ABSTRACT
Even today, especially in U.S. based journals that attend to academic discussions of public relations, most of the research features process in terms of variable analytic discussions rather than judgments of meaning and the ways it is formed. That trend is much less the case in such journals based outside of the United States. Also, some of the U.S. based publications that have recently emerged are emphasizing more of a meaning approach using variously the assumptions and principles of the rhetorical heritage, social constructionism, discourse analysis, and critical theory. Other journals that do not include “public relations” in their titles provide insightful discussions relevant to the practice and teaching of public relations as being vital to the collective making of meaning that defines commercial transactions and relationships between organizations, between them and individuals, society, and their physical and social environments. Some of these address the role that meaning plays in society and the way that organizational spokespersons work constructively as well as unreflectively or self-interestedly to discuss the ways that meaning is shaped which in turn influences marketplace activities and public policy decisions. Some critiques suggest that organizations assume individuals targeted in their campaigns are delusional and naively willing to accept corporate interpretations of very important matters.
