Adrienne A. Wallace Grand Valley State University Editor-in-Chief Journal of Public Relations Education Email: wallacad@gvsu.edu
At JPRE, we love it when a plan comes together, resulting in a powerful themed issue. In 11-1, the evolving landscape of public relations (PR) education and the necessity of preparing students for industry challenges through experiential learning, ethical considerations, and AI literacy is brought full circle. This issue features a diverse array of pedagogical innovations aimed at bridging the gap between academic instruction and professional application.
“The Kids Are Alright” by Tefertiller, Vaszuez and Brammer delves into the ethical dimensions of AI use among PR students, revealing how future practitioners navigate the complexities of AI-driven communication while maintaining professional integrity. The creative thinking of Riddell, Fenner, and Kearney uses Enneagram Harmony Triads for group formation in PR courses, and highlights the role of team dynamics in successful campaign execution. By leveraging personality-based grouping, this method improves collaboration, reduces interpersonal friction, and enhances overall project outcomes, reinforcing the importance of soft skills in PR education. The teaching brief by Howes on creating a prompt library for AI-driven public relations education underscores the growing importance of AI proficiency in public relations practice, emphasizing both the technical skill of prompt engineering and the critical thinking necessary to evaluate AI-generated content. Finally, the critical dimension of industry readiness is explored by the dynamic duo from Jacksonville State University, Murphy and Joyce, in a teaching brief giving us a roadmap for the integration of job application practice into a PR campaigns course, which provides students with hands-on experience in applying for PR roles, refining their resumes, and preparing for professional interviews. This approach mirrors industry expectations, ensuring that students graduate with not only theoretical knowledge but also practical skills that enhance employability.
Together, these articles reflect the Journal of Public Relations Educator’s ongoing commitment to advancing pedagogical strategies that align with industry needs. From AI literacy and ethics to career preparation and collaborative learning, the articles in this issue provide a roadmap for equipping students with the knowledge, skills, and ethical frameworks necessary to thrive in the modern PR landscape.
Coming soon: Keep your eyes peeled for two special issue calls dropping in the upcoming weeks: first, in what we are calling the graduate issue, is the collective creation of previous JPRE editors-in-chief, Pamela Bourland-Davis, Emily Kinsky, and Charles “Chuck” Lubbers which will invite invite research articles, teaching briefs, and book reviews – we are especially interested in manuscripts that explore BOTH the challenges and opportunities for public relations pedagogy focusing on graduate-level education; then the second special issue, we are affectionately referring to as the GIFTs of leadership which features another all-star guest editor lineup of David Grossman (The Grossman Group), Tina McCorkindale (IPR), Karla Gower (Plank), and more. This special issue will welcome submissions of articles, teaching briefs, and book reviews that examine both the challenges and opportunities in public relations pedagogy, with a focus on leadership in the undergraduate classroom. Watch the AEJMC PRD listserv for complete calls and the PRD community website for these calls as they go live.
Our appreciation goes out to the Editorial Review Board, the Past Editors Council, as well as our beloved sponsors, the Arthur W. Page Center for Integrity in Public Communication and the Stan Richards School of Advertising & Public Relations – Moody College at the University of Texas at Austin. If you are interested in joining the ERB or sponsoring JPRE, please reach out. I’d love to talk to you about how you can contribute to our 100% volunteer-operated open-access journal.
Adrienne A. Wallace Grand Valley State University Editor-in-Chief Journal of Public Relations Education Email: wallacad@gvsu.edu
As we present the latest issue of the Journal of Public Relations Educator, a common theme emerges across the contributions: the critical role of evolving pedagogical practices in equipping public relations students to meet contemporary challenges. This issue underscores the field’s pressing need to adapt and innovate in response to societal, technological, and ethical transformations often, and lately, in a highly charged political environment.
Several articles emphasize the importance of experiential learning as a cornerstone of public relations education. The study on the PRSSA Bateman Case Study Competition explores how such initiatives can provide students with practical, hands-on experiences that align with industry expectations while integrating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) considerations. Similarly, the teaching brief on group work in research methods courses addresses the persistent challenges of collaboration in post-pandemic classrooms, offering motivational strategies to foster engagement and equitable participation.
The themes of ethics and critical thinking are equally prominent. One article delves into the skillsets required for managing (mis/dis)information, stressing the ethical responsibilities of PR professionals in navigating the post-truth era. This contribution highlights the importance of incorporating ethics into curricula and suggests practical strategies for combating disinformation through transparency and proactive communication. Another piece introduces moral entrepreneurship as a pedagogical framework, encouraging educators to integrate activism and ethical leadership into the curriculum to prepare students for roles as change agents in a rapidly evolving field.
Finally, this issue addresses student autonomy and privacy, exploring how educators can respect privacy boundaries while leveraging digital tools for learning. This teaching brief reflects on the balance between fostering critical digital literacy and maintaining ethical standards in the classroom, showcasing innovative assignments that empower students to navigate the digital landscape responsibly.
Through these diverse yet interconnected discussions, this issue reaffirms the transformative potential of public relations education when it embraces innovation, ethical rigor, and inclusivity. As educators, researchers, and practitioners, we have a shared responsibility to continue evolving our practices to better serve our students and society. Our educators in this issue once again have effectively transformed wicked problems into practical and professional solutions. I’m so proud of our work at JPRE, and I hope these scholars inspire your practice.
Thank you for a great first year working with an incredible volunteer team to elevate PR pedagogy research to its deserved prominence. Our appreciation goes out to the Editorial Review Board, the Past Editors Council, as well as our beloved sponsors, the Arthur W. Page Center for Integrity in Public Communication and the Stan Richards School of Advertising & Public Relations – Moody College at the University of Texas at Austin.
I hope a restful break is upon you and the new year brings you joy.
Editorial Record: Submitted Record June 9, 2023. Accepted August 30, 2023. Published October 2024.
Author
Katie R. Place Professor School of Communications Quinnipiac University Connecticut, USA Email: Katie.Place@quinnipiac.edu
ABSTRACT
This great idea for teaching (GIFT) aims to help undergraduate or graduate students review extant social media and web ethics policies and then apply their knowledge to the development of their own ethics policy. This GIFT guides educators through the rationale of the study, the steps of the study, a teaching note regarding the study, and relevant references.
Editorial Record: Submitted April 20, 2023. Revised July 3, 2023 and October 18, 2023. Accepted November 28, 2023.
Author
Young Joon Lim Professor Department of Communication University of Texas, Rio Grande Valley Texas, USA Email: young.lim@utrgv.edu
ABSTRACT
This study delves into the effects and implications of ChatGPT on American college students, focusing on their familiarity with emerging communication and educational technologies. The research also seeks to provide valuable insights for college administrators concerned about the ethical implications of OpenAI’s ChatGPT in higher education. The study examines students’ perceptions of ChatGPT, how colleges are responding to it, and the steps that should be taken in light of the proliferation of AI-based learning tools. The findings reveal that students are apprehensive about the lack of education regarding AI tools in today’s digital age and expect colleges to stay abreast of rapidly evolving AI technologies. To foster ethical conduct, it is crucial to remind students of the code of ethics that discourages unethical practices such as cheating, plagiarism, and academic dishonesty. Colleges should also establish clear and responsible guidelines for using AI tools. This will encourage students to contemplate the purpose of college education and consider the significant role it plays in their lives.
Adrienne A. Wallace Associate Professor Grand Valley State University Editor-in-Chief Journal of Public Relations Education Email: wallacad@gvsu.edu
The 10-2 issue is all about the student experience. Following the Commission of Public Relations Education (CPRE) issue in 10-1, wherein we examined expectations of a complicated and growing field, we look at not just how students will succeed in the industry but rather their experience and perspective in getting to the finish line of the undergrad experience, using the classroom as a laboratory.
This issue addresses courageous methods with Madden & Guastaferro lending brave insight into the emotional toll that students endure when working with sensitive topics. In fact, their findings show us that students found this topic motivating and meaningful in providing support to victims. I’m grateful for Madden & Guastaferro bringing these issues and advice to light so as to help other PR professors understand how to more effectively integrate trauma-informed practices into campaign courses. We can’t avoid commonly stigmatized issues for the sake of our own comfort in classrooms, we must remain vigilant and maybe even, comfortably uncomfortable in order to improve outcomes related to all matters of communication with all people. I hope you find this article as moving and helpful as I did.
Then, Weed & Nye reveal an additional aspect of student satisfaction using extracurricular activities through PRSSA as a model for maximizing leadership potential and their knowledge, skills, abilities, and traits (KSATs) – building upon the last two CPRE reports. They recommend to maximize these KSATs that PRSSA should be structured within a for-credit curricular design to enhance career preparedness in the student experience. This left me thinking about the potential that exists for high-impact practices and experiential learning crossovers in my own curriculum and asking the question, am I advocating enough for my own PRSSA chapter?
This takes us to the role of technology in this experience discussion, which Lim and Place address in the use of technological tools and responsible use in public relations with our final article and GIFT. In these final pieces, Lim reveals, that college students anticipate professors to incorporate ChatGPT into many course materials rather than prohibiting its use. This study highlights that ChatGPT is a powerful PR tool that can be used by colleges to improve their public relations efforts in a number of ways, from classroom to campus-wide innovation. I appreciated this article and timing as my own university and unit wrestle with policymaking and educational practices surrounding emerging tech in the classroom and campus.
As luck would have it, Place provides us with a solution to the implementation of this looming issue in our classrooms in her award-winning GIFT from the PRSA Educators Academy Summit in 2022. This assignment has miraculously stood the test of tech time and is structured to empower, enable, and embolden students to apply ethical and legal theory in PR to practice by way of a policy writing assignment. Really turning the student into an expert to engage as counsel and “ethical guardians” in the field; furthering a confident student through this classroom experience. Our educators in this issue have effectively transformed wicked problems into practical and professional solutions. I’m so proud of the work we do at JPRE, and I hope our scholars inspire your own practice.
The Journal of Public Relations Education (JPRE) is devoted to the presentation of research and commentary that advance the field of public relations education. JPRE invites submissions in the following three categories:
Research Articles
Teaching Briefs
Book/Software Reviews
Learn more by visiting the About JPRE page and the Authors/Contributors page for submission guidelines. All submissions should follow the guidelines of the most recent edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA).
Editorial Record: Submitted June 9, 2023. Revised September 22, 2023. Accepted November 13, 2023. Published March 2024.
Author
Christie Kleinmann Professor College of Liberal Arts & Social Sciences Belmont University Tennessee, USA Email: christie.kleinmann@belmont.edu
ABSTRACT
According to the 2018 “Fast Forward” report by the Commission on Public Relations Education, an understanding of ethics is crucial to effective public relations practice. Yet, this latest report notes a gap between ethical knowledge and ethical practice. Simply stated, professionals do not believe that entry-level practitioners are prepared for the ethical demands of modern public relations practice. This article proposes an assignment to address this concern. Using a reflective learning model, the Perspectives: Quiet Place Journal assignment seeks to deepen students’ understanding of ethical principles and develop students’ practice of ethical decision making.
According to the 2018 report by the Commission on Public Relations Education, an understanding of ethics is crucial to effective public relations practice; yet this report notes a gap between ethical knowledge and ethical practice (Commission on Public Relations Education, 2018). Simply stated, professionals do not believe that entry- level practitioners are prepared for the ethical demands of modern public relations practice. In response, this article introduces a reflective learning assignment that educators can use to deepen students’ understanding of ethical principles and develop students’ practice of ethical decision making.
The Quiet Place (QP) Journal is a series of reflective journal prompts on ethical literacy and decision making. Its goal is to develop the ethical understanding and application skills of emerging public relations professionals. Students are instructed to find a quiet place and be still for 30 minutes. In that stillness, students are asked to complete an ethical activity and reflect on the experience. There are six journals in the series: values, competencies, strengths, perspectives, change, and ethical promises. The Perspectives: QP Journal will be presented here.
This assignment is completed at the midpoint of the course and transitions student learning from knowledge of ethical concepts to application of ethical concepts. In the assignment, students complete an ethical simulation and reflect on their decision making process.
Rationale
The Perspectives: QP Journal assignment was developed in response to the CPRE’s 2018 report — Fast forward: Foundations and future state, educators and practitioners on the importance of ethics in public relations education as well as the power of silence and reflection to enhance student learning. The report ranked ethics as the top knowledge area for students (CPRE, 2018). Specifically, the report noted that students need to understand ethical philosophies and be able to utilize ethical decision making processes. The Perspectives: QP Journal addresses this need by helping students use key ethical philosophies in an ethical decision making process and reflect on how this process guides their own personal ethical practice.
The CPRE (2018) report also noted the importance of teaching ethical decision making processes. It said that greater education on ethical decision making was needed “to help prepare the next generation to work in an environment that does not always value truth” (p. 68). This focus is important as the report noted that a gap exists between ethical knowledge and ethical practice. Thus, guiding students through the ethical decision making process helps students recognize the importance of ethical concepts and how to apply these concepts to real-world situations. The Perspectives: QP Journal focuses on this need by leading students through a perspective switching exercise. In this assignment, students are asked to complete the Moral Machine (2017), an ethical simulation of self-driving cars, but to do so from different perspectives and then reflect on their decision making process. In doing so, students engage in ethical decision making, discovering how perspectives impact ethical outcomes and recognizing how they often unknowingly follow certain ethical philosophies to arrive at a decision.
The Perspectives: QP Journal is also important from a scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) perspective. SoTL research has demonstrated the importance of quietness and reflection when dealing with abstract ideas, such as ethics (Eswaran, 2021). The Perspectives: QP journal helps students do so by requiring them to find a quiet place to think and reflect. The inclusion of a quiet place is an important component of the assignment. Eswaran (2021) said that we “have forgotten (or even fear) quiet. We live in a world full of noise and chatter. A world wherein our daily routines are inundated with distractions and responsibilities” (para. 33). Yet, a routine of silence can help individuals understand how they perceive the world and how this perception impacts behavior (Larsen et. al., 2016).
Reflective practice is also important in ethics education. Helyer (2015) found that the process of reflection utilizes knowledge that “lies deep within – so deep it is often taken for granted and not explicitly acknowledged, but it is the data humans use to make instinctive decisions based upon accumulated knowledge from past actions and experience” (p. 22). Thus, reflective practice through the Perspectives: QP Journal enables the invisible aspects of ethics to become visible, allowing students to examine how their ethics guide their behavior.
Assignment Learning Objectives
The overall goal of the Perspectives: QP Journal is to engage students in ethical thinking and bridge the gap between ethical knowledge and practice through reflective learning. As a result of this assignment, students will be able to:
Apply ethical philosophies in an ethical situation.
Assess an ethical situation from different perspectives.
Use ethical decision making processes to make an ethical decision.
Identify the ethical philosophies that guide their ethical decisions.
Employ the use of silence and reflection to guide future ethical practice.
Connection to Public Relations Practice and/or Theory
The Perspectives: QP Journal offers several connections to public relations practice and theory. The assignment reinforces key ethical philosophies and considers the application of these philosophies in an ethical decision making process. The assignment also teaches students the importance of reflection and its ability to transform an abstract concept such as ethics into practical application. This connection is important as educators cannot prepare students for every future ethical situation.
Rather, the Perspectives: QP Journal offers students the foundation and tools needed to approach future ethical situations with confidence.
How the Assignment was Class-Tested
The Perspectives: QP Journal has been an assignment in an asynchronous online public relations ethics course for the past three semesters. The assignment is assessed qualitatively by a final course reflection termed the “souvenirs of the class.” This reflection asks students to identify two or three souvenirs from the class, or things they will take with them and use later either personally or professionally. By design, this reflection does not ask specifically about the Perspectives: QP Journal. A key aspect of the assessment is to determine if the QP Journal series or the specific Perspectives: QP Journal assignment emerged as a resonant component of the course.
Empirical Evidence of Learning Outcomes/Assessment
Over the past three semesters, seven themes or souvenirs emerged from the souvenir course assessment. Five of the themes related to the Perspectives: QP Journal assignment. Twenty-six percent of students identified the Perspectives: QP Journal prompt as a key souvenir from the course. Students discussed the value of perspective switching to better understand ethical situations and the perspectives of others. One student said, “I sometimes have difficulty seeing from someone else’s perspective. This was a VERY important topic to write about because, in the real world, there will be many disagreements,.” Another student echoed the importance of assuming others’ perspectives, saying “The last but DEFINITELY not least (possibly most important) souvenir was about perspectives. I think that the world would be so much better if we took a little bit of time to stand where our ‘opposers’ come from, or where their thought processes are stemming in ANY subject!” As a result of this assignment, students also noted the importance of decision making tools such as the Potter Box to help them make ethical decisions. One student said, “There have been many times in my life when I have been faced with an ethical dilemma, but I never really knew how to work through the problem. Learning about the Potter Box gave me an easy way to work through ethical problems, and I know that when I am faced with ethical problems in the future, I will remember the Potter Box and put it to use.” Finally, students noted that the Perspectives: QP Journal would help them in their future work. One student noted, “This journal entry helped me think about how important it is to think about the perspectives of others in all situations. I think this will help me a lot in the future in both my personal and professional life.”
The reflective practice of the Perspectives: QP Journal also emerged as a key souvenir with 21% of students identifying this format as a significant component of their ethical learning. One student said, “I really enjoyed the quiet place journals. It gave me time to really think about each topic and gave me an opportunity to reflect on how I was feeling.” Another student commented, “I actually looked forward to these each week. Truly it was a time that pushed me to sit down in my own thoughts and just reflect and write. I don’t do this often but like to! It helped me to think outside of the box and think deeper about my thoughts and feelings.” This reflective practice also helped students connect classroom learning with life experience. “Journaling allows me to reflect on everything I have learned and put it into a tangible form. Instead of just cruising through the class and trying to get readings done, I was able to actually reflect on what I was learning rather than just going through the motions. I hope to bring this concept to all future career and personal endeavors,” one student said.
