DNIPROPETROVSK UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND LAW

THE DEPARTMENT OF THE HUMANITIES

AND SOCIO-POLITICAL SCIENCES

D.V. PROSHYN

INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC RELATIONS

The Notes of Lectures

for all Specialities with the English Language of Teaching

Dnipropetrovsk

2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface 2

Factors of international PR evolution 2

Society as the IPR object 5

The problems of ethno-cultural stereotypes and cross-cultural differences 6

PR subjects in the international relations 9

State structures of IPR 10

Ipr of the non-governmental organizations 11

Ipr of the private companies. Private pr agencies 11

PR directions and methods in the international relations 12

Current information management 12

Image-making 15

PR problems, directions and methods in relations between Ukraine and the countries of North America and Europe 19

Ukraine in the eyes of the countries-IPR objects. Potential problems in conducting PR- activities 20

Ethno-cultural peculiarities of the countries-IPR objects of Ukraine 20

PR problems, directions and methods in relations between Ukraine and the countries of Asia and Africa 29

Ukraine in the eyes of the countries-IPR objects. Potential problems in conducting PR- activities 29

Ethno-cultural peculiarities of the countries-IPR objects of Ukraine 29

Conclusion 33

Preface

During recent years, American word-combination “public relations” (PR) has firmly installed in the professional vocabulary as well as everyday speech of thousands of people in Ukraine, Russia and other countries established in 1991 after the Soviet Union collapse. This new term is rather popular, but it does not concern only fashion. Our willingness to use it more and more represents a wide range of changes occurred in our societies. The specialists talk about political, corporate PR, show-business PR and security agencies PR. International PR is known as a special type of public relations.

As to the above the author adheres to the other point of view of PR. He thinks that the term “public relations” should denote the open activity, carried on behalf of the person, organization concerned and so on (PR subject) to make stable good relations with public, to provide with the understanding and readiness for mutually beneficial cooperation.

What helps to achieve the goals of PR? Their progress depends on the investigation of the social environment where, actually, the PR subject acts, a timely supply of the information about the goals and plans of the PR subject, about their compliance with the interests of the society; an overcoming of the stereotypes and allaying of the rumors about the activities and intentions of the subject. Thus, PR can be characterized as special control element of social processes, that is responsible for the information supply of the significant activity of the person, organizations concerned.

International Public relations (IPR) – is an open activity, that gives an opportunity to the person concerned (government, private company, public organization, etc.) to make contacts with different groups of foreign community, to inspire the foreign citizens with kindly feelings, respect and readiness to accept the given line of action.

Factors of international PR evolution

So, in the introduction we have used the term “international public relations” for naming such a form of the social processes management which gives a person concerned (government / private company / social organism) a possibility to establish relations with different groups of foreign public, represent its positive image abroad, inspire the foreign citizens with kindly feelings, respect and readiness to accept the given line of action.

There are 3spheres in the field of activity:

1) governmental sphere, where IPR serves the interests of the states, is the part of their foreign-policy strategy;

2) non-governmental (civil) sphere, where IPR serves the interests of public organizations and movements, like “Greenpeace”, “World Wildlife Fund”, “Amnesty international” etc.;

3) commercial sphere, where IPR sereves the interests of private business.

The activity that reminds the IPR according to different indications started long ago. However the XX century is the time of real establishment of the international PR.

Reasons of active IPR development in the XX century:

1) democratization of the international relations;

2) Soviet-and-American confrontation;

3) appearance of the international social movements;

4) expansion of the international economic relations;

5) pregress in the technologies of international communication..

The democratization of the international relations played an important role in the development of the governmental IPR. The population in the West countries during the XX century had more and more opportunities to become educated, they got more and more political rights and thus they organized rather powerful social movements. By the beginning of the XX century these factors turned the society into the powerful force in the international policy.

Soviet-and-American confrontation, well-known all over the world as “the cold war”, has had a strong but at the same time ambiguous influence upon the international PR formation. (It was the main conflict in terms of “cold war” between West, headed by the USA and socialist East, headed by the USSR). The attack in the war was waged simultaneously on all “fronts”, including propaganda. Every party tried to prove the superiority of its way of life and to win the sympathy of the citizents of the foeign countries (not only the representatives of the wide groups, but the political, economic, scientific, creative elite).

By the beginning of the XX century the society had become the powerful force that acts on the domestic area in more developed countries. At the end of the century important international social movements accured. Their influence spread well over the borders of some countries.

