When the Going Gets Tough, the Tough Get Ready

Simone Batelaan

Source: Personal LinkedIn Kimberley Ho

When the going gets tough, the tough get going. Best known as the world famous song of Billy Ocean, but for the blogspotters among us it will remind you of the great article written by political communication scholar Kimberley Ho. She emphasizes the need of brands and companies to take a stance in political disputes. Sounds easy, but even the largest corporates do not know how, and more important, why to do so. Excited for part 2? When the going gets tough, the tough get READY!

Delightful Dissensus & Cool CPA

First of all, you should remember the most crucial concepts that are mentioned in the article: the postmodern idea of dissensus and corporate political advocacy (CPA). Both well explained by Ms. Ho, but let me refresh your memory and clarify a bit. According to our American friends Erica Ciszek & Nneka Logan, dissensus “may be understood as the reverse of consensus, where unanimity is not required nor the goal of communication.” In other words, it is the opposite of the Excellence PR theories of the Grunigs that underline the importance of rational thinking and two-way communication misery. The goal of dissensus in a postmodern project

Source: The Professors 

 “is not to make PR campaigns more effective, rather, it is to open the discipline up to multiple discourses, confronting existing ideological frameworks and challenging oppressive worldviews” – Gary Radford

This view fits neatly into the other just introduced term: Corporate Political Advocacy. CPA encourages companies 

to determine the opinion of a company in a certain political or social issue, which is not per se in line with the voice of their stakeholder(s). These matters

of contentions, from gender inequality to the China Hong Kong affair,

are of primary concern, euro signs should come next.

Evil Economic Doxa

However, as we have seen in the past and I even read about the other week, Ihlen & Levenshus show us that the economic drive is for most companies still number one reason to come into existence, not necessarily to raise awareness for the dispute between our Asian neighbors. It comes down to the economic doxa; if an idea takes to long to get return on investments, it will be removed. So, the CPA sounds great as a theory, but is it something we can achieve in companies or would to aspire to that become another reason to kick us out - small nod to the PR paradox - of the corporate boardroom?

Powerful practice

On that note, there is a need for research on the practical ramifications of this idea. First and foremost in my humble opinion we have to actually plan and produce. What I mean is, and how slightly childish it may sound, corporations should actually literally plan to get into the discussion and even consider to not wait for a political dispute to happen. Why not get the conversation going yourselves, step into the discursive arena, and see who is there to follow.

Source: Pinterest Sean Ward

 “Looking at organizations as players in arenas of meaning constructions, the context of modern public relations is much more complex than what a notion of two-way communication with relevant publics implies” – Betteke van Ruler

Social media can be the first step, as dissensus is most logical to easily flow on these platforms. However, it does not occur when there is no effort put into practice by the PR practitioners themselves; practitioners have to plan and work for it.

Be like Billy

What Ihlen & Levenshus, but also their comrades Olsson& Eriksson demonstrate, open dialogue, dissensus and connectivity with the public can be an unreachable goal as organizations have their own set goals; it limits an open real dialogue with the people. Therefore, we should aim to take the opportunity as PR practitioners to claim our role and to emphasize that it is not all about the economic drive, how idealist it may sound. Start the conversation, enter the dome, take a stance, and it may surprise you how people will like you for it.

Remember, you can’t please everyone, but when the going gets tough, the tough get R E A D Y! 

 Some tunes from Billy O. to slide into the weekend. Listen & enjoy dear followers.

About the author: Simone Batelaan took a gap year to South America and discovered that her main interests were in languages, communication and international relations. This explains the BA in American Studies and 

– almost – MA in Corporate Communication; some would say best of both worlds. She sees herself working at a sports brand as marketing and communications specialist.

Read more?

Ciszek, E. & Logan, N (2018). Challenging the dialogic promise: how Ben & Jerry’s support for Black Lives Matter fosters dissensus on social media, Journal of Public Relations Research, 30:3, 115-127, DOI: 10.1080/1062726X.2018.1498342

Ihlen, O & Levenshus, A. (2017) Panacea, placebo or prudence: Perspectives and constraints for corporate dialogue. Public Relations Inquiry 6(3), p. 219-232.

Olsson, E-K. & Eriksson, M. (2016) The logic of public organizations' social media use: Toward a theory of 'social mediatization'. Public Relations Inquiry 5(2), 187-204.

Radford, G. P. (2012). Public relations in a postmodern world. Public Relations Inquiry, 1(1), 49–67. doi.org/10.1177/ 2046147X11422143

van Ruler, B. (2015). Agile public relations planning: The Reflective Communication Scrum. Public Relations Review, 41(2), 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.11.008