Students recognized the Perspectives: QP Journal as a key bridge between knowing ethical concepts and practicing ethics. One student said, “The information learned was valuable, but I most enjoyed getting to spend some quiet time each week reflecting on important and useful topics. I want to continue this practice throughout my work journey.” Another student echoed this sentiment, adding that the assignment “helped me get a better understanding of the material and how to apply it to real life situations. This helps me in the future because the more I understand something, the more likely I am to apply it my own life and experiences.” As a result, the Perspectives: QP Journal offered a tangible way for students to think deeply about the abstract concept of ethics and make applications. It also gave students a life-long learning tool that can be used to address future ethical issues.
Template Assignment Guide
Assignment Guide for Perspectives: Quiet Place Journal
Assignment Introduction
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology created the Moral Machine (2017) to study our ethical decision making in the context of self-driving cars. In this online simulation, an individual is presented with 13 scenarios in which a collision involving an autonomous vehicle is unavoidable. The scenarios include a combination of passengers and pedestrians and asks who the individual would spare.
In the Perspectives: QP Journal we will use this simulation to understand the ethical philosophies and assess how different perspectives impact ethical decision making.
Assignment Resources
To prepare for this assignment, review the ethical philosophies discussed in Part I and read Chapter 16 on ethical decision making in Ethics in Public Relations: A Guide to Best Practice by Patricia Parsons. Another good resource on ethical philosophies is the Core Ethical Principles module in The Arthur W. Page Center Public Relations EthicsTraining.
Assignment Instructions
This assignment has two parts: (1) complete the “Moral Machine” simulation, and (2) then in essay-format, reflect on your experience by responding to the guiding questions below.
Part 1. Complete the “Moral Machine” simulation a minimum of six times. The first three times do so as the driver of the car. Pay attention to the decisions you make in each scenario. Then complete the simulation three more times but from three different perspectives. You might complete the simulation from the perspective of a passenger, from the perspective of the driver of an oncoming car, or as the owner of the dog who ran out in front of the car. The key is to choose a different perspective each time you complete the simulation.
Part 2. Reflect on the experience using the questions below as a guide.
After completing the simulation, reflect on your decisions. When you were the driver of the car, what guided your decisions? How did these guides relate to the ethical philosophies?
Then reflect on the simulation when completed from perspectives of others. Did your decisions change based on the perspective? How might this simulation relate to ethical decision making in public relations?
Finally, explain how this simulation and reflection might be helpful in your current and future practice of ethical public relations.
Assignment Rules
In order to complete this assignment effectively, follow the three rules of the Perspectives: QP Journal:
Find a space where you can be quiet and reflective. Spend a minimum of 30 minutes in quiet reflection.
Be honest with yourself. While this assignment will be shared with me, you are the primary audience, so be honest with yourself. If there is something that you want to keep private, black-out those portions from the entry.
Be gracious to yourself. This assignment is a space to explore, learn, and grow in our ethical maturity.
Assignment Grading Criteria or Rubric
The Perspectives: QP Journal is graded on engagement and completion. Researchers found that the effectiveness of reflective learning is greatly reduced when students are concerned about getting the “right answer” (Persson, et. al, 2018). Instead SoTL literature suggests that reflection should be used for developmental assignments, often without credit assigned (Chang, 2019). In an online course structure, if an assignment does not have a point value, students often omit the assignment. As a result, the Perspectives: QP Journal does assign credit, but it is a low-stakes completion assignment. Assessment is based on the student’s acknowledgment that they met the expected timeframe, that they thoughtfully engaged in reflective practice, and that the assignment was submitted by the deadline.
SoTL research also noted that students will often be less honest in reflective assignments and instead try to write what they believe the instructor wants to hear (Chang, 2019). To combat this drawback, students could blackout portions of their QP Journal entries that they felt were too personal or that they did not want to share with the instructor. This technique allowed students the space to be more honest and feel a greater sense of safety in their reflection.
Finally, for reflective learning to be effective, instructor involvement is critical. To facilitate student engagement, it is important for an instructor to thoughtfully dialogue with the student in the Perspectives: QP Journal. The two-way dialogue gives the instructor an opportunity to guide the student to deeper reflection by asking follow-up questions or requesting more explanation on a point or connection. Typically, this two-way interaction is all that is needed to help students remain engaged with the assignment. With these issues in mind, the following grading rubric was developed.
Grading Criteria
The Perspectives: QP Journal is a completion-based assignment worth 25 points. Credit is based on the following criteria:
The student’s assignment was a minimum of 500 words.
The student’s assignment met the stated deadline.
The student engaged in thoughtful reflection and in written dialogue with the instructor.
Teaching Note
The Perspectives: QP Journal has been used for the last three semesters in an online asynchronous public relations ethics course. The assignment occurs near the midpoint of the course and transitions course content from understanding ethical concepts and theories to applying these concepts through decision making processes.
While used in a public relations ethics course, the Perspectives: QP Journal can also be used in an ethics unit of any public relations/ communication course. The assignment reinforces ethical philosophies by helping students apply these philosophies in a simulation. The assignment would also be useful in a public relations management or leadership course as the assignment introduces students to the ethical decision making process. Further, the perspective switching component of the assignment helps students see different perspectives, which would work well in a public relations cases course. Finally, the introspective, reflective format of the assignment makes it ideal for an online course.
No matter the specific course, the Perspectives: QP Journal works best when the instructor is engaged with the students. The assignment becomes a dialogue between the student and the instructor, a space where the instructor can affirm, ask additional questions, and share observations.
Research has found that the element of reflecting and sharing improves student learning and offers a sense of belonging and social support (Chang, 2019). As a result, the instructor should respond thoughtfully to each student. Doing so helps create the safe space necessary for students to feel comfortable to share. In the early stages of implementing this assignment, the importance of dialogue with students was missed. The Perspectives: QP Journal was originally set up as a graded assignment, and instructor comments were provided in the grading feedback. Student received the instructor’s response, but could not reply to the instructor.
Many students instigated dialogue by emailing the instructor directly to respond to the instructor’s comments. Their initiative led to the realization that the assignment needed to be set up as a private two- way communication channel so that the student and instructor could converse back and forth easily. The move to two-way communication was revolutionary in student engagement with the assignment.
The drawback to the Perspectives: QP Journal is time. While rewarding, facilitating a dialogue with each student is immensely time consuming. A potential solution is to incorporate more collaborative reflection. Research shows that collaborative reflection highlights different perspectives and encourages students to see things differently and challenge their assumptions (Bowne et. al., 2010; Chang, 2019; Krutka et. al., 2014). Currently students may incorporate ideas from this assignment into class discussions, but are not required to do so. As a result, offering student-to-student collaborative reflection opportunities may reduce the time burden on the instructor while capitalizing on the benefits of collaborative reflection for the student.
Recommended Sources Related to the Assignment
There are several resources that support the Perspectives: QP Journal. Prior to the assignment, students are introduced to an overview of ethical decision making models by reading chapter 16 in Ethics in Public Relations: A Guide to Best Practice by Patricia Parsons (2016), which provides a resource on the ethical philosophies that are reinforced in the Perspectives: QP Journal. The online training modules from The ArthurW. Page Center Public Relations Ethics Training also provide resources for this assignment with a module two on core ethical principles and module four on ethical decision making (Kent, n.d.; Kleinmann, n.d.). Finally, engaging students through activities or simulations are important. The Moral Machine (2017), created by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology is the simulation tool used for the Perspectives: QP Journal. Thus far, the Moral Machine (2017) has collected information from 2.3 million people and offers interesting conclusions on how people around the world approach ethical situations.
There are also several excellent resources on the reflective learning format used in the Perspectives: QP Journal. A few to note include Parker Palmer’s (2000) Let Your Life Speak: Listening for the Voice of Vocation and The Growth Mindset by Carol Dweck (2006). Both resources offer good information on the importance of reflective practices and its influence on a learning growth mindset.
In conclusion, the Perspectives: QP Journal assignment was successful in bridging the gap between ethical concepts and practice through reflective learning. Through this assignment students noted the importance of perspective switching and decision making tools such as the Potter Box, and committed to their usage when faced with ethical dilemmas. Students also identified the power of reflective processing as a tool to transfer abstract ethical concepts into concrete ethical practice. Most importantly, students affirmed that ethics matters, both personally and professionally, and recognized that while not always comfortable, doing the right thing is always necessary. One student summarized it best saying that through this assignment, “I learned the significance of doing what is ethical even when it is not the most convenient thing to do.”
References
Bowne, M., Cutler, K., DeBates, D., Gilkerson, D. & Stremmel, A. (2010). Pedagogical documentation and collaborative dialogue as tools of inquiry for pre-service teachers in early childhood education: An exploratory narrative. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 48-59. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ890715.pdf
Helyer, R. (2015). Learning through reflection: The critical role of reflection in work-based learning. Journal of Work-Applied Management, 7(1), 15-27. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWAM-10-2015-003.
Kleinmann, C. M. (n.d.). Module 2: Core ethical principles. The Arthur W. Page Center: Public relations ethics training. https://www.pagecentertraining.psu.edu/
Krutka, D. G., Bergman, D. J., Flores, R., Mason, K. & Jack, A. R. (2014).
Microblogging about teaching: Nurturing participatory cultures through collaborative online reflection with pre-service teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 40, 83-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.02.002
Larsen, D. P., London, D. A. & Emke, A. R. (2016). Using reflection to influence practice: Student perceptions of daily reflection in clinical education. Perspectives on Medical Education, 5(5), 285-
Palmer, P. J. (2000). Let your life speak: Listening for the voice of vocation. Wiley.
Parsons, P. (2016). Ethics in public relations: A guide to best practice. Kogan Page Limited.
Persson, E. K., Kvist, L. J. & Ekelin, M. (2018). Midwifery students’ experiences of learning through the use of written reflections – An interview study. Nurse Education in Practice, 30, 73-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2018.01.005.
To cite this article: Kleinmann, C. (2024). The Perspectives Quiet Place Journal: Reflective learning to bridge the gap between ethical concepts and practice. Journal of Public Relations Education, 9(3), 86-100. https://journalofpreducation.com/?p=4278
Editorial Record: Submitted June 9, 2023. Revised October 1, and November 20, 2023. Accepted November 21, 2023. Published March 2024.
Author
Jasmine Gray Assistant Professor Communication Division Pepperdine University California, USA Email: jaz.gray@pepperdine.edu
Jacob Thompson Hussman School of Journalism and Media UNC-Chapel Hill North Carolina, USA Email: jacobthompson@unc.edu
ABSTRACT
In the last few years, the US social climate has been shaped by the COVID-19 pandemic as well as social unrest due to racial injustice. As instructors of a research methods course that traditionally focused on the needs of corporate clients, we wondered how these developments could inspire a new learning experience for students that encourages them to develop research skills through responding more directly to major life disruptions and the inequities revealed. We aimed to avoid compounding challenges our students faced while also giving them knowledge and skills that would empower them to address diversity and ethics in their future work as public relations professionals (CPRE, 2018). The result is a semester-long project that asks students to critically engage with questions of ethics and inequalities in research methods.
Our classrooms are spaces where students can practice using research skills to navigate the realities of our social world rather than reify false notions of neutrality, whether in research and strategic communication or in education as a whole (Freire, 2018). This GIFT asks students to spend their time and effort addressing significant social issues, including issues that coincide with current events and those that reflect a prior interest or passion for the student. The project increases student engagement by helping them see the research methods they learn as relevant to current challenges, and students build self-efficacy as they apply course objectives in reframing a societal obstacle as an opportunity for a positive impact (Anderson, 2004; Ineson et al., 2013; Leston-Bandiera, 2013; Chowdhury, n.d.). Students leave the course understanding how research methods are relevant to issues they care about and confident in their ability to conduct ethical, inclusive public relations research in their careers.
Assignment Rationale
Our primary objective in designing this assignment is to improve student engagement in public relations research methods courses. Although we were initially driven by the need to engage students during the shift to remote learning during COVID, improving engagement is always especially desirable in methods courses, which our students frequently cite as the most challenging. Our primary intervention is asking students to choose an organization and PR issue they find personally relevant for their semester-long project. By giving students a greater say in developing their project and the ability to choose a topic relevant to their career goals, we expect to see increased engagement and self- efficacy (Anderson, 2004; Leston-Bandiera, 2013). This increased sense of ownership will lead them to develop better research skills and feel confident applying those skills in professional settings as well as help them build ethics knowledge with an eye to real-world effects.
A second, and complementary, goal in designing this assignment is to better students’ ability to apply their research skills beyond the classroom as they move into careers as communication professionals. We hope that asking students to work on projects that they see as aligned with their personal interests and career goals will lead them to think critically about the potential strengths and weaknesses of each method as it might be employed in the real-world contexts they will eventually face. We ask students to go beyond designing and executing the most ideal version of a study and to instead grapple with the challenges of applying those research methods to more realistic business cases.
Finally, we considered what the increased social unrest due to racial injustice meant for our students, both as they completed coursework and as they prepared to enter the world as early career communicators. At a minimum, we felt that all students needed to consider ethics with an eye toward diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), and we updated our research ethics accordingly. We also encouraged – but did not require – students to take on DEI questions in their project selection. Pushing or requiring students to choose DEI topics would have risked undermining our first two goals. But for students who chose to pursue these questions, the semester- long assignment provided an opportunity for deeper engagement.
Future instructors could choose to implement one of these interventions without committing to both of them. Project choice in itself can improve student agency, even if it is not explicitly connected to future career goals, social issues or questions of DEI. And of course, giving students the opportunity to work on projects that emulate real-world campaigns helps students build confidence applying research methods in practice, regardless of whether they are invested in the particular topic.
Bringing these three elements together, however, has the added benefit of encouraging students to think about ethics and equity in terms of their own goals and aspirations, hopefully preparing them to take those ideas to a career of their choice. Further, the interventions that allow for all three elements are synergistic rather than in conflict; each has the potential to improve the others’ effects.
Assignment Learning Objectives
Learning Objective 1 (abbreviated as LO 1):
Students increase their capacity to connect coursework to professional success in future careers.
Learning Objective 2 (abbreviated as LO 2):
Students develop research and analytic skills.
Learning Objective 3 (abbreviated as LO 3):
Students develop ethics and diversity/inclusion knowledge.
Learning Objective 4 (abbreviated as LO 4):
Students increase confidence in their ability to employ new skills and knowledge in their future careers.
Connection to Public Relations Practice or Theory
Research and analytic skills, ethics knowledge, and diversity and inclusion knowledge are three of the qualities employers most desire in entry-level public relations professionals, yet many college graduates enter the workforce without a strong understanding of relevant research methods or how they relate to ethics and inclusion (CPRE, 2018). Investigations find that, in particular, communication practitioners do not consistently employ research methods to measure and evaluate the success of their messaging (Thorson et al., 2015). These disconnects, however, are not because public relations curricula lack research methods training; in fact, more than 90 percent of undergraduate programs require a research methods course (CPRE, 2018).
Instead, research suggests that students frequently struggle to actually learn the research skills covered in these courses, in part because they do not understand how the material relates to their existing knowledge or future goals (Markle, 2017; see Early, 2014 for meta- analysis). As a result, it is difficult for students to integrate new concepts into their worldview, and they are less motivated to engage with course materials.
Additionally, when students enter the working world, they may not see these research tools as ways to improve their messaging but as potentially undermining their contributions (Nothhaft & Stennson, 2019). We posit that teaching research methods in a vacuum, disconnected from students’ goals and interests, may exacerbate this problem.
By asking students to choose an organization and topic that feel relevant to them, we improve student learning, connecting research and analytic skills and ethics knowledge developed in the course to their existing knowledge, real-world experience, and future goals (Anderson, 2004; Leston-Bandeira, 2013). Students more clearly recognize how the information they are learning might apply directly to their future careers, and they build confidence in their ability to apply those skills in the workplace.
Employers increasingly feel that DEI training must be embedded in all aspects of business and communication education rather than treated as a separate topic (Ragas, 2023). This GIFT addresses this need by incorporating questions of diversity and inclusion into the study of research ethics and, in many cases, as a core component of the issue students choose to address for their semester topic.
How the Assignment was Class-Tested
The activity consists of reshaping a semester-long, client-based project, providing opportunities for students to rethink the values that usually underlie research courses in strategic communication. It was class tested in two 30-person undergraduate Advertising/Public Relations Research Methods classes.
In the traditional course, over sixteen weeks, lectures on research methods including focus groups, interviews, ethnography, surveys, and experiments were each followed by a graded assignment conducted individually or in a group. Due to COVID-19, we reimagined the class as an asynchronous remote course, as many other instructors had. Our new design aimed to increase online engagement and make the course feel relevant by giving students opportunity to think deeply about real-world issues across two core course elements that encompassed the GIFT:
Choosing a client and issue related to a current social issue,
Learning about research ethics issues that have involved BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) communities,
Each group was required to select a client engaged with a relevant social issue that they would like to address throughout the semester. A relevant social issue was defined as an important problem for discussion that is closely connected to the current time and affects human society (Dictionary.com, n.d.a; Dictionary.com, n.d.b; Dictionary.com, n.d.c). The social issue could but did not have to be related to DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion).
Once clients and issues were approved, each group refined a research problem to address on behalf of their client over the course of the semester. As we covered each method, students posed research questions which could be best answered with that method and which deepened their understanding and built on their previous work. There were three phases of research assignments: Secondary Data (background research project), Qualitative Primary Data (focus group, in-depth interview, participant observation/ethnography), and Quantitative Primary Data (survey, experiment). These assignments led to a reflection assignment that allowed students to speak to the value of the unique aspects of the course (i.e. social issue and diverse research ethics) and a final project (presentation and paper) that synthesized the previous assignments and provided recommendations for their clients’ advertising or PR effort.
Maintaining the advocacy focus, the reframed project was complemented by content highlighting the perspectives of marginalized or minoritized communities. Each week, in addition to working toward graded assignments, students were prepared to engage fully in discussion activities including contributing written or video recorded posts in the internal message forum for the class. We reworked the section of the course examining research ethics to include socially relevant aspects. For example, previous ethics modules centered studies involving white researchers and participants (e.g., the Milgram and Stanford Prison Experiments). We added the “Tuskegee Experiment” to our case studies and included new sections on “Black Women & Medicinal Experimentation” and “Research Ethics and Exploitation in Developing Countries” (see sample assignment titled Research Ethics through Diverse Experiences). We also provided an assignment that allowed students to reflect on the knowledge they gained over the semester including what was most valuable, what outstanding questions they had, and what was most relevant to their personal and professional life. These opportunities allowed students to further consider their professional futures as well as discuss ethical considerations addressed during the semester.
Evidence of Learning Outcomes/Assessment
Evidence of learning outcomes was demonstrated through qualitative student feedback that aligned with key learning objectives. Students said the course felt especially relevant compared to other courses they had taken. They emphasized that focusing on real-world issues (in this case, DEI related) was important to them and made understanding concepts easier (LO 1, LO 3). Students indicated that having a topic that was meaningful to them and relevant to current events made it easier for them to engage with course topics.
Notably, the GIFT served as the bridge between course content taught by us as instructors and the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) that public relations practitioners value (specifically, research skills and ethics knowledge). Students believed that choosing the social issue related topic made their explorations of the various research methods especially engaging (LO 2, LO 4). Furthermore, the topics covered in the ethics section worked to deepen their appreciation for the related discussion activities. Students said that the expanded ethics section was especially engaging and made them think more seriously about the importance of ethics in research.
The perceived relevance of the GIFT provided the glue of engagement and self-efficacy needed to bring about the intended outcomes. Additionally, the ethics section provided food for thought about diversity, equity, and inclusion that could guide subsequent research.
Importantly, the students also said that the GIFT better prepared them for entry-level positions in their field. Students felt that they could use the project as an example on their resume and in job applications. Some also indicated that it made them stronger candidates as they entered the job market, with one noting that the project prepared them for an interview, allowing them to speak about hands-on work employing multiple research methods that they would need to use over the course of a campaign if hired.
The feedback students provided suggests that they found this approach meaningful and exciting, even at a time when they faced more remote classwork that could make staying engaged difficult.
Template Assignment Guides
There are three template assignments:
Client/Issue Choice Opportunity
Research Ethics through Diverse Experiences Activity
Reflection Assignment
Client/Issue Choice Opportunity
Learning Outcomes
Define team goals and expectations for group work
Collaborate toward the selection of an organization/client
Create research topic based on a social issue impacting an organization/client
Assignment Description
This semester you will have the opportunity to focus on a client’s engagement with a major social movement or current event. Each group will be required to select a client engaged with a relevant social issue that you would like to address throughout the semester.
A relevant social issue will be defined as an important problem for discussion that is closely connected to the current time and affects human society (Dictionary.com, n.d.a; Dictionary,com n.d.b, Dictionary.com, n.d.c).
Assignment Requirements
First, you will fill out a survey that will assess your personal project preferences including your skills, interests, and the social issues which you are most passionate about. After being assigned to groups based on your preferences and completing a team charter, your group will decide on and submit your top three clients and potential research topics for my final approval.
Once confirmed, your group will further refine a research problem to address throughout the semester. With each assignment, you will pose research questions that can be addressed using the research methods covered in the course. The research you conduct will involve how your client is responding to a social issue (as defined above).
Each potential client that your group identifies should fall under one of the following categories:
This client should consider addressing [relevant social issue] through strategic communication research,
This client is currently addressing [relevant social issue] and should assess their effectiveness through strategic communication research, or
This client is involved in a corporate crisis/situation related to [relevant social issue] that should be addressed through strategic communication research.
The client can be a for-profit or nonprofit organization. It should be an organization that is big enough to have a media footprint. The social issue can but does not have to be related to DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion). It can be any social issue (e.g. anti-Black racism, climate change, disability justice, animal rights, bullying etc.). However, it should be a problem that requires strategic communication research to solve.
Research Ethics through Diverse Experiences Activity
Learning Outcomes
Increase understanding of ethical considerations involved in research through diverse perspectives/examples.
Connect ethical considerations to the professional world.
Connect ethical considerations to your research project.
Assignment Description
You will discuss the ways in which learning about these unethical studies inform your understanding of communication research ethics.
Assignment Requirements
Please read and/or watch at least two videos or articles from the subsections below. Afterward, use the discussion questions listed below for this week’s forum post.
Discussion Questions (Post answers in forum discussion)
What is the importance of discussing ethics in research?
Describe some historical instances of unethical research practices. Include any important takeaways.
What are the risks of participating in research?
Now that you have engaged with these case studies and seen the potential for harm related to conducting research, what can you take from this to ensure that you are being ethical in the research you design for your project?
How does the general topic of ethics relate to the client organization your group chose for this semester?
How could the general topic of ethics inform your future professional goals?
Reflection Assignment
Due by [DATE] at [TIME]
This assignment will provide you an opportunity to reflect on the knowledge you have gained this semester – what has been valuable to you, what you have questions about, and what is relevant to your personal and professional life. Please write at least one single-spaced page total (note, bullet point indents and the questions below do not count toward the page count). You can feel free to write more than one-page.
Reflecting on the readings, summary guide, engagement activities, slide notes, instructor videos, and additional content provided and discussed through the semester:
Please discuss knowledge you have gained in each of the following areas:
Understanding of secondary research
Understanding of qualitative analysis
Understanding and quantitative analysis
The uses and benefits of using research to answer advertising and/or PR questions.
Please discuss how examining ethics from a range of diverse perspectives impacted the execution of your research assignments. For example, you can discuss the impact it had on the overall direction of your research (e.g. what your group decided to address). You could also discuss the impact it had on how you approached specific research aspects (e.g. designing research questions, interacting with research participants, etc.).
Please discuss any outstanding questions you have or points of confusion regarding any topic discussed in the course so far. I will provide additional feedback. If you have no outstanding questions, discuss how you have been able to gain clarity and better understand the meaning of the topics or texts discussed so far this semester.
Please discuss the aspects of the course that have been most valuable to you so far this semester, including how any of the topics or materials covered so far relate to your life, the communities to which you belong, and/or your career aspirations.
Assignment Grading Criteria or Rubric
Client/Issue Choice Opportunity
This client preference activity accounts for 2.5% of the student’s total grade (pass/fail). To receive credit for the client/issue choice, students must submit three potential clients (falling under one of the three listed categories) and the corresponding social issue to be researched for each. Alternatively, the assignment can be viewed as a low stakes engagement opportunity used to develop a graded assignment.
Research Ethics through Diverse Experiences Activity
This research ethics forum response activity is one of ten responses that accounts for 5% of the student’s total grade. Students receive full credit for each one as long as they address each part of the prompt and respond to a classmate. Alternatively, the assignment can be viewed as a low stakes engagement opportunity used to develop a graded assignment.
Reflection Assignment
This Reflection Assignment accounts for 10% of the student’s total grade. Grading will be based on the accuracy of the information provided in question one and the substantiveness of the responses to questions two through four.
Teaching Note
Intended Courses
Advertising/Public Relations research methods; Undergraduate communication research methods
Best Practices of Implementing the Assignment
We made a decision to require that each student engage with a social issue, rather than to “strongly suggest” or to allow opting out. We took this stance because we felt strongly that engaging successfully in the professional field (and in society in general) will increasingly require young adults to step outside of the comfortable and agreeable. However, we balanced this decision with a variety of student choice moments that allowed students to maintain agency and equity in the course. For example, groups were assigned based on students’ responses to a survey about project preferences, including issues about which they were most passionate. Student groups were provided autonomy in selecting clients, which could be any for-profit or nonprofit organizations with a significant media footprint. The activity design asked each group to work together to decide on three client/issue ideas with justifications for each. The instructors then selected one of the three ideas for the students to continue to develop.
Notably, the social issue could be but did not have to be related to DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion). Setting tight parameters around the type of client and issue the students chose could have resulted in students feeling pressure to choose issues perceived as important to the instructors. Instead, we welcomed a range of social issues as long as they could be addressed with strategic communication research. Broad parameters ensured students chose issues engaging for them (e.g., climate change, disability justice, animal rights, bullying etc.). Yet, our approach allowed for students to explore DEI by choice. For example, one student in a group researching diversity in NASCAR shared:
I want to say that I already valued diversity in research, but this course has furthered my appreciation for it. Especially when finding that a great deal of research associated with our client has been focused on the white feminist perspective in branding and social change, rather than further inclusion of factors like race and ethnicity.
Furthermore, the way we framed our approach—as an “opportunity” for students to “choose” to delve into social issues paired with “understanding” the unethical research experiences of people from minoritized communities (as well as completing a team charter detailing an approach for working well together)—seemed to prepare students to be inclusive and ethical themselves. Because of our approach, students– including our underrepresented students–felt not only accommodated but empowered. For example, after discussing her group’s decision to choose a DEI related social issue, the Black student mentioned earlier continued by expressing her gratitude for our approach–while bridging key aspects of the GIFT in her response (i.e. student engagement toward addressing PR, exploring a social issue and practicing ethics and inclusion):
I enjoyed our focus group because we asked sensitive questions that are generally avoided. In our focus groups, [the] majority of our participants strayed away from questions of diversity and race, but it started a conversation. Another factor is that there were no persons of color in our focus group which is an important part of providing solutions. Research participants should come from diverse backgrounds because one opinion and point of view does not speak for all. Thank you for allowing our research topics to be centered around the current racial climate that we live in today.
We opted for open-ended ethics discussion questions that allowed students to engage in deep reflection beyond a regurgitation of course concepts (see Research Ethics through Diverse Experiences Activity).
However, the original discussion questions did not directly ask about relevance specifically to the research project/client and career goals. We also opted for reflection questions that allowed students to engage in contemplation about knowledge they gained over the semester without being primed by the instructor (see Reflection Assignment). The original reflection prompts did not explicitly ask students to address ethics and diverse perspectives. However, students’ responses organically included references to ethics and inclusion. For example, a student mentioned their group contemplating whether or not to ask women at a shelter about their abuse experiences (ultimately, going a different route after further reflection on their research goals). Another student discussed their group grappling with not having the proper survey sample for questions meant to address size-inclusive clothing for a popular women’s athleisure brand (and their decision to acknowledge this limitation in the write up of their data). Going forward, we would consider including a specific prompt to further allow for reflection related to DEI and ethics. Questions in this document were revised to support the aim of balancing reflectiveness and learning objectives (without leading the students to specific conclusions).
Recommended Resources Related to the Assignment
Watch
Crash Course [CrashCourse] (2018, April 18). Henrietta Lacks,the Tuskegee experiment, and ethical data collection: Crash course statistics #12 [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzNANZnoiRs
Read
Scharff, D. P., Mathews, K. J., Jackson, P., Hoffsuemmer, J., Martin, E., & Edwards, D. (2010). More than Tuskegee: understanding mistrust about research participation. Journal of health care for the poor and underserved, 21(3), 879–897. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.0.0323
Limitations/Challenges of Implementing the Assignment
The COVID-19 pandemic allowed for an innovative spirit that led to the development of this GIFT but also presented certain challenges. Due to COVID-19 restrictions, the exploration of certain methods was curtailed. For example, there were workarounds needed for methods like ethnography or interviewing. Because the information needed to be delivered asynchronously due to COVID-19 parameters, the ethics additions to the course, which were significant, still felt insufficient in depth. This was due to the sensitive nature of the topics and the lack of rich, in person, real-time discussion.
However, in a traditional or asynchronous class, it may be a challenge for instructors teaching our GIFT to create the conducive social/physical environment students need to engage with these topics. Instructors should work to manage emotional responses, nonverbal cues, etc. toward enriched (even vulnerable) depths of conversation. For both the diverse ethics examples as well as the social issues related to each client, robust interpersonal discussion should be encouraged among students where communication aspects like tone of voice, reflection on previous commenters etc. can add to the weight of the discussion. Furthermore, there may be additional limitations for this GIFT in a summer course where there may be less time to select groups, a client and a social issue, all of which require larger portions of class time.
Instructors teaching smaller courses may find that it is more challenging to sort students into groups with similar interests based on their survey responses. In larger course sections, we were easily able to assign groups where students had at least some evident shared interest. When there are less students in total, it can be more challenging to identify clear areas of overlap. It is important to take care in this step to ensure that a student does not feel excluded or unenthusiastic as someone without as much direct interest in the project.
Finally, it is important to make sure that students continue to view the project from the perspective of their client, operating in an ethical manner that serves the best interest of the organization. Because students have selected social issues about which they are passionate, some may at first be inclined to focus on solving the challenge itself, rather than what it means to represent a client engaging with the issue. This is both a limitation – in that it requires additional attention from the instructor – and an opportunity for students to engage critically with what it means to operate ethically as a public relations professional.
References
Anderson, R. C. (2004). Role of the reader’s schema in comprehension, learning, and memory. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 594–606). International Reading Association.
Freire, P. (2018). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Bloomsbury.
Ineson, E., Jung, T, Haines, C, & Kim, M. (2012).The influence of prior subject knowledge, prior ability and work experience on self- efficacy. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 12(1), 59-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2012.11.002
Leston-Bandeira, C. (2013). Methods teaching through a discipline research-oriented approach. Politics, 33(3), 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9256.12013
Markle, G. (2017). Factors influencing achievement in undergraduate social science research methods courses: A mixed methods analysis. Teaching Sociology, 45(2), 105–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X16676302
Murtonen, M., Olkinuora, E., Tynjälä, P. et al. (2008). “Do I need research skills in working life?”: University students’ motivation and difficulties in quantitative methods courses. High Education, 56, 599–612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9113-9
Nothhaft, H. & Stensson, H. (2019). Explaining the measurement and evaluation stasis: A thought experiment and a note on functional stupidity. Journal of Communication Management, 23(2). https://doi.org/10.1108/JCOM-12-2018-0135
Thorson, K., Michaelson, D., Gee, E., Jiang, J., Lu, Z.,, Luan, G., Weatherly, K., Pung, S., Qin, Y. & Xu, J. (2015). Joining the Movement? Investigating Standardization of Measurement and Evaluation Within Public Relations. Research Journal of the Institute of Public Relations, 2(1), 1-25. https://instituteforpr.org/wp-content/uploads/MichaelsonEtcArticle.pdf
To cite this article: Gray, J., and Thompson, J. (2024). Infusing real-world social issues and ethics into research methods instruction. Journal of Public Relations Education, 9(3), 101-120. https://journalofpreducation.com/?p=4294
Editorial Record: Submitted June 9, 2023. Revised September 23, and November 19, 2023. Accepted November 21, 2023. Published March 2024.
Author
Tiffany Derville Gallicano Associate Professor Department of Communication Studies UNC-Charlotte North Carolina, USA Email: tgallica@charlotte.edu
ABSTRACT
An ethics assignment is shared involving a cultural crisis. Any moral dilemma involving a cultural crisis could be used in this assignment, or the Arla Foods cartoon crisis could be adopted, which is the model case used in this assignment description. Arla Foods confronted a crisis when it was boycotted based on its Danish identity. This case involves a heated clash in values, it pulls an apolitical company into a high-stakes political battle, it involves managing the complexities of ethics in a global context, and it has themes of cancel culture in the form of boycotts. These themes are relevant to today’s ethical landscape. In addition, the case broadens traditional examinations of diversity and inclusion by delving into the religious diversity of both internal and external key stakeholders, and the case requires students to understand cultural differences. Students engage in environmental scanning by navigating academic, corporate, and news sources; thinking critically; creating solutions; and analyzing them, providing the opportunity to reinforce foundational knowledge about moral decision making (e.g., Martin & Wright, 2016) and crisis management (e.g., Coombs, 2007) from previous lessons or courses while advancing to higher levels of Bloom et al.’s (1956) taxonomy. Leadership and teamwork skills are developed through a lecture about Tuckman’s (1965) group stages and how to navigate them, including ways to confront poor team behavior in this team project.
On September 30, 2005, a controversial newspaper in Denmark published cartoons ridiculing the Prophet Muhammed, which were depicted by a UAE cabinet minister as “cultural terrorism, not freedom of expression” (Fattah, 2006, para. 20). The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the Arab League sent a joint letter to the Danish Prime Minister, who turned down the invitation to meet and backed the newspaper’s freedom of speech, reflecting Danish sentiment. About four months later, a newspaper in Norway reprinted the cartoons. A little more than two weeks later, Arla Foods issued an apology through ads in 30 Middle Eastern newspapers, which activated Danish feminist NGOs, politicians, and other influencers, who criticized the response as supportive of a religion that represses women (Holmström et al., 2010). Middle Eastern consumers started boycotting Danish companies, including Arla Foods, because the Danish government would not accept responsibility or punish the newspaper (Gaither & Curtin, 2008). Within five days of the boycott, the company’s $1.8 million in daily sales from the Middle East plummeted to nearly nothing (Gaither & Curtin, 2008).
GIFT Overview
In teams, students collectively take on the role of vice president of public relations for Arla Foods on the day the cartoons were first printed. They are instructed to gather information about the case as a practice of environmental scanning. Although their information gathering is different (i.e., they would not read a case study about their current situation in an academic journal), they still gain the experience of learning about an event through the navigation of required sources and summarizing the issue concisely at the start of their moral analysis document. They benefit from knowing what actually happened in the case and are in the pilot’s seat to argue for the best morally justifiable solution for how the company should have responded, starting on the day of the initial cartoon publication. In groups, they perform an analysis based on a framework for moral decision making. The textbook by Martin and Wright (2016) was used for teaching the model; however, the model can be found in other ethics textbooks, such as Bivins (2009). Instructors using alternative models for moral decision making can still use the assignment. They would need to start the assignment by having students begin their document by concisely summarizing the issue in about five sentences for the CEO, developing a list of relevant facts, generating a list of key stakeholders, and proposing their best set of three potential moral solutions. Then, any moral decision-making model already used in class could be applied. A common learning moment for student teams is falling into the trap of figuring out what the company can get away with rather than what the company has a moral duty to do. Once students have developed their three moral solutions, instructor feedback is shared and moral solutions can be revised before proceeding to the final step, which involves choosing one of the solutions and justifying it for the CEO in about two paragraphs.
Rationale
Ethics, Diversity and Inclusion, and a Cultural Perspective
The Commission on Public Relations Education is “the authoritative voice on behalf of public relations education, with a board representing 18 organizations and groups, and between 50 and 60 board members on an annual basis” (CPRE, 2018, p. 9). According to the Commission on Public Relations Education’s Fast Forward report, there is a large gap between how PR professionals rate the amount of ethics knowledge entry-level practitioners should have (the importance of which was rated as an average of 4.57 on a 5-point scale) and the amount of ethics knowledge found among entry-level practitioners (rated as an average of 3.34 on a 5-point scale; CPRE, 2018). Although a public relations ethics course was endorsed by CPRE in its 2006 report, The Professional Bond, the need for stronger ethics training has persisted as an issue, leading the CPRE (2018) to list it as its first recommendation in a report of major recommendations, noting that it is “more essential than ever” (p. 20). CPRE’s (2023) recent report indicates that professionals viewed ethics as “an essential competency” despite finding that young professionals lack ethical skills in their first five years.
The assignment also delves into what CPRE (2018) described as “knowledge areas that entry-level practitioners should have”: diversity and inclusion, in addition to a cultural perspective (p. 55). CPRE’s position was informed by practitioners’ prioritization of the areas as the most desired, in addition to a cultural perspective, social issues, and business acumen. The presence of a multicultural perspective among entry-level practitioners was rated as an average of 2.82 on a 5-point scale). This case can help students develop their knowledge of these areas, as religious diversity is seldom explored in the public relations classroom, and students have commonly grown up in a freedom of speech culture in which no religion is so sacred that it is spared from public ridicule. In fact, students typically make the initial mistake of summarizing the event as an issue of racism, seemingly lacking the lexicon to distinguish racism from religious hatred and failing to find words (such as blasphemy) to depict an event that is deeply offensive to members of a religion. Students learn from instructor feedback about how to write about religious offense as they revise their work prior to the recommendation stage of the project.
There are several advantages of using the Arla Foods case with the recommended materials mentioned earlier. The case is a moral dilemma involving conflicting duties to oppositional stakeholders. Students should be reminded that they have a major duty to the organization, but they must also consider their duties to others. As Martin and Wright (2016) noted, “In the ethics classes and workshops we have taught, we have noticed a tendency for public relations people to address ethical issues in terms of “what works?” rather than “what’s right?” That is sometimes because it is often more difficult to figure out what ethics requires than what good public relations practice demands (p. 219).
The case is also strong because of the variety of solutions, some of which could involve collaborating with other groups, ranging from the Confederation of Danish Industries to the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, which students learn about when completing their reading assignments. The availability of high quality teaching materials (mentioned in the Teaching Note in this manuscript) provides deep opportunities for cultural learning. The case is also ideal because it involves pressure on a decidedly apolitical company that must do something politically to address its moral duties. The case involves managing the complexities of ethics in a global context, and it has themes of cancel culture in the form of boycotts. Students must understand the religious offense from a Muslim standpoint, explain why Middle Eastern countries expect the government to have unilateral control over the media, and use the characteristics of Middle Eastern culture to understand why collective behavior such as boycotts are expected to have high participation rates.
Although the company’s crisis began in 2005, the context continues to be relevant to contemporary events. For example, in 2023, an adjunct art professor was sued and fired for sharing artwork of the Prophet Muhammad in a global art course following a Muslim student’s complaint (Patel, 2023). The tweet promoting this story received over a million views on Twitter (New York Times, 2023). Notably, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (i.e., described by the Associated Press as the largest Muslim advocacy organization in the United States) took the position that analyzing images of Prophet Muhammad for academic purposes was not Islamophobic, unlike efforts to produce images for the purpose of offending Muslims (Hollingsworth, 2023; Lawson-Tancred, 2023).
Another example is the controversy the Asia Society faced when blurring images of the Prophet Muhammad in the museum’s online showcase––the museum called the blurring a mistake and explained that the physical museum tour includes Prophet Muhammad images with warnings to avoid the area if the content is found offensive. Discussing contemporary cases in the context of the Arla Foods case helps students recognize the importance of the intent behind the action, which aligns with Kantian theory (e.g., Bivins, 2009; Martin & Wright, 2016).
To complete the assignment, students must think critically, create solutions, and analyze them, which provides the opportunity to reinforce foundational knowledge about moral decision making (Martin & Wright, 2016) and crisis management (e.g., Coombs, 2007) from previous lessons or courses while advancing to the application level of Bloom et al.’s (1956) taxonomy. Leadership and teamwork skills are also developed through a lecture about Tuckman’s (1965) group stages and how to navigate them, including ways to confront poor team behavior.
Assignment Learning Objectives
The assignment has the following learning objectives:
Succinctly summarize a complex moral issue for a CEO based on environmental scanning that is compelling enough to be deemed a priority by the CEO
Identify key stakeholders to consider in an ethical dilemma
Present three strong solutions to a moral dilemma
Perform a moral analysis of potential solutions to a moral dilemma
Justify a chosen solution based on moral arguments
Connection to Public Relations Theory
This class project is an ideal way for students to apply approaches to moral decision making they have learned throughout the semester. Students can apply concepts such as Ross’ moral duties, Kantian theory, utilitarianism, and care ethics. These topics are generally covered in PR ethics textbooks, such as Bivins (2009) and Martin and Wright (2016). Students can even focus on virtue ethics by thinking about the best solution for developing the company’s moral character (see Martin & Wright, 2016). When understanding the Danish government’s initial lack of a response, instructors can guide students through Grunig and Hunt’s (1984) linkages model––summarized in an open access publication by Rawlins (2006)––placing the Danish government in the center of the figure. This figure can also be used to help students understand why targeting Danish companies is a compelling option for applying pressure to the Danish government. In addition, instructors can discuss the case in light of Rawlin’s summary of how to prioritize publics based on linkages type (i.e., enabling, functional, normative, or diffused), situational theory classification (e.g., active, aware, or latent), and additional considerations (e.g., power, legitimacy and urgency). Moral duties fall into the third category (additional considerations). Furthermore, students review and apply primary and secondary crisis response strategies in their proposed solutions (e.g., Coombs, 2007). The case allows students to determine how to apply theory to understand and navigate their moral analyses. In addition, Tuckman’s (1965) group stages can be presented with strategies for navigating each stage.
How the Assignment was Class-Tested
This project was adopted in one graduate Public Relations Theory course and in three undergraduate Public Relations Ethics classes. One of the classes included a student who participated in the Arla Foods boycott, and this student served as an additional resource for the class. The revision opportunities for each part of the assignment were essential to most students’ ability to achieve the learning outcomes. The heart of the assignment is the moral analysis of three options for resolving the issue. Students’ rough draft scores typically increased with each subsequent option they assessed, likely due to the benefit of instructor feedback.
The team member evaluations that were due with each rough draft were helpful for discouraging freeloading. Students evaluated themselves and their teammates based on communication skills, reliability, and contribution to the assignment due (considering that rotational team leaders carried expectations for performing greater work than the rest of the team). Students assessed performance on a 5-point scale for each criterion and were required to add comments for themselves and for any student rating below a 3 (i.e., a “meeting expectations” score). Each assignment in the project was set up to be graded individually rather than as a team in Canvas to enable the ability to lower students’ scores for contributing less to the team. If a student did not contribute at all, a zero was given on the assignment. If a student contributed far less than the rest of the team, points were deducted and an email was sent to check in with the student and explain the need for better communication with the team and more substantive contributions to each assignment. Students were required to respond to each other’s communication within 24 hours and had the option to make this window shorter, provided that the team unanimously agreed. These guard rails were effective in correcting poor team behavior. Throughout the team assessment assignments, feedback was shared about the stage their team might be in from Tuckman’s group stages (1965).
Evidence of Learning Outcomes
Each semester, students were invited to reflect upon the assignment. Students appreciated the opportunity to apply an ethical analysis to a complex case and to engage in collective problem solving when deliberating about a difficult ethical case. They also appreciated the experience of guiding a company that is entangled in a culture war and discovering how the assignments within the project were helpful to understanding how to address the conflict. Other students also emphasized problem-solving and expressed appreciation for the diversity and inclusion context of the cast. In addition, students expressed a deeper appreciation for the importance of environmental scanning and audience analyses. Students took the initiative to talk about the case in class discussions of theoretical material.
Template Assignment Guide
The instructions for teaching the assignment in an asynchronous course, a semester-length timeline, and the grading rubrics are presented below in their original format.
Project Instructions
For our class project, you will apply the framework for ethical reasoning, described by Martin and Wright (2016) in chapter 13, to the Arla Foods case. As with all assignments in class, the use of ChatGPT on this assignment would be a form of academic dishonesty other than an area where I state that it is allowed to understand scholarly concepts from cultural studies. I want your thinking to entirely be your own to maximize your learning.
Here are the steps to follow for the assignment.
1. Choose your team in the People tab by the end of the day on Thursday, Aug. 24, or I will assign you to a team after that date.
Communicate with the team and figure out who is taking on which role.
2. Learn about the Arla Foods case and the moment in time I’ve chosen for your assignment.
You are the vice president of public relations for Arla Foods. Every part of this assignment should be written as if you are in this position, and your audience is the CEO of the company (i.e., write to me as the CEO, not as your professor). On Sept. 30, 2005, a controversial newspaper in Denmark published cartoons ridiculing the Prophet Muhammed, which are highly offensive to the Islamic community. As a Danish company with substantial profit from the Middle East, you are concerned about a backlash against Arla Foods just on the basis that it is from the same country as the controversial newspaper.
Sept. 30, 2005, is the day on which we are entering the case.
This means that no one has started boycotting yet because the newspaper cartoons were just published. You are developing the framework to make a recommendation to the CEO about what Arla Foods should do. I will act in the role of the CEO. Although we are completing this project over the course of the semester, in the real world, you would identify the potential damage from this incident (always preparing for the worst as a PR practitioner) and complete the framework within the day.
I chose this historic case because it involves a heated clash in values, it pulls an apolitical company into a high-stakes political and social battle, it involves managing the complexities of ethics in a global context, and it has themes of cancel culture in the form of boycotts. These are all important characteristics in today’s ethical landscape.
This project involves navigating high-quality research. Each of the sources below has unique information, in addition to overlapping information. Each team member is responsible for reading each of the sources below, regardless of the section you are leading. Learn important details about the context and discover what Arla actually did and the consequences of its actions. Seeing what happened will help you when you develop your best- and worst-case scenarios later in the process.
Gaither, T. Kenn, & Curtin, P. A. (2008). Examining the heuristic value of models of international public relations practice: A case study of the Arla Foods crisis. Journal of Public Relations Research, 20(1), 115–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627260701727051
Holmström, S., Falkheimer, J., & Nielsen, A. G. (2010). Legitimacy and strategic communication in globalization: The cartoon crisis and other legitimacy conflicts. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 4(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15531180903415780
Use the Martin and Wright (2016) book as one of your resources. Our textbook authors present the framework we are using and write out an example for us. I’ll want you to use full sentences (unlike they did), skip a line of space between bulleted information and paragraphs, and go a little deeper than they did, but it is still a useful example.
3. Dive into the assignment.
Ready to get started? Follow the steps below.
Watch my assignment template walk-through. You might want to open the assignment template below first.
Head over to the assignment template, go to File in the Google Docs menu and select “Make a copy.”
Go to the Share button in the upper right corner and give anyone access to the document who has the link. Make sure to give “editor” access from the drop-down menu. This is technically listed under Team Member One’s duties, but anyone can do it.
Download the free version of Grammarly for your internet browser and use it to help you proof as you write.
Coordinate roles, meeting times, and a timeline for completion with your team.
I have organized the project into roles, so each team member will have a turn leading at least one assignment. This leader will be responsible for coordinating team meetings for the assignment they are leading, in addition to taking a leadership role in developing the content and writing. Also, this person will coordinate a timeline for completion to enable all team members to have 24 hours to edit the document before it is due.
Finally, the team member is responsible for revising the work based on my feedback and sharing it with the team for final approval.
There will be a team member assessment due with each original (non-revision) assignment, which will factor into the individual grades I assign. You will report how you contributed to the portion of the group project that is due and you will share feedback about your team members. Although feedback is not required on the revisions because this work should be performed by the team leader with final approval from team members, if there are contribution issues that arise, please share them in the comments section of the assignment or email me.
Below is a list of assignment responsibilities for each team member role, which you will determine in your groups. Additional instructions for each part of the assignment appear in the template after this section.
Team Member One: Fill in your name here.
You are responsible for starting the Google Doc for your team to use for their individual assignments and for the team assignment at the end of the document. You will share editing access with your classmates and me (see the “share” button in the upper right corner and ensure that you are selecting editing access for me rather than the default option).
You will lead the “issue” section, which is one paragraph. See page 209 in our Martin and Wright (2016) textbook for an example of this paragraph.
You will co-lead the “relevant facts” section with Team Member Two by incorporating relevant facts from the Gaither & Curtin (2008) article and the Arla Foods (2006a) annual report (see the assignment description on Canvas for these two documents). Remember to use in-text citations. Work with Team Member Two to organize the information in decreasing order of importance, ending with historical facts. Also, ensure that the facts you include do not overlap. See pages 209-210 in our Martin and Wright (2016) textbook for an example of this section.
You will co-lead the decision and justification section with Team Member Two since both of your roles do not otherwise involve applying a moral analysis.
Team Member Two: Fill in your name here.
You will co-lead the “relevant facts” section with Team Member One by incorporating relevant facts from the Holmstrom et al. (2010) article and the Arla Foods (2006b) news release (see the assignment description on Canvas for these two documents). Remember to use in-text citations. Work with Team Member One to organize the information in decreasing order of importance, ending with historical facts. Also, ensure that the facts you include do not overlap. See pages 209-210 in our Martin and Wright (2016) textbook for an example of this section.
You will lead the “relevant stakeholders” section.
You will co-lead the decision and justification section with Team Member One.
You will lead the “team reflection” section, which is due with the decision and justification sections (co-led with Team Member One).
Team Member Three: Fill in your name here.
Lead your team in proposing a strong option for Arla Foods to take, list the best-case and worst-case scenarios for the option, and evaluate the option (see pages 211-215 in the Martin and Wright textbook). If your team would like feedback on the collection of three options chosen by your team (since they will need to be strong options as a part of your grade), list the proposed actions (for all three options) and email me with a link to your document. I would be happy to sign off on them if you get them to me at least 24 hours before the deadline.
Team Member Four: Fill in your name here.
Do the same thing as Team Member Three; however, your option needs to be different from the other options.
Team Member Five: Fill in your name here.
Do the same thing as Team Member Three; however, your option needs to be different from the other options.
Sample Project Timeline
Assigned work in the schedule below is based on when it is due rather than when it is assigned. Teamwork evaluation forms are not reflected in the schedule below to save space; however, they are due on the class day that follows each rough draft deadline.
Week One, Thursday
Thursday: Instructor: Present a lecture about the case study project. Walk through the assignment description (recorded or in person).
Thursday: Students: Choose a five-person team for the class project, or the instructor will assign you to a team by next week if you prefer. (Sign-ups can occur in person or via the learning management system used for class.)
Week Two, Tuesday
Instructor: Assign students to project teams if needed.
Students: Set up your team meetings for the semester based on your project deadlines and which person will full each role described in the assignment template. Reach out to your instructor if a team member does not return communication within 24 hours, which is a class requirement.
Week Two, Thursday
Students: Read the case study resources (see the list earlier in this description) and watch the historical context video (also found earlier in this description).
Instructor: Facilitate a discussion of the reading material in person or online.
Week Three, Tuesday
Students: The Issue Summary is due. Team Leader: Person One.
Week Four, Tuesday
Students: The Issue Summary Revision is due. Team Leader: Person One.
Week Five, Tuesday
Students: The Relevant Facts section is due. Team Leaders: Person One, who leads the contributions from Gaither and Curtin (2008) and the Arla Foods (2006a) annual report; Person Two, who leads contributions from Holmström et al. (2010) and Arla Foods’ (2006b) news release.
Week Six, Tuesday
Students: The Relevant Facts revision is due. Team Leaders: Person One, who leads the contributions from Gaither and Curtin (2008) and the Arla Foods (2006a) annual report; Person Two, who leads contributions from Holmström et al. (2009) and Arla Foods’ (2006b) news release.
Week Seven, Tuesday
Students: The Stakeholders section is due. Team Leader: Person Two.
Week Eight, Tuesday
Students: The Stakeholders revision is due. Team Leader: Person Two.
Week Nine, Tuesday
Students: Option One is due. Team Leader: Person Three.
Week 10, Tuesday
Students: Option One revision is due. Team Leader: Person Three.
Week 11, Tuesday
Students: Option Two is due. Team Leader: Person Four.
Week 12, Tuesday
Students: Option Two revision is due. Team Leader: Person Four.
Week 13, Tuesday
Students: Option Three is due. Team Leader: Person Five.
Week 14, Tuesday
Students: Option Three revision is due. Team Leader: Person Five.
Week 15, Tuesday
Students: Decision, Justification, and Assignment Reflection assignment is due. Team Leaders: Person One and Person Two.
Week 16, Tuesday
Students: Decision, Justification, and Assignment Reflection assignment is due. Team Leaders: Person One and Person Two. Assigning a revision is optional. This particular assignment tends to be strong enough to stand on its own without revision opportunities.
Instructor: Facilitate a discussion about each team’s decision and justification.
GIFT Grading Criteria or Rubric
Each initial draft assignment is listed below. Each assignment rubric also contains the following text, which is solely listed here to save space:
“In addition, the score you earn is based on your teammates’ evaluation of your performance, as well as your reflection of your performance with regard to communication, reliability, and contribution to this assignment.”
Students complete a team assessment form following the submission of each initial draft assignment based on the following criteria primarily provided by ChatGPT: reliability (i.e., meeting internal team deadlines; leading the team in setting deadlines for the team leadership role), communication skills (i.e., listening, expressing ideas, giving constructive feedback, working collaboratively as a team member; facilitating productive communication for the team leadership role), and contribution to the assignment (in the context of the expectations of the team member or team leader role). Students rate themselves and their team members on a 5-point scale for each criterion and have an optional comments area for each criterion.
The assessment of the content for each assignment is based on the rubric below (see Figure 1).
Figure 1
Content Rubric
The assessment of the writing for each assignment is based on the rubric below; a quantitative approach is used to increase grading consistency and the communication of expectations (see Figure 2).
Figure 2
Writing Rubric
Minor corrections include errors relating to format (see the template for the format), AP style, grammar, punctuation, executive voice and brevity.
Major corrections include mistakes such as word jumbles, typos, spelling errors, and other obvious issues, such as quotation marks facing the wrong way.
Revision assignments use the same assignment criteria and rubric as the corresponding drafts, but they are worth half the number of points as the original drafts to emphasize the performance of the work independent of my help, the incentive to focus on doing the assignment well the first time, and the lower level of effort generally required to revise the content and writing.
Revisions are performed by the one to two people leading the team for the assignment and include the requirement of a 24-hour window for the team to proof the work.
Assignment: Issue (40 points)
Content: 20 points, Writing: 20 points
The situation is summarized in a paragraph, so your CEO understands what happened.
The paragraph begins with details the CEO would need to understand what happened (what is the name of the newspaper, is it the largest newspaper in Denmark, how many cartoons were there, how did they come about, and what does the Islamic religion say about any visual depiction of the prophet, even if it is positive? What is an example of what was portrayed?).
Based on the content, I can grasp the severity of the offense.
The paragraph helps the CEO understand why an outside issue of this nature is relevant to the company.
At the end of the paragraph, there is a sentence about what is at stake (this is the same idea as why the CEO should consider a response to this issue).
The content is clearly targeted to the CEO (not an external audience). The paragraph does not include potential solutions to the issue.
I am looking for the quality of the content, as well as the extent to which relevant facts are included and less pivotal facts are omitted.
Assignment: Relevant Facts
Content: 40 points, Writing: 40 points
Additional information is shared about the case. If you did not already cover it in the Issue section, the relevant facts section includes information about how these cartoons came into existence (there is a backstory).
Information is also provided about the prominence of the newspaper. The potential for the Streisand effect is addressed.
Economic, social and political pressures are included. Based on this section, the CEO is reminded of the company’s economic interests in the Middle East and the amount of revenue from the Middle East versus the company’s overall revenue.
This section also includes facts that help the CEO understand whether there is potential for retaliation through peaceful and violent means.
Facts are also shared that help the CEO make inferences about how Middle Easterners might expect a Danish company and Danish government to respond. The explanation for why this is the case is explained clearly for someone to understand who is not a cultural studies scholar. Permission is given to use ChatGPT to understand the meaning of some of the terms in the scholarly articles, provided that the output is entirely reworded. A prompt that includes some of the jargon and “can you explain this for a seventh grader” works well.
A comparison of Danish and Middle Eastern cultures is made. Statistics or numerical facts are shared when helpful to understanding the factual statement.
A discussion of Muslims in Denmark is included based on the assigned reading.
Information is ordered thematically based on what is particularly relevant to the situation before getting into more historical facts.
Factual information about anything occurring after the day the cartoons were published is excluded since this project takes place on the day when the cartoons appeared.
Both journal articles are cited extensively, and the annual report is cited. APA style is used for in-text citations and in the references section. Outside sources are welcome.
I am looking for the quality of the content, as well as the extent to which relevant facts are included and less pivotal facts are omitted.
The same A-F rubric is used for content and for writing that appeared in the Issue section. The number of writing errors is adjusted for a 40-point scale, staying consistent with the percentages reflected in the 20-point scale.
Assignment: Stakeholders
Content: 20 points, Writing: 20 points
The stakeholder section includes all of the people your decision could affect and everyone to whom you have a duty.
This section includes what each stakeholder group is likely to be thinking, desiring in the situation, and feeling in response to the cartoons and in response to what the group might expect from Arla Foods.
Lower grades will correspond to the extent to which stakeholders and their interests are excluded.
In addition, the score you earn is based on your teammates’ evaluation of your performance, as well as your reflection on your performance with regard to communication, reliability, and contribution to this assignment.
Assignments: Option One, Option Two, and Option Three
Content: 40 points, Writing: 40 points for each option
These three assignments are evenly spaced in the timeline but are condensed here since they are identical.
When evaluating each Option assignment, I am examining the quality of the primary and secondary crisis response options, as well as the quality of argumentation for justifying them.
The primary response option conveys whether the option involves siding with the non-Muslim Danish community, having the company side with the Muslim community, or having the company stay neutral. All three options could involve different ways of enacting the same primary response option, provided that they are substantially different. For example, one option could involve the company’s coalition building efforts with the Confederation of Danish Industries to take a particular stance on the issue, and another option could involve the same stance but be carried out through attempts of dialogue between the company and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.
The secondary response option involves efforts that can be added to a primary response option, such as a corporate social responsibility initiative. The secondary response option could vary or stay the same across all three options.
In addition, I am considering the quality of the pros/cons section, duties section (including harm/care, duties, rules, and the categorical imperative), and personal values section.
The section is written as if the option is being weighed rather than arguing that the option should be chosen. Choosing the option and defending it is a separate assignment after Option Three is completed.
Assignment: Decision, Justification, and Team Reflection
Content: 10 points, Writing: 10 points
This assignment contains three components: the decision of which option the team recommends, a justification for the chosen option, and a reflection about the assignment. The content guidelines for the rubric are presented below.
The decision chosen is a wise decision, and the justification is compelling. Arguments for why the other two options were not chosen are shared. If the chosen option has a decent chance of not working (such as attempting dialogue with the Organisation for Islamic Cooperation or convincing the Confederation of Danish Industries to adopt a particular position and engage in certain actions), one of the alternative options is shared as a backup response.
The assignment reflection includes at least five sentences about what was learned (as a team or individually, depending on your team’s choice). Feedback about how to improve the assignment is welcome and counts towards the sentence minimum.
Teaching Note
Any moral dilemma involving a cultural component could be used for this assignment. As noted previously, this assignment was used in a graduate Public Relations Theory class and three undergraduate Public Relations Ethics courses. The assignment would also function well as a final project in a Principles of Public Relations class or in an International Public Relations course. The Danish cartoons do not need to be shown to the class for this assignment; in fact, students can be informed that none of the required materials involve examining the offensive images. In addition, students should be informed that part of their grade is based on the quality of the three moral solutions they present, and they should be expected to benefit from knowing what the company actually did and what the ramifications were.
Recommended resources include all of the sources found in the assignment description. An additional cultural insight from a student who was an activist when the case occurred is the importance Muslims place on not wasting food. Articles about contemporary controversies involving depictions of the Prophet Muhammad mentioned earlier can also enrich class discussions (Hollingsworth, 2023; Lawson-Tancred, 2023; Patel, 2023; Small, 2023).
Instructors can also help students engage in critical thinking by introducing other contemporary cases of religious cultural controversy. For example, the Los Angeles Dodgers invited a drag troupe called the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence to its annual LGBTQ Pride celebration, rescinded the invitation after experiencing backlash, and then re-extended the invitation once again to honor the group (Li, 2023). Two of the team’s players were deeply offended because they thought the honoring of the group violated organizational values of respect and inclusivity by impersonating and ridiculing Catholic practices and beliefs (Li, 2023). The application of virtue ethics, Kantian theory, utilitarianism, and care ethics would be insightful to new contexts, especially in light of discussions about the Arla Foods case.
This assignment can be adapted to diverse institutions of learning, as well as online and in-person formats. The assignment has been taught in an online class; however, it would arguably be easier to teach in an in-person class based on the comparative ease of understanding directions delivered by an in-person instructor and coordinating with team members.
Five-person teams can be reduced to smaller teams for smaller class sizes. Colleges with religious affiliations could take particular interest in this study and related contemporary studies that provide a grounded case study approach to exploring contestations over religious tolerance and critique.
Bivins, T. (2009). Mixed media: Moral distinctions in advertising, public relations, and journalism (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Bloom, B. S., Englehart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, Handbook: The cognitive domain. David McKay. Commission on Public Relations Education (CPRE). (2006). The professional bond. http://www.commissionpred.org/commission-reports/the-professional-bond/
Coombs, W. T. (2007). Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and application of situational crisis communication theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(3), 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550049
Gaither, T. Kenn, & Curtin, P. A. (2008). Examining the heuristic value of models of international public relations practice: A case study of the Arla Foods crisis. Journal of Public Relations Research, 20(1), 115–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627260701727051
Grunig, J. E., & Hunt, T. (1984). Managing public relations. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
New York Times. (2023, January 8). An adjunct professor at Hamline University showed a painting of the Prophet Muhammad for an art history class. It was followed by an outcry from Muslim students. University officials said it was Islamophobic, but many scholars say the work is a masterpiece. Twitter. https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1612147150472757249?lang=en
To cite this article: Gallicano, T.D. (2024). Spilt milk: Navigating a response to a moral dilemma. Journal of Public Relations Education, 9(3), 141-169. https://journalofpreducation.com/?p=4324
Editorial Record: Submitted June 13, 2021. Revised December 2, 2021. Revised February 23, 2022. Accepted March 7, 2022.
Authors
Kelly Chernin, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Communication Department of Communication Appalachian State University Boone, North Carolina Email: cherninka@appstate.edu
Brigitta R. Brunner, Ph.D. Professor & Associate Director, Public Relations School of Communication & Journalism Auburn University Auburn, Alabama Email: brunnbr@auburn.edu
Abstract
Public interest communications, an emerging field that implements strategic communications in an effort to drive sustainable social change that advances the human condition, provides an opportunity to create a foundation to incorporate activism in the public relations classroom. This paper highlights why a PIC curriculum is ideal for Generation Z students given their desire to make an impact and utilize technology in meaningful ways. In addition, this paper outlines a possible PIC curriculum that aligns with current public relations standards while discussing the field’s interdisciplinary benefits. Public Interest Communications offers a skillset for future activists.
Keywords: curriculum development, critical pedagogy, public interest communications, activism, ethics
On February 14, 2018, people were notified of yet another mass school shooting in Parkland, Florida. As always, there were “thoughts and prayers” Tweets that followed the event. Pundits along with ordinary citizens assumed that the media attention and calls for gun reform would die down after a week. However, the student survivors of the Parkland shooting, high school students who had just experienced a profound tragedy, mobilized and started the March for Our Lives Movement (Jones, 2018). These young activists were not alone. Their peers began environmental organizations and collectives such as the Sunrise Movement and young activists also became involved with Black Lives Matter in the summer of 2020. These same young activists are now sitting in university classrooms eager to engage with social causes. While public interest communication (PIC) is still an emerging field, it offers a flexibility that has the potential to engage a new generation of public relations students and to incorporate existing fields of study in an interdisciplinary manner.
Although the concepts and theories within PIC are still being explored, the most common definition is “the development and implementation of science-based strategic communications with the goal of significant and sustained positive behavior change or action on an issue that transcends the particular objectives of any single organization” (Christiano & Neimand, 2017a, p. 38; Fessmann, 2016). PIC also focuses on human rights and “communication that advances the human condition” (Hon, 2016, para 1).
As such, this emerging field presents a unique opportunity to integrate activism into public relations the curriculum. Most public relations curricula are typically aligned with corporate structures and founders such as Edward Bernays; however, campaigns such as the early labor movement also utilized many of the same skill sets taught in foundational public relations courses, yet receive little mention (Ciszek, 2015; Pomper, 1959). Journalism and public relations are both areas that teach students essential skills they will need to be successful in the industry. However, PIC has the potential to teach students the skills necessary to be an activist. Currently, classes that are taught about activism tend to focus more on theory. Students learn about collective action (see Olson, 1965) and the importance of community-based social networks (see Tilly, 1978), but learn very little about how to apply these skills. Subsequently, public relations courses offer a variety of skills-based courses, with minimal emphasis on activist movements. Introducing PIC as a class in an existing PR program or as part of a larger, more focused curriculum provides today’s students with a skillset that will teach them to be impactful activists.
The aim of this article is to introduce PIC as a new area of study similar to the initiatives established by feminist scholars in the 1970s as they attempted to introduce Women’s Studies as a distinct academic and scholarly topic. Today, many universities have gender and women’s studies programs. We are not introducing new theories or data; instead, we are trying to introduce a new area of study that, while related to current programs of study such as public relations, offers something different—something essential to the betterment of our educational institutions and our society. This article thus examines why the behaviors of this current generation provide a strong foundation for the introduction of PIC; PIC’s unique characteristics and how these features can enhance current curricula by introducing an activist skill set; and how practitioners and scholars can implement past models of curriculum development to build PIC as an important area of study. In addition, we will also provide suggestions for how PIC can be incorporated into existing PR curricula based on CPRE guidelines and offer syllabi and program recommendations based on an analysis of currently available PIC syllabi and programs of study.
Important Role of Generation Z
Generation Z (Gen Z) is the group of students most likely to be found in today’s college classroom. Gen Z follows the Millennial generation and is defined as those born between 1997 and 2012 by the Pew Center (see Dimock, 2019). Others define the generation as starting in 1995 and ending in 2010 (Seemiller & Grace, 2016). While we recognize that using terms such as Gen Z has the potential to stereotype a diverse group of people, it is still common practice among researchers to organize generations based on birth year and shared characteristics (Wang & Peng, 2015). Gen Z makes up roughly 20% of the entire current U.S. population (Frey, 2020) and is considered the most diverse generation yet. This group is said to be very accepting of diversity and inclusion (Canvas Blue, 2018; Robinson, 2018). Gen Z members aged 18 to 21 are more likely to attend college than their Millennial or Gen X counterparts (Parker & Igielinik, 2020). Members of Gen Z are also the population who will make up the cohort of traditional-aged college students for the next decade and a half (Chronicle of Higher Education, 2019). They have been profoundly affected by the wars, financial ups and downs, terrorism, school shootings, social causes, and social media that have been ever-present in their lives (Adamy, 2018). Often these concerns have manifested as forms of activism for members of this generation as discussed earlier in this piece.
The connectivity afforded by social media has made their world smaller. Gen Z has been heavily influenced by technology and globalization (Abdullah, et al., 2018) because both factors have been a part of their worlds since day one. They have always had technology and information at their fingertips (Schwieiger & Ladwig, 2018; Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2021). Some even say this generation use their digital and tech savvy to recreate what activism is and drive change; as one Gen Z member said, “At the click of a button, we can start a movement” (Ziad Ahmed as cited in Cohen, 2020). Members of Gen Z use social media such as Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok to find their communities, to share their thoughts, and to organize (MacColl, 2019). In other words, members of Gen Z use social media to be activists. While some may dismiss these efforts as clickivism, defined by Oxford Language as, “the practice of supporting a political or social cause via the internet by means such as social media or online petitions, typically characterized as involving little effort or commitment” (n.d., para. 1), social media are important ways for people to organize around the causes about which they care (MacColl, 2019).
Youth-led activism is not a new phenomenon. In the 1960s, high school and college-aged students often led the charge for civil rights. In the 1970s, youth advocated for women’s rights and protested against the Vietnam War. Some even say the punk movement of the 1970s was a form of youth-led activism against the status quo (Pekacz, 1994). In more recent times, youth have been involved in the DREAM act, gay-straight alliances, the #BLM movement, addressing climate change, and the movement to end sexual assault.
A campus is often an important place for youth-led activism because students have greater proximity to each other due to dorm and apartment living; they also have down time between classes in which they discuss and engage with one another (Enriquez, 2014; Van Dyke, 1998; Zhao, 1998). College is also often a transformative and transitional time for many students which brings about changes in their routines, and peers and affords the opportunity to explore activism (Munson, 2010). In addition, students in college are typically unmarried, childless, and often do not have jobs making it easier to participate in activism because they have fewer obligations (McAdam, 1998; Earl et al., 2017). Although some may argue today’s youth are not as involved as those of the past (See Delli Carpini, 2000), others say these notions are incorrect (See Henn et al., 2002; Strama, 1998) and the ways in which youth choose to be active has changed. “Just as the student activists of the 1960s were concerned with the issues that had a direct (negative) effect on their lives, so are today’s young activists. And just as their predecessors had used the media available to them to further their cause, so too do today’s young activists” (Teruelle, 2011, p. 204). While Gen Z may not rely as much on traditional media for their activism, they are still activists. They just choose to use social media because it is familiar to them. In this process, this generation is redefining what activism can look like.
The causes about which Gen Z cares about are many. Gen Z is known to advocate for fairness and equal treatment for all; other issues of importance to this generation include healthcare, mental health, higher education, economic security, civic engagement, race equity, and the environment (Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2021). Gay marriage, climate change, and gender identity are also issues this generation is more likely to support than other generations (Biedermen, et al., 2020). Another description of significance is that this generation is very we-centric rather than me-centric (Mohr & Mohr, 2017; Seemiller & Grace, 2016) meaning that Gen Z thinks about others and wants to better society for all.
Irregular Labs, a learning network and innovation lab that helps its clients connect with Gen Z, conducted a study of 2,013 members of Gen Z worldwide. From this study, it was learned that close to 75% of the respondents, not only believed being politically and socially engaged was important to their identities, but they also believed such engagement was the hallmark of a good citizen (Irregular Labs, 2019). These findings seem to suggest PIC might be an area of great interest to today’s college students. Whether it is hyper-local activism such as the student-organized Bucks Students for Climate Action and Protection of the Environment whose members raised money, took part in forums, and initiated climate strikes (Biederman, et al., 2020) and the graduation speech given by Paxton Smith, a Dallas-area valedictorian, who spoke out against the new Texas heartbeat ban law (Zdanowicz & Johnson, 2021), or activism on a national or international level such as March for Our Lives or the Sunshine Movement, Gen Z is talking more, seeing more, and doing more about issues such as climate change than the older generations (Tyson, et al., 2021). Members of Gen Z are not afraid to call out what they see as unfair, and they are not afraid to drive change. While most people know the work of Greta Thurnberg, it should be noted that Gen Z people of color, such as Mari Copeny who has fought for clean water in Flint, Michigan; Amelia Telford who works against global heating and fossil fuels in Australia; and Elizabeth Gulugulu who has put a focus on climate issues in Zimbabwe, have sustained such movements (Clauson-Wolf, 2021).
Gen Z wants to be more involved with and participate in political, social justice, and humanitarian causes beyond clicktivism, “they just need to know how” (MacColl, 2019, para. 4). It is with the ability to explain the hows of activism, social justice, and advocacy along with preparing students with a skill set for how to be activists and advocates that a PIC curriculum could strongly connect with members of Gen Z. Perhaps the time has come for educators to disrupt how communication fields are taught so students have options beyond a curriculum that is corporately focused.
Public Interest Communications’ Role in the PR Classroom
For public relations programs seeking to introduce an activist toolkit, PIC has the potential to provide a framework for PR professors to still teach essential industry skills while providing a curriculum more suitable for Gen Z learners and future activists. While the overall aim is to build PIC as a unique field of study, PIC was initially introduced within PR and communication classrooms, and still serves an important function as either a unit in an ethics course or as a special topic for PR and journalism majors interested in social change (Fessmann, 2017; Fessmann, 2018a; Fessmann, 2018b).
In addition, PIC frameworks highlight six spheres through which strategic communication could drive change using PIC tactics: media; policy, communities of influence, the market, activism, and behavior change marketing (Christiano, 2017). While activism is only one of the spheres mentioned, an understanding of all six spheres opens the possibility to create a more sustainable platform to drive change and gives students an opportunity to explore a variety of interests and disciplines. As noted previously, this generation of students is adept at utilizing social media; this PIC framework gives Gen Z students multiple avenues to utilize the technologies they grew up with in ways that can create meaningful change for everyone, while still sitting in a classroom. Essentially, these spheres help to provide future activists with a toolkit as they enter society beyond the classroom. Public relations teaches students valuable skills that have been successfully used to promote various brands; however, these same tools can also be used to create a better, more inclusive world (see Weibe, 1951; and Hon’s (1997) work on how public relations tactics were utilized during the Civil Rights Movement). Creating this better and more inclusive environment is what PIC aims to do, and as such, PIC offers a valuable outlet to introduce social justice into the PR classroom.
As the notion of introducing activism into public relations classrooms becomes more widely discussed (Mules, 2021), PIC has the opportunity to bridge the divide among professors more interested in the functionalist approach, a pedagogical theory that teaches students skill sets that will later benefit the entirety of society, and those more entrenched in activism or critical cultural studies. PIC provides a framework for sustainable social change and provides a new lexicon for those who may want to explore activism in the PR classroom, but fear the stigmatization of such terms. Similar to traditional journalism and public relations, PIC has a theoretical foundation; however, PIC, like the other two fields, should also teach students necessary skills. Functionalists, those who wish for a field to remain neutral, tend to use case studies and corporate structures. In contrast, activists, and professors with critical cultural backgrounds, tend to problematize these structures as sites of oppression (Ciszek, 2015). Given these tensions, creating a space where both of these ideas are welcome within the public relations curricula has proven difficult. PIC has the ability to create a space where both of these avenues can reside. Activists need to learn about messaging, and audience engagement using skills-based approaches, skills that can still be taught by functionalist professors or those with a more traditional PR background. Just as theory and practical skills are complementary in traditional PR curricula, PIC serves as a complement to this same curricula for students who are more interested in social causes. Hou (2019) notes the importance of “rejecting a ‘false binary of public/private’” remarking that what is in the public interest is complicated and not within the domain of any particular group. The tensions between the “state vs. collective, government vs. corporate, commerce vs. public are considered not as mutually exclusive but interwoven as potentially competing forces to shape the public interest in different directions” (Hou, 2019, p. 159). Although Hou is discussing the role of public interest in China, this same idea can be applied to how professors discuss similar tensions within PR. Corporations can participate in PIC initiatives so long as their actions transcend doing more than merely promoting the bottom line (i.e. DICK’s Sporting Goods and the decision to stop selling guns. See Gaither et al., 2018).
Given that this generation of students is leading the effort to ensure that retail is more sustainable (Petro, 2020), and that companies using pride as a marketing strategy are authentic and not just implementing rainbow-washing approaches (Wolny, 2021), PIC is a valuable area of study that does offer a different approach to traditional CSR approaches that some of these students may see as inauthentic.
Johnston and Pieczka (2019) view the public interest as the foundation of democratic governance and public policy stating that it should incorporate “political reflection on how the relationship between the individual and the state should be managed” (p. 9). We can see this also being applicable to public relations education in the sense that managing and maintaining relationships between the public and organizations is a central tenet of the field. “Public relations shares a common link with public interest through valorization of publics” (Gaither & Curtin, 2019, p. 124). As areas such as journalism and public relations struggle to reexamine the nature of objectivity and the relevancy of a functionalist approach to pedagogy while these fields are contemplating how to combat misinformation, PIC offers a potential structure to move beyond the confines of “neutrality and impartiality” (Campbell & Marshall, 2002). Given that PIC utilizes science-based strategic communication strategies, PIC instruction teaches students how to define what is considered the public good by using an evidence-backed approach. When faculty use PIC’s body of knowledge to examine and evaluate how social movements have used strategic communication, students interested in activism will better acquire the necessary skills to be successful than if they took traditional public relations courses.
Connections to Critical Pedagogy
Teaching activism is not a new concept and is most associated with the notion of critical pedagogy. Critical pedagogy has been a part of curriculum discussions since the 1970s. Freire (1972) first introduced the view that students should have a voice in their own education. This change was proposed as a way to move past the banking model of education where students were expected to passively listen to lectures and recall facts for an exam. Freire noted that this was a form of educational colonialism that silenced diverse voices and experiences in the classroom. Freire’s views on liberating education are applicable to PIC curriculum building in that it helps students understand how to not only express their own views and take ownership of their own educational process, but also amplify the voices of those they serve in the hopes of creating a more just society. The action-reflection framework proposed by Freire teaches students how to incorporate the importance of genuine and effective dialogue where both action and reflection are essential components (Freire, 1972). Giroux (1997) later added to the notion of critical pedagogy stating that it provided a “language of possibility.” Today, critical pedagogy is “concerned with the elimination of oppression, the resurgence of hope and possibility–in short, with the making of a better world in which to live. A better world for all” (Shaw as cited in Tintiangco-Cubales, et al., 2020 p. 26). The perspective of making the world a better place to live directly aligns with many of the same PIC goals.
Traditionally, academia has favored “objective” knowledge; however, this perception is often tied to our notions of objectivity defined by white knowledge construction. Recent events have shed light on the fact that many of our institutional structures, education included, have ignored the voices of marginalized peoples (Tintiangco-Cubales, et al., 2020). As such, there has been an increased push to decolonize syllabi, meaning attempts have been made to bring in more readings from authors from different backgrounds (Ahadi & Guerrero, 2020). In addition to bringing in material sourced from authors of different genders, sexual orientations, races, and ethnicities, critical pedagogy values the first-person accounts of students. “Pedagogy takes into account the critical relationship between the purpose of education, the context of education, the content of what is being taught, and the methods of how it is taught. It also includes who is being taught, who is teaching, their relationship to each other, and their relationship to structure and power” (Tintiangco-Cubales, et al., 2020, p. 22). In the past, education has relied heavily on the banking model, alienating students from being active participants in their own education. The banking system is a model that at best encourages thinking, but does little to foster engagement. However, critical pedagogy encourages students to not only be active participants in the classroom, but teaches them to be active members within their own communities.
Similar to PIC, critical pedagogy is still an emerging field that is constantly being redefined. For public relations, implementing a critical pedagogical approach would mean moving away from the traditional corporate case studies or campaigns and incorporating more cases that look at how activist groups have utilized similar PR tools in their endeavors. Ciszek and Rodriguez (2020), write about the importance of “decentering whiteness and heteronormativity, and [how] it works to disrupt the problem of homogeneity in public relations research and practice” (p. 537). If the field of public relations wants to move forward in an ethical way, it will become increasingly more important for public relations curriculum to adopt a more critical pedagogical approach in an effort to train students to be more aware of the current social and political space they will enter once they join the workforce; a PIC curriculum provides such a foundation. Fessmann (2017) argued that the social activism of the Millennial generation gave reason for further developing PIC. Downes (2017) suggests that by having an understanding of PIC, college students would not only be able to hear the call to promote social change, but also have the ability to follow through and create social change upon graduation and their subsequent employment. We believe the increase in social activism shown by members of Gen Z demonstrates the need for a PIC curriculum is even greater now. Without such a move, public relations and other communication fields may lose students interested in activism and advocacy to other fields and disciplines.
[2] It is difficult to know the full scope of PIC’s current reach because there are likely professors and instructors working in this area who are not aware of the growing PIC academic and practitioner community. However, we received syllabi from five universities, including those from the authors, and spoke to PIC educators currently working on developing curricula standards for the field. Both authors are part of a group of educators currently working to establish a more standard PIC curricula.
Creating a New Field of Study
The process of creating a new academic field is no novel task. Academia is generally steeped in tradition and while fields and disciplines may adapt to changing times, the introduction of new disciplines is not common and takes effort from various stakeholders and institutions. Currently, graduate-level PIC programs are offered at the University of Florida, Florida State University, and West Virginia University. Additionally, faculty from other institutions are introducing and have taught PIC as units in other classes, special topic courses, or potential electives. Researchers are also including PIC as part of their program of research as is evident by the growth of the field’s flagship journal The Journal of Public Interest Communications. However, a formal systematic framework for building this field on a larger scale does not yet exist. Looking at the evolution of Women’s Studies in the 1960s and ‘70s and beyond provides a rough framework as we seek to build PIC as a unique and significant academic discipline.
Ginsberg (2008) wrote that Women’s Studies development “mirror[ed] larger changes in both American and academic politics, culture and history” (p. 1). The same can be seen with the development of PIC and the importance of teaching young activists essential skills. While social movements and activism are not new concepts, climate change and racial injustice are no longer issues that interest and impact a select few. The killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor led to massive protests throughout the United States. Young activists such as Greta Thunburg speak out at climate summits attended by world leaders. Students can learn the skills to be architects, doctors, and journalists, but there is currently no field that teaches a unique skill set to our future activists.
The work of curriculum building should employ a diverse perspective in content, thought, and lived experiences (Kvam et al., 2018). In Martin et al.’s (2020) recent study, they found that including topics surrounding diversity not only helped students expand their viewpoints, but also helped explain key media concepts as well. PIC has the same opportunity to bring concepts such as activism into the public relations classroom, while expanding student viewpoints and also explaining key public relations concepts such as two-way symmetrical communication or the importance of stakeholders.
Like Freire’s contributions to critical pedagogy, early Women’s Studies scholars and educators “were actively creating and owning knowledge based on their own personal and political experiences” (Ginsberg, 2008, p. 10). PIC, like the beginnings of Women’s Studies, is in the process of simply being recognized as a legitimate discipline. There are a few spaces where scholars can meet to discuss research at conferences (for example Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC), International Communication Association (ICA), and frank gathering), but there has yet to be a designated avenue to share syllabi and pedagogy. Although we do review existing PIC syllabi and programs of study in a subsequent section, we hope that this is the start of a larger movement to discuss more comprehensive goals of systematic PIC education. However, we are still building PIC based on personal experience as we create and own its body of knowledge.
In the 1980s, Women’s Studies experienced conservative backlash. Even today, there are critics of gender equality initiatives such as Title IX (Ginsberg, 2008). However, despite this reaction there was an increased effort to focus on efforts to examine the nature of intersectionality in the field. During this time, Women’s Studies programs worked on establishing core courses, minors, and even BA programs. These programs had to contend with defining theory and curricula, while defending themselves against internal academic forces and external political forces (Ginsberg, 2008). Given the current political environment, these challenges exist for the early stages of PIC curriculum development as well.
Much of the academy is siloed based on expertise. Even within communication disciplines you will often see journalism, public relations, advertising, and cultural studies separated into areas or departments. While these areas are unique and important, the communication industry is becoming increasingly hybridized and expects recent graduates to be able to adapt to new positions that often blur the lines among these fields. PIC’s interdisciplinary nature gives students an opportunity to explore many of these avenues beyond the typical silos of traditional programs. In the past, public relations students would not always be exposed to critical cultural ideas, which have a strong foundation in promoting more ethical systems. PIC curriculum can bridge the gaps among many of these areas giving students a more robust understanding of communication. Furthermore, theoretical understandings within PR would be enhanced by a more diversified curriculum and PIC would give students within cultural studies, postcolonial studies, ethnic studies, and queer studies the ability to develop a practical and applicable skill set (Ciszek & Rodriguez, 2020).
In addition to providing public relations students with a more critical perspective, PIC provides a space to discuss and push back against the similar backlash experienced by Women’s Studies development in the 1980s. PIC’s interdisciplinary nature draws on other areas and provides new ways of speaking about race and gender in a critical way that may provide a more secure avenue for teachers to introduce concepts such as diversity and inclusion into the classroom. One activity presented in current PIC classes and trainings is the “back -of- the- envelope guide to communications strategy[1].” Students are asked to think of a social issue and how to create change within that context. They are then asked “who has to do something they’re not doing now (or stop doing something) for you to achieve that goal?” (Christiano & Neimand, 2017b, para 15). Given the number of proposed bills against Critical Race Theory require that educators “who discuss ugly episodes in history, or controversial events […]explore ‘contending perspectives without giving deference to any one perspective’” (Florido, 2021, para 13), this activity could possibly allow PR educators to look at “contending perspectives’” in a way that could teach students to think about changing the minds of those who hold on to problematic beliefs.
[1] The back-of-the-envelope guide communications strategy can be found in Christiano & Neimand (2017b)’s Stanford Social Innovation Review.
Students want to learn more about events such as the Tulsa massacre and Japanese internment camps (Florido, 2021). Events such as the killing of George Floyd have prompted this generation of students to want to learn more about these issues. However, parents, conservative administrators, and politicians present a major barrier to incorporating these topics into the current curriculum. In addition, the traditional silos often present in communication departments and colleges give power to those forces that do not want to consider the importance of change. However, incorporating PIC’s interdisciplinary approach to public relations curricula could be a way to incorporate the back-of-the-envelope guide to our own educational system. By examining the process of Women’s Studies curriculum development, who also faced a similar challenge with regard to negotiating traditional academic structures (Ginsberg, 2008), in addition to critical pedagogy, PIC can use a similar approach of development, adaptability, and perseverance to create a space where both meaningful dialogue is promoted and practical skills are taught. The evolution of Women’s Studies programs over the past 50 years demonstrates how similar fields can be developed in the wake of political tensions in an effort to create change. This context provides some comfort that the same is possible for PIC.
Potential PIC Benefits and Curriculum
While we recognize that PIC is a unique field that can be applicable to a variety of different areas from journalism to health communication, we have chosen to focus specifically on how PIC can be incorporated into public relations programs. We follow the work of Taylor (2001) and Hutchison (2002) who examined ways to incorporate internationalization and ethics respectively into the existing public relations curriculum. They did so by making suggestions for how to bring these concepts into the existing coursework established by the The Commission on Public Relations Education (CPRE) as well as sharing ideas for standalone courses focused on these topics.
Members of the CPRE are mindful that public relations curricula should be flexible and adapt to societal and professional changes while also allowing students to take courses or even pursue minors in other areas of interest to better prepare them for the workplace (Duhe et al., 2018). While the CPRE suggests some content areas that might enhance a student’s learning experience include social media, business literacy, analytics, and digital technology (Duhe et al., 2018) and Krishna, et al. (2020) add listening, digital storytelling, and leadership to this list, the authors of this manuscript believe educators could add to interdisciplinarity within public relations curricula by adding coursework related to PIC as electives for PR majors. Further, they believe a PIC-focused curriculum could be built by following the guidelines of the CPRE and making adjustments to them much as Taylor (2001) and Hutchinson (2002) did in their work. The following sections look at PIC curriculum building from a micro to macro perspective starting with an examination of current syllabi followed by an exploration of current programs of study and our suggestions for a potential curriculum based on CPRE guidelines.
A Review of existing PIC Syllabi and Programs of Study
Similar to the early introduction of Women’s Studies programs in the 1970s, PIC classes appear to be offered at only a few institutions[2]. This review is by no means exhaustive, but does attempt to cover key learning objectives, major assignments, and required readings. Five PIC class syllabi were examined; four focused within PR/PIC and one focusing on journalism and PIC. One of the major similarities across all the syllabi examined was the emphasis on discussion. This discussion-based emphasis appears to align with Freire’s (1972) pedagogical principle of giving students and future activists ownership of their own education and compliments the nature of the course content, which predominantly emphasizes relevant and timely case studies focusing on social justice campaigns. In addition to implementing discussion, there are a number of skills building activities and learning goals including campaign analyses and overviews for developing strategic plans. For example, one activity that gets students to learn the complexities of trying to build activist movements within the policy sector breaks the class into different interest groups. Student groups are given different organizations and have to come up with a strategic plan to persuade one group of students, who are assigned to be government officials up for re-election, to develop a policy that will align with their interests. For the duration of class, students meet with other groups with a similar interest to form coalitions. The instructor also serves as the scheduling assistant for the elected official student group and can halt or grant access to these policy makers in a way that reflects the power the various interest groups may hold within our political system (i.e., a group representing a powerful lobby would get more access than the group of concerned parents). At the end of the activity, students have the opportunity to discuss what they learned with regard to policy, activism, persuasion, and coalition building. Students who took part in the activity said it helped them learn how to compromise with various stakeholders in order to create meaningful change that would benefit the most people.
[2] It is difficult to know the full scope of PIC’s current reach because there are likely professors and instructors working in this area who are not aware of the growing PIC academic and practitioner community. However, we received syllabi from five universities, including those from the authors, and spoke to PIC educators currently working on developing curricula standards for the field. Both authors are part of a group of educators currently working to establish a more standard PIC curricula.
The Intro to PIC syllabi for the University of Florida Master’s program, as well as a forthcoming undergraduate PIC class taught at Auburn University, require New Power by Jeremy Heimans and Henry Timms as required reading. This book is not a traditional textbook potentially highlighting how PIC does attempt to bridge scholarship and practice. Other required readings include texts and articles related to relevant movements such as March for our Lives. Glimmer of Hope by the March for our Lives founders was also a commonly utilized text. Although there were a number of similar readings, there were also a number of readings that focused on specific social movements such as Hong Kong’s Umbrella Movement and Black Lives Matter. Professors also brought in readings to emphasize important activist skill sets such as community organizing, the importance of storytelling and using metaphors, and audience engagement. The University of Washington’s journalism/PIC course assigned Community-Centered Journalism and Reporting Inequality along with the Associated Press Stylebook. These texts again highlight the importance of combining skill building (AP Stylebook) with theory. The two other texts, while more focused on social justice issues pertaining to journalism and not PR, also demonstrate the importance of community building and understanding your publics in a more comprehensive and just manner.
Another way professors can bring activism into the PR classroom through PIC is to utilize guest speakers. At the University of Florida, guest speakers from Participant Media, Burness, and other PIC-related organizations have come to classes to give students networking opportunities and first-hand knowledge with regard to working in the PIC field beyond the classroom. Professors doing PIC related research can also provide useful insights for students. Providing a mix of practitioner and research focused guest speakers helps to promote the idea of using scientifically grounded strategies to promote social change. Guest speakers and partnerships with local non-profits and activist groups would also provide students with relevant hands-on experience.
West Virginia University is also in the process of developing an Advocacy and PIC class with the intent of also creating a stand-alone MA program. While WVU is currently in the process of creating PIC classes and programs, they do promote the Public Interest Communication Research Lab which “work[s] to train leading undergraduate and graduate students to continue the legacy of pursuing social science for social change” (West Virginia University Media Innovation Center, 2021, para 2). These research-based institutions help students learn and apply various skills they can utilize in future careers as advocates and activists much as our proposed PIC curriculum would.
Suggested Program Curriculum
Following Taylor’s (2001) and Hutchison’s (2002) examples, we offer suggestions for how educators could incorporate PIC into existing public relations programs. From a larger program view, the ideal PIC curriculum would include 45 hours comprised of PIC, PR, journalism, mass communication, and/or communication courses and would be filled out with electives from other disciplines beyond those found in communication schools and departments. Any programs accredited by ACEJMC would also need to be certain any program course hours do not exceed the limits imposed by the accrediting body. By allowing such flexibility, the addition of a PIC curriculum or track would be fairly easy and also cost efficient as few new courses would be needed. In addition, the curriculum would allow students to build a major to fit their unique interests as they pertain to the public interest such as interests in social justice, racial equity, sustainability, gender studies, social movements, peace and hunger studies, health, science, ecology, etc.
The PIC curriculum would need to have a theoretical basis that might include coursework in public relations, mass communication, communication, and/or rhetoric. The PIC curriculum might be set-up with choices from which students could select the course or courses of most interest to them or it could be set-up to match the strengths and abilities of the current faculty. Similarly, a PIC curriculum should include a research course. Again, PIC students could pick from courses such as survey research methods, qualitative research, quantitative research, critical perspectives, and/or rhetorical methods based on their interests and/or the offerings of their respective departments. A writing course would also be necessary for the PIC curriculum. This course could also come from a program’s existing coursework as a public relations writing or a news writing course would suffice.
This suggested PIC curriculum should also include PIC-specific content. In place of the introductory public relations or similar course, a new course that introduces students to PIC, advocacy, activism, and cause communication could be added. If the addition of a new course is not feasible, the addition of a PIC, advocacy, activism, and cause communication unit to an existing introduction to public relations course could be implemented until the new PIC-focused course could be created. While it would be ideal if a PIC case studies course built on content related to PIC could be offered, infusing PIC-related cases into an existing case studies course would be acceptable until an independent PIC case studies course could be developed. Similarly, the PIC curriculum would be best suited with a PIC campaigns course that allowed students to work with community partners who worked and advocated for the public interest. Such a course could also tie-in well with any civic engagement work the department, school, college and/or university was actively supporting and could build better relationships with entities across campus. Again, if a separate PIC campaigns course could not be offered, faculty could include a PIC-related community partner as one with whom students could work with for their semester project.
Another required course in a PIC curriculum would be an ethics class. Again, if there is an existing public relations ethics class, PIC-specific content could be added to it if resources did not allow for a stand-alone PIC-specific ethics course. However, either course should include the ethics of care perspective because such a worldview to ethics would be most appropriate for budding PIC professionals. Much of PR’s ethical perspective, especially in times of crisis, is influenced by an ethics of justice perspective where legal obligations and an effort to maintain or rebuild reputation are emphasized (Tao & Kim, 2017). In contrast, an ethics-of-care perspective would bring a more humanistic approach to ethics. Ethics of care derives from the work of Gilligan (1982) and shifts the focus of ethical responses to accountability to those people affected by the situation from a focus on legal rights (Bauman, 2011; Simola, 2003). Such a shift in ethical perspective puts the public interest in the center of any communication efforts (Fraustino & Kennedy, 2018). As Madden and Alt (2021) simply state, “care should come before image” (p. 38). By adding ethics of care to coursework, academics would be fostering Gen Z students’ orientation of being we-centric.
The PIC curriculum should also include an internship experience for students so that they could apply their knowledge and skills in a professional setting. This step might require a conversation between PIC faculty and internship directors to be sure the experience would allow students to work within PIC, advocacy, activism and/or cause communication and to help internship directors to better recognize what would constitute PIC-related internships.
Finally, students should have the ability to pick from a range of courses for electives. PIC faculty might have to work with faculty in other departments to make agreements for PIC students to take courses in these other areas to ensure there are enough seats in these outside courses. Some areas in which students might take electives include sociology, sustainability, science communication, health communication, ecology, gender studies, climate, social movements, diversity, political science, nonprofit management, civic engagement, social media, digital storytelling, leadership, organizational communication, rhetoric, business, marketing, management, crisis communication, foreign languages, and corporate social responsibility. Courses outside of communication divisions such as ecology, sociology, health, science, climate, social movements, diversity, civic engagement, foreign languages, peace and conflict studies, hunger studies, and political science would help students to build the interdisciplinarity of their knowledge and allow them to pursue their interests as they relate to the public interest. Similarly, courses in areas such as nonprofit management, leadership, organizational communication, crisis communication, corporate social responsibility, management, and business would help students to understand how to manage and maintain organizations devoted to PIC and advocacy. Further courses in social media, digital storytelling, rhetoric, foreign languages, and marketing would help students to build persuasive promotional materials and develop better programs for PIC organizations.
Innovative Solutions for Student Engagement: Suggestions for Instructors interested in PIC
In addition to utilizing resources that incorporate interdisciplinary learning, PIC gives students the opportunity to pursue civic engagement in the classroom. In 2006, The Carnegie classification system for higher education included a “Community Engagement Classification.” This classification was meant to incorporate service-learning “to the primary systems and structures of higher education” (Saltmarsh & Zlotkowski, 2011, p. 3). Civic engagement is closely tied to the goals of higher education and PIC and is meant to encourage students to become democratic citizens (Saltmarsh, 2011). Civic engagement incorporates service-learning initiatives which move us beyond the banking model of education (Freire, 1972) and teaches students to be advocates and active members of the community.
When thinking of the sustainability of a movement, a central PIC tenet, recent Gen Z-led movements offer ample opportunity for student engagement in the classroom as well as throughout the university and local community. For example, the Sunrise Movement allows participants to join hubs, which offer new opportunities to collaborate with local communities. Similarly, March for Our Lives has various local and university chapters. The localized focus of these movements not only helps to sustain the movements encouraging long-term action and change, but also gives students an opportunity to become involved at a reasonable entry point.
Students can feel overwhelmed by massive social issues such as racial injustice, gun control, and climate change. Larger movements might also present a barrier to entry for those who do not live in urban areas. Brewer and Roccas (2001) suggest that individuals need to feel connected to a movement, while also feeling as if they are contributing in a unique way. The simple act of discussing activism and advocacy in the context of something such as the Sunshine Movement, when talking about climate change, or March for Our Lives, if discussing public relations and policy, can spark student interests enough for them to consider becoming involved in local chapters beyond the classroom. The initial act of joining a local chapter might even prompt students to become involved in national chapters once they graduate. Heimens and Timms (2018) refer to this phenomenon as moving up the participation ladder, which increases participation in social causes. Additionally, such involvement allows students to realize the political and social engagement that members of Gen Z equate with being good citizens (Irregular Labs, 2019). The participation ladder also provides a low-stakes entry for professors who might feel more comfortable casually discussing social causes, but might be less inclined to directly bring in activist community partners and projects.
Conclusion
While PIC is still an emerging field, some scholars (Christiano, 2017) believe that it has the potential to make inroads in curtailing inequities and addressing social justice issues. While PIC is grounded in the public relations discipline and its scholarship, PIC courses and curricula differ in both content and in the students that they attract – those students “who are interested in social activism but who are not comfortable with the corporate focus of PR” (Fessmann, 2017, p. 27). This proposed PIC curriculum would allow Gen Z students, those who will be the generation of traditional college-aged students for the next decade and a half (Chronicle of Higher Education, 2019), to pursue their passions and interests in ending inequities and social injustices. It allows for interdisciplinarity and flexibility to best suit student, faculty, and program needs and resources. PIC-centric courses could easily support students who wish to apply their learning to societal issues.
In sum, the PIC curriculum could be one through which members of Gen Z learn how to use their energy, passions, and knowledge of social media to do more and be more engaged with social justice, politics, and other causes so that they are no longer accused of being slacktivists. “Thus, PIC ultimately hopes to train and empower a new generation of communication-savvy social change activists” (Fessmann, 2017, p. 27). During the 1970s, the original pioneers of Women’s Studies found the interdisciplinary nature of this new discipline difficult based on their more traditional trainings. However, with the introduction of graduate programs, the field’s unique nature became normalized and Ph.D. programs in the area trained a new generation of scholars interested in changing views of gender and societal power (Ginsberg, 2008). PIC development is in a similar stage, and we hope this first step is just the start of growing a rigorous and distinct field of study that has the opportunity to teach future activists. As Downes (2017) states, PIC curricula should “empower others who can rally around causes leading toward the good” (p. 39). When educators introduce PIC to students, they ultimately introduce PIC to organizations as students educated in PIC will soon move up into management roles and will have the opportunity to work for the public good directly.
References
Abdullah, A., Ismail, M. M., & Albani, A. (2018). At-risk Generation Z: Values, talents and challenges. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 8(7), 373-378. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.1.2018.8.373.378
Adamy, J. (2018, September 7). Ready, set, strive – Gen Z is coming – Battle-scarred, they are sober, driven by money and socially awkward; a 1930s throwback. Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition, A1.
Bauman, D. C. (2011). Evaluating ethical approaches to crisis leadership: Insights from unintentional harm research. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(2), 281-295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0549-3
Brewer, M. B., & Roccas, S. (2001). Individual values, social identity, and optimal distinctiveness. In C. Sedikides & M. B. Brewer (Eds.), Individual self, relational self, collective self (p. 219–237). Psychology Press.
Campbell, H., & Marshall, R. (2002). Utilitarianism’s bad breath? A re-evaluation of the public interest justification for planning. Planning Theory, 1(2), 163-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/147309520200100205
Christiano, A. (2017). Foreword: Building the field of public interest communications. Journal of Public Interest Communications, 1(1), 4-15. https://doi.org/10.32473/jpic.v1.i1.p4
Ciszek, E. L. (2015). Bridging the gap: Mapping the relationship between activism and public relations. Public Relations Review, 41(4), 447-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.05.016
Ciszek, E. & Rodriguez, N. S. (2020). Power, agency and resistance in public relations: A queer of color critique of the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance. Communication Culture & Critique, 13(4), 536-555. https://doi.org/10.1093/ccc/tcaa024
Delli Carpini, M. X. (2000). Gen.Com: Youth, civic engagement, and the new information environment. Political Communication, 17(4), 341– 349. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600050178942
Downes, E. (2017). “Doing good” scholarship: Considerations for building positive social
change through the emerging field of public interest communications. Journal of Public Interest Communications, 1(1), 31-44. https://doi.org/10.32473/jpic.v1.i1.p31
Duhe, S., Ferguson, D., Halff, G., & Shen, H. Undergraduate curriculum: Courses and content to prepare the next generation of public relations practitioners. Fast forward: Foundations + future state. Educators + practitioners. The Commission on Public Relations Education 2017 report on undergraduate public relations education. (pp. 59-64). Commission on Public Relations Education. http://www.commissionpred.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/report6-full.pdf
Earl, J., Maher, T. V., & Elliott, T. (2017). Youth, activism, and social movements. Sociology Compass, 11(4), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12465
Edgett, R. (2002). Toward an ethical framework for advocacy in public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 14(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1401_1
Enriquez, L. E. (2014). “Undocumented and citizen students unite”: Building a cross-status coalition through shared ideology. Social Problems, 61(2), 155– 174. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2014.12032
Fessmann, J. (2016). The emerging field of public interest communications. In E. Oliveiro, A. Duarte Melo & G. Goncalves (Eds.), Strategic communications for non-profit organizations (pp.13-33). Vernon.
Fessmann, J., (2017). Conceptual foundations of public interest communications. Journal of Public Interest Communications, 1(1), 16-30. https://doi.org/10.32473/jpic.v1.i1.p16
Fessmann. J. (2018a). On communications war: Public interest communications and classical military strategy. Journal of Public Interest Communications, 2(1), 156-172. https://doi.org/10.32473/jpic.v2.i1.p156
Fessmann. J. (2018b). Fundamentals of public interest communications [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Florida.
Fraustino, J. D., & Kennedy, A. K. (2018). Care in crisis: An applied model of care considerations for ethical strategic communication. Journal of Public InterestCommunications, 2(1), 18-40. https://doi.org/10.32473/jpic.v2.i1
Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Herder and Herder.
Gaither, B. M., Austin, L., & Collins, M. (2018). Examining the case of DICK’s Sporting Goods: Realignment of stakeholders through corporate social advocacy. Journal of Public Interest Communications, 2(2), 176-201. https://doi.org/10.32473/jpic.v2.i2.p176
Gaither, T. K., & Curtin, P. A. (2019). Articulating national identity in postcolonial democracies: Defining relations through competing publics. In J. Johnston & M. Pieczka (Eds.), Public interest communication: Critical debates and global contexts (pp. 113-132). Routledge.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Harvard University Press.
Ginsberg, A. E. (2008). Triumphs, controversies, and change: Women’s studies 1970s to the twenty-first century. In A. E. Ginsberg (Eds.), The evolution of American women’s studies: reflections on triumphs, controversies and change (pp. 9-37). Palgrave Macmillan.
Giroux, H. A. (1997). Pedagogy and the politics of hope: Theory, culture and schooling. Westview Press.
Heimans, J. & Timms, H. (2018). New power: How power works in our hyperconnected world—and how to make it work for you. Doubleday.
Henn, M., Weinstein, M., & Wring, D. (2002). A generation apart? Youth and political participation in Britain. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 4(2), 167–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-856X.t01-1-00001
Hon, L. C. (1997). ‘To redeem the soul of America’: Public relations and the civil rights movement. Journal of Public Relations Research, 9(3), 163-212. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr0903_01
Hon, L. (2016). frank (scholar, 2016) [Brochure]. Gainesville, Florida: frank (scholar, 2016) conference.
