Public Relations Review, 24(3): 321-334 Copyright © 1998 by JAI Press Inc.

ISSN: 0363-8111 All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.

Building Dialogic
Michael L. Kent
and Maureen
Relationships Through
Taylor the World Wide Web
ABSTRACT: This article provides a theory-based, strategic
framework to facilitate relationship building with publics
through the World Wide Web. Although many essays on the
Web have appeared in professional and technical periodicals,
most treatments of the Web have lacked theoretical frameworks.
Strategic communication on the World Wide Web can benefit
from a consideration of dialogic communication.1
This article offers dialogic communication as a theoretical
framework to guide relationship building between organizations
and publics. Five strategies are provided for communication
professionals use to create dialogic relationships with Internet
publics.
Michael Kent is an Assistant Professor of Communica-
tion at Emporia State University in Emporia, Kansas. Maureen
Taylor is an Assistant Professor of Communication at Rutgers
University in New Brunswick, New Jersey.

Each day corporations, political groups, and non-profit

organizations tap into an expansive computer network known as the Internet,
and uriliTe the World Wide Web (WWW). 2 Virtually every industry, product,
activity, and public pursuit is referenced somewhere on the WWW, and although
not every organization currently maintains a Web site, it is not unlikely that in the
near future many will. Indeed, it is estimated that in 1998 the Internet will reach
100 million people and by the end o f the decade that number could double. 3 This
enormous potential for outreach has captured the attention o f professional com-
mtmicators all around the world.

Fall 1998 321

 Public Relations Review

Public relations practitioners and scholars have expressed great interest in

the Web. Organizational Web sites and homepages serve such public relations
functions as outlets for news releases, opportunities for research of publics, and
dissemination of organizational information. These Web sites also offer opportu-
nities for immediate response to organizational problems and crises. But, for all
of its public relations potential, the World Wide Web still remains underuriliTed
by many organizations and tmderexamined by scholars as a tool for building
organizational-public relationships.
This article provides a theory-based, strategic framework to guide relation-
ship building through the World Wide Web. To explore the dialogic capacity of
the WWW this article begins with an examination of the current literature of
public relations and the WWW. Johnson has argued that although many essays
have appeared in professional trade journals, most treatments lack rigor and theo-
retical frameworks.4 Strategic communication using the WWW can benefit from
a consideration of dialogic communication theory, s The second section of this
essay discusses dialogic commtmication as a theoretical framework that can guide
relationship building between organizations and publics. To illustrate how a dia-
logic framework can create and change organizational-public relationships, the
final section of this essay discusses five strategies that communication profession-
als can follow to develop dialogic relationships through the WWW.

P U B L I C RELATIONS A N D T H E W W W

Botan6 has suggested that public relations is the use of

communication to negotiate relationships among groups. The WWW offers a
multi-channel environment where negotiation between organizations and publics
may occur. Unfortunately, much of the previous research on the WWW has
focused on philosophical, metaphysical, and futuristic projection,7 rather than on
how the WWW might be used to improve relationships with publics. Other
scholars have assumed that knowledge of the WWW is already pervasive, or that
most, or many, already know how to use the Web. 8 Few articles have been writ-
ten about how public relations practitioners can effectively take advantage of this
new communication medium.9 In short, futurists and technology critics have
moved in ahead of communication scholars seeking to explain how to strategi-
cally use the WWW's unique communicative featuresA0
Articles dealing with Webbed environments are common. There are
numerous excellent and comprehensive books, articles, and manuals that provide
even novice users with the "know-how" to put together their own Web pages. 11
Only a few articles have appeared in the practitioner-oriented journals in the last
several yearsA 2 These essays share a genuine optimism regarding the role of the
Web in public relations. Indeed, Capps noted that new technologies need to be
learned and applied by public relations professionals to make using them easier
and more successful. 13 According to Capps:

322 Vol. 24, No. 3

 Building Dialogic,Rehu'iomhips

The phrase "new technology" conjures up all kinds of visions for people,
depending on how technically oriented they view themselves. PR profession-
als pride themselves on the personal touch--the relationships between clients,
the media and the practitioners--the perfected "human contact." As off-put-
ting as a technological revolution might be in such a press-the-flesh environ-
ment, meaningful technological advances can be integrated to your benefit
rather painlessly.... The trick is to realize the technology, at hand and forth-
coming, must be used to keep in touch and not to distance ourselves--from
clients, peers, the media. 14

The important point is that using technology does not have to create distance
between an organization and its publics. Instead Internet communication can
include the "personal touch" that makes public relations effective. As Ovaitt is
and Mitra 16 suggest, entire "communities" of diasporic groups are located in
"cyberspace." These publics who constitute (often-times global) communities
unto themselves might otherwise remain disparate were it not for the Internet
and the WWW. Thus, the Intemet may be one of the only ways to reach tradi-
tionally isolated publics.
H o w can the WWW achieve this potentiality? One answer may lie in an
understanding of dialogic communication. The next section discusses the theory
of dialogic communication and focuses on the dialogic capacity of the Web.

