang, H. 26, 32 Chen, G. 25, 33–34, 40, 118 cheng (trust, faithfulness) 30 Cheng, I. 119 cheng-xin 30 China: authoritarianism 64–65; caritas (charity, benevolence) 107–109; Confucianism see Confucianism; crisis communication see crisis communication; face (mianzi) 66–67; guanxi 65–66; hang 90; harmony 67–68; humanism 80, 86–91; humanistic turn to PR 74–77; human side of 18; Middle Period China 86–87; modern PR 68–74; moral conduct 89; public diplomacy 168–169; social class structure 87–88; social value of PR 75 China Global PR 69 China International Public Relations Association (CIPRA) 71 China Public Relations Association 70 Chinese Dream 74, 76 Chinese humanism 81, 86–92; comparing to Western humanism 81–82 Chinese media 69 Christian humanitarianism, Code of Athens 49 Christianity, Nigeria 136 Christus, P. 84 cinematic aesthetics, building public image 54–56 CIPRA (China International Public Relations Association) 71 citizen-centricity measurement, place branding 191 Code of Athens 48–49 Code of Conduct 49 collaborative diplomacy 164 collectivism 134 communication 40; crisis communication see crisis communication; entrepreneurs 205 communications scholars, public diplomacy 172–173 comparing, Chinese and Western humanism 81–82 compassion 101–102 competition 12 conflict rationale 10–12 Confucian dynamism 135 Confucianism 1, 24–25, 64, 74–75, 108, 116; authoritarianism 64–65; cheng (trust, faithfulness) 30; guanxi 65–66; harmony

67–68; he (harmony) 26, 34–38; hierarchical structure of universe and human societies 119; li (ritual propriety) 25–26, 31–34, 39; ren (benevolence, humaneness) 25–31, 39–40; wisdom 29–30, 38–43; yi (righteousness) 26, 33; Zhong-shu (golden rule) 28–29, 36, 40–41; Zhong Yong 118–119; Zhong-yong (the doctrine of the mean) 26 Confucius 25, 27, 82, 87, 108; Analects see Analects; de (virtuosity) 27; harmony 35; li (ritual propriety) 33–34; love 27–28; relationships 29 consensus rationale 10, 12–14, 17 Coombs, T. 130, 173 corporate social responsibility (CSR) 203–204 corporations 110 Corpus Hippocraticum (CH) 50–51 counseling management 98 counselor-client relationships 100 covenantal stewardship 102; sanctity of life 104–105 COVID-25 pandemic 157 cow-and goat-sharing/adoption 202 Creation 98 crisis, defined 130 crisis communication 67; China 116–126; Nigeria 130–131, 135–140 crisis information, ethnicity and religion, impact on perception of crisis information 135–137 crisis management, Nigeria 130–131 critics of PR 2 Cronin, A. 150 CSR (corporate social responsibility) 203–204 Cull, N. 162 cultural studies 151 culture: China, crisis communication 116–120; of illusion 157; Nigeria 134–135 Cutlip, S. 10, 12 Dalí, A.-M. 54 Dalí, S. 54, 57 danmu (user-generated comments flying on video screens) 124 Dante (Alighieri) 82 dao 27, 35 Datini, Francesco Di Marco 84–85 Davis, A. 152 Daymon, C. 147 de (virtuosity) 25, 27

Index Debord, G. 156 Declaration on Human Rights, United Nations 48–49 “Decorum” 51–53 decorum 51–52 defined end rationale 9–11 Delury, J. 67 Deng, Xiaoping 68 Dent, M. 146 Dervin, B. 13 De Tocqueville, A. 18–19 differential mode of association (chaxu geju) 65 digital media 207–208 Dinan, W. 11 diplomacy practitioners, breaking the message monopoly 166–169 disaster recovery, Nigeria 131 diversion 117 Divine Comedy (Dante) 82 doing good 201 Dolphin, H. 9 dominating facework 66 doutu (commenters using competing kuso emoji and video in online conversation) 124 dramaturgy 153 dualism 53 Durkheim, É. 146 Ebola crisis (Nigeria) 133, 138–140 ecology 97 Eden-Green, A. 49 edicts, Asoka 103–105 Edward III 83 Edwards, L. 145–148, 153 Ellul, J. 13 Emergency Response Law 72, 122 engineering consent 1–9, 96 engineering of: activism rationale 10, 14–16; conflict rationale 10–12; consensus rationale 10, 12–14; a defined end rationale 9–11 entrepreneurs, communication 205 “The Era of State PR” 73 ethics: aesthetics 58; Code of Athens 48–49 ethnicity, how people perceive crisis information in Nigeria 135–137 Europe, public diplomacy 170 European doctrine of public relations 48–50 European humanism 80–86, 90 Ewen, S. 11 Excellence project 151

