مشخصات مقاله | |
عنوان مقاله | Accredited vs. non-accredited: How accreditation impacts perceptions and readiness to provide ethics counsel |
ترجمه عنوان مقاله | معتبر در مقابل غیر معتبر: چگونه اعتباربخشی به ادراکات و آمادگی بر ارائه مشاوره اخلاقی تاثیر می گذارد |
فرمت مقاله | |
نوع مقاله | ISI |
سال انتشار | |
تعداد صفحات مقاله | 11 صفحه |
رشته های مرتبط | روانشناسی، مدیریت و علوم ارتباطات اجتماعی |
گرایش های مرتبط | روابط عممی |
مجله | بررسی روابط عمومی – Public Relations Review |
دانشگاه | گروه روزنامه نگاری، روابط عمومی و رسانه های جدید، دانشگاه بیلور، ایالات متحده |
کلمات کلیدی | اعتباربخشی، وجدان اخلاقی، محدود کردن پوشش، روابط عمومی |
کد محصول | E4834 |
تعداد کلمات | 7043 کلمه |
نشریه | نشریه الزویر |
لینک مقاله در سایت مرجع | لینک این مقاله در سایت الزویر (ساینس دایرکت) Sciencedirect – Elsevier |
وضعیت ترجمه مقاله | ترجمه آماده این مقاله موجود نمیباشد. میتوانید از طریق دکمه پایین سفارش دهید. |
دانلود رایگان مقاله | دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی |
سفارش ترجمه این مقاله | سفارش ترجمه این مقاله |
بخشی از متن مقاله: |
1. Introduction
Public relations scholars and industry leaders have called for practitioners to provide ethical leadership in their organizations for many decades (e.g., Bivins, 1992; Bowen, 2008, 2009; Fitzpatrick & Gauthier 2001; Fitzpatrick, 1996; Paluszek, 1989; Ryan & Martinson, 1983). However, qualitative research has found what ranges from a “state of neglect” among public relations professionals “in a plethora of areas related to ethical understanding, ethics counsel, and the ability to enactthe role of ethical counsel” (Bowen, 2008, p. 271–272) to senior practitioners who embraced the role of organizational conscience with perceptions of “a fervent duty to the public interest” (Neill & Drumwright, 2012, p. 220). More recently, trade publications have questioned the ethics of public relations practitioners asking “are all publicists liars?” (Willens, 2015) and suggesting that they are “professional manipulators” (Bowen, 2015). Both of the articles were referencing a qualitative study conducted in South Africa as presented at the International Public Relations Research Symposium, referred to as BledCom, in Slovenia in July of 2015, which included interviews with public relations practitioners who admitted to lying. Based on these divergent findings, the following questions arise: do public relations practitioners perceive a personal responsibility to provide ethics counsel, how prepared do they perceive they are to provide ethics counsel on public relations issues, how likely are they to provide ethics counsel, and what are the most common issues they are facing? Furthermore, do public relations educators embrace the role of ethical conscience and do they believe recent graduates are prepared to provide ethics counsel? This study addresses these issues through survey research with a national sample of practitioners who are members of the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) and educators who are members of PRSA and the Public Relations Division of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication. |