Search

In spite of the macro-economic impact of the so-called ‘sharing economy’ there is a nearly complete dearth of contributions from the communication academy to its discourse. More attention is overdue, particularly for the conceptual pressure the ‘sharing economy’ is exerting on the public relations function. The authors propose a reconceptualization of public relations by identifying the constitutive aspects of the sharing economy and bringing together the explanatory concepts ‘circuits of commerce’ and ‘viable matches’ from economic sociology and communicative constitution of organizations theory to develop the notions of ‘deliberate disintermediation’ and ‘circuits of communication’ in public relations. The contention is that by doing this, communicative acts not only contribute meaning in the sharing economy, but have economic value. Furthermore, the sharing economy poses challenges to the traditional forms of organizing public relations functions, but offers opportunities to realize different potential when public relations facilitates circuits of communication and becomes a meta-communicative competence embedded within the organization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The notion of public relations contributing to the fabric of society is heavily contested in the public sphere and under-researched by the academy. The authors of this paper propose that the study of the relevance of public relations to society can be enlightened by turning to economics. Using information asymmetry as a framework, the argument is that public relations can be analyzed as a social institution that both helps to mitigate market imperfections and consequently increases the efficiency with which society’s resources are allocated as well as the chances for more market participants to derive value out of economic transactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights: [•] The framework of expert systems and institutional logics is used to analyze the historical development of public relations. [•] Public relations in Asia-Pacific emerged as part of nation building and later grew in reaction to economic globalization. [•] The governance sphere dominates in most Asian societies while the corporate sphere is gaining importance. [•] An indigenous Asian model of public relations conceptualizes both spheres and their shifting relationships. [•] Proposals for a new approach to conceptualizing a model of Asian public relations are made. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Highlights: [•] Global models in the theory and practice of public relations tend toward hegemony and simplification. [•] The UK and Singapore are exemplars where hegemony has arguably succeeded and where it needs to be resisted, respectively. [•] Theoretical diversity is required to reflect the complexity of globalization. [•] Epistemological and practical subsidiarity can and should lead the way. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Big data in public relations is a hegemonic development. • It reinforces, unquestioned, the current institutional logics of the three main spheres of society: corporate, governance and civic. • The economic notion of externalities conceptualizes the main issue: the loss of agency over personal data. • The data supplier is disempowered and uncompensated for this loss of agency. • A debate is required which poses ethical and potential economic redress for those yielding their data. Over the last two decades it has been argued that public relations contributes to hegemony by corporate organizations over stakeholder groups who have less power and resources. In its original formulation, the concept of hegemony had two defining features: firstly, it was conceived of as a society-wide, macroscopic formation and second as self-reinforcing i.e. self-replicating. This article argues that the rise of big-data in public relations is a hegemonic development that further re-enforces the current institutional logics and power in the three main spheres of society: corporate, governance and civic. Using the economic notion of externalities, the authors argue that loss of agency over personal data is the unpriced, unrecognized externality that drives the big-data market. This externality is dependent on those who are the losers of agency not having the requisite information, power or resources to negotiate alternatives that might re-dress the balance. As users and proponents of the use of big data, the public relations profession has a number of key questions to answer if it is not to re-inforce arguments that it is a hegemonizing force in organizations and society. Normal economic remedies to address externalities are not adequate to a case that is both ethical as well as economic in nature. The article therefore concludes with five arguments that the public relations profession should debate to provide leadership within organisations and society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]