DIALOGIC COMMUNICATION THEORY

Much of public relations theory and research has been

based upon Grunig and Hunt's four models of public relationsNpress agentry,
public information, two-way asymmetrical and two-way symmetrical communi-
cation. 17 Of these four models, Grunig 18 has argued that the two-way symmetri-
cal model is the most desirable. To fully understand symmetrical communication,
however, one must first understand dialogic communication. Karlberg 19 traced
the concept of symmetrical communication from historic philosophers such as
Plato through such modern thinkers as Jurgen Habermas. In an attempt to rec-
oncile ethical approaches to public relations with the concept of symmetrical
communication, Karlberg called for a new research agenda to further develop
true discourse between organizations and publics. 2° We believe that further dis-
cussion of dialogic communication will contribute to the development of true
organization-to-public discourse.
The relationship between two-way symmetrical commtmication and dia-
logic communication can be seen as one of process and product. That is, two-way
symmetrical communications theoretical imperative is to provide a procedural
means whereby an organization and its publics can communicate interactively. As
Grunig and Grunig explain, organizations "must set up structured systems, pro-
cesses, and rules for two-way symmetrical public relations. "21 In contrast, dia-
logic communication refers to a particular type of relational interaction--one in
which a relationship exists. Dialogue is product rather than process.

Fa111998 323
 Pub/~ Re/at/ons Rev/ew

Although the term dialogue "means many things to many people, "22 a dia-
logic perspective "focus[es] on the attitudes toward each other held by the partici-
pants in a communication transaction. "23 The concept of dialogic theory is often
associated with the philosopher, Martin Buber. Buber viewed human communi-
cation as an intersubjective process in which parties come to a relationship with
openness and respect. 24 Dialogue is the basis for that relationship. 25 Buber's con-
ception of dialogue focuses implicitly on ethics. That is, for a dialogic relationship
to exist, parties must view communicating with each other as the goal of a rela-
tionship. Communication should not be a means to an end, but rather, as Kant's
Categorical Imperative suggested, communication should be an end in itself.
Dialogue has also been a cornerstone of the work of Jurgen Habermas.
Habermas relied on the framework of dialogue to examine communicative eth-
ics. 26 For Habermas, dialogue occurs when parties agree to "coordinate in good
faith their plans of action.'27 Inherent in Habermas' conception of dialogue is a
belief that ethical communication cannot be dominated by one party. Thus, dia-
logue involves a cooperative, communicative relationship.
Dialog has also been a focus for Communication scholars. Johannesen 28
contrasted dialogic communication to the traditional monologic models popular
during the early years of commtmication research. Johannesen characterized dia-
logue as genuine, accurate empathetic understanding, unconditional positive
regard, presentness, spirit of mutual equality, and a supportive psychological cli-
mate. 29 Arnett also argued that "dialogue is honesty in relation to what is called
the rhetorical situation. "30 Stewart further explored the foundations of dialogic
communication. Responding to criticism that dialogue was a "touchy-feely"
activity, Stewart traced the philosophical roots of dialogical communication and
argued that it "can lead to a reconceptualization of the phenomenon which is var-
iously labeled 'relationship.' ,,31
If relationship building is the foundation of public relations, how can the
technology of the Web affect communicative relationships? Technology itself can
neither create nor destroy relationships; rather, it is how the technology is used
that influences organization-public relationships. As a dialogic medium, the
Internet may be viewed as a "convivial tool." Clifford Christians explored ethics
and new technologies and argued that convivial technology was socially responsi-
ble because it:

respects the dignity of human work, needs little specialized training to oper-
ate, is generally accessible to the public, and empathizes personal satisfaction
and ingenuity in its use. Convivial tools are dialogical: they maintain a kind of
open-ended conversation with their users. Because convivial tools conform to
the desires and purposes of their users, rather than transform human desires to
fit the shape of the tools, they can become true extensions of human sub-
jects. 32

Christians' conception of convivial tools and social responsibility is another dia-

logic framework to understand the potential of the WWW.