211

Fa, H. 102 face (mianzi) 42–43, 66–67 facework 66 Fairchild, C. 151 Fan, R. 30 Fan, Z. 108 Fanés, F. 54–56 fashion 53–54 Fawkes, J. 148 Fearn-Banks, K. 130 “federal character” principle 135 Fei, X. 65 filiality 29 Fink, L. 19 Finkelstein, J. 149–150 Fitch, K. 148 food safety crisis, communication 121 Foreman-Wernet, L. 13 forgiveness 100–102 Four Occupations 90 Franklin, B. 163 French Personalist movement 49 Fulbright, J. W. 175 Fulbright program 167 funding 201 gailou (users generating comments to push up the posts) 124 Gambetti, R. 154 Gang, A. 70 gao guanxi 69 García-Gual, C. 52, 58 gender 145, 147–148 General Motors 96 Ghilardi, L. 191 Gibson, I. 54 GNGOs (government-led NGOs) 73 Goffman, E. 55, 145–146, 148–149 Gokhale, B. 104–105 Golan, G. 173 gongfu (embodiment of abilities) 40 government, crisis communication 120–122 government-led NGOs (GNGOs) 73 Government Public Information Regulation 72 Great Pause 157 Greenblatt, S. 85 green branding 185 green cities 184–185; overlapping ideas with smart cities 189; publications on 186–187 greenness 185 Greenyarn 202

212 Index Grunig, J. E. 3, 9, 38, 48, 71 Grunigian Paradigm 96 Guangzhou Bai-Yunshan Pharmaceutical Factory 69 guanxi 65–66, 69 Gubern, R. 54 guilds, European humanism 85–86 Gullion, E. 162, 166, 175 Guth, D. 97 Haberman, D. 9 habitus 147 Hammond, P., 54 hang, China 90 Hanna, S. 184 Hansen, C. 27 Hao, M. 25 harmony 34–38, 40–42, 67–68 Harvey, D. 191 Hawking, S. 110 he (harmony) 26, 34–38 He, Yang 70–71 Heath, R. 12, 14, 18 Hedges, C. 155 Hill & Knowlton 68–69, 72 Hippocrates 51, 53, 57 Hiuen, T. 102 Hofstede, G. 117, 134, 135 holism 38 Hong Kong, sustainable urban development and place branding 187, 189–190 Hu, J. 72 Hu, Y. 118, 120–121, 123 Huang, Y. H. 67, 117–120 huiguan (clubhouses) 91 human harmony 40 humanism 1–2, 75, 80–81, 133–134; Chinese humanism 81–82, 86–92; European humanism 82–86, 90; mercantile humanism 91–92; Renaissance humanism 85; Western humanism 81–82 humanistic 3 humanistic approach 175 humanistic communication 50 humanistic public relations framework 19–20 humanistic values 75 humanities 3 humanist PR 80 Hung-Baesecke, C.-J. F. 25 Hunt, T. 38

identity issues, for public relations practitioners 146–149 IDP (internally displaced persons) 138 illusion 155–157 inactive publics 97 inclusiveness 98 India: Asoka see Asoka; caritas (charity, benevolence) 108–109 individualism 134 instrumental values 99 integrating facework 66 integration propaganda 13 interconnectedness 109 interdisciplinarity 170 internally displaced persons (IDP) 138 International Code of Ethics see Code of Athens International Public Relations Association (IPRA) 49 international relations, public diplomacy 171–172 Internet, China 73 intersectionality 147 IPRA (International Public Relations Association) 49 Islam, Nigeria 136–137 Jackson, P. 9 James, M. 18 Jansen, S. C. 152 Jia Duo Bao (JDB) 125 jing-quan principle 32–33, 41 Johansson, C. 150 Jonathan, Goodluck 137, 139 Jones, W. H. S. 52 Jung, C. 157 junzi (gentleman) 26, 28, 30, 34–35, 42 Kempe, M. 83 key opinion leaders (KOLs) 125–126 Kieser, A. 86 Kingsnorth, P. 157 KOLs (key opinion leaders) 125–126 Kruckeberg, D. 19, 24, 53 L’Âge d’Or 54, 56–57 Lai, K. 32 Lain, P. 52 Land Without Bread 55–56 language, li (ritual propriety) 31 Lao, Tzu (Lao Tzu) 34, 37, 63, 81, 87–89 Lasch, C. 155 Lasswell, H. 10, 13 laws of beauty 59

