Photo was taken at 1am the morning of the storm, we had lost power so I went to my car to charge my phone and listen to the radio report on the storm.
When I tell people
that I am continuing my education by pursuing a masters degree in communication
I am often met with negativity. A comment I repeatedly hear is, “how is
communication even a field” or “what would you do with that degree?” Other
individuals scoff at me and state, “oh well that is an easy degree, it isn’t
like you are studying math or science.” I often become discouraged by these
negative comments when I know that I am a hardworking scholar. It wasn’t until
I read Dues and Brown’s, “Boxing Plato’s Shadow” that I was able to understand
the history of this negative outlook on the field of communication.
During
the 5th century B.C., in the Athenian courts, citizens were required
to defend themselves publicly in front of the Assembly. Therefore the ability
to speak persuasively was imperative. Those who were skilled in public speaking
inevitably gained greater wealth and prestige, creating an obvious market for
knowledge and skills in public speaking. People who studied and taught
persuasive public speaking were known as sophists. The sophists are credited as
the first to begin the systematic study of communication with their practical
study of rhetoric. Some sophists were not ethical and used rhetoric to mislead,
deceive or defraud. Plato viewed the sophists and their ideas as harmful
influences in Athens, and openly objected to their teachings of rhetoric. He
believed that rhetoric was used to deceive and to avoid being brought to
justice.
The idea of
“boxing Plato’s shadow” is that Plato had cast such a negative shadow over the
field of communication, that we are still fighting it today. The author Michael
Dues said he felt like he was shadow boxing, meaning he was punching at thin
air when defending the field of communication, because the opponent isn’t
really there. When defending or explaining the communication discipline we are
fighting that shadow that Plato cast back in the 5th century B.C.
A perfect example
of how we are still boxing Plato’s shadow today is the negativity associated
with the field of public relations. My first job was in the public relations
department at Mohegan Sun. When I told friends and family about my position
frequently people would make comments that I was a “spin master” and I was
hiding the truth from the public. The definition of public relations is the
management of communication between an organization and its publics. As a
public relations professional I need to understand the Japanese terms of Honne
vs. Tatemae; honne meaning the truth and tatemae is the external or appearance.
In public relations there can be a difference between what you know is the
truth about the company and what you tell the public about the company, or how
you represent the company.
The ethical
question of a public relations professional is how to represent a company
honestly but maintain a positive corporate outlook with the media. This
question can be more difficult for organizations that have negative qualities
which they wish to hide from the public. I believe that the way to handle this
situation is the be honest and straightforward if asked directly, however to
spend your time and energy highlighting the positive attributes with the
company.
One example that
is fresh in our minds in Connecticut is the October snow storm that knocked out
the electricity across the majority of the state. Since it was October, the
trees where still full of leaves, so when the snow hit, the limbs became
extremely heavy. This lead to tree branches breaking and trees falling across
the state, and often lead to electrical wires falling. This was a crisis that
had the entire state in chaos. Northeast Utilities’ reaction to this emergency
had many people up in arms. The public
relations team at NU had a very difficult task in front of them, how were they
going to react to the storm and the extensive power outages. People across the
state where without power for days, and with each day came more resentment from
the public. The PR team had to determine would they be honest (hone) and tell the state that the damage was so
great that it would take days to get their power back on, or should they tell
the public what they wanted to hear even if they knew it wasn’t true (tatemae).
The PR team has
received harsh criticism during and after the crisis. At the time, the PR team
took on a realistic, and honest approach with their timeline and set date. The
majority of the state did have power back by the time they had determined.
There were still small pockets of the state that where still in the dark by
their cut-off time of Sunday by midnight, so this ended up hurting the
organization’s reputation. Now, in the aftermath, the company is trying to
rebuild credibility with the general public in CT through an advertising
campaign to show the “everyday employees” who were dedicating their time and
energy to restoration after the storm. They are also offering discounts to
those individuals who still hadn’t had their power restored by their predicted
date and time. These are two examples of how the PR team is trying to move the
attention away from the negativity and animosity that the public feels towards
their organization. They were honest but now are trying to rebuild the public
perception of the organization.