324 Vol. 24, No. 3

 Building Dialogic Relationships

Dialogic communication in this essay refers to any negotiated exchange of

ideas and opinions. Dialogic denotes a communicative give and take and is
guided by two principles. First, individuals who engage in dialogue do not neces-
sarily have to agree---quite often they vehemently disagree--however, what they
share is a willingness to try to reach mutually satisfying positions. Although dis-
cussants may fail to reach agreement, dialogue is not merely about agreement.
Rather, it is about the process of open and negotiated discussion. Second, dia-
logic communication is about intersubjectivity, and not objective truth, or subjec-
tivity. Because of the nature of dialogic commtmication and its emphasis on a
process of negotiated communication, it is considered to be an especially ethical
way of conducting public dialogue and public relations. 33 This essay does not
seek to prove that dialogic communication is preferable to, or more ethical than,
monologic communication. Such arguments have been made elsewhere.34
Rather this essay will discuss how to effectively use the Web's dialogic capacity.
Recently politicians and educators have implied that computers and the
Internet are a panacea for economic, social, and educational inequalities. This
remains to be proven. The Web, however, has proven to be an excellent informa-
tion dissemination tool and useful for "getting a message out." Consider, for
example, the enormous popularity that the various presidential Web sites had in
the last election, hosting thousands of visitors a day in 1996, or the enormous
popularity of sites such as NASA's Web site with 300,000,000 ,,hits,,35 in a two
week period--fifty to sixty-million hits alone on July 7, 1997, a day after the
landing of the Sojourner spacecraft on Mars. 36 Such commtmication, however, is
not dialogic and its goal is to disseminate information rather than to create public
dialogue. This distinction is important. Public relations literature about the Web
has operated under a monologic communication continuum, suggesting that the
public relations practitioner's role is primarily one of information gatherer and
d i s s e m i n a t o r . 37
There is some confusion about what a two-way relationship between orga-
nizations and publics means in an Internet environment. Ovaitt viewed the Inter-
net as a great public relations opportunity '~¢ou can talk to customers and other
audiences directly and get equally direct feedback .... [O]n the Internet, virtually
everyone...can afford to communicate without filters. ''38 Strenski also suggests
that the Internet should be "monitored for incorrect information," and that "PR
professionals can [then] respond to this by immediately posting accurate infor-
marion and clarifications.''39 While such proactive monitoring activities are
important aspects of public relations, terms such as "talk" and "feedback," and
"monitoring" and "responding," do not equate to genuine "dialogue" or negotia-
tion of relationships. As Leeper40 suggests, ethical public relations is not about
"responding" and "talking," but recognizing that meeting publics' needs requires
dialogue and understanding.
To create effective dialogic relationships with publics necessarily requires
just that: dialogue. Without a dialogic loop in Webbed communication, Internet
public relations becomes nothing more than a new monologic communication
medium, or a new marketing technology. The Web provides public relations

Fall 1998 325

 Public Relations Review

practitioners an opportunity to create dynamic and lasting relationships with

publics, however, to do so requires that dialogic loops be incorporated into Web-
pages and Webbed communication. The remainder of this essay discusses strate-
gies for successful information exchange and dialogue.

B U I L D I N G PUBLIC RELATIONSHIPS
T H R O U G H THE W W W

Relationship building is an important yet relatively unde-

fined function in public relations. Broom, Casey, and Ritchey41 attempted to
explicate the concept of relationships and provided ten tentative conclusions and
suggestions for how public relations researchers and practitioners can better
understand relationships. One conclusion in particular serves as a foundation for
this essay: relationship formation and maintenance represents a process of mutual
adaptation and contingent response.'~2 Indeed, in a study of technology issues in
public relations, Johnson found that both "reach" and "relationship building"
were "paramount concerns of public relations practitioners. ''43
Relationships between publics and organizations can be created, adapted
and changed through the WWW. There are multiple resources for constructing
visually appealing and economically successful Web sites; however, less common
are strategies for providing public information on the Web and enhancing rela-
tionships with publics. If practitioners are to create and maintain sites that
enhance interest in their organization, contribute to public dialogue, and increase
public knowledge and awareness, then practitioners must strive for sites that are
constructed with an understanding of how the Web functions. Below are five
principles that offer guidelines for the successful integration of dialogic public
relations and the World Wide Web.

