Public Relations Review 33 (2007) 96–98

Exploring the development of an organizationalapproach to media relationships

Scott E. Desiere a, Bey-Ling Sha b,∗a Cassel Communications, San Diego, CA

b School of Communication, San Diego State University, 5500 Campanile Dr. San Diego, CA 92182-4561, USA

Received 17 July 2006; received in revised form 30 October 2006; accepted 27 November 2006

Abstract

Using semi-structured, qualitative interviews with practitioners, this study explored an organizational approach to media relations.Interviewees provided insight as to how organizations and their media relations practitioners integrated principles of excellent publicrelations and principles of relationship management with principles of traditional practitioner–journalist relationships. Resultsindicated that the practice of media relations can be viewed as a theory-based organizational commitment at the meso-level, and notmerely as an atheoretical practitioner skill at the micro-level.© 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Media relations; Relationship principles; Excellence in public relations; Relational outcomes

1. Introduction

Although media relations makes up the core of the public relations profession and most public relations campaignscannot be waged successfully without media relations (Grabowski, 1992), the organization–media relationship remainsa largely understudied aspect of our field (Grunig, Grunig, & Dozier, 2002; Mateas, 2001). When media relations havebeen studied, in both academic research and trade literature, the focus has been on individual practitioners, and not orga-nizations as a whole, with most emphasis being placed on the tactics public relations practitioners should use to securefavorable media placements on behalf of their organization (Cutlip, Center, & Broom, 2006; Delfin, 1983; Grabowski,1992; Howard, 2004; Jo & Kim, 2004; Kosmicki & Bona, 1996; Marconi, 2004; Schenkler & Herrling, 2004; Shin& Cameron, 2003; Wielgos, 1990). Also, while researchers have thoroughly examined practitioner–journalist rela-tionships (Aronoff, 1976; Cancel, Cameron, Sallot, & Mitrook, 1997; Jo & Kim, 2004; Lee & Solomon, 1990;Ryan & Martinson, 1984, 1988; Shin & Cameron, 2003), few if any have developed a theoretical approach tothe organization–media relationship, one that goes beyond the practitioner–journalist relationship to analyze mediarelations at the organizational level.

In this study, we shift the focus away from a micro-level analysis of relationships between an organization’spractitioners and the journalists with whom they interact, and onto a meso-level consideration of the single exist-ing relationship between a given organization and the media that cover it, which we refer to in this study as theorganization–media relationship.

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 619 594 0641.E-mail address: bsha@mail.sdsu.edu (B.-L. Sha).

0363-8111/$ – see front matter © 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2006.11.019

S.E. Desiere, B.-L. Sha / Public Relations Review 33 (2007) 96–98 97

2. Method

For this exploratory study, we conducted six semi-structured qualitative interviews with practitioners work-ing in government offices, university settings, and private sector businesses. We explored principles of effectiveorganization–media relationships, whether these reflected any characteristics of public relations excellence (cf. Gruniget al., 2002), and relational outcomes.

3. Findings and discussion

3.1. Relationship principles

The following five general principles, all imperative to building practitioner–journalist relationships at the individuallevel (cf. Battenberg, 2002; Delfin, 1983; Grabowski, 1992; Howard, 2001; Wielgos, 1990), were found to also beapplicable to the development of media relations at the organizational level: (1) honesty and openness, (2) accuracy,(3) responsiveness and timeliness, (4) reliability and consistency, and (5) preparedness. Perhaps no trait was deemedmore important than honesty. As one practitioner noted, “There is a total honesty, number one. We don’t hide thingsfrom the media”. Another practitioner echoed the sentiment: “Basically, as an organization you need to be honest withthe media. You don’t lie to them”.

3.2. Dominant coalition involvement

Findings indicated that to build media relations at the meso-level, an organization must adhere to some princi-ples of excellence. In particular, practitioners repeatedly emphasized that the media relations department must havethe support and involvement of senior level executives – the dominant coalition (Grunig et al., 2002) – in buildingorganization–media relationships. One participant said, “I’m very fortunate in the sense [that] the people who I reportto respect what I do and kind of understand what I do. . . . So I have a very good relationship with my presidentand CEO.” Another practitioner said, “Very fortunately, I have a president who is not shy of the media and will talkto them any time they want.” A third interviewee, summing up the dominant coalition’s influence, said, “. . . it addsvaluable credibility. . . . To see the [organization’s] director or other high-level officials quoted in the news makes [theorganization] more top-of-mind when a reporter can actually talk with the CEO on a relevant issue.”