Index Lee, I. 10 Lensen, G. 101 L’Etang, J. 39 Leung, C. C. M. 120 Levick & Co. 138 LeVine, R. A. 118 li (ritual propriety) 25–26, 31–34, 39 Li, C. 36, 38 Li, R. 71, 76 Lin, Tsai 108 Lin, Y. T. 43 Lipovetsky, G. 59 Lippmann, W. 1 Liu, C. 25 Liuliu 125 long-term orientation (LTO) 135 love, ren (benevolence, humaneness) 27–28 Low, R. 200; conversation with 201–208 LTO (long-term orientation) 135 Lyu, J. C. 118 Macnamara, J. 17–18 management 96 Marafa, L. M. 189 Marsh, C. 97 Marshall, P. D. 149, 151 Marx, K. 59 masculinity/femininity (MAS) 135 masks 156–157 Matrat, L. 48–49 Maurya, C. 101 Mauryans 100–101; Asoka see Asoka; forgiveness 101–102 McKeon, R. 104 McKevitt, S. 150, 152 media, crisis communication 122–126 Mencius 28–29, 34–35, 82 Meng, Q. 25, 122 Menjant Garotes 54–57 mercantile humanism 91–92 mercantile public relations 81 Merchant Adventurers 86 merchants: China 91; Europe 86 mercy 101–102 Messina, A. 17 Metsys, Q. 84 mianzi (face) 42–43, 66–67 Middle Period China 86–87, 89 Miike, Y. 65 Miller, D. 11 Miss Public Relations (gongguan xiaojie) 69 modern PR: first decade (1980-1989) 68–70; fourth decade (2011-2019)

213

73–74; second decade (1990-1999) 70–71; third decade (2000-2010) 71–73 Modi, Narendra 109 Moloney, K. 150 money, European humanism 84 Moore, H. 15 moral conduct, China 89 Mounier, E. 49 National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA), Nigeria 130, 141 netizen culture 124 netizens 73 new media 124–126 NGOs (non-government organizations) 73 Nigeria 140–141; avian flu 131; background of 132–133; Boko Haram 132, 133, 137–138; challenges for government 140; crisis communication 131; crisis management 130–131; culture 134–135; disaster recovery 131; Ebola crisis 133, 138–140; ethnicity and religion, impact on perception of crisis information 135–137; NEMA (National Emergency Management Agency 130, 141 Nigerian Communications Act (2003) 131 Nigerian Red Cross Act 130 Nigerian Telecommunications Industry Act (2018) 131 Nikam, N. 104 Nisbett, R. E. 38 Nye, J. 171 Olins, W. 168 online publics 73 ostrich policy 120 Pang, A. 118, 120–121, 123 Payne, G. 172 peace-making 102–103 Peng, K. 38 performance 145–146, 149–153, 156 performance society 153–158 performance theory 154 performativity 145–147 persona 151–152, 157 personalism 49 persona studies 151 personhood 110 persuasive sphere 150 Petrarch 82–83 philanthropy 58 physicians 53

214 Index pillar edicts, Asoka 103–104 place brand equity 184 place branding 182–184, 190–191; green/ smart cities 184–187; Hong Kong 187, 189–190 Plato 87 POEs (privately-owned enterprises) 123 Policy Addresses 187 Polo, M. 87 Pope Francis 109 Powell, C. 165 power distance 134 practical-aesthetic sense 58 PRe (public relations of everything) 146, 150, 175 principle of change 38 principle of contradictions 38 principle of relationship 38 privately-owned enterprises (POEs) 123 professional identity 148 professionalism 147 profits, Greenyarn 202–203 promotion 150 promotional culture 149–153 promotional intermediaries 152 propaganda 50, 69, 71, 96 Protagoras 87 PR professionals 71 PRSA (Public Relations Society of America) 25, 97 pseudo-events 145, 154 the public 60 “The Public Be Damned” era 96 public diplomacy 162–166, 173–175; breaking the message monopoly 166–169; scholars 169–173 public goods 17, 203 public image, building with cinematic aesthetics 54–56 public promise 100 public relations capitalism 150 public relations practitioners, identity issues 146–149 Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) 25 publics 97–98, 110 Qing dynasty 102 race 147–148 rationale 8; activism rationale 10, 14–16; conflict rationale 10–12; consensus rationale 12–14; defined end rationale 9–11