Principle One: The Dialogic Loop

One benefit of new technologies is that they "allow feed-
back from audiences to be embedded in the [public relations] tactic itself. "44
Thus, a feedback loop is an appropriate starting point for dialogic communica-
tion between an organization and its publics. A dialogic loop allows publics to
query organizations and, more importantly, it offers organizations the opportu-
niry to respond to questions, concerns and problems. For dialogic communica-
tion to take place on the Web requires a commitment of resources on the part of
Web site providers. It is not eno.ugh to have "information" for publics if the orga-
nization cannot provide the information that publics need or desire. Moreover, is
it not helpful to have published electronic mail addresses for organizational mem-
bers if these individuals do not respond to their messages and are not committed
to or capable of negotiating relationships with publics. Two issues are most rele-
vant here.

326 Vol. 24, No. 3

 Building DlalogicRelationships

First, organizations that wish to create dialogic communication with pub-

tics through the Internet need to specially train the organizational members who
respond to electronic communication. There is a danger that organizational
members who may be technically proficient and capable of creating Web sites
may not be skilled in addressing public concerns. Dialogic public relations on the
Internet requires the same professionalism and communication skills as is
required from public relations specialists who use the more traditional media of
print and broadcast. Although direct access to key members of an organization
might represent the most dialogic and egalitarian means of providing publics
with access to an organization, such an approach might create more public rela-
tions problems than it solves. One way to avoid such problems is to designate
particular individuals on the public relations staff as Internet contacts. These
individuals can be trained to answer questions, explain organizational policy and
have the communication skills necessary to handle difficult questions or public
concerns.
Second, dialogic loops incorporated into Web sites must be complete.
That is, there must be an individual available to respond to public concerns, ques-
tions, and requests. As any veteran Web surfer is aware, many organizations do
not monitor their Web sites very closely----or at all---operating under the assump-
tion that "presence" is more important than service, access, or content. 45 Indeed,
only recently a colleague was asked to submit a news release to a local newspaper
regarding the unforeseen hospitalization of a city mayoral candidate. The press
release was intended to explain the candidate's absence from political debates, and
why he had not been returning calls from the local news media. The release was
sent via electronic-mail to the newspaper. As it turned out, the newspaper "never
checked that electronic mail address." As a result, timely, important, and relevant
political information was never relayed to voters. Anecdotes such as these are not
rare in Webspace. If the principles below are to be applied usefully, Webbed com-
municators must make the commitment to their Web sites that they make to their
"customer service" lines and other forms of interactive communication: profes-
sional and timely responses. Response is a major part of the dialogic loop, how-
ever, the content of the response is also critical for relationship building. The next
principle explores information dissemination on the Web.

Principle Two: The Usefulness of Information

Sites should make an effort to include information ofgen-
era/value to all pubfics---even if a site contains primarily industry, or user, specific
information. For example, a Web site for a non-profit organization primarily
serving a particular public or group of publics, should make an effort to provide
"background," or historical, information about itself. Making available genetic or
historical information is not new, it is what is behind the idea of "press packets"
and "news briefings, "46 and many Web sites already include such information.
However, as many scholars have recently noted, "content" is what should drive

Fa~11998 327
 Public Relations Review

an effective Web site, and not the "smoke and mirrors" and fancy graphics that
many Web sites currently rely upon. 47
Related to the usefulness of information issue is the idea of hierarchy and
structure. This is an issue that is covered in any good summary of Web site con-
struction, however, it is often an area that is overlooked in an effort to have "eye-
catching" headers and graphics. As Elmer has pointed out, "five of the top ten
Web sites (measured by user 'hits' or visits) still consist of indexical apparatuses
(search engines).'48 In other words, the sites are visited because they have some-
thing of on-going value to offer visitors. This feature offers the basis for a dialogic
relationship because publics come to rely on an organization's site to provide use-
ful and trustworthy information.
Informational efforts can provide Web site visitors with contact addresses,
telephone numbers, and electronic-mail address of organizational members,
external experts, share holders, and those holding valid competing/contradictory
positions. Other types of information offered might include explanations of how
products are produced, or services delivered, lists of ingredients, and explanations
of what ingredients are, and their known side effects if any.
In light of hierarchic and structural issues, audience-specific information
should be organized such that it is easy to fred by interested publics. A Web
site serving a public relations function should not only be a well organized
information extension of an organization, but also should create positive atti-
tudes by being easily accessible to all publics, 49 and by providing all publics--
both generic and particular--with "useful" information. Making information
available to publics is the first step involved in developing relationships with
them. Just as the gathering of rudimentary interpersonal information is the first
step involved in developing a relationship, so the same is true of relationships
between organizations and publics. Publics must have their questions and con-
cerns addressed if relationships are to be built, and, if genuine dialogue is to
OCCur.
Another important consideration is to provide information with value.
Information that can be distributed automatically is more desirable than informa-
tion that must be solicited. Web sites that offer publics an opportunity to sign-up
for mailing lists and discussion groups are ahead of competing organizations that
require their public to come to their site and "request" information. One caveat:
do not "trick" publics into receiving information in perpetuity or under the guise
of a "one-shot-deal. ''51
Principle two suggests that relationships with publics must be cultivated
not only to serve the public relations goals of an organization, but so that the
interests, values, and concerns of publics are addressed. Information is made
available to publics not to stifle debate or win their accent, but to allow them to
engage an organization in dialogue as an informed partner. H o w do publics
become partners of organizations? The next principle explores ways to create the
foundation for long lasting relationships.

