Ann Wilmer Prof Charles Wellborn told us it was: "codified common courtesy.

." Lebeko "Cassey" Madikgetla A very important question that gets one going back to basics! Within the broader field of communications is the many strands like marketing, advertising, public relations etc. The one is distinguished from the other based on functionality or end goal. Public relations is aimed at maintaining "mutually" beneficial relations with ones stakeholders, with a key word being "relations". It is about communicating messages that concerns themselves with mutual well being of ourselves (organization) and those who matter to us (our publics).
Dan Williams Tell a Story.

Julia Thorne Shaping Stories Skillfully Chrif Ali Najmi tell the other exactly what he really wants to hear. Nancy Nicolelis Influencing public opinion Bob Long Strategically Planned Outreach Paul Chimera Targeted strategic communication Ken Freeze It has been interesting seeing the string of short definitions. Im sure everyone feels their definition is the best definition, and it probably is for them and the work they do. But I wonder if the definitions would have shifted any if the requirement also included that by using the three words, when told to someone outside the PR profession, you needed no further explanation of what PR truly encompassed? Many years ago someone I knew compiled a list of all the things that PR professions did (or could do). The list contained over 600 jobs and skills. Very hard to put into just three words. Robert Fisher Inform, persuade, motivate Wayne Thompson Purposeful storytelling John Howze diplomacy with results David Kowal I'm really impressed by the response this discussion is getting. Most of the threeword definitions you've all come up with are better than the pretentious PRSA definition of public relations. Mindy Mizell Galey Relating to public Darby Duffin Advocate. Inform. Influence. Craig Butterfield Compelling, thorough communication. Barbara Erskine Creating a perception

Guy Versailles, ARP, FSCRP Here in Quebec, our professionnal association , the Socit qubcoise des professionnels en relations publiques, has actually done that at the concluding stage of a positionning excercize we held almost ten years ago. having consider dozens of possible slogans for our association, we finally came up with the following three verbs: COMPRENDRE, COMMUNIQUER, RAPPROCHER which translate as: To UNDERSTAND (the situation, the stakeholders, the issues) To COMMUNICATE(devise adequate strategy and tactics) To BRING CLOSER (the overall objective always being to foster mutual understanding of each party's situation and position) In French, it has a nice ring to it and I still beleive it captures the essence of what professional, ethical PR is about. Chrif Ali Najmi Basicly, to convince, to win roud is an art! A godsend! We were born communicator Or not! The equipment is delivered by school! the good use, will depend on the knowledge of a RP. Sheri Bambrough An organization's personality, identity & rhythm Jeffrey Lamb 1. persuasive, 2. integrated 3.connected Linda Sanders maximizing positive exposure for a product, service or brand Charlie Corr Promotion, branding, newsworthiness Roe Murphy Spreading the Word Lisa Woolery, MA, APR Telling our story Jossy Nkwocha, FNIPR Building, managing relationships. Tracie Donahue-Hovey Transparent, Strategic Communication John Howze creating synergy John Howze buying power, selling you John Howze Stairway to Heaven Barbara Erskine Creating a perception Contacto Translations Interesting discussion. I would say most of the above comments are good definitions of public relations in three words or less. It's not easy to define a so complex

profession in only three words. But it is also very important to explore how new tools such as social media and content marketing are changing how we define this profession in 2013. Dr. Christoph Glauser publish or perrish Monica Wroblewski Perception management Deborah Mower Ask yourself what bad PR is and then it's quite easy to understand. We always hear , "they got some bad PR" and most people get that! Beth Dempsey Persuading influential audiences Kemal Saiki Agrees with all offerings but isn't there a bit of angelism here? What about the dark side of PR such as spin, propaganda and "engineering of consent" dixit Edward Bernays, the "father of Public Relations"? Has this really disappeared, not practiced anymore on K Street? Am neither cynical nor jaded, just trying to be the proverbial agent provocateur... Maureen A. Ryan Promoting and protecting. Linda Draskic Perak getting and keeping attention James G. Marzano, ABC One word: POSITIONING David Rosen Flacking, spinning, lying. Just kidding. Marilena P. smile, understand, execute John O'Connell What it is not: Advertising Gina Cuclis Communicating the why. Jerome Cleary better than advertising Wesley "Pat" Pattillo Fostering mutual understanding. Chilton G. Goebel Jr. Public Relations can not be defined in three words. We do not need a tag line. During the first decade of the 20th century, Ivy Lee defined public relations: Public relations means the actual relationship of the company to the people and that relationship involves more than talk. The company must act by performing good deeds Today, the Public Relations Society of America defines public relations as:

