SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 21 Sayı: 4

Postmodern Culture and Public Relations: An Analysis through Campaigns

Beris Artan Özoran(ANKARA UNIVERSITY)
Pages
1051–1070
Publication Date
2021-12-21
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

At the same time, it is found that they do not ensure polyphony, equality, and freedom by deconstructing modernity and resisting metanarratives, but rather "pretends" to reproduce them.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Despite the diversity of paradigms in the field of public relations, it is evident that the dominant paradigm in the field is the functional paradigm, which defines public relations as a "management function".
📊
Key Findings & Data:It leads to the ignorance of "cultural function" of public relations and becomes an obstacle to the development of the field.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:At the same time, it is found that they do not ensure polyphony, equality, and freedom by deconstructing modernity and resisting metanarratives, but rather "pretends" to reproduce them.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Public Relations · Postmodern Culture · Cultural İntermediary

Özet

Despite the diversity of paradigms in the field of public relations, it is evident that the dominant paradigm in the field is the functional paradigm, which defines public relations as a "management function". It leads to the ignorance of "cultural function" of public relations and becomes an obstacle to the development of the field. By establishing a relationship between public relations and culture, this article addresses public relations as a "cultural intermediary" profession that is influenced by the postmodern culture and (re)produces postmodern culture.In the article, three public relations campaigns determined by purposive sampling were analyzed using critical discourse analysis within the framework of multiple case analysis. How postmodern cultural features do public relations campaigns (re)produce; how they (re)produced the postmodern understanding of consumption, whether they reproduce the concepts of polyphony, equality and freedom by deconstructing modernity was analyzed. As a result, it is found that campaigns re(produce) the individualization, modular identity, spectacle, and simulation features of the postmodern culture of the campaigns and, the postmodern understanding of consumption by attributing "new meanings" to organizations and products. At the same time, it is found that they do not ensure polyphony, equality, and freedom by deconstructing modernity and resisting metanarratives, but rather "pretends" to reproduce them.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özoran, B. A. (2021). Postmodern Culture and Public Relations: An Analysis through Campaigns. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 21 Sayı: 4, 1051–1070. https://doi.org/10.18037/ausbd.1039499

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (66)

