Social media: The implications for the public relations practice

Guest speaker Darren Wilcox delivered a refreshing and highly engaging lecture on social media as a strategic communication channel, as well as touching on other areas. We were presented with the opportunity to ‘tweet’ our notes along with the hashtag #smthefuture creating an interactive experience that was very enjoyable. In addition, it demonstrated how effective social media is as a communicative platform and reinforced its importance within the public relations (PR) industry.

Every aspect of how we exchange information is feeling the impact of the technological revolution (Brown, 2009).

Today, anyone with access to a computer, an Internet connection and basic literacy can make his or her voice heard to a global audience (Phillips and Young, 2009). Brown (2009) advocates, “We are seeing the democratisation of the means production, distribution and exchange”, through the rise in user-generated content, as social networks are transformed into vast public spaces and word of mouth drives influence. Web 2.0 has made our conversations increasingly digital. This has profound consequences for the PR industry.

More than four out of five marketing and PR bosses plan to increase their investment in social media during the next year (PR Week, 2010). This transition shows that PR now considers social media an important medium for communication. However, does the industry understand how use to this new medium successfully?

Social media tools such as blogs, YouTube, Flickr, Twitter and Facebook allow the average person to create content that can be shared with a worldwide audience (Lewis, 2010). The use of social media Web sites has increased exponentially, to the point where Facebook.com has in excess of 350 million active users (Econsultancy, 2010). According to Grunig (2009), these new media have the potential to make the PR profession more global, strategic, two-way and socially responsible.

Sheldrake (2008) argues that the social web has taken us back to the original definition of PR; “the building of relationships and the management of communication between organisations and its publics” (Thomsen, 1996). This can be argued because social media provides unique opportunities for PR professionals to engage actively and directly with consumers (Clapperton, 2009). Furthermore, it represents a powerful, and additional, channel to first listen to publics, and in turn, build two-way paths of conversations with them (Sheldrake, 2008). Hence, social media fits coherently into Grunig and Hunt’s model for two-way symmetrical communication (1984).

Facebook is the most recognised social media service (Vorvoreanu, 2009). It is a micro-website that allows people to exchange interactive, user-submitted content among a network of friends through personal profiles and comment discussion lists (Phillips and Young, 2009). The Web site introduced Facebook pages in 2006; “distinct, customised profiles designed for businesses, brands, celebrities and more to represent themselves on Facebook” (Pearlman, 2008). This created a direct, innovative platform where brands can generate and respond to content in a personal manner (Scott, 2010). Moreover, a user must tick the ‘like’ box to be able to access a Facebook fan page. This automatically means “you are not spamming people with information that they are forced to read” (Robertson 2008, cited Scott, 2010). However, companies must be mindful of Facebook culture, and their communication with the public must conform to Facebook social norms (Vorvoreanu, 2009).

Organisations shouldn’t be on Facebook just for the sake of it, as there will be no direction or consistency in their existence. PR practitioners must formulate a specific strategy before ‘jumping on the bandwagon’ and creating a Facebook page. This notion is echoed by Richards (Econsultancy, 2010), who argues that putting a page up onto Facebook, with no coherent social media strategy, is unlikely to do anything for an organisation. Regularity is also seen as an important factor whilst using Facebook as a communicative tool. If an organisation is on Facebook, but they aren’t updating their page frequently, this may damage reputation.

For an organisation to be seen positively within the online world, PR practitioners should facilitate social activity through the use of interactive content such as mobile applications, games and events. This is reiterated by Kent and Taylor (1998) who believe both organisation and public should contribute equally and with the aim to build relationships.

The Smirnoff Nightlife Exchange Project is a great example of an organisation that utilised Facebook to create a social community which appealed to a mass audience. The social media campaign used a voting system that united people and made users interact with one and other. Not only did Smirnoff put on a fantastic nightlife experience, they also took the time to interact and create a more competitive atmosphere. Thus, social media campaigns have the potential to positively engage consumers and consequently, enhance organisational perception on a large scale.

However, numerous practitioners remain rooted in the traditional paradigm of PR, in which cognitions, attitudes and behaviours of publics are influenced through asymmetrical communication (Grunig, 2009).

"Many practitioners are using new media in the same ways they used old; as a means of dumping messages on the general population rather than as a strategic means of interacting with publics and bringing information from the environment into organizational decision-making" (Grunig, 2009).

Facebook founder and CEO, Mark Zuckerberg (2006, cited Brown, 2008) reiterates Grunig’s viewpoint saying, “for the last hundred years media has been pushed out to people, but now communications professionals are going to be a part of the conversation and they must do this by using the social graph in the same way our users do”. Thus, social media has the potential to revolutionise PR but only if a paradigm shift occurs in the mind of practitioners (Grunig, 2009).

In conclusion, social media holds the potential to make PR more symmetrical. Thanks to Web 2.0, there is now space for PR practitioners to engage and in turn, influence consumers in a way that is personal and authentic. However, communications professionals must be wary of the strong cultural values that lie within social media. Messages should not be invasive or ultra-frequent to the point of annoyance. Inside the social web, PR campaigns should seek to facilitate social experience by creating information, events or products that are desirable. This will help to stimulate brand loyalty, awareness and reputation – assets that are highly attractive to an organisation.

Public spheres and activism inside the online world

This reflective blog post will outline and analyse the concept of a public sphere, contextualising it in relation to the digital world. An example of contemporary activism will be provided to identify and externalise the existence of online public spheres and the impact they are having on the modern world.

The German social theorist Jurgen Habermas founded the idea of a public sphere in 1962. His work focuses on the “literate bourgeois public” and defines the public sphere as a space which gives voice to those who were previously not included in issues of governance (Habermas, 1989). The discussion-based concept is often mediated and includes open debate with the intention of changing policy. However, critiques point out that Habermas’s ideology is restricted in terms of class and gender, only middle class men could participate (Fraser, 1992 cited Poor, 2005). This is somewhat ironic as the purpose of a public sphere is to be democratic, not exclusive. Subsequently, the concept developed into accounting for the “public at large” which can act as critical counterbalance to the state (Jary and Jary, 2000).

Media content is becoming increasingly biased and controlled as news corporations become more dominant and authoritative. Rupert Murdoch’s controversial merge with BSkyB will further decrease market competition and add to a divide of power. The public is regarded “not as democratic citizens but simply as a mass of consumers” (McNair, 2006). Therefore, implications for democracy of this concentrated, conglomerated and hyper-commercialised media are entirely negative. As a result, “The public sphere has become anarchistic, vulnerable to conversions and communication disturbances” (Eriksen and Fossum 2000, p.189).

With regards to public relations (PR), Habermas (1989) argues that the practice “invades the process of ‘public opinion’ by systematically creating news events or exploiting events that attract attention”. We can say PR has the ability to set agenda and thus intervene, disrupting the bottom-up flow from citizens to those in power.

The offline public sphere remains gloomy and distant from its ideology. The UK’s so-called ‘Big Society’ lacks commitment and can be seen merely as a false act of corporate social responsibility, a delusive tactic to attract conservative votes. We are currently living in an information environment dictated by the elite. Our government likes telling our population what is ‘right’, but without democratic consultation. However, does the Internet change prospects for the public sphere? Are the ideals of democratic participation within reach as communication becomes more inclusive and less controlled?

The rapid development of Internet technology has made the public sphere more expansive, to the point where it can act more effectively. The rise of Web 2.0 has seen the fall of media gatekeepers, decentralising the information available. Furthermore, it has made communication instantaneous, globalised and accessible. Thus, the online world holds great potential for capacitating democracy, due to its participatory nature.

The direct connection between the Internet and the public sphere is that both hold the capacity to connect the previously unconnected, so ideas may be discussed to reach new understandings, often involving democracy (Poor, 2005). Dahlberg (2001) believes the Internet has formed an extension of the public sphere of rational-critical citizen discourse-discourse autonomous from state and corporate power through which public opinion may be formed that can hold official decision makers accountable.