3.3. Symmetry and conservation

Findings also reflected the importance of symmetrical communication, or being open to organizational adjustmentwith respect to the media (cf. Grunig et al., 2002). Furthermore, Sha’s (2004) explication of a symmetry–conservationduality applies to the development of organizational media relations, as organizations must strive to meet the needsof the media without sacrificing interests fundamental to their existence. One practitioner characterized the duality bynoting, “We’re not close friends with the media. I think we work closely with them but . . . our goal first and foremost isto make sure that . . . we are . . . advancing the [organization] as accurately as possible and as responsibly as possible.”Another said, “If we’ve got bad news, we’ll tell it. . . . But . . . there is a line. . . . We can’t just totally meet the media’sneeds. The media’s best interests are not always the [organization’s] best interests”.

3.4. Relational outcomes

A mutually beneficial outcome – an outcome fostered by practicing organizational media relations – leads to afeeling of respect between an organization and the media, a feeling of mutual credibility, the existence of a give andtake relationship characterized by helpfulness, and a situation in which an organization is valued by the media and inthe community. Said one practitioner of the relationship, “[A]s an organization by . . . the media . . . we are pretty wellrespected,” later adding, “As an organization you want credibility and you would want to have that high credibilitywith media.” Another practitioner characterized the mutually beneficial relationship outcome this way: “This is a giveand take relationship and we need each other.”

98 S.E. Desiere, B.-L. Sha / Public Relations Review 33 (2007) 96–98

4. Concluding remarks

The size, scope, and influence of the media all continue to grow, and with the Internet now firmly entrenched, withsatellite television and radio slowly becoming societal fixtures, and with the yet-to-be-invented Internet of tomorrowwaiting to emerge, that size, scope, and influence will only expand. Thus, analyzing the media relations function as anorganization-level practice, not merely as an individual practitioner skill, will allow media relations to keep up with,and be included in, future advancements in public relations theory. In short, as public relations scholarship continuesto push forward and advance the discipline, media relations should not be left behind.

References

Aronoff, C. E. (1976). Predictors of success in placing news releases in newspapers. Public Relations Review, 2(4), 43–57.Battenberg, E. (2002). Managing a media frenzy. Public Relations Tactics, 9(12), 1–2.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.Cutlip, S. M., Center, A. H., & Broom, G. M. (2006). Effective public relations (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Delfin, S. (1983). Positive media coverage: Openness is key. The Public Relations Journal, 39, 8–9.Grabowski, G. (1992). The seven deadly sins of media relations. Public Relations Quarterly, 37, 37–39.Grunig, L. A., Grunig, J. E., & Dozier, D. M. (2002). Excellent public relations and effective organizations: A study of communication management

in three countries. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Howard, C. M. (2001). Ten strategies to avoid global gaffes in media relations. Public Relations Strategist, 7(4), 34–37.Howard, C. M. (2004). Working with reporters: Mastering the fundamentals to build long-term relationships. Public Relations Quarterly, 49, 36–39.Jo, S., & Kim, Y. (2004). Media or personal relations? Exploring media relations dimensions in South Korea. Journalism and Mass Communication

Quarterly, 81, 292–306.Kosmicki, R. J., & Bona, F. E. (1996). Media relations: How to relate to the press. In R. Dilenschneider (Ed.), Dartnell’s public relations handbook

(4th ed., pp. 58–75). Chicago: Dartnell.Lee, M. A., & Solomon, N. (1990). Unreliable sources. New York: Carol.Marconi, J. (2004). Public relations: The complete guide. Mason, OH: Thomson.Mateas, M. M. (2001). The poor, mistreated, media relations function. Public Relations Strategist, 7, 24–27.Ryan, M., & Martinson, D. L. (1984). Ethical values, the flow of journalistic information and public relations persons. Journalism Quarterly, 61,

27–34.Ryan, M., & Martinson, D. L. (1988). Journalists and public relations practitioners: Why the antagonism? Journalism Quarterly, 65, 131–140.Schenkler, I., & Herrling, T. (2004). Guide to media relations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Sha, B. L. (2004). Noether’s theorem: The science of symmetry and the law of conservation. Journal of Public Relations Research, 16, 391–416.Shin, J., & Cameron, G. T. (2003). Informal relations: A look at personal influence in media relations. Journal of Communication Management, 7,

239–253.Wielgos, S. (1990). How to create successful media relationships. Economic Development Review, 8, 50–52.