  1. Aktaş, M. (2013). Halkla ilişkiler araştırmalarında vaka incelemesinin kullanımı üzerine. In M. Aktaş and P. Özdemir (Ed.), Halkla ilişkilerin kazancı (p.187-197). Ankara: De Ki Yayınları.
  2. Allagui, I. (2017). Towards organizational activism in the UAE: A case study approach. PR Rewiev, 43, 258-266. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.12.007
  3. Arman, A. (2017, 29 April). Can Bonomo: Erkekler kendileriyle barışırlarsa kadınlarla da barışacaklar. Hürriyet. Retrieved from: http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/yazarlar/ayse-arman/can-bonomoerkekler-kendileriyle-barisirlarsa-kadinlarla-da-barisacaklar-40442060
  4. Axe Can Bonomo ile “Erkekler de Ağlar” dedi, 36 saatte 4.6 milyon tık aldı. Marketing Türkiye. (2017 April). Retrieved from: https://www.marketingturkiye.com.tr/haberler/axe-can-bonomo-ile-erkekler-de-aglar-dedi-36-saatte4-6-milyon-tik-aldi/
  5. Axe Türkiye. (2017, 29 March). Erkekler de ağlar (Video). Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwLpSiBvnKs
  6. Balaban, U. (2014, March). Bir sonraki temaşayı beklerken: Hadise toplumunda deneyim ve temsil. Bianet. Retrieved from: https://m.bianet.org/bianet/bianet/154442-bir-sonraki-temasayi-beklerkenhadise-toplumunda-deneyim-ve-temsil
  7. Batı, U. (2015). Tüketim davranışları. İstanbul: Alfa Yayınları.
  8. Baudrillard, J. (2008). Tüketim toplumu. İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
  9. Baudrillard, J. (2012). Kusursuz cinayet. İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
  10. Baudrillard, J. (2014). Simülakrlar ve simülasyon. Ankara: Doğu Batı Yayınları.
  11. Bauman, Z. (2000a). Ölümlülük, ölümsüzlük ve diğer hayat stratejileri. İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
  12. Bauman, Z. (2000b). Siyaset arayışı. İstanbul: Metis Yayıncılık.
  13. Bauman, Z. (2001). Bireyselleşmiş toplum. İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
  14. Beck, U. (2011). Risk toplumu: Başka bir modernliğe doğru. İstanbul: İthaki Yayınları.
  15. Berk, Y. and Yıldırım, K. (2015). Yapısacılık ile post-yapılsalcılık bağlamında dil ve metinden anlam kurma. Okuma Yazma Eğitimi Araştırmaları, 3, 39-45. Berthon, P and Katsikeas, A. (1998). Essai: Weaving postmodernism. Internet Research, 8, 149-155. doi: 10.1108/10662249810211610
  16. Best, S. and Kellner, D. (2016). Debord and postmodern turn: New stages of the spectacle. Retrieved from: https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/Illumina%20Folder/kell17. htm.
  17. Bora, E. S. (2016). Yapı ve yıkım eylemi olarak mimari manifestolar. (Master thesis, İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, İstanbul). Retrieved from: https://polen.itu.edu.tr/handle/11527/14273
  18. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  19. Caldiero, C. (2016). Neo-PR: Public relations in a postmodern world. NY: Peter Lang.
  20. Curtin, P. And Gaither, K. (2005). Privileging identity, difference and power: the circuit of culture as a basis for public relations theory. Journal of Public Relations Research, 17, 91-115. doi: 10.1207/s1532754xjprr1702_3
  21. Çelik, G. (2016). Erkekler (de) ağlar!: Toplumsal cinsiyet rolleri bağlamında erkeklik inşası ve şiddet döngüsü. FE Dergisi, 8, 1-12. doi: 10.1501/Fe0001_0000000161
  22. DDB Worldwide. (2014, 2 June). Lufthansa: Are your Klaus Heidi? (Video). Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QAIHqrWtLs
  23. Debord, G. (2006). Gösteri toplumu. İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
  24. Edwards, L. and Hodges, M. C. (2011). Public relations, society and culture. New York: Routledge.
  25. Edwards, L. (2011). Defining the object of pr research: a new starting point. Public Relations Inquiry, 1, 7-30. doi: 10.1177/2046147X11422149
  26. Edwards, L. (2012). Exploring the role of public relations as a cultural intermediary occupation. Cultural Sociology, 6(4), 438-454. doi: 10.1177/1749975512445428
  27. Eliot, T.S. (1987). Kültür üzerine düşünceler. Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Yayınları.
  28. Fırat. (1991). The consumer in postmodernity. In R.H. Holmance and M.R. Solomon (Ed.), Advances in consumer research (p.70-76). USA: Association for Consumer Research.
  29. Freidman, U. (2013, December). How one airline convinced 42 swedes to change their names. The Atlantic. Retrieved from: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/12/how-one-airlineconvinced-42-swedes-to-change-their-names/282346/
  30. Funk, R. (2013). Ben ve biz: Postmodern insanın psikanalizi. İstanbul: YKY.
  31. Gower, K. (2009). Halkla İlişkiler Araştırmaları Yol Ayrımında. In F. Keskin and P. Özdemir (Ed.), Halkla ilişkiler üzerine (p. 31-53). Ankara: Dipnot Yayınları.
  32. Güzel, M. (2015). Gerçeklik ilkesinin yitimi: Baudrillard’ın simülasyon teorisinin temel kavramları. Felsefe ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 19, 65-84. Harris, M. (1999). Theories of culture in postmodern times. London: Altamira Press.
  33. Holtzhausen, D. (2000). Postmodern values in public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 2, 93-114. doi: 10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1201_6
  34. Holtzhausen, D. (2002). Towards a Postmodern Agenda for Public Relations. Public Relations Review, 28, 251-264. doi:10.1016/S0363-8111(02)00131-5
  35. Holtzhausen, D. and Voto, R. (2009). Resistance from the margins: The postmodern public relations practitioner as organizational activist. Journal of Public Relations Research, 14, 57-84. doi:10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1401_3
