Let's get dangerous – A review of current scholarship in public relation history

Abstract

IntroductionThe mottoofthiscommentarycomesfromthelateSovietpresidentNikitaKhrushchev,whosaidin1956:“Historiansaredangerous and capable of upsetting everything”. It is applied in an ironic manner, as I wish that public relations historianswere more challenging than they are. In this paper the “state of play” in the history of public relations field is considered.It reflects upon papers and keynote addresses delivered at the International History of Public Relations Conference (IHPRC),which was first held in 2010, and journal articles published since 2008. Using these data, recent historiography and schol-arship are reviewed. The field, it will be shown, is trending from an initial eclectic, often descriptive, approach towards themore analytical and sometimes critical.ReconsiderationI argue for reconsideration of the “Great Men” focus and the Anglo-American primacy (e.g. content of many texts andarticles. Increatingahistoryofpublicrelations,somescholarsandmanyintroductorytextshavereliedtoomuchonThomasCarlyle’s dictum that, “the history of the world is but the biography of great men”. It is greatly concerning that manydeveloping countryscholarsapplyGrunigandHunt’sfourmodels(Grunig&Hunt,1984)andExcellenceTheoryasframestorecord andbenchmarkthegrowthoftheirnationalPRsectorusingtheseconvenientbutculturallyinappropriatestandards.There is,however,anemerginghistoriographicdebate,exemplifiedbyMegLammeandKarenMillerRussell’smonograph– RemovingtheSpin:TowardsaNewTheoryofPublicRelationsHistory(2010).Otherimportantcontributionsarerecentbooks,articles andpresentationsfromJacquieL’Etang,GunterBentele,DavidMcKie,DebashishMunshi,andJordiXifra.Theimpetusis growing for a genuine revision of the history of public relations in many countries which will show a less corporatist andmore authentic foundation.There is also a case for a distinction between public relations-like strategies and actions that occurred before publicityand public relations became discussed entities in the late 19th century, which I call ‘proto-PR’, and ‘public relations’ itself.The exact time boundary may never be defined but publicity, press agentry and institutionalised communication activitieswere widely evident in some countries from around 1875 onwards.