Given the University of Maryland's recent decision to abolish its undergraduate PR sequence, communication pros find themselves debating what constitutes a good PR background.
The vote to eliminate several undergraduate communications sequences in favor of more in-depth journalism studies comes at a time when PR pros have enjoyed an unequaled windfall of recognition and funding.
While the decision may seem isolated and of minor importance, nationwide it's seen as a blow by many in PR, including major players in the profession at Edelman and Ketchum who have written opposition letters to the College of Journalism's Dean Reese Cleghorn.
He's worn that hat since 1981, when he left a 30-year career in journalism.
Major players in the debate include Cleghorn, publisher of American Journalism Review and a Freedom Forum honoree, and academicians Lari Grunig and Jim Grunig. The Grunigs are both tenured University of Maryland professors reputed for elevating PR, both the profession and the specialized academic study. But their views against eliminating the PR degree sequence have pitted them against Cleghorn.
Despite the Grunigs' opposition, Cleghorn's drive to abolish the undergraduate PR sequence and strengthen the university's graduate PR program was backed (10-to-9) in an April 29 vote by the journalism school's governing body. The Grunigs have requested a May 26 meeting with the university's provost to argue their case.
But the Grunigs' fight is just one facet of the groundswell of concern that the decision has triggered. Ironically, those who oppose Cleghorn's decision are using a PR strategy to rally support - forgoing filters to reach constituent audiences. For example, student opponents are updating a Web site, http://www.wam.umd.edu/~samara/final.html, to promote their views.
Views From the Trenches
Outside the Maryland area, academicians and PR pros are expressing concern.
"I do see this as a bad sign that one of the top programs in the country is being dismantled, but I'm not convinced that others will necessarily follow suit," says Linda Hon, an assistant professor of public relations and graduate coordinator at the University of Florida in Gainesville.
Elizabeth Toth, a professor in the School of Public Communication at Syracuse University, N.Y., agrees. "Any time a PR degree program is removed, it's a step back for the profession. The philosophy that you can easily go into PR if you have a journalism degree is no longer valid."
At Syracuse, PR courses include an integration of research used in social science and management classes, interpreting and applying information to affect change in target audiences' behaviors.
Indeed, we agree that the profession is peppered with gaps between those in the upper echelons of PR and those who are fledgling media relations reps. Perhaps what we need isn't the annihilation of PR studies, but rather a review. We're lobbying for a PR education where business skills - such as statistics or measurement-driven applications; disciplines such as marketing and integrated communications; and financial and management studies - are all a part of the learning process. If PR is seen as, or relegated to, a creative art executed by tacticians, we agree that its purpose isn't being served.
Cleghorn's Bull Horn?
Cleghorn tells PR NEWS he is not surprised by the controversy, but said the decision to abolish the undergraduate PR sequence was made to bolster the quality of eduation through studies that "broaden students' exposure across media lines." The new focus will include specializations in business and science journalism, including online media. Other sequences that will be eliminated include advertising, news editorial and broadcast.
The decision also is being criticized at the professional level as The University of Maryland has a stellar reputation for turning out some of the best and brightest communicators. U.S. News & World Report has ranked the University of Maryland at College Park as the No. 1 PR program in the country based on rankings by academics.
"We need more, rather than less, of a focus," says David Wickenden, a senior partner of Fleishman-Hillard, whose Washington, D.C. office has employed several PR interns from the University of Maryland. "I was very surprised to hear this. The need for professional communicators who are grounded in strategic thinking is great and the job market is showing us that there are not enough talented [PR] people."
"I see a great demand, which has been occurring for some time now, for someone with PR expertise," says Hon.
Conversely, there's Frank Mankiewitz, vice chairman of Hill & Knowlton's Washington, D.C., public affairs practice who congratulated Cleghorn's initiative. He says that "most undergraduates who have a degree in PR have prima facie evidence that they've wasted their time."
The action, however, has been reviewed by an impartial body. The journalism school's Board of Visitors, in a 13-0 vote, endorsed the assembly's move. The board is an outside advisory committee comprised of leaders from mass media and communications. Members of the visitors board mostly are from the editorial profession. They include John Carroll, editor and senior VP of The Baltimore Sun, Eleanor Merrill, associate publisher of the Capital-Gazette Newspapers, and Tom Phillips, president and CEO of Phillips Publishing International, Inc., which owns PR NEWS. Only two of the 15 members come from the PR profession.
The proposal will be reviewed by the University's Senate in the Fall and it is unclear exactly when the sequences will be phased out. Current PR track students will be able to finish their degrees. (Univ. of Md., 301/405-2383)
The Dividing Lines
NEWS conducted a straw poll about the University of Maryland's move to abolish the PR sequence in its undergraduate journalism school. Here's where pros and students stand: