READING DIARY: A response to News journalism and public relations: a dangerous relationship by Kevin

A response to News journalism and public relations: a dangerous relationship by Kevin Moloney, Daniel Jackson and David McQueen.

The piece offers a critical overview of the relationship between PR and journalism. Initial impressions suggest that the focus of the writing will be centred around ethics, power, consequences, and responsibility between unfiltered PR and journalism.

Instantly the difference between journalism and PR is established; "These two communication types want incompatible outcomes: independent reporting against favourable reporting." This sets the tone for the text being favourable of Journalists over PR professionals, which is quickly re-enforced through the suggestion that Public relations "exploit hard-pressed journalists." However it cannot be said that the chapter is biased as it does explain how "indiscretions" such as the phone hacking scandal by tabloid media, has left the public lacking trust in traditional journalism.

A large portion of the paper relates back to the concept of PR-isation. This is defined as "When scrutiny by journalism is absent; when facts and opinions are not checked, and sources are not revealed." It is implied that this could also be explained by the manipulation and advantage taking of over-worked journalists by PR professionals to suit their own agenda. Usually this is achieved through PR people writing "detailed briefings of the background to a story, especially in technical areas. These briefings are usually written in a journalistic style and are easy to imbed into news copy." This has become easier due to the decreasing number of journalists in the NUJ by "between 25% and 33%", thus making deadlines more demanding and less achievable. This is happening simultaneously to an increase of "6-7%" in PR employment.

The in-depth discussion regarding "poacher-turned-gamekeepers" is a particularly interesting section. This is the name given to a journalist who protects the interests they previously attacked by becoming part of a PR team. The highlight of this is a quote from Nick Davies, an investigative journalist, "modern media failure is complicated and subtle. It involves all kinds of manipulation, occasional conspiracy, lying, cheating, stupidity, cupidity, gullibility, a collapse of skill and a new wave of deliberate propaganda." This is another example of where the authors balance the argument between the two professions, by exploring the concept of both using manipulation for their own gain.

Towards the end the chapter became very repetitive. It includes various examples of where PR-isation has contributed to false news. All though the evidence provided is supportive of the points raised, it is excessive in comparison to the lack of explanation. Overall the piece is successful in exploring the difference between PR and journalism and meets all the concepts which were initially outlined. My only criticism is that there appears to be a lot of evidence yet not a lot of explanation into what it means.

All quotes are from the original source.