Authenticity is defined as:

au·then·tic·i·ty

n. The quality or condition of being authentic, trustworthy, or genuine.

So, what does this really mean and why is it up to public relations professionals to be the custodians of it?

At its most basic sense, authenticity implies ‘doing what you say, and saying what you do’. This is true for all elements of business and communications. So who is there to ensure that companies and people are genuine and trustworthy? PR baby, PR.

When you think of the elements that PR are involved in, in a business, it is only natural that we take on the role of custodians of authenticity. From the very beginning in developing the internal communications strategy, crafting the brand attributes and how this translates to every aspect of the operations, through to the external communications, media relations and even social media strategies. This is the opportunity to instill the ‘doing what you say, and saying what you do’ modus operandi.

It’s a natural extension of our evolution kids

As  public relations professionals, we are ultimately responsible for the ‘public’ and the ‘relations’ of our client, our organisation or our Minister. Now we have heard from people like Brian Solis about the new (well, slightly old now) putting the public back into public relations, and the theory of our practice including focusing on the two-way model of communications first advocated by Grunig. He has said:

I think public relations is headed in two incompatible directions… I call these two competing approaches to public relations the symbolic, interpretive, paradigm and the strategic management, behavioral, paradigm.

Now, the second assertion is where I’m heading.

All of this is only positive for our industry, particularly if it is embraced and implemented by each and every one of us flacks. However, it feels for me, there is a missing link which underpins this theory and ethos. Authenticity.

Every element of successful and smart public relations involves authenticity:

Think about it. When you’re drafting a media release announcing some new, exciting development, you wouldn’t lie or massage the facts and figures would you? Or what about when you’re looking at community consultation and setting your parameters, you wouldn’t tell your consultees they have a choice in something that is already set in stone, would you?

Even online, in this increasingly digital age, you wouldn’t post something that was wrong, or comment on something under a false identity, would you? As Daniel Young has said, “Trust is the currency of social media; it forms the basis of our relationships (virtual and real). It is worthy of protection.”

Most of this, we just take for granted. I suspect though, we act in this way to avoid the negative fall-out if we were to be found out. We know people, publics and consumers are increasingly wary and cynical about companies, activities and even stunts. We know we are under a microscope and to risk our reputation would be to risk our sustainability in this current economic climate. But what I’m suggesting, or perhaps pleading, is that we start advocating for authenticity to our peers and to our bosses.

What happens if we don’t act authentically?

Well… close your eyes. I know you can think of a recent case study of a brand or person who has been caught out in less than genuine or trustworthy actions. Take for instance, today’s revelation that Obama doesn’t author his own tweets. Julie Posetti has been very vocal in her advocacy for authenticity in Twitter use, and social media in general, including suggesting (which I agree with) having people of influence or brands declare when or if they are authored by a ghost writer, and to attribute tweets or posts accordingly.

It is easy to spot a non-genuine act or communication. And when we as a profession, are aiming to build trust, respect and currency with our publics, to act in a non-authentic way is to undo all of our effort and success. And, for what it is worth, I argue that one mistake is enough to create a disengaged and cynical audience. Others, like Nathan Bush who I respect immensely, argues it doesn’t last forever. But Australians in particular, are a stubborn bunch and we hold grudges. We don’t forget, especially when we feel we’ve been lied to.

So, what is my thought-vomit trying to allude to?

Public relations, by necessity and theory, should be the custodians of authenticity. We have the opportunity and the ethical requirement to not only ensure that all communications are genuine, trustworthy, and authentic, but to educate and empower our clients or our CEOs to embrace this in all aspect of business. Do what you say, and say what you do.

So what do you think? Are public relations professionals the custodians of authenticity? Are we the moral compass of an organisation?

related posts

• Part One – Greenpeace vs Nestlé: social media as the lobbyist’s platform (5)
• What do you think when you think about PR? (2)
• how can PR increase accountability and where should it be located in an organisation? (10)