328 Vol. 24, No. 3

 Building Dialogic Relationships

Prindple Three: The Generation of Return Visits (RV)

Sites should contain features that make them attractive for
repeat visits such as updated information, changing issues, special forums, new
commentaries, on-line question and answer sessions, and on-line "experts" to
answer questions for interested visitors. Sites that contain limited/unchanging
information, are no longer useful after one visit and do not encourage return vis-
its. Sites that contain constantly updated and "valuable" information for publics
appear credible and suggest that an organization is responsible. Updating infor-
marion is an easy way for public relations practitioners to create the conditions
for dialogic relationships.
Simply updating "information," or trying to include "interesting" content
represents a one-way model of public relations. While such useful information
dissemination tools should be one of several strategies used by public relations
practitioners, dialogic strategies are more desirable. Interactive strategies include
forums, question and answer formats, and experts--such as featuring the com-
pany President, CEO, or Department Head on the site once a month--and lead
to relationship building between an organization and its publics. While such
Webbed public information events have been relatively rare in the corporate
world, they take place regularly in academic circles, and several of the larger Inter-
net providers host such discussions regularly. This is one of the unique aspects of
the Internet and public relations should take full advantage of this opportunity.
Other tools to encourage repeat Visits include formats for frequently asked
questions (FAQs), easily downloadable or mailed information, technical or spe-
cialized information that can be requested by regular mail or electronic mail, and
referral services or links to" local agencies or information providers. All of these
"informational" outlets must be accompanied by access to public relations profes-
sionals who can guide publics through the site and tailor information to specific
public needs. Communication professionals are only one part of generating
repeat visits. Sites must also be easy to use.

Principle Four: The Intuitiveness/Ease of the Interface

Visitors who come to Web sites for informational pur-
poses, or even for curiosity, should fred the sites easy to figure out and under-
stand. Tables of contents are useful and, as suggested in Principle Two, should be
well organized and hierarchical. Users/visitors should not have to follow seem-
ingly "random" links to discover what information a site contains and where links
will lead. A great deal of a Web site's content should be textual rather than graph-
ical--text loads faster than graphics, and well typeset pages can actually be more
effective attention getters than a graphic that takes 30 seconds to load. Too many
graphics at the beginning of a site may annoy users who are in a hurry and often
times the graphics do not add any information. Well formatted/organized text is
also easier for information seeking publics to work with than text and graphics
combined. The Web is designed to be rich in content, however, sites intended to
provide information should do it as quickly and efficiently as possible.

Fall 1998 329

 Public Relatian~ Rt't,icm

Sites that contain information which, "theoretically," could be of use or

could be accessed by any individual, should not contain interfaces that exceed the
software or computer m e m o r y capacity of "slightly-below-average" users. 52
Thus, it is not desirable to design your site to be accessible only to those users
with the "latest," or "particular," versions of network software. One increasingly
c o m m o n option is to allow users to select between a "basic" text based site and a
"supercharged" site with graphics and/or sounds. The idea o f "choice" is key here
because it allows publics to interact with the organizations on their o w n terms
and does not engender a feeling of inadequacy or intimidation in users.
The focus of sites should be on the organization, product, or information
located there, and not on the "bells and whistles" that accompany it. Just because
you can make a whirling, flaming, logo, does not mean you should. Sites should
be interesting, informative, and contain information of value to publics. These
Web site features should not be overshadowed by "gratuitous" special effects.
Although, as noted previously, the W W W is a communication environment that
is designed to be rich in content. Graphics and sounds, however, may not be the
most useful tools for providing publics with information. As many critics have
noted, the newspaper still contains more information on one page than an entire
network broadcast. 53 Web sites that are rich in ambiance often do so at the
expense of content. Dialogic public relations seeks to create lasting, genuine, and
valuable, relationships with its publics, and it should not operate merely as a pro-
paganda, marketing, or advertising tool.
Organizational image is an important part of any organization's communi-
cation with external publics. If a Web site ultimately leaves certain publics with a
negative image of the organization--that it is fluff, that it does not care about all
its publics, that it serves only the technologically privileged--then ultimately the
Web site has failed to foster or facilitate dialogic relationships. Content should
take precedence over aesthetic considerations. This does not mean that sites
should be "boring corporate brochures" as Seybold 54 suggests. Sites should be
dynamic enough to encourage all potential publics to explore them, information
rich enough to meet the needs of very diverse publics, and interactive enough to
allow users to pursue further informational issues and dialogic relationships. The
fmal principle offers one more tool for fostering relationships.

