new post 1.blogger

PR Theory and Prac: History in Australia
Widespread improvements of literacy rates in nineteenth century Australia provided a burgeoning audience for newspapers, which accordingly grew in circulation and in pages per edition.
Added to this was the birth of new 'daily' papers due to improvements in printing technology,
created a dilemma for publishers. While the changes afforded vast new sources of revenue not only from readership but especially from advertisers, the burden to include ever greater news and editiorial copy to accompany each page or line of advertising significantly increased.
The solution was serendipitous. Some advertising agencies [like Greville in Sydney and Gordon and Gotch in Melbourne] paid not with money, but in 'kind'; doubling as press agencies, providing news or entertainment in exchange for space in the papers.
Also, in an era of heavy political involvement in the world of journalism, partisan reporting was scrapped in favour of more evenhanded coverage, as it was conducive to wider acceptance rather than limiting itself to one ideological 'camp' or another. Theoretically, neutral reporting could potentially double a newspaper's audience, and certainly profits did increase for some.
Again, this broadenend the scope for those who wished to advertise through newspapers.
All these changes lead to early accusations of what could only be described as 'payola'. The suspicion is that overly complimentary or insufficiently skeptical reports on various products, services or companies were not the work of gushing reporters, but trojan horse promotion by combined press/ad agency writers calling themselves journalists.
At any rate, it appears that such accusations are not a purely modern phenomenon, and indeed the accusators may have simply been competitors, and not indignant purists at all!
Slightly more justifiable coverage of friendly business interests could be afforded by staging a bit of 'hooplah', ie. some attention grabbing and vaguely newsworthy event that could be included by reporters for some amusement or entertainment value, businessmen with this job came to beknown as publicists or press agents.
Leading the way in the field was the Circus proprietor and promoter P.T. Barnum, of 'sucker born every minute' fame. Not surprisingly, businesses such as circuses, already involved in public entertainment became adept at the task of garnering business through 'publicity stunts' as it was really just an extension of what they did already. Movie studios were to become the next biggest employers of publicists and press agents.
It would be difficult to assess just how profoundly American traditions influenced early Australian styles and practice, but certainly publicity from the 1920's onwards would have been inextricably interwoven with an American approach, as it was so dominated by film promotion, which itself was run and almost wholly owned by US studios and corporations.
As the textbook explains, prior to the first world war, films were promoted individuallly, in a fairly ad hoc manner, by minor and independent players. After 1921, the well known US companies like Fox and Paramount assumed control of distribution even here in Australia, so from then on the whole culture [of the industry] was saturated with American thought
and training, even American people, who headed the various head offices of Australian publicity departments. Their local employees were also sent over to the US to learn the craft.
Again, the dominant theme was positive copy paid for or planted in newspapers, combined with some stunt or public spectacle that could garner enough interest to generate free press coverage. The textbook then gives examples of journeys and chases via 'unusual forms of tranport' by men in costumes to illustrate this practice.

PRIA was formed in 1959 from an industry that had been developing for some years, but it would be another decade before the discipline was offered in an Australian university.