Negotiating public policy: Are there roles for the media and public relations?

Abstract

This study evaluated the use of 10 conflict resolution strategies in public relations/public affairs to help those in public policy understand, prepare for, and not underestimate the significant role the media and public relations will play in a public dispute and help the media to understand their unique responsibilities when reporting on public policy negotiations. The abiding question for this research was, “What were the mediator roles for the news media and public relations (PR) in the decision to build the Real Salt Lake stadium?” A case analysis of the content of media reports, and news releases was initially conducted, and initial patterns and themes were identified to construct an interview protocol and to set up the interviews. Twelve interviews were then conducted. Bias in this study was controlled through triangulation and reflexivity. The qualitative computer analysis program NVivo was applied to determine final patterns and themes. No one theory can explain the real interactions of a multiple party negotiation. Contention spread from the issue, to the process, to the media, and back again. The media both set agendas and have agendas set for them. The media cannot be totally neutral because they are part of the public negotiation process. The conflict resolution strategies of contention, cooperation, principled, avoidance, perseverance, and mediation were all used in this process. This case study is at the forefront of research involving public relations and conflict resolution. It brings together a number of other fields as well to evaluate a real public policy negotiation.