| dc.contributor.author | Campbell, F.E. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Herman, R. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Noble, D. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2010-01-20T09:04:34Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2010-01-20T09:04:34Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2006 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Campbell , F E , Herman , R & Noble , D 2006 , ' Contradictions in “reputation management” ' , Journal of Communication Management , vol. 10 , no. 2 , pp. 191-196 . https://doi.org/10.1108/13632540610664733 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1363-254X | |
| dc.identifier.other | dspace: 2299/4172 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2299/4172 | |
| dc.description | Original article can be found at: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ Copyright Emerald Group Publishing. DOI: 10.1108/13632540610664733 [Full text of this article is not available in the UHRA] | |
| dc.description.abstract | “Reputation management” is widely used as a rationale for public relations, although the public relations practice has problems with its own reputation. Public relations is presented in textbooks as a mature management discipline, yet the term “public relations” is rejected by many practitioners and academics. “Reputation management” may have been introduced to counter negative associations and to gain status for the practice. The purpose of this paper is to use critical theory to question the ideas and assumptions underlying “reputation management” and to examine contradictions within the term. | en |
| dc.language.iso | eng | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of Communication Management | |
| dc.title | Contradictions in “reputation management” | en |
| dc.contributor.institution | Department of Marketing and Enterprise | |
| dc.description.status | Peer reviewed | |
| rioxxterms.versionofrecord | 10.1108/13632540610664733 | |
| rioxxterms.type | Journal Article/Review | |
| herts.preservation.rarelyaccessed | true | |
