How Public Relations Practitioners and Editors in Florida View Each Other

Kopenhaver, Lillian Lodge; Martinson, David L.; Ryan, Michael G.

doi:10.1177/107769908406100419

Cited by 49 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Aronoffs (1975) study of Texas journalists and public relations practitioners concluded that journalists have generally negative attitudes toward public relations practitioners. Kopenhaver, Martinson, and Ryan (1984) replicated Aronoffs study in part and arrived at similar conclusions.…”

Section: T H E Publicity Function Of Public Relationssupporting

confidence: 70%

“…The first section explored the attitudes of editors toward public relations practitioners. Twentytwo previously tested statements about public relations practitioners were rated on 5-point Likert scales (Aronoff, 1975;Kopenhaver, Martinson, & Ryan, 1984; see Table 4 later in text). The second section asked editors how much contact they had with public relations practitioners, how much of the public relations-supplied material they used, and how useful they considered that material.…”

Section: The Study Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Newspaper Editors' Perceptions of Public Relations: How Business, News, and Sports Editors Differ

Pincus¹,

Rimmer²,

Rayfield³

et al. 1993

Journal of Public Relations Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: T H E Publicity Function Of Public Relationssupporting

confidence: 70%

Section: The Study Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

Newspaper Editors' Perceptions of Public Relations: How Business, News, and Sports Editors Differ

Pincus¹,

Rimmer²,

Rayfield³

et al. 1993

Journal of Public Relations Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Journalists tend to discount the credibility of information subsidies from public relations practitioners because they believe practitioners are inclined to deceive the press by depicting news about their clients solely in a favorable light (Aronoff, 1975;Kopenhaver, Martinson and Ryan 1984;Stegall and Sanders, 1986). However, journalists' frequent usage of websites as news-gathering materials is well documented in prior research (Callison, 2003;Gower and Cho, 2001;Hill and White, 2000;Middleberg and Ross, 2000).…”

Section: Media Relations On the Web For Nonprofit Organizationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactive Communication Features on Nonprofit Organizations' Webpages for the Practice of Excellence in Public Relations

Yeon

Choi

Kiousis

2007

Journal of Website Promotion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The main aims of this study were: (1) to examine how nonprofit organizations utilize their websites as a public relations tool, especially for media relations, donor relations, volunteer relations and their interactive communication features and (2) to ascertain whether nonprofit organizations' revenues are positively correlated with the presence and prominence of their media relations, donor relations, and volunteerrelations efforts online. To accomplish this, a content analysis of 98 websites was conducted from the list of the NPT Top 100. Statistical analysis revealed that there were no significant relationships between revenues and usage of the web by nonprofit organizations for media relations, donor relations and volunteer relations. This study found that although most of the top 100 nonprofit organizations have website content for online media relations, the majority had yet to furnish journalist-friendly web content because clearly labeled online press rooms dedicated to journalists were infrequent. We also found that donors are treated as the most important stakeholders given the frequency of interactive features and prominence of content dedicated on the websites to donors in comparison with journalists and volunteers. Finally, the conceptual and practical implications of the investigation are discussed.

show abstract

“…111), numerous studies reveal negative perceptions of and attitudes towards PR (DeLorme & Fedler, 2003;Jeffers, 1977;Kopenhaver, 1985;Kopenhaver, Martinson & Ryan;1984;Ryan & Martinson, 1988;Sallot & Johnson, 2006;Stegall & Sanders, 1986;White & Shaw, 2005;Wilson & Supa, 2013). In their historical review of journalist-PR relations, DeLorme and Fedler (2003) concluded that the relationship is "tense and complex" (2003, p. 101).…”

Section: Highly Negative Perceptions Of Prmentioning

confidence: 99%

Journalism–PR relations revisited: The good news, the bad news, and insights into tomorrow's news

Macnamara

2014

Public Relations Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extensive research over the past 100 years has shown that the interrelationship between journalism and PR is tensioned and paradoxical, with negative perceptions of PR among journalists and trivialization and demonization of PR as 'spin' contrasted by claims of 'symbiosis' and evidence that 40-75 per cent of media content is significantly influenced by PR. However, studies have been predominantly quantitative and most predate the recent 'crisis in journalism' and rapid growth of new media formats. This article reports in-depth interviews with senior editors, journalists and PR practitioners in three countries that provide new insights into journalism-PR relations today and identify trajectories for future research, education and practice.

show abstract

How Public Relations Practitioners and Editors in Florida View Each Other

Cited by 49 publications

References 0 publications

Newspaper Editors' Perceptions of Public Relations: How Business, News, and Sports Editors Differ

Newspaper Editors' Perceptions of Public Relations: How Business, News, and Sports Editors Differ

Interactive Communication Features on Nonprofit Organizations' Webpages for the Practice of Excellence in Public Relations

Journalism–PR relations revisited: The good news, the bad news, and insights into tomorrow's news

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About