 A strategic communication process that builds mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and their publics. Robert Fenner Sophistry for money :-) Cyndi Bloom Know my company Finkie Zuma "Messaging,Messaging,Messaging"... to your business-internal client, to your broader audience-market via media, to your stakeholders-accountability...

Despre viitorul PR si new media

The New Look of Public Relations A Dissenting View [by Richard Edelman]
2013-05-01 by EPR Contributor 30 22 520 0 9

Editors note: The following piece written by Edelman PR CEO, Richard Edelman, was first published April 30th via Richards blog. With his firms permission, we republish it here as a contributory, industry supportive piece. First PUBLISHED APRIL 30, 2013

Mondays New York Times ran an article by Stuart Elliott on the rebranding of our competitor, Fleishman-Hillard (FH). The firm will be the most complete communications company in the world channel agnostic across paid, owned, earned and shared media, according to agency CEO Dave Senay. His is a bold vision, to partner with brands and to serve consumers with content that is alluring and worthy of sharing. The firm is hiring from outside of the PR field, from ad agencies, consultancies and brand identity firms. It sounds to me like the creation of a marketing services company within a single corporate entity. I agree with Senays assessment of the convergence of media. I also agree with his recruitment of non-traditional talent. Where we part company is his strategy for becoming a one-stop shop that is as much an ad agency as PR firm. At Edelman, we are going to evolve and expand the remit of the public relations business. The world is moving in our direction. We are not selling to an audience; we are trying to build relationships across the community of stakeholders. The horizontal, peer-to-peer, conversation is supplanting the top-down, controlled messaging that is the essence of advertising. The consumer is now also an employee, a shareholder, a member of an NGO, a community activist and a passionate user of products willing to advise on design. PR is more than a set of tactics or tools. Its a mindset; the ideas that come from PR people are different than those that come from advertising people. Both are engaged in storytelling, but the PR idea stimulates discussion and has the potential to play out over years. A PR idea has to start with relevancy and newsworthiness. We are going to take full advantage of the inherent advantages of PR, which are credibility, speed, two-way interaction and continuous story creation. In the end, the consumer may not care about the source of the content, but quality counts. We see massive white space opportunities with media, squeezed by declining print circulation and diminished digital advertising rates. We can accelerate promising content through promoted tweets and sponsored lists that go viral. We are going to reinvent the advertorial in cooperation with mainstream media. We will propose topics for special reports financed by a sponsor but

with editorial autonomy. We will create a place for intelligent debate, from salon dinners to Twitter newsfeeds and industry conferences. It is public relations that is best poised to serve clients in a dynamic marketplace that can be disrupted by a poor customer experience well catalogued in social media. We listen, we recommend policy change, we announce the new approach giving due credit to the aggrieved customer who pointed out the problem. We see the potential of expanding into new product development, utilizing the community. Our client Adobe uses Facebook (image above) and its fans to beta test its products while in the development phase, then gives credit to members for useful adjustments. For this program we developed Adobes Create Manifesto, which helped frame advertising and overall communications. We are playing a broader role, but we have to focus in our area of comparable advantage. Clients want specialist expertise and the opportunity to choose best in class partners. We are happy to work with advertising agencies, CRM and media buying firms for the betterment of clients. Our industry has grown more slowly than advertising and much slower than digital in the past year. We have to re-frame our argument. Some will opt for the FH play of becoming a fullservice provider. Others, like Edelman, will expand the definition of PR. Richard Edelman is president and CEO.
Comments:

Chris Goddard says: 2013-05-05 at 3:00 pm To me not sure it makes sense to be all things to all people it is about choosing a focus and executing particularly well. Im with Richard on this one.