Principle Five: The Rule o f Conservation of Visitors

Designers of Web pages should be careful about links that
can lead visitors astray. Some Web design documents actually cite " c o m m o n
courtesy," or "goodwill" as rationales for including links to other related sites.
Web site visitors are to be valued; they are coming to your site for what the site
offers and not to "shop for other sites." Once a visitor leaves your site on a "link,"
s/he may never get back. If the goal of public relations in Webbed environments
is to create and foster relationships with publics, and not to "entertain" them,
Web sites should include only "essential links" with clearly marked paths for visi-
tors to return to your site.

330 VoL 24, No. 3

 Building DialogicRelationships

Advertising has become a major use of the WWW. 55 Web designers

should place sponsored advertising, or institutional advertising, at the bottom of
pages or behind other clearly marked links to avoid the "attractive-nuisance" fac-
tor, and the tendency of users to be led astray. Sponsored advertising is one way
that visitors are lost. Because Web advertisements, like all advertisements, target
particular publics, advertisements in headers and side bars often cause visitors to
"surf out"--sometimes never to return. Web advertisements also slow the opera-
tion of sites down, even a relatively "lean" site can be bogged down with adver-
tisements. If an organization is trying to provide information, it should either
avoid sponsored advertising or use strategic placement that will not distract pub-
tics. This principle follows Buber's s6 suggestion that dialogic communication
should be the goal of the interaction and not merely a means to an end such as
marketing or advertising.

CONCLUSION

Dialogic communication created by the strategic use of

the W W W is one way for organizations to build relationships with publics. The
Web has great potential as a dialogic commtmication medium. Because of the
WWW's increasing ubiquity, many public relations practitioners will regularly be
communicating with tens of thousands (even millions) of individuals and dozens
of publics, each with particular interests, at the same time. If for no other reason
than the WWW's omnipresence, public relations practitioners must become
skilled in its use.
N e w technologies such as the Web offer multiple opportunities for public
relations scholars and practitioners. As Johnson noted, public relations strategies
that use new technologies can include feedback mechanisms as specific tactics.S7
Of course, dialogic webbed communication cannot be achieved overnight.
Rather, creating mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and
publics is a time consuming and dynamic process. The principles discussed here
provide guidance to practitioners on how to develop Web pages, structure con-
tent, organize information, appeal to publics, and most importantly, build rela-
tionships with publics. The W W W has enormous potential as a communication
tool because, as Marlow noted, "public relations is and always will be about
human relationships. "~8

NOTES

. J. E. Grunig, Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management (Hills-

dale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992); R. Heath and G. M. Vasquez,
"Rhetoric as the Basis for Socially Responsible Public Relations," paper delivered to
the International Communication Association's national conference, Chicago, IL,
August 1995; R. Pearson, "Business Ethics as Communication Ethics: Public Rela-