Information regarding matters of importance such as public affairs can be easily stored online, making it accessible to a global audience. This entitles our population to a complete understanding of subjects that have previously been blurred by media conglomerates. Thus, the general public can become more informed and in turn, participate in discourse. Online space such as discussion forums, blogs and social media has triggered autonomous communication that is self-regulated. Our collective ability to share information has been drastically empowered through the development of interactive media platforms. Moreover, the Internet “can augment avenues for personal expression and promote citizen activity” (Papachrissi, 2002). However, individual opinion is of minimal relevance to a public sphere. For opinion to be democratic, it must be united with others and debated in a way that is fully interactive (Rafaeli, 1988).

One can agree the Internet facilitates democracy and holds the potential for the existence and extension of public spheres. For example, Slashdot is a web-based bulletin board which meets the criteria detailed by Poor (2005) for an online public sphere. It has several mechanisms promoting democracy such as allowing users to filter content and the ability to judge comments (ideas) on their own merit.

The UK’s public sector is currently witnessing an array of cuts in light of its unstable economic climate. This has triggered the birth of UK Uncut, a contemporary activist group and online public sphere that was brought about by a trend on Twitter. The phrase “social media for social change” is becoming increasingly realistic as the group gather mass support and a frequent supply of media coverage.
UK Uncut predominantly rebels against large corporations who don’t fully comply with tax laws and often give payments which are hugely below requirements. For example, Barclays paid the UK treasury £113 million in 2009, only 1 per cent of its profits (Treanor, 2011).

Video: A new age of protest: UK Uncut in their own words.



As detailed by Joyce (2010), UK Uncut is embarking into a space of ‘Meta-Activism’, “the practice of using digital technology for political and social change”. The movement has been driven by a consensus of ideology and the effectiveness of the Internet as a foundation for action.

PR professionals should monitor the public environment to identify and enhance strategic opportunities. Campaigns that have emotional meaning at their forefront are often highly successful. Obama’s “Vote for Change” campaign is a fantastic example whereby a public issue has been exploited to gain mass support. Public spheres are harnessing the Internet to voice opinion and gather strong support. Therefore, PR practitioners must understand this shift of influence and always consider public trends during the preliminary stages of a campaign strategy. A message which engages consensus has the potential to gain significant following and thus, attract brand loyalty and enhance reputation.

In conclusion, public spheres are becoming increasingly more influential, thanks to a rise in Internet use and understanding. Publics are able to voice consensus through various forms of digital platforms, reaching out to a global audience immediately. I believe the Internet is most effective as an extension to the public sphere; providing accessible information, space for mass participatory debate and a network for efficient organisation. Activist groups such as UK Uncut need to demonstrate consistency and relentlessness in the fight for democracy.

Viral Marketing

The Internet is a physical and electronic network. It is also a network on a much more human scale (Phillips and Young, 2009).

It was the reading based on viral public relations (PR) which caught my eye this week, slightly off topic from the lectures but an eye-opener nonetheless. I have always been intrigued as to what makes something go viral online and if there are specific criteria or techniques which can be followed. Thus, this post will firstly define and explain the term ‘viral marketing’ and secondly, contextualise it into the online communications practice, providing relevant examples of choice.

Viral marketing is a technique whereby information about a product is passed electronically from one Internet user to another (Oxford Dictionary, 2010). Viral campaigns are stemmed through ‘word-of-mouth’ or more appropriately ‘word-of-mouse’, credibility that links directly to the origins and existence of PR.

However, from carrying out wider research, I believe the word ‘viral’ is not most appropriate for defining the concept. Instead, we can describe the idea as a memes - a cultural unit, often a video, an image or a story that spreads rapidly across the web, passed mainly from person to person (Brown, 2009). The content is usually based around humour, rumour or insight. Interestingly, the term was originally coined to describe how Darwinian principles could explain the spread of ideas and cultural phenomena. Dawkins (2006) argued that memes propagate themselves in societies in a way that is similar to the behaviour of a gene or virus.