  36. Is it ok for guys? Axe says yes. (2017, 10 October). Retrieved from: https://www.unilever.com/news/news-andfeatures/Feature-article/2017/is-it-ok-for-guys-axe-says-yes.html Accessed:10.10.2017.
  37. Karaduman, S. (2010). Modernizmden postmodernizme kimliğin yapısal dönüşümü. Journal of Yaşar University, 17, 2886-2899. Kosovic, M. (2011). Revisiting the society of the spectacle in the post-9/11 world. Contemporary Issues, 4, 18-29. Retrieved from: http://contemporary-issues.vern.hr/files/1537b89cccb3209491f9a242bb079563.pdf
  38. Krouber, A.L. and Kluckhohn, C. (1952). Culture: A critical review of concepts and definitions. Cambridge: Peabody Museum of American Archeology and Ethnology.
  39. L’Etang, J. (2013). Public relations: A discipline in transformation sociology. Compass, 7, 799-817. doi: 10.1111/soc4.12072
  40. Lewis, A. (2017). News: Gold for the impossible signing session at Cannes Lions 2017. Retrieved from: https://www.teamlewis.com/us/insights/articles/news-gold-for-the-impossiblesigning-session-at-cannes-lions-2017
  41. Negus, K. (2002). The work of cultural intermediaries and the enduring distance between production and consumption. Cultural Studies, 16, 501-515. doi: 10.1080/09502380210139089
  42. O’Connor, J. (2015). Intermediaries and imaginaries in the cultural and creative industries. Regional Studies, 49, 374-387. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2012.748982
  43. Odabaşı, Y. (2012). Postmodern pazarlama. İstanbul: Media Cat Kitapları.
  44. Odabaşı, Y. (2013). Tüketim kültürü: Yetinen toplumdan tüketen topluma. İstanbul: Sistem Yayıncılık.
  45. Oğuz, E. S. (2011). Toplum bilimlerinde kültür kavramı. Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(2), 123-139. Oktan, A. (2008). Türk sinemasında hegomonik erkeklikten erkeklik krizine: yazıtura ve erkeklik bunalımının sınırları. Selçuk İletişim Dergisi, 5, 152- 166. O’Sullivan, T., Hartley, J., Saunders, D., Montgomery and Fiske, J. (1994). Key concepts in communication and cultural studies. London: Routledge.
  46. Özcan, K. (2012). Postmodern örgüt kuramı. Ankara: Gazi Kitapevi.
  47. Palinkas, L., Horwitz, S.M., Green, C.A., Wisdom, J.P., Duan, N. And Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed methodimplementation research. Adm Policy Ment. Health, 42, 533-544. doi: 10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y
  48. Parsa, A. F. (2004). İmgenin gücü ve görsel kültürün yükselişi. Anadili Dergisi, 33, 59-71. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308785296_Imgenin_Gucu_ve_Gorsel_Kulturun_Yukselisi
  49. Radford, G. (2011). Public relations in a postmodern world. Public Relations Inquiry, 1, 49-67. doi: 10.1177/2046147X11422143
  50. Rose, G. (2001). Visual methodologies. London: Sage Publication.
  51. Sartori, G. (2006). Görmenin iktidarı. İstanbul: Karakutu Yayınları.
  52. Soydan, M. (2008). Postyapısalcı bir okumayla eurimages destekli türk filmlerinin çözümlenmesi. (PhD Thesis, Ege Üniversitesi, İstanbul). Retrieved from: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezDetay.jsp?id=-NI6y5t2xs28Ue_pPvhSeQ&no=Kt0dKhufIa3xk4qayBr8KQ
  53. Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. (Ed.) The Sage handbook of qualitative research (p.443-466). CA: Sage.
  54. Swedish Klaus Heidi made world famous by Lufthansa campaign. (2018, 12 Feburary). Retrieved from: https://www.ddb.com/blog/press-releases/swedish-klaus-heidi-made-world-famous-by-lufthansaspr-campaign//?closed=true
  55. The impossible signing session. (2018, 7 January). Retrieved from: https://www.coloribus.com/adsarchive/onlinedirectmarketingcasestudy/unknownadvertiser-the-impossible-signing-session-image-16616365-22519965
  56. Toth, E. (2002). Postmodernism for modernist public relations: the cash value and application of critical research in public relations. Public Relations Review, 28, 243-250. doi: 10.1016/S0363-8111(02)00130-3
  57. Uçan, G. (2012). Post-Modern erkek(lik). CBÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10, 262-271. Watson, N. (2006). Postmodernizm ve yaşam tarzları. In S.Sim (Ed.) Postmodern düşüncenin eleştirel sözlüğü (p. 45-59). İstanbul: Ebabil Yayınları.
  58. Yıldız, N. (2013). Aşk yüzyılı bitti: Aşk’ta, İş’te, Siyaset’te yeni zamanlar. İstanbul: Doğan Kitap.
  59. Yin, R. (2009). Case study research design and methods. USA: Sage Publications.
  60. Zainal, Z. (2007). Case study as research method. Jurnal Kemanusiaan, 9, 1-6. Retrieved from: https://jurnalkemanusiaan.utm.my/index.php/kemanusiaan/article/view/165
  61. Berk, Y. and Yıldırım, K. (2015). Yapısacılık ile post-yapılsalcılık bağlamında dil ve metinden anlam kurma. Okuma Yazma Eğitimi Araştırmaları, 3, 39-45.
  62. Güzel, M. (2015). Gerçeklik ilkesinin yitimi: Baudrillard’ın simülasyon teorisinin temel kavramları. Felsefe ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 19, 65-84.
  63. Karaduman, S. (2010). Modernizmden postmodernizme kimliğin yapısal dönüşümü. Journal of Yaşar University, 17, 2886-2899.
  64. Oğuz, E. S. (2011). Toplum bilimlerinde kültür kavramı. Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(2), 123-139.
  65. Oktan, A. (2008). Türk sinemasında hegomonik erkeklikten erkeklik krizine: yazıtura ve erkeklik bunalımının sınırları. Selçuk İletişim Dergisi, 5, 152- 166.
  66. Uçan, G. (2012). Post-Modern erkek(lik). CBÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10, 262-271.