Fall 1998 331

 PublicRelationsReview

tions Practice and the Idea of Dialogue," in C. Botan and V. Hazleton, Jr. (eds.),
Public Relations Theory (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1989).
2. For excellent introductory discussions of how the WWW works, see R. Bobbitt,
"An Internet Primer for Public Relations," Public Relations Quarterly 40(3) (Fall
1995), pp. 27-32; G. M. Santoro, '~rhe Internet: An Overview," Communication
Education 43(2) (April 1994), pp. 73-86.
3. P.H. Lewis, "Trying to Find Gold With the Internet," New York Times, (3 January
1995).
4. M.A. Johnson, "Public Relations and Technology: Practitioner Perspectives,"Jour-
hal of Public Relations Research 9(3) (1997), pp. 213-236.
5. J.E. Grunig, op. cit.; R. Heath and G. M. Vasquez, op. cit.; R. Pearson, op. cit.
6. C. Botan, "International Public Relations Critique and Reformulation," Public Rela-
tionsReview 18(2) (Summer 1992), pp. 149-159.
7. R.V. Bettig, "The Enclosures of Cyberspace," Critical Studies in Mass Communica-
tion 14(2) (June 1997), pp. 138-157; D. J. Gunkel and A. H. Gunkel, "Virtual
Geographies: The New World of Cyberspace," Critical Studies in Mass Communica-
tion 14(2) (June 1997), pp. 123-137; M. Morris and C. Ogan, "The Internet As
Mass Medium," Journal of Communication 46(1) (Winter 1996), pp. 39-50; J. E.
Newhagen and S. Rafaeli, "Why Communication Researchers Should Study the
Internet: A Dialogue," Journal of Communication 46(1) (Winter 1996), pp. 4-38; T.
Spencer, "The Internet Comes of Age For 1997," Spectra 33(1) (January I997), p.
5.
8. G.H. Marken, "Getting the Most From Your Presence in Cyberspace: What Works
in PR," Public Relations Quarterly 40(3) (Fall 1995), pp. 36-37; J. B. Strenski, "The
Ethics of Manipulated Communication: Public Relations in Internet," Public Rela-
tionsQuarterly 40(3) (Fall 1995), pp. 33-35.
9. Cf., R. V. Bettig, op cit.; G. Elmer, "Spaces of Surveillance: Indexicality and solici-
tation on the Internet," Critical Studies in Mass Communication 14(2) (June 1997),
pp. 182-191; D. J. Gunkel and A. H. Gunkel, op cit.; E. Marlow, Electronic Public
Relations (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1996); A. Mitra, "Diasporic Web Sites:
Ingroup and Outgroup Discourse," Critical Studies in Mass Communication 14(2)
(June 1997), pp. 158-181.
10. R. Bobbitt, op. cit.; G. H. Marken op. cit.; E. Marlow op. cit.
11. Sun's "Guide to Web Style" is available on-line and provides easy to understand
explanations for Web design, and also cites dozens of related sources including cri-
tiques of the web and several technical manuals. R. Levine, "Sun on the Net: Guide
to Web Style," (Sun Microsystems Inc., 1995); "Guidelines for Web Document
Style and Design," document maintained at, (http://Sunsite.Berkeley.Edu/Web/
Guidelines.html), (UC Regents, 1996); L. Lemay, "Teach Yourself Web Publishing
with HTML 3.0 In a Week" (second edition), (Indianapolis, IN: Sams.net Publish-
ing, 1996), chapters 1 and 6.
12. R. Bobbitt, op. cit.; R. L. Gustafson and S. R. Thomsen, "Merging the Teaching of
Public Relations and Advertising Onto the Information Superhighway," Public
Relations Quarterly 41(1) (Spring 1996), pp. 38-42; G. H. Marken, op. cit.; F.
Ovaitt, ''Wired Strategist and the Ten Thousand Dimensional Web," Public Rela-
tions Strategist 1(4) (Winter 1995), pp. 17-22; J. B. Strenski, op. cit.
13. I. Capps, "What the 'New Technology' Really Means for Communications Profes-
sionals," Public Relations Quarterly (Summer 1993), pp. 24-25.
14. Ibid., p. 24.