Improvement of the international economic contacts, formation of the world consumer, services and labor market is the main development stimulus of the commercial IPR. The companies and banks, that run their business abroad, saw the problems. They have to address to the foreign society in order to solve the problems. Ordinary tasks of private business – winning and keeping the consumer’s confidence – were added with the overcoming of the intercultural differences and a natural suspicion about everything strange, foreign. Many underdeveloped countries have the difficult colonial or semicolonial past and the foreign (american and european) business has to prove the honesty of its plans, reject the blames concerning the changing of the colonial oppression by new forms of the economic dependence and expluatation there.

Speaking about IPR evolution factors one more thing is left over – the progress in the technologies of the international communication. In 1815 Napoleon escaped from Elba exile and landed in the south of France not far from Nice. Paris got to know about it only on the fifth day of his debarkation. On the 11^th of September 2001 George Bush the President of the USA got the information about the consequences of the attacks on the International Trade Center and the Pentagon at the same time with millions of the TV viewers all around the world. According to Marshall McLuhan the Canadian sociologist, technological development turns the globe into the united populous “global village”.

Society as the IPR object

Foreign society, government (private company / nongovernmental organization) seeks to establish productive relations based on mutual understanding and kindly feelings with, can be seen as the IPR object. In the structure of the IPR object we can distinguish two basic elements:

1. groups of foreign society;

2. public opinion formed abroad in these or those sections of the public.

Groups of foreign society. By the groups of foreign society we mean a relatively stable range of people possessing a certain social characteristic (or characteristics). It can concern the same place of the individuals in the social system, common ground of their interests, the unity of their cultures, coincidence of their opinions and systems of values.

As to a PR specialist, groups of foreign society can differ according to their attitude towards the government, a company, or a social organization that wages a PR-campaign, quantity and effect on the social processes, the extent of information awareness and competence. Prior to fixating on a certain group of society, a PR expert answers following questions: “Whom should we address to and for what purpose in connection with a problem we have? To what extent do the activity of the given group of people concern or can concern our interests?”

The groups of foreign society IPR experts deal with in the most of cases can be classified in the following way (in the approximate order of their amplification).

1. members of foreign (government / business) delegations;

2. groups of foreign political leaders (it differs from the mentioned-above foreign government delegations because they are considered in terms of their national “context” but not in the simulated conditions of the trip abroad);

3. groups of foreign business leaders (see the remark in brackets by the point # 2);

4. representatives of the foreign mass-media who connect the IPR subject with the abroad;

5. various groups of public opinion, participants of the international social movements;

6. groups of foreign society involved in the principal activity of the IPR subject (foreign clients, consumers and so on).

One – utmost wide – group of foreign society should be mentioned apart:

7. foreign citizens as a whole, represented by the so-called “casual” representatives who take an active part in the dedicated PR-activities of the IPR subject (attendees of the various exhibitions / viewers / ordinary guests of different shows / readers of the specialized printed publications and so on). In this case it is appropriate to speak about Americans / Germans / Poles and so on “in general”, about general characteristic features of the national cultures and so on (see below).

The problems of ethno-cultural stereotypes and cross-cultural differences

Ethno-cultural stereotypes. The term “stereotype” (from Greek stereós – hard and týpos – imprint) is now widely used in the modern languages thanks to the American journalist and writer Walter Lippmann. Before his book “The Public Opinion” being released in 1922, the word “stereotype” was used by the print workers only who called in such a way a ready duplicate of the typographical text in the form of metal or rubber plates, or rollers. Lippmann was the first to denote with the help of this term a generalized and simplified image of the social event or phenomenon, usually emotionally coloured and strictly fixed in the language.

A specialist on establishing relations with the foreign society can also face another problem concerning cross-cultural differences. We mean cultural peculiarities revealed in the process of interaction of different countries and people representatives.

Among the most essential cross-cultural differences we distinguish the following ones:

1. language differences;

2. national peculiarities of nonverbal communication.

Language differences. The matter of fact concerns not so much the knowledge of the country-object language (actually, it is an ideal exemplar; nevertheless, both sides usually use the English language, which is foreign for both of them) as the “security”, even despite understanding the language of the foreign society, against those mean jokes the foreign language can play with your message that you address to the foreigners. The international advertising, which is to a large extent related to the IPR, presents us with a whole range of the instructive examples produced because of the negligent attitude towards the language differences.

