Discrimination in