332 Vol. 24, No. 3

 BuildingDialogicRelationships

15. F. Ovaitt, op. cit.

16. A. Mitra, op. cit.
17. J.E. Grunig and T. Hunt, Managing Public Relations (New York, NY: Holt Rein-
hart and Winston, 1984).
18. J.E. Grunig, "Symmetrical Presuppositions as a Framework for Public Relations
Theory," in C. Botan and V. Hazleton Jr. (eds.), Public Relations Theory (HiUsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1989); J. E. Grunig, 1992, op. cit.
19. M. Karlberg, "Remembering the Public in Public Relations Research: From Theo-
retical to Operational Symmetry," Journal @Public Relations Research 8(4) (1996),
pp. 263-278.
20. Ibid.
21. J.E. Grunig and L. A. Grunig, "Models of Public Relations and Communication,"
in J. E. Grunig (ed.), Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management
(Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992), pp. 285-325, p. 316.
22. R . L . Johannesen, "The Emerging Concept of Communication as Dialogue," The
Quarterly Journal @Speech 57(4) (1971), pp. 373-382, p. 373.
23. R . L . Johannesen, Ethics in Human Communication (Prospect Heights, IL: Wave-
land, 1990), p. 58 (author's emphasis).
24. M. Buber, Iand Thou (Trans., Walter Kaufmann) (New York: Scribners, 1970); M.
Buber, "Elements of the Interhuman," in John Stewart (ed.), Bridges Not Walls
(Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1982).
25. Ibid., M. Buber, 1982.
26. J. Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 1: Reason and the Rationaliza-
tion @Society (Boston: Beacon Hill Press, 1984); J. Habermas, Moral Consciousness
and CommunicativeAction (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1990).
27. Ibid., Habermas, 1990, p. 79.
28. R.L. Johannesen, 1971, op. cir.
29. R.L. Johannesen, 1971, p. 376. op. cit.
30. R . C . Arnett, "Toward a Phenomenological Dialogue," Western Journal of Speech
Communication 45 (Summer 1981), pp. 201-212, p. 205.
31. J. Stewart, "Foundations of Dialogic Communication," The Quarterly Journal of
Speech 64(2) (1978), pp. 183-201, pp. 197-198.
32. C.G. Christians, "Social Responsibility: Ethics and New Technologies," in R. L.
Johannesen, 1990, op. cit., pp. 265-278, p. 272.
33. R. Pearson, op. cit.
34. C. Botan, op. cit.; R. Pearson, op. cit.
35. A "hit" refers to a visit to a site. This number represents repeat visitors, short visits,
and long visits. In terms of sheer numbers of visitors per day, fifty million hits is a
staggering figure and far above the average number of hits per day of the most pop-
ular web sites. For more information, cf., http://www.web21.com/
36. D. Dubov, (Mars Pathfmder Web master), electronic request for information,
[email protected] (July 16, 1997). Other notable examples include the
enormous interest in the Heaven's Gate cult's web site after its mass suicide in 1997,
and the interest in the Value Jet web site after its highly publicized crash in 1995.
37. This critique obviously does not apply to the several Public Relations and Commu-
nication related essays that provide "background" and explanation of the web.
38. F. Ovaitt, op. cit., p. 21.
39. J.B. Strenski, op. cir., p. 33.

Fa111998 333
 PublicRdationsReview

40. K. A. Leeper, "Public Relations Ethics and Communitarianism: A Preliminary

Investigation," Public Relations Review 22(2) (Summer 1996), pp. 163-179.
41. G.M. Broom, S. Casey, and J. Ritchey, "Toward a Concept and Theory of Organi-
zation-Public Relationships," Journal of Public Relations Research 9(2) (1997), pp.
83-98.
42. Ibid., p. 95.
43. M.A. Johnson, op. cit., p. 225.
44. M.A. Johnson, op. cit., p. 233.
45. A. Day, "A Model for Monitoring Web Site Effectiveness," Internet Research: Elec-
tronic Networking Applications and Policy 7(2) (1997), pp. 109-115.
46. I. Capps, op. cir.
47. Guidelines, op cit.; L. Lemay, Teach Yourself Web Publishing with HTA4L 3.0 In a
Week (2nd ed.) (Indianapolis, IN: Sams.net Publishing, 1996), chapters 1 and 6; C.
J. Silverio, "Why the Web Sucks: II," personal "rant" located on the authors home
page, (http://WWW.spies.com/-ceej/words/rant.Web.html), (1994), pp. 1-8; T.
Spencer, op. cit.
48. G. Elmer. op. cit., p. 185.
49. G. Elmer. op. cit., p. 185.
50. G.M. Broom, S. Casey, and J. Ritchey, op. cit.
51. Examples of information automatically provided include: airlines, Government
information such as the what the Clinton and Dole political camps offered during
the 1996 Presidential election, and governmental sites that automatically distribute
information to users---such as grant opportunities. For an excellent list of such sites
for communication scholars see, T. W. Benson, "Electronic Network Resources for
Communication Scholars," Communication Education 43(2), (April 1994), pp. 120-
128.
52. As C. J. Silverio points out, "Your audience is going to have an assortment of con-
nections that range from 14.4 PPP accounts to T3s to 2400 baud terminal connec-
tions" (p. 7).
53. N. Postman, Conscientious Objections (New York: Vintage Books, 1988).
54. P. B. Seybold, "Don't Let PR Control Your Web Site," Computerworld 30(15)
(April 8, 1996), p. 37 f.
55. E. Marlow, op. cit.
56. M. Buber, 1970, op. cit.
57. Johnson, op. cit.
58. E. Marlow, op. cit., p. 161.

334 Vol. 24, No. 3