Nicole Shore says: 2013-05-07 at 3:12 pm Former Edelman staffer here. I agree. I am not sure what the size of those client teams will look like and how they will operate efficiently and decisively. Perhaps in line with what Richard says, I also think the idea of it mistakenly minimizes the role that PR plays. I find that many clients at first are not aware that PR looks at their entire business, that it isnt the single tactic of publicity, while advertising, a tweet, etc. is a slice or a moment in a clients lifecycle.

 Giselle Bisson says: 2013-05-04 at 4:30 pm Its fascinating to see the shakeup that social media is creating in PR and marketing social media IS the media. Its a new, conversational, collective way of creating news and sharing it in a two way, globally broadcast conversation that blasts our wirelessly to mobile devices. How agencies and marketers respond to that reflects how we tell stories best. Verbally, visually or virally, every way is ok as long as the message gets out and customers engage.

Paul DelColle says: 2013-05-04 at 4:09 pm Saw this column and had reservations about F-Hs strategy. Working across paid, owned, earned and shared media would be an invitation to blur them and thus imply that they have equal standing. Do they? I would like to think not, else we are in a totally pay-for-play universe where PR and the independent validation that it provides does not really exist anymore. Not sure if this serves the client well, either. Glad to be proven wrong. Just saying.

De pe linkedin:

Richard Edelman's dissenting view of the future of PR

Edelman responds to FleishmanHillard's rebranding as a combined marketing-services company across all channels (including advertising) by charting a very different course for the world's largest independently owned PR company. I prefer Edelman's vision to FH's. Which do you think is the better future direction for PR?

The New Look of Public Relations A Dissenting View [by Richard Edelman] everything-pr.com
Mondays New York Times ran an article by Stuart Elliott on the rebranding of our competitor, Fleishman-Hillard (FH). The firm will be the most complete communications company in the world channel agnostic across paid, owned, earned and shared media, according to agency

CEO Dave Senay. His is a bold vision, to partner with brands and to serve consumers with content that is alluring and worthy
8 days ago

Follow Deanne Deanne Hollis-DeGrandpre I agree with you, Steven. In fact, I gave this so much thought I was compelled to write a response from a practitioner's perspective vs. the mega-PR agency leaders. I would be interesting to know your thoughts: http://bit.ly/12mYFTm
1 day ago Like

Follow Steven Steven Spenser I am not as pessimistic about PR's future as you are, Deanne. Many tens of millions of target-audience consumers do not use social media. While I agree that the Web and social media have ushered in a new era of disintermediation, PR has never been solely about media relations and publicity. Organizations will always need trained communicators to present their stories, which is why PR will survive for at least our lifetimes. FH sounds as if they're transitioning from a PR agency into a full-service *marketing* firm. The marketing discipline is experiencing rapid change, but public relations has merely added a few new (technological) arrows to its promotional quiver. New channels of communication may have been developed, offering much wider opportunities to reach consumers and other target audiences, but the basic premise--and practice--of PR remains unchanged. Marketing is concerned with Product, Price, Place, Process, Physical Presence (Evidence), People and Promotion. The latter is the only overlap with PR, but is such a large one (based on similar techniques) that it has led people to conflate marketing with PR. This conflation is all the more tenacious because the two disciplines are both based on research, measurement, evaluation and plans that contain objectives, strategies and tactics. But the ultimate differential is that every marketing objective is designed to get consumers to buy a good or service, whereas an ideal PR objective specifies desired outcomes within target

publics, such as increased knowledge and/or awareness, or changed opinions, attitudes and behavior. Those are not something marketing or advertising can do.
1 day ago Like

