¿El lado oscuro? Análisis sobre la percepción que tienen los periodistas de los profesionales de las relaciones públicas / The dark side? Analysis of journalists' perception of PR practitioners
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5783/revrrpp.v3i5.187Keywords:
Periodismo, Buenas prácticasAbstract
A través de una aproximación exploratoria y cualitativa, esta investigación se orienta a conocer la percepción que tienen los periodistas de la labor de los profesionales de las relaciones públicas en España. De forma más específica, se asume un doble objetivo: identificar las prácticas profesionales de relaciones públicas que son más aceptadas y conocer los perfiles publirrelacionistas que son mejor valorados por los profesionales de la prensa. Para cumplir ambos objetivos, 40 periodistas han sido entrevistados.
Los resultados obtenidos apuntan a que la labor de los profesionales de las relaciones públicas tiende a ser considerada como necesaria y útil por los periodistas. Sin embargo, determinadas actuaciones del campo de las relaciones públicas son etiquetadas como malas prácticas y, en consecuencia, se convierten en potenciales fuentes de conflicto entre ambos roles comunicativos. Aunque la investigación realizada carece de representatividad estadística, en algunos aspectos se evidencia un claro consenso.
Además de las conclusiones genéricas sobre la percepción que los periodistas tienen de los profesionales de las relaciones públicas y de sus actuaciones, está investigación también ha generado –a modo de subproducto no menos valioso– una serie de recomendaciones. Tales recomendaciones pueden ayudar a los relaciones públicas a optimizar su labor cuando se orienta a la obtención de atención mediática para sus empresas o instituciones.
Taking an exploratory and qualitative approach, this research seeks to understand journalists’ perception of public relations practice in Spain. More specifically, a twofold objective is pursued: to identify the most accepted PR practices and to know what PR practitioner profiles are best valued by media professionals. To achieve both objectives, 40 journalists have been interviewed.
The results obtained point to journalists tending to consider public relations activity as necessary and useful. However, some public relations practices are labelled as bad practices and, therefore, they become a potential source of conflict between both communication disciplines. Although the research conducted is not statistically representative, a clear consensus emerges in some issues.
Besides the general conclusions concerning journalists' perception of PR professionals and their practices, this research has also provided – as a not less valuable sub-product – a set of recommendations. Such recommendations can help PR practitioners to optimize their work when they aim to earn media attention for their companies or institutions.
Downloads
References
ARONOFF, C. (1975). Credibility of public relations for journalists. Public Relations Review, 1, 45-56.
BELZ, A., TALBOTT, A. D. y STARCK, K. (1989). Using role theory to study cross perceptions of journalists and public relations practitioners. Public Relations Research Annual, 1 (1-4), 125-139.
CHARRON, J. (1989). Relations between journalists and public relations practitioners: Cooperation, conflict, and negotiation. Canadian Journal of Communications, 14(2), 41-54.
DELORME, D. E. y FEDLER, F. (2003). Journalists’ hostility toward public relations: An historical analysis. Public Relations Review, 29(2), 99-124.
ESTUDIO DE COMUNICACIÓN y DEMOMÉTRICA (2006). Periodistas, empresas e instituciones: Claves de una relación necesaria. Recuperado el 4 de febrero de 2013, de http://www.estudiodecomunicacion.com/extranet/wp-content/uploads/2012/ESTUDIOS/Periodistas%20empresas%20Espa%C3%B1a.pdf
GRAYLING (2009). La imagen del dircom: La percepción del director de comunicación entre los periodistas del sector económico/financiero. Recuperado el 5 de febrero de 2013, de http://es.grayling.com/Assets/Spain/InformeDIRCOM2009.pdf
JEFFERS. D. W. (1977). Performance expectations as a measure of relative status of news and PR people. Journalism Quarterly, 54(2), 299-307.
KOPENHAVER, L. L., MARTINSON, D. L. y RYAN, M. (1984). How public relations practitioners and editors in Florida view each other. Journalism Quarterly, 61(4), 860-865, 884.
LALUEZA, F. (2011). Sin mediar los medios. ¿Se desmarcan las relaciones públicas de la función de gabinete de prensa? En Life without media (341-349). Barcelona: Universitat Ramon Llull.
LEN-RÍOS, M. E. et al. (2009). Health news agenda building: Journalists' perceptions of the role of public relations. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 86(2), 315-331.
NEIJENS, P. y SMIT, E. (2006). Dutch public relations practitioners and journalists: Antagonists no more. Public Relations Review, 32(3), 232-240.
RYAN, M. y MARTINSON, D. L. (1988). Journalists and public relations practitioners: Why the antagonism? Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 65(1), 131-140.
SALLOT, L. M., STEINFATT, T. M. y SALWEN, M. B. (1998). Journalists’ and public relations practitioners’ news values: Perceptions and cross-perceptions. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 75(2), 366-377.
SALLOT, L. M. y JOHNSON, E. A. (2006). Investigating relationships between journalists and public relations practitioners: Working together to set, frame and build the public agenda, 1991-2004. Public Relations Review, 32(2), 151-159.
SHIN, J.-H. y CAMERON, G. T. (2005). Different sides of the same coin: Mixed views of public relations practitioners and journalists for strategic conflict management. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 82(2), 318-338.
TURK, J. V. (1985). Information subsidies and influence. Public Relations Review, 11 (3), 1-14.
TURK, J. V. (1986). Information subsidies and media content: A study of public relations influence on the news. Journalism Monographs, 100, 1-38.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors publishing in this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right to be the first publication of the work as licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of authorship of the work and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors may separately enter into additional arrangements for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in the journal (e.g., placing it in an institutional repository or publishing it in a book), with an acknowledgement of initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are allowed and encouraged to disseminate their work electronically (e.g. in institutional repositories or on their own website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and higher citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access).