Memes depend on voluntary action, in the sense that people must find something either; interesting, entertaining or shocking enough for them to pass it on to others through social media, email, blogs and so on (Horton, 2002). In any event, the meme peters, but if successful, it reaches thousands if not millions of people.

Thanks the introduction of social media, sharing has become incredibly easy, often at the click of a button. For communications professionals, it is this instantaneous nature that is most attractive. If and when an idea takes off, it can propel a company or brand into never seen before fame and fortune, for free! The challenge is for marketers and PR practitioners to harness the amazing power of a meme. There are people who preach about ‘viral’ campaigns and agencies that even specialise in the area. However, the reality is most organisations that set out to go viral, fail. The few that succeed can be described as “happy accidents” due to their unpredictable nature.

A meme includes randomness. Its success cannot be predicted and neither can whom it goes out to (Horton, 2002). I believe it is a mistake to enter into a campaign with viral marketing as the central feature. That is not to say that it is impossible to deliver, but exceptionally difficult. A PR campaign’s duty is to deliver return on investment, this must be guaranteed. To imply that a piece of material or video clip will achieve viral status at the outset of a campaign is similar to guaranteeing that the campaign will be of national award-winning quality before ideas have even been brainstormed (Brown, 2009).

The ideas espoused by Malcolm Gladwell (2000) in his book The Tipping Point are interesting to say the least. Some people are ‘hubs’, they are well connected. On the other hand, some people are influencers (respected bloggers, journalists, key figures). Therefore, to spread an idea, one that is ‘sticky’, PR practitioners must target the 'influencers', who are gatekeepers to the mass market. However, the content must be appropriate and relevant to the influencer. It is a PR practitioner’s job to get the content published, classic case of media relations.

A ‘viral’ identified:

Incredibly, if you chuck a Mentos sweet into a bottle of Diet Coke, you get a ‘marketing’ explosion. Scientifically, the mint/cola combination triggers a geyser that sprays ten feet or more. The phenomenon was popularised in video experiments produced by Fritz Grobe and Stephen Voltz on their eepybird Web site. The initial ‘hype’, stimulated by online interest, led to a final creation by the pair titled “What happens you combine 200 litres of Diet Coke and over 500 Mentos mints?” Web audiences were mesmerised by the result, causing a classic viral sensation. In a mere 3 weeks, four million people viewed the video and hundreds of bloggers had written about it. The footage also attracted a wealth of media attention with Grobe and Volz appearing on Late Night with David Letterman and The Today Show.



The brand exposure for Mentos was astronomical and even more so considering there was no cost involved. The price tag to get results of this scale from traditional marketing and PR might have accumulated to tens, if not hundreds of million dollars (Scott, 2010).

Things for communications professionals to consider when devising a campaign which aims to go viral:

- Quirkiness: People like things that are different and slightly offbeat. For an idea to be meme, it must turn heads and attract attention on a mass scale.
- Humour: Ideas that make people laugh are those to be treasured. They have the ability to spread like wildfire, through email and social media as well as many other digital platforms.
- The shock factor: As humans, we are forever demanding substance that goes beyond what we have witnessed before. An idea that is truly shocking is one that millions will want to be a part of.
- Home made: It is often the natural, low budget work that becomes most popular. Authenticity should be at the core of an idea if it is to become viral.

In conclusion, memes or ‘viral marketing’ should be dealt with a degree of scepticism and taken with a pinch of salt. Digital PR specialists will often be asked by clients to assist them with online viral marketing and whilst we cannot promise to deliver memes as part of a PR campaign, we should be able to recognise them and to facilitate their development. However, one must always bear in mind that like the Mentos/Coca Cola example, something may go viral that an organisation didn’t start and it may show products in a positive or negative light. Take United Airlines for example. No thanks to the ‘viral effect’, they are now known as the airline that breaks guitars. Thus, a meme can be detrimental as well as positive for organisational reputation.