rationales, continuing relevance of 16–20 Raucher, A. 8, 16 Red Cross 130 relational diplomacy 165 relationship management 173 relationships 97–98; counselor-client relationships 100; ren (benevolence, humaneness) 29 religion, how people perceive crisis information in Nigeria 135–137 religious identity, Nigeria 136 ren (benevolence, humaneness) 25, 26–31, 39–40; de (virtuosity) 27; as ethical wisdom 29–30; as love 27–28; relationships 29 Renaissance humanism 85 reputation 60, 83, 92, 149, 206, 208; Corpus Hippocraticum (CH) 50–54; guilds 85 reputation management 60, 86 ritualistic communication 39 rituals 156 Roberts, W. R. 163 rock edicts, Asoka 103–104 Rowley, J. 184 Ruder Finn 99 Ru Shang 108 Rwanda 99 Saint Francis of Assisi 83 Salcedo, N. R. 63 sanctity of life, Asoka 104–105 Sanlu melamine crisis (2008) 67, 117–118, 120, 122–123 SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) crisis 118, 122 Saunders, J. 107 Sawyer, Patrick 138–139 Schechner, R. 146, 156 scholars, public diplomacy 169–173 Schulberg, L. 101 Scrovegni, E. 84 Secretum (Petrarch) 82–83 self 149 self-fashioning 85, 89 self-illusion 155 September 17, 2001 164 Serroy, J. 59 Servaes, J. 18 shadow 157 Shanghai World Expo (2010) 73 Shared Values Initiative 165 shareholder capitalism 202

Index Signitzer, B. 173 Simmel, G. 53–54 smart cities 185; overlapping ideas with green cities 189; publications on 188 Smith, S. 12, 14, 16 Smith-Mundt Act 166–167 Snow, N. 172 social aesthetics 57–59 social business 201, 203, 206–207 social capital 206 social class structure, China 87–88 social impact 204–205 socialism 15 social media 207; Chinese crisis communication 124 social movement leaders 14 social order 16–17 social taste 58 SOEs (state-owned enterprises) 118 soft power 171 South Africa, forgiveness 100 Southern Song Dynasty 108 Sproule, J. 11 stakeholder capitalism 201, 207 Standard Oil 15 Starck, K. 19, 24 state-owned enterprises (SOEs) 118 St John, B. 152 Stoker, K. 17 strategic planning (cehua) 70 Sun, S. 89 Surma, A. 147 sustainability 184–185, 201 sustainable urban development, Hong Kong 187, 189–190 Sweden, public diplomacy 169 symmetrical worldviews 98 Syntruna infant milk powder precocious puberty crisis 117 Tackett, N. O. 89 T’ai Tsung 106–107 Tang dynasty 102, 106 Taoism 88 Tencent 73 terminal values 99 theatre of public relations 150 Three Bonds 90 Tiananmen Square 69–70, 75 Tianjin chemical warehouse explosion (2015) 123, 125 Torroella, R. S. 54 Toth, E. L. 16

215

traders, Europe 86 tribal rituals 156 Trujillo, N. 16 trust 206, 208 Tu, W. 26 Turkey, public diplomacy 169 Turner, V. 146 Tutu, D. 100 Twitchett, D. 106 Ubuntuism 100 uncertainty avoidance 135 United Kingdom, public diplomacy 168 United Nations, Declaration on Human Rights 48–49 United States, public diplomacy see public diplomacy United States Information Agency (USIA) 169 United States Information and Educational Act (1948) 166 United States Information Service (USIS) 167 urban areas: greenness 184–185; smart cities 185 USIA (United States Information Agency) 169 USIS (United States Information Service) 167 Valentini, C. 13 values 99 Vanc, A. 173 Vanderbilt, W. H. 96 van Eyck, J. 84 Velten, H. R. 146 Voice of America (VoA) 163 Waddock, S. 14 Wakefield, R. I. 24 Wang, J. 173 Wang, Q. 123 Wang, Y. 125 Wang Lao Ji 125 water 63–64, 74 Watson, T. 49 wealth, China 88, 89 Weibo 125 Weijian, L. 69 Wenger, E. 147 Wernick, A. 149–152 Western humanism 81–82 Whanganui River (New Zealand) 110 Whitehead, S. 146

216 Index Wilberforce, W. 111 Wing-Tsit-Chan 1 wisdom 38–43, 51–52; ren (benevolence, humaneness) 29–30 women, public relations and 148 Woon, E. 120–121, 123 World Trade Organization (WTO) 71 worldviews 97–100, 109–110 WTO (World Trade Organization) 71 Wu, F. 119 wu-wei 88–89 Xi, J. 74, 109 Xinhua News Agency 69 Xu, B. 25 Xunzi 35

yang (the unyielding force) 37, 42, 67 Yang, A. 173 yi (righteousness) 26, 33 yin (the amiable force) 37, 42, 67 yin-yang 38, 42 Yun, S.-H. 173 Yunus, M. 201, 204 Yusufzai, M. 137 Zaharna, R. S. 164–165 Zenker, S. 191 Zhong-shu (golden rule) 28–29, 40–41 Zhong Yong 118, 119 Zhong-yong (the doctrine of the mean) 26, 36, 41 Zhou Dunyi 30 Zhu Xi 26