National peculiarities of nonverbal communication. It is evident that the language differences will come back to haunt us on the way to the cross-cultural understanding. People speak and write, write and speak trying orally as well as in written form to express their thoughts and feelings in the most exact and persuasive way. That is why many people think the words exchange to be the main means of communication. Nevertheless, according to the researchers, our words turn out to be just a drop in the ocean of the information where each of us is sunk into. In the process of communication only 7 % of the core information is transferred via words while 35 % of it is apprehended via the view, facial expression, postures, and gestures, and the last 38 % – via the intonation and voice modulation.

The most important communication channels are as follows:

1. eye contact;

2. facial expression;

3. gesticulation.

Eye contact. Everybody agrees that to catch an eye of your interlocutor is a very important means of communication. In spite of the fact that the expression “the eyes are the mirror of the soul” is a bit trite, it reflects the real state of affairs as before. A look of the interlocutor can betray his mood, his attitude towards the audience, the extent of his attention and so on. The representatives of some cultures feel quite at ease while keeping an eye contact for a long time. In other cases an intent gaze provokes negative reaction of the audience and such a behavior is assessed as a desire for showing the superiority and gripping the attention of the audience, as a display of hostile intentions and, finally, just as an impudence.

Facial expressions. Imagine a Russian or a Ukrainian who tells with a smile about his relative’s illness or death. It would ordinarily seem quite absurd to us. But Elias Erenburg, a Soviet journalist, noted after his trip to China: “In China people are used to smiling when they tell about some dramatic event – it means that they do not want to upset their interlocutor”. In some countries a smile can produce no positive impression at all, it expresses only malice or threat. Certainly, in the Western culture people sometimes smile when they are not really glad and do not wish any good to those their smile is addressed to. Nevertheless, it does not change the basic – positive – meaning of a smile.

Gesticulation. In one of the Shakespearian works, “Titus Andronicus”, there is such a line: “It would be good to compose an alphabet from all the gestures and thus understand all the thoughts”. Nevertheless, our gesticulation can be got hold of the wrong end of the stick by the foreigners. Of course, it is too hard to refuse to use the gestures, even if we are not Italians, in whose culture any act of communication is almost impossible without tumultuous gesticulation. (The hands of the first Italian television anchormen had to be tied under the table.) Nevertheless, while dealing with the representatives of the little-known culture it would be better to control your temper and be more cautious.

Some foreign scholars propose a special term – “cross-cultural literacy” – to name the knowledge of the peculiarities of foreign cultures up to a nicety of communication which can help to avoid awkward moments in the conversation with foreigners. Of course, to reach the top of the “cross-cultural literacy” it takes many years of hard work, full of meetings, negotiations, and acquaintances. Much depends on the personal talents of the observer. Maybe, one of the most important steps to the acquisition of the deep knowledge about foreign cultures is to study some basic characteristics of different peoples and countries represented by the researchers, by Geert Hofstede, the Dutch psychologist in particular. When he worked for the IBM he classified a great number of peoples of our planet according to four keyword parameters. Each of them will be examined below. But, for a start, let’s answer a logical question: “Isn’t a generalized model by Hofstede just one more stereotype very safely hidden behind the complicated scientific terminology?”

Our answer will be negative – no, it is not. Ethnocultural classification by Hofstede didn’t appear spontaneously, just as a result of the unconditioned simplifications produced by the lack of information about other peoples. It has no emotional colouring which is typical for the stereotypes, it doesn’t contain any narrow-minded bigotry and it doesn’t divide peoples into “good” and “bad”. We have a proper generalization of the information collected for many years about real, of vital importance social characteristics of the peoples of the world.

These characteristics are as follows:

1. social distance;

2. individualism (collectivism) of the culture;

3. fear of uncertainty;

4. “manhood” (“womanhood”) of the culture.

Social distance. This characteristic shows the attitude of the society towards the cases of the social, physical, and intellectual inequality of people. In the societies with a large social distance (in Spain, France, Greece, Turkey, the Arab countries, Japan, etc.) a strict hierarchy, a well-defined designation of the social top and lower circles, and a manifestation (at least in small things) of this or that variety of inequality do not cause any sharp protest. In the societies with a lesser extent of the social distance (for example, in the USA, Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand) such manifestations are either obviated or, at least, smoothed, “played down”.