Hou, J. Z. (2019). Understanding the public interest puzzle in China’s public relations: The role of balance and counterbalance based on Confucian great harmony. In J. Johnston & M. Pieczka (Eds.), Public interest communication: Critical debates and global contexts (pp. 153-171). Routledge.
Johnston, J., & Pieczka, M. (2019). Public interest communication: A framework for systematic inquiry. In J. Johnston and M. Pieczka (Eds.), Public interest communication: Critical debates and global contexts (pp. 9-31). Routledge.
Kvam, D. S., Considine, J. R., & Palmeri, T. (2018). Defining diversity: An analysis of student stakeholders’ perceptions of a diversity-focused learning outcome. Communication Education, 67(4), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2018.1465189
Madden, S. & Alt, R. A. (2021). More than a “bad apple”: Applying an ethics of care perspective to a collective crisis. Journal of Public Interest Communications (5)1 24-44. https://doi.org/10.32473/jpic.v5.i1
Martin, J. M., Sellnow-Richmond, D. D. & Strawser, M. G. (2020). Building a diverse curriculum: The role of diversity across communication coursework. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication 21(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/17459435.2019.1677750
McAdam, D. (1988). Freedom Summer. Oxford University Press.
Mohr, K. A. J. & Mohr, E. S. (2017) Understanding Generation Z students to promote a contemporary learning environment. Journal on Empowering Teaching Excellence, 1(1), 84-94. https://doi.org/10.15142/T3M05T
Saltmarsh, J. A. (2011). The civic promise of service learning. In J. A. Saltmarsh & E. A. Zlotkowski (Eds.), Higher education and democracy: Essays on service-learning and civic engagement (pp. 28-34). Temple University Press.
Saltmarsh, J. A., & Zlotkowski, E. A. (2011). Introduction: Putting into practice the civic purposes of higher education. In J. A. Saltmarsh & E. A. Zlotkowski (Eds.), Higher education and democracy: Essays on service-learning and civic engagement (pp. 1-8). Temple University Press.
Schwieger, D. & Ladwig, C. (2018). Reaching and retaining the next generation: Adapting to the expectations of Gen Z in the classroom. Information Systems Education Journal, 16(3), 4-13. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1179303.pdf
Seemiller, C., & Grace, M. (2016). Generation Z goes to college. Jossey-Bass.
Simola, S. (2003). Ethics of justice and care in corporate crisis management. Journal ofBusiness Ethics, 46(4), 351-361. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025607928196
Strama, M. (1998). Overcoming cynicism: Youth participation and electoral politics. National Civic Review, 87(1), 71– 78. https://doi.org/10.1002/ncr.87106
Tao, W., & Kim, S. (2017). Application of two under-researched typologies in crisis communication: Ethics of justice vs. care and public relations vs. legal strategies. PublicRelations Review,43(4), 690-699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.06.003
Teruelle, R. (2011) Social media and youth activism. In Al-Deen, H.S. N. & Hendricks, J. A. (Eds.), Social media: Usage and impact (pp. 201-217). Lexington Books.
Tilly, C. (1978). From mobilization to revolution. McGraw-Hill.
Zhao, D. (1998). Ecologies of social movements: Student mobilization during the 1989 prodemocracy movement in Beijing. American Journal of Sociology, 103(6), 1493– 1529. https://doi.org/10.1086/231399
To cite this article: Chernin, K. and Brunner, B. (2022). Public interest communications in the classroom: Bringing activism to public relations education. Journal of Public Relations Education, 8(2), 111-146. https://aejmc.us/jpre/?p=3051
EditorialRecord: Submitted June 15, 2021. Revised November 16, 2021. Revised February 26, 2022. Accepted March 7, 2022.
Abstract
Melissa Janoske McLean, Ph.D. Owner, Tenure and Beyond Coaching, LLC Maine Email: melissa.janoske@gmail.com
Kim Marks Malone,APR, Fellow PRSA Instructor and Online Coordinator Journalism and Strategic Media University of Memphis Memphis, TN Email: ksmarks@memphis.edu
Abstract
This teaching brief looks at two aspects of public relations work for organizations who wish to make issue/activist statements: how to write an effective statement that is followed by action, and how to engage in ethical conversation with publics about the statement. The brief also addresses what happens if there are no follow up actions, and how to build relationships with the dominant coalition in order to aid in writing statements that will match organizational actions. These two lessons each include a discussion of purpose, materials, objectives, activities, and assessment (including ACEJMC assessment format and terminology) for easy adaptation into the public relations classroom.
Building relationships with an organization’s or client’s publics often occurs through the writing and dissemination of statements. Historically, these statements are distributed through traditional news outlets but more and more often, they are also being shared via social media.
These statements are going beyond announcing new products or changes in organizational leadership; organizations are also offering statements of opinion and belief, especially about social issues, social policies, and social change, and publics are watching very closely. This teaching brief will look at how PR professionals can help clients make corporate social activism (CSA) count through writing effective statements that are followed-up by action, incorporating organizational values into the statement and supporting their organization’s or client’s beliefs. It’s important to note that the vocabulary for these types of statements and actions by organizations is developing with some referring to it as advocacy (Dodd & Supa, 2014) and some as activism (Chatterji & Toffel, 2018; Hambrick & Wowak, 2019; Oikkonen & Jääskeläinen, 2019). With the increased emphasis on an organization’s actions (Bhagwat et al, 2020) – both stand-alone and in support of statements – corporate social activism is the term used in this teaching brief.
While understanding how to write these statements effectively is important, it is also important for PR professionals to understand that not every public will agree with them all the time. PR professionals need to be prepared for backlash on these statements from publics who disagree with them. This lesson will look at how to acknowledge and work through their anger or vitriol with the organization or individual and to ethically communicate with these publics, and potentially make them allies.
Follow through must play a role here. Organizations offering statements supporting a social issue or policy must be ready to follow-up with actions that also support it. This lesson will address what happens if that doesn’t occur, and how to write statements that will match organizational actions.
Public relations practitioners need to be able to write these activism statements, make sure their organization is supportive of the words and the necessary actions, and engage in ethical communication with their publics about the statement and the actions of the organization. Therefore, this teaching brief will include two lessons: 1) recognizing and crafting an effective activist statement and 2) building ethical and activist relationships, as well as a case study. Each lesson includes learning objectives, activities, and assessments.
Lesson #1: Identify & Practice Writing Activist Statements for an Organization
Purpose:
To help students understand how PR professionals can craft effective social activist statements for sharing on a client’s or organization’s social media channels by studying and writing similar statements.
Materials:
A variety of social activist statements posted on social media channels or website from organizations, including Ben & Jerry’s (to complement the case study below), Peloton, Nordstrom, Dove, Uber, and Gushers. We also recommend the professor look to see if their own university/college/department wrote statements for analysis.
Objectives:
At the end of the lesson students will be able to:
Discuss the differences between corporate social responsibility and corporate social activism.
Recognize corporate social activism messages.
Identify an organization’s values from their written social activism statements.
Build connections between an organization’s stated values and social causes through their actions.
Understand how to communicate authentically during times of heightened uncertainty.
Body of Lesson:
This lesson should start with a discussion of effective public relations writing and writing for activism and the differences between corporate social responsibility and corporate social activism.
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) can be defined as “business firms contributing in a positive way to society by going beyond a narrow focus on profit maximization” (McWilliams, 2015, p. 1). CSR focuses on an organization’s actions that “advance social good beyond that which is required by law” (Kang et al, 2016, p. 59) and the strategies organization’s take to demonstrate that it is operating ethically.
Activism is defined as “the activity of working to achieve political or social change” (Oxford Dictionary, 2020). In the past, activism has been viewed by public relations scholars and practitioners from an organization-centric point of view (Ciszek, 2015) because PR professionals typically find themselves in the position of responding to activism directed at the organization. Smith (2005, p. 6) defined activism as a process where pressure is exerted on organizations (or other institutions) to change policies and practices. Today, stakeholders expect an organization to demonstrate its values through public support for or against public policies on social or moral issues through both statements and actions. Bhagwat et al (2020) call this phenomenon “corporate sociopolitical activism (CSA) also referred to as corporate social activism.
The main difference between CSR and CSA is that the focus of CSR efforts and initiatives are typically widely accepted and can be said to work within the framework of society’s current value system while CSA efforts and initiatives are typically polarizing and partisan (Bhagwat et al, 2020). An example that helps drive home the difference between CSR and CSA is Walmart. In 2015, Walmart stopped selling rifles commonly used in mass shootings, engaging in corporate social responsibility and distancing itself from the controversial firearms industry (Bhattarai, 2019). In 2019, following a mass shooting in one of its stores, Walmart CEO Doug McMillan urged lawmakers to enact stricter gun control measures, moving the retail giant from CSR to CSA (Tensley, 2019).
Important questions to ask and answer during the lesson include: What does persuasive writing look like in times of heightened uncertainty (typical during activist moments)? How do you humanize your communication efforts to demonstrate authenticity? How do you make sure a statement reflects corporate values and actions? How can you encourage publics who agree with you to extend their support via social media?
Key Concepts:
Persuasive writing
Communicating authentically
Organizational values
Uncertainty
Corporate social activism vs corporate social responsibility
Activities:
Have students read and evaluate a variety of statements from organizations, including Ben & Jerry’s and, if available, their own institution. What were the goals/objectives of these statements? What are the organizational values evident in the writing? How do they address their publics? Can students find evidence of the organization taking action to back up their statements? If not, what action(s) can they suggest? Why?
Then have students practice writing their own statement for an organization and issue of their own choosing. How will they make sure it reflects organizational values? Who are the main publics they are trying to reach? Who are the stakeholders that may and may not support the organization’s statement and actions? How will they balance writing to those who support them with those who may not? Have students plan out at least one follow-on action that the organization can take after the statement is released to back up their words.
Evaluation:
Student understanding of concepts will be demonstrated by their contributions to the discussion.
The in-class writing exercise (Activity #2) will be peer reviewed and edited, and then their statements and recommended actions will be shared with the class for analysis and discussion.
How assessment of student learning will be met:
Awareness
Learn about corporate social activism and the role that public relations plays in helping an organization demonstrate its values to stakeholders.
Learn the importance of an organization backing up social activism statements with action.
Analyze existing content on popular social media platforms to determine an organization’s or brand’s values, goals, and objectives.
Understanding
Given social media content, distinguish the differences between corporate social responsibility and corporate social activism.
Recognize social issues and policies that align with an organization based on the organization’s stated values.
Application
Improve persuasive writing and authentic communication skills through written corporate and brand social activism statements.
Choose appropriate actions for an organization to take in support of social activism statements.
Lesson #2: Ethical Activist Communication with Publics
Purpose:
To understand how to ethically communicate with and engage with publics regarding comments resulting from social activism statements, especially with followers who disagree with them or shame the organization for past actions or lack of action that supports the organization’s stand.
Materials:
Access to Ben & Jerry’s, Peloton, Nordstrom, Dove, Uber, and Gushers social media pages (Facebook, Twitter and Instagram), with a focus on the content announcing corporate social activist statements and/or actions. Again, if their university/college/department issued a corporate activist statement and/or took action, this should be included as well. These posts should include access to a sample of comments and responses that agree and disagree with the organization’s statements/actions.
Objectives:
Explain the differences between bandwagon activism and social activism.
Identify techniques and language to humanize responses to hostile followers on social media platforms.
Create authentic messages to effectively engage with hostile followers on social media platforms.
Discuss the differences between audiences and communication strategies on popular social media platforms.
Body of Lesson:
This lesson will start by reviewing best practices for engaging with audiences on social media – from followers who applaud your brand to followers who are critical, emotional or abusive. For examples of best practices see Social Media: How to Engage, Share, and Connect (Luttrell, 2016) and Social Media for Strategic Communication: Creative Strategies and Research-Based Applications (Freberg, 2019). Additionally, the importance of organizational accountability (sharing about the action behind the words) and ‘owning’ past errors (apologizing for past organizational mistakes), will be emphasized. Students will discuss and evaluate the responses of organizations to both positive and negative comments to their statements on different social media platforms. Different types of activism (bandwagon and corporate social) will be looked at, discussed and differentiated.
Bandwagon activism happens when an organization’s social activist statements aren’t seen as genuine and authentic and aren’t followed up by action. When an organization’s statements are viewed by the public as “jumping on the bandwagon” and only one-time opportunities to employ temporary tactics, CSA can backfire (Sakoui & Faughnder, 2020). An example of this is when Amazon faced scrutiny for sharing statements supporting Black Lives Matter wihout implementing any real changes to reflect the statements into their internal policies and business practices (Paul, 2020).
Key Concepts:
Bandwagon activism versus corporate social activism
Humanizing the message
Adapting strategies for audiences on different platforms
Actions speak louder than words
Activities:
Have students look at an organization’s social activist statements on social media and find examples in the comments section of these posts that are in support of and against the organization’s shared statement to compare and discuss. Students will present their examples of negative and positive comments to the organization’s activist statements on social media to the class and discuss why the organization’s statement is successful or not, based upon the comments. (Was the statement deemed inauthentic? Did commenters see it as organizational bandwagon activism? Did the organization either not have or forget to mention potential actions to support message? Was it not aligned with the organization’s stated values?)
Then, ask students to craft responses to both positive and negative social media comments on the organization’s social media activism content.
Evaluation:
Student understanding of concepts will be demonstrated by their contributions to the discussion.
The in-class writing exercise (Activity #2) will be peer reviewed and edited, and then their responses will be shared with the class for analysis and discussion.
How assessment of student learning will be met:
Awareness
Learn the differences between bandwagon activism and social activism.
Learn how to humanize messages with authentic language and empathy.
Understanding
Given social media content, distinguish the differences between bandwagon activism and corporate social activism.
Understand the effective use of empathy to humanize an organization’s response to negative or hostile comments on the organization’s social justice statements.
Application
Analyze existing social activism content on popular social media platforms to determine appropriate strategies for different channels.
Improve writing skills and humanizing messages through written responses to positive, negative/hostile, and/or emotional comments on social media platforms.
Case Study
A useful case study for organizational issue activism focuses on Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, and their social justice/Black Lives Matter (BLM) activism on social media. They are unabashed in their beliefs and stances, take proactive action to support those beliefs, and encourage people to both agree and disagree with them on social media.
Some of the actions they have taken to support their statements include creating the Ben & Jerry’s Foundation (launched 1985), which distributes money ($2.8 million in 2018) to support grassroots organizing for social and environmental justice. They have also created multiple new flavors to support their issues, including a Colin Kaepernick Change the Whirled Non-Dairy pint.
Additionally, Ben & Jerry’s supports issues that are relevant and important to their customers, employees, and leadership, allowing for a variety of issues and ways to support the causes. In 2016, when Ben & Jerry’s announced their support for BLM on social media, they had the largest reaction in their organizational history, including everything from cheering them on to announcing the customer was boycotting their product (Ben & Jerry’s, 2016; Ciszek & Logan, 2018).
Rob Michalak, Ben & Jerry’s Director of Social Mission Special Projects, said that “We respect that some people will have a set of values that are meaningful and important to them, and we may lose some customers. But what we’ve also learned is that those who share those values are more deeply loyal” (Forbes, 2020, para. 8). Fans on Facebook (one of their main platforms) support this: “I think I just need to buy another deep freezer for all the ice cream I’m gonna have to buy to counter everyone that claims they are gonna quit buying Ben & Jerry’s because wait for it…they speak out on injustice.”
Finally, Ben & Jerry’s believes that “purpose-driven companies really are the companies of the future; they’re profitable and more sustainable” (Forbes, 2020, para. 12). This belief, along with the idea that it’s simply the right thing to do, is clear through all their messaging, and that confidence is perhaps unique to their presentation and statements.
Ben & Jerry’s offers an interesting perspective on making social justice statements on social media, and they back up their words with clear and concrete actions. They also have a fun and yet sincere approach to engaging publics in conversation on social media. These qualities combine to make them an excellent case study for this module and for student learning.
Bhagwat, Y., Warren, N. L., Beck, J. T., & Watson, G. F. (2020). Corporate Sociopolitical Activism and Firm Value. Journal of Marketing, 84(5), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920937000
Chatterji, A. K., & Toffel, M. W. (2018). The New CEO Activists. Harvard Business Review, 96(1), 78-89.
Ciszek, E., & Logan, N. (2018). Challenging the dialogic promise: How Ben & Jerry’s support for Black Lives Matter fosters dissensus on social media. Journal of Public Relations Research, 30(3), 115-127. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2018.1498342
Dodd, M. D., & Supa, D. W. (2014). Conceputalizing and Measuring “Corporate Social Advocacy” Communication: Examining the Impact on Corporate Financial Performance. Public Relations Journal, 8(3), 2-23. http://www.prsa.org/Intelligence/PRJournal/Vol8/No3/
Freberg, K. (2019). Social Media for Strategic Communication: Creative Strategies and Research-Based Applications. Sage.
Hambrick, D. C., & Wowak, A. J. (2019) CEO Sociopolitical Activism: A Stakeholder Alignment Model. Academy of Management Review, 46(1). https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2018.0084
Kang, C., Germann, F., & Grewal, R. (2016). Washing Away Your Sins? Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Social Irresponsibility, and Firm Performance. Journal of Marketing, 80(2), 59-79.
Luttrell, R. (2016). Social Media: How to Engage, Share, and Connect. (2nd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.
McWilliams, A. (2015). Corporate social responsibility, in Wiley Encyclopedia of Management, 1-4.
Olkkonen, L., & Jääskeläinen, J. (2019). Corporate Activism: Exploring Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Communication. Academy of Managemenet Proceedings, 2019(17350).
To cite this article: McLean, M.J. and Malone, K.M.(2022). Beyond slacktivism: Lessons for authentic activist messages through public relations. Journal of Public Relations Education, 8(2), 158-171. https://aejmc.us/jpre/?p=3122