Reflexive mediatization and remaking of the middleman
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The emergence of public relations in early 20th century was largely fuelled by the rapid mediatization of society. As journalists gained power as middlemen between organizations and society framing news and setting public agenda in the mass media, organizations (corporations and governments alike) responded by introducing counter-parts on their side: public relations practitioners as middlemen between the mass media and organizations. Public relations practitioners enabled organizations to become reflexive (van Ruler and Vercic 2005) to the mass media expectations and adjust their behaviors to journalistic needs. Media relations -- management of relations between organizations and the mass media -- is the most common practice area in the public relations sector (Swerling, Thorson & Tenderich 2012 ; Wilson & Supa 2013 ; Zerfass et al. 2011). In the second half of the 20th century, more than 150 studies explored relations between public relations and the mass media and they found that between 20 and 80 per cent of the journalistic media content was influenced by some sort of ‘information subsidies’ provided by public relations (Cameron, Sallot & Curtin 1997). But that was when journalism as a profession was on its peak and public relations was only becoming an aspiring profession. Sullivan (2011) collected data on changes in the relative weights of the two sides. In the past 30 years, the number of journalists per 100, 000 Americans dropped from .36 to .25. At the same time, the number of public relations practitioners per 100, 000 Americans rose from .45 to .90. Now there are more than three public relations practitioners per one journalist. Between 2000 and 2009, the newspaper advertising revenue in the US dropped from $49 to $22 billion. Between 1997 and 2007 revenues of the US public relations agencies went up from $43.5 to $8.75 billion. The number of US newspaper reporters and editors dropped from 56, 900 in 1990 to 41, 600 in 2011. The number of people employed by the US public relations agencies increased from 38, 735 in 1997 to 50, 499 in 2007. While introduction of public relations practitioners since 1920s lead to reflexivity in media relations, what is emerging today leads to a new phenomenon of reflexive mediatization: non-core-media organizations (corporations and government agencies) are reflexively mediatizing themselves. From providers of information subsidies, public relations is transforming into media producer and distributor of stories and news. Coca-Cola corporation is experimenting with its own “brand journalism” in its digital magazine - http://www.coca-colacompany. com (Working 2013). In September 2013, Alex Aiken, the Executive Director of the UK Government Communications declared: “The press release is dead.” (Magee 2013). In January 2014, Kim McKinnon, the Canadian Government’s Communications Community officer, published the following statement on the Canadian Government official website: “The Government of Canada is retiring the traditional press release format in favour of a more digital-friendly product that makes the key messages of announcements clearer, quick facts more accessible and integrates more effectively with social media channels.” (McKinnon 2014). The paper introduces the notion of reflexive mediatization and proposes conceptual apparatus to tackle with it.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".