Follow Eva Eva Maclaine What a very interesting post, Stephen. Thanks for starting it here. Its an old discussion, which I remember from way back when but none the less important today. In some ways its a no-brainer. Advertising, PR, direct mail, marketing are all closely inter-related and, of course, have to work together. It has always amused me that this ever needs to be explained to clients, some of whom suppose that we can all work in our own little silos with no reference to each other. And, indeed, occasionally when I have been working with SMEs or preparing strategies for large governmental departments my knowledge of other disciplines such as marketing and advertising has been invaluable and I have included these in my overall strategy. In addition to this we are now often fighting for the same slice of the cake with many others and here I am thinking of accountants, management consultants, lawyers, all clamouring for their share. So cooperation is essential. The question is do we get into bed together? As you so rightly say, Stephen, PR is about so much more than media relations. Yet, too often when advertising companies stray into PR they shove some ex-journalists into a newly-created PR department so that when one of their highly profitable advertising clients expresses a desire for media coverage they can service it all in-house. Unfortunately PR then becomes a poor cousin of advertising. The latter pulls in millions in revenue. PR accounts are usually worth a fraction. The nub of the article lies in the statement highlighted by Deanne: the agency last year placed more than $1.2 billion worth of ads in paid media, compared with $250 million in 2011. And what was their PR worth, I wonder? It is worth noting that in the NYT this article appeared in the business section under Advertising. My point precisely. We are subsumed into advertising. The argument is a financial one. Yet PR is hugely important. Whilst I dont quite agree with you Stephen that advertising cannot change behaviour (think drink/drive or anti-smoking campaigns in the UK), PR is far broader and deeper. At its best advertising takes a simple message and hammers it home. PR can engage on several levels at once. As Edelman says we build relationships across the communities of stakeholders.

I am not sure that PR needs to expand its remit, so much as explain its value and demand its rightful place in business. And a one-stop shop will not help us do so.
21 hours ago Like

Follow David David Rosen Richard, I subscribe wholeheartedly to your view, which, as always, is well put. I say three cheers for Richard Edelman. Public relations is not marketing, even though the latter has largely subsumed the former in most sectors. Fleishman-Hilliards throwing in the towel and fusing advertising and PR is the latest and perhaps greatest example. A big mistake in my opinion, but what do I know. Lets hope Edelman is right, and the tide is moving in our direction. If it is, it's moving very slowly. If it doesn't pick up speed, we may be washed away. How's that for a gloomy Saturday morning thought.
20 hours ago Like

Follow Deanne Deanne Hollis-DeGrandpre I agree with you, Steven, regarding PR's continued value and the lack of need for social media in some arenas. I came at the point from the technology-oriented PR world. I believe there will always be a need for publicists and skilled PR practitioners in big business, perhaps even more so on the corporate side, but in my experience PR practitioners were always siloed, as Jennifer pointed out. Asked for our input on marketing matters, but never seen as marketers. Reigniting the image of PR's value would be fantastic; I just don't know how possible that is. From my exposure, people have set minds about PR and its purpose. Today, with limited budgets, the last place money is going is into a PR budget. Why should it when all of the critical media are gone? Again, this is from my point of view in my sector. If I couldn't do all the other functions outside of PR, I would make half my income. I did an interesting exercise a couple of weeks ago. I went to the PRSA site and looked at its membership. Thinking, perhaps, the loss of jobs was primarily limited to the Tech sector. What I found was a ghost town compared to what it used to be. The field with the most entries next to

healthcare/medical (28) was technology...a whopping 25. Long ago, you had to have a primary membership in order to join other chapters. If I am spending money on a membership, I want to be listed. In fact, if I am considering joining, the first thing I will do is look at who are members already. It states 20,000 members, but, I don't know about that. I don't see it. Here's a sample: consumer products (13), entertainment (0), gov't (3), pharmaceuticals (3), sports/leisure (3), travel/tourism (10)...and some of those overlap in specialties. If we don't do something to save and reignite our industry, we'll disappear. Reminds me of clock makers, a dying art.

Follow David David Rosen Yeah, guys who make kuku clocks, perhaps, with little birds that that pop up every hour and read a press release. Hah-hah. But it's no laughing matter, Deanne. You're right.