Individualism (collectivism) of the culture. The given characteristic indicates the connection between a man and his social environment and the strength of this very connection. In the individualistic societies (the USA, Great Britain, Canada, Spain) personal contacts between the individuals are rather weak; freedom and self-sufficiency are highly appreciated. In the first place a man takes care of himself and his inner circle (husband / wife, children). There parents can be given much lesser attention. In the collectivist societies (the Arab world, Turkey, Greece, Japan) contacts between the individuals are much closer. In these societies people are born in this or that social group (large family clans, neighborly communities, associations); in the groups like these everybody is expected to take care uppermost of the good of the group and move his private interests to the background.

Fear of uncertainty. This characteristic helps to understand what people’s attitude towards changes and as well as new, still vague situations is produced by this or that culture. The more is the desire for avoiding uncertainty (the Arab countries, Greece, Spain, Turkey), the more painful is the reaction to the changes, innovations, the stronger is the desire for steadiness. In those societies where people are not so afraid of uncertainty (the USA, Great Britain, Canada), constant changes are welcome as they are thought to be a sign of virility and vitality, flexibility and progress.

“Manhood” (“womanhood”) of the culture. In the “male” cultures (the USA, Great Britain, Greece, the Arab countries) traditional “male” values (force, power, victory) prevail. In can be very well exemplified by the example of the USA where even women are filled with the “male” spirit. In the “female” cultures (Netherlands, the Scandinavian countries) less ambitious spirits prevail, a special attention is devoted to the concord in the interpersonal relations.

PR subjects in the international relations

PR subjects initiate, organize, or fulfill PR-activities. It is evident that according to their roles in the process of IPR we can divide PR subjects into two groups – subjects of the first-order and subjects of the second-order. Subjects of the first-order are those who order and direct PR-activities on the international scene. Correspondingly, by the subjects of the second-order we mean the whole variety of PR-activities executors (government information-and-propaganda services, PR agencies, PR departments of the private companies). Of course, such a division is rather relative. Sometimes some subject (for example, non-profit social organism) can exercise two functions at the same time. Nevertheless, the segregation of duties is more often for the IPR-sphere: even social movements and funds (for example, Worldwide Wilderness Society) deal quite often with the professional PR-specialists.

Subject to the direction of its actions we can refer this or that PR subject to one of the three spheres of the international public relations: governmental, non-governmental (civil), or commercial. Combining the functions of the PR subjects with the spheres of their activity we get such the following picture (see Table 1).

Table I

Combined classification of the PR subjects in the process of the international relations

Spheres of the IPR	IPR subjects according to the functions they perform
	Subjects of the first-order	Subjects of the second order
Governmental	Heads of states / goverments, large offices of state (for example, Ministry of Foreign Affairs)	Special state structures or those private PR agencies who hold a contract with them
Non-governmental	Non-governmental organizations and movements (NGO)	NGO themselves or those private PR agencies who hold a contract with them
Commercial	Business leaders, private companies, banks, etc.	PR departments of the private organizations or those private PR agencies who hold a contract with them

State structures of IPR

The sphere of PR origin (theory and practice of establishing a mutually beneficial dialogue with the society) is the policy of the first democratic states. Within the framework of this article we are not going to analyze any of the legal, political, or philosophical problems, connected with the process of democracy development. The questions about the effectiveness of the democratic institutes, about the depth and sincerity of the democratic beliefs of the politicians in power should be discussed in another context. The point we want to make is that in some states the masses of the individually free people have an inalienable right to participate in the process of the authority formation and influence to some extent its actions.

The notion “public relations” as we know it now was introduced by Thomas Jefferson the third president of the USA (the author of the Declaration of Independence) in 1807. But soon after the emergence of the term “public relations”, which Jefferson used to denote the necessity to keep benevolent relations between people and elective government, in the USA it was made an attempt to build these relations on the organizational base.

Of course, we can’t consider the USA as the historical pioneer in the sphere of the international public relations. The USA were one of the first to use PR in the domestic policy, the term “public relations” is of American origin, but something, that is know related to PR, had penetrated into the sphere of the international relations long before the foundation of the first English colony in the North America, say nothing about the declaration of independence. Much earlier than Americans, many countries and people created the first prototypes of the international PR-campaigns and began using the abilities of art and technology in this direction. Nevertheless, the USA, which joined comparatively late the process of the IPR formation, made up soon for lost time and began to make the running in the development of this sphere of the international relations. Its part also played the transformation of the second-rate transatlantic republic into one of the main participants of the international politics who has wide experience in the work with the societies within the borders of the country and quite enviable material and technical basis to use this experience in the international scene.