Public relations
Public relations (PR) is the means and industry of influencing public opinion towards an organization and its products or services. Public relations clients include political parties, ruling or otherwise. PR is distinct from advertising as it is generally not aimed at selling a particular product from a particular business, and, for further comparison, propaganda, sometimes carried out for political purposes by governments. Many of the same PR techniques may be employed in all these areas. Within the industry, those involved in marketing may consider public relations a subfield of marketing; those involved in PR may disagree.
Related Topics:
Industry - Influencing - Public opinion - Advertising - Propaganda - Political - Government - Marketing
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ Table of Content ~
| ► | Introduction |
| ► | History |
| ► | The industry today |
| ► | Methods, Tools and Tactics |
| ► | Ethical and social issues |
| ► | Public relations in fiction |
| ► | Notes |
| ► | Books |
| ► | See also |
| ► | External links |
~ Community ~
| ► | History Forum Come and discuss about History, Civilizations, Historical Events and Figures |
| ► | History Web-Ring A community of sites, blogs and forums dedicated to History. Do not hesitate to submit your site. |
Latest news on public relations
AP, Wash. Post fail to report ties between Swift Boat Vets, ad attacking Obama
Reporting on an ad by the American Issues Project (AIP) attacking Sen. Barack Obama for his association with William Ayers, the Associated Press and The Washington Post quoted the group's spokesman in August 21 articles without mentioning that he was employed in 2004 by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group that led a smear campaign against Sen. John Kerry in the 2004 election. Associated Press writer Jim Kuhnhenn wrote that the American Issues Project has a "past link to Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign" and "wants to spend $2.8 million on an ad questioning Democrat Barack Obama's relationship to a founder of the 1960s radical group Weather Underground." The article then reported that one of AIP's board members, Ed Failor, is a former paid McCain campaign consultant. A Washington Post article about the ad that appeared in its campaign diary The Trail also reported that Failor did paid work for McCain in Iowa, collecting $50,000 through July 2007. Both articles quoted AIP spokesman Christian Pinkston making assurances that Failor was no longer connected to the McCain campaign. However, neither article mentioned that Pinkston is founder of a public relations firm that was employed in 2004 by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group that ran a campaign of false and baseless smears against Sen. John Kerry's Vietnam War record in 2004, including a book co-written by discredited anti-Obama author Jerome Corsi. By contrast, The New York Times and Los Angeles Times both reported in August 22 articles about the American Issues Project's ad that Pinkston was involved with the Swift Boat campaign. New York Times reporter Jim Rutenberg, after reporting Failor's connection to the McCain campaign and quoting Pinkston saying, "This has nothing to do with McCain," wrote: "Mr. Pinkston's firm, the Pinkston Group, had worked for the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group that ran advertisements against Senator John Kerry when he ran for president in 2004." A Media Matters for America search through Swift Boat Veterans' expenditure disclosure forms on the Internal Revenue Service's website confirmed the Pinkston Group's employment.
Ronn Motor Company Appoints Insignia Brand Partners for North American Public Relations Support
Secession in South Carolina must be peaceful
Christian Exodus occasionally hears from respondents that secession from the Union is "insane." Well, Independence from the other States in the union is only "insane" when coupled with an assumption that it would be violently attained. This is of course the very first conclusion uninformed Americans make when they hear the word "secession". A State declaring independence today would be entirely different than in 1776, because a global public relations campaign would need to succeed. Let's look at how it'd play out: if South Carolinians voted for independence at the ballot box, the case would then have to be made in international discourse that our vote is just as sovereign as any other people's vote, and a demand would be made that Washington and the United Nations recognize that fact. Should they recognize it, the vote would stand. Should they deny recognition and send in troops to disband our government then the world would witness Washington's tyranny and we would suffer the trouble of occupation, but at the very next opportunity we should vote for independence again, and again, and again, continually demanding freedom and notifying the world that the "land of the free" aint so free. Until eventually the other States of the involuntary union cannot stomach their own hypocrisy and finally acquiesce and let "freedom ring." That's the peaceful path to independence if ever required. No weapon would ever be used except the ballot box.South Carolina could never forcefully demand independence with military use - that would be "insane."
and are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
[Under Construction] - Spiritus-Temporis.com ©2005.