Revisiting the concept “dialogue” in public relations

Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 5–13

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Public Relations Review

Revisiting the concept “dialogue” in public relations

Petra Theunissen∗, Wan Norbani Wan Noordin1

School of Communication Studies, Faculty of Design & Creative Technologies, AUT University, Private Bag 92006, Auckland 1142, New Zealand

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:

Received 2 October 2010

Received in revised form

14 September 2011

Accepted 14 September 2011

Keywords:

Public relations

Dialogue

Two-way symmetric communication

Risk

a b s t r a c t

This paper follows a critical approach in exploring the philosophical underpinnings and key

features of dialogue in public relations practice and thinking. It argues that dialogue has

been uncritically equated to two-way symmetrical communication, which has not done

justice to the nature of dialogue, and has effectively stifled concrete development of a

dialogic theory in public relations. The paper draws from a range of literature, including

mainstream public relations and communication philosophy—in particular the philosophy

of Martin Buber. The purpose of this paper is to inform public relations thinking by encour￾aging debate rather than proposing a new theoretical approach. As such, it sets out to

explore the concept of dialogue and its philosophical underpinning, considers its practical

application and suggests that it should not be seen as superior to persuasion.

© 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The term “dialogue” has become ubiquitous in public relations writing and scholarship, and even more so in the light

of the ever-evolving Internet and its social media application (see e.g. Briones, Kuch, Fisher Liu, & Jin, 2011; Henderson &

Bowley, 2010; Taylor, Kent, & White, 2001; Yang, Kang, & Johnson, 2010). Authors such as Mersham, Theunissen, and Peart

(2009), for example, suggest that the Internet is forcing practitioners to return to dialogue and conversation:

Public relations will be increasingly about dialogues and conversation rather than traditional one-way monologues

of the past, adapting to the free exchange of opinions across groups and collectives that previously were merely

recipients of communication messages. (Mersham et al., 2009, p. 10)

Not surprisingly, numerous writings in the area of dialogic communication in public relations focus on social media

applications and their uses (see e.g. Bortree & Seltzer, 2009; Gordon & Berhow, 2009; Rybalko & Seltzer, 2010). While these

studies contribute to our understanding of social media in the practice of public relations, they do not sufficiently contribute

to developing a clear philosophical understanding of the theory of dialogue.

In a discipline that has adopted functionalism as an extension of the systems theory (see L’Etang, 2008) and has become

process-driven, dialogic theory per se appears to have made little inroads in mainstream public relations thinking. While

functionalism and the systems theory have important roles to play in public relations theory, these paradigms have resulted

in unintended consequences. One of these is that “dialogue” has been uncritically equated to “two-way symmetrical” com￾munication as if they were two sides of the same coin, and in instances where dialogue is mentioned, the focus remains on

two-way communication rather than dialogue per se:

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +64 21 183 7080; fax: +64 9 921 9987.

E-mail addresses: [email protected] (P. Theunissen), [email protected] (W.N. Wan Noordin).

1 Tel.: +64 21 286 1002.

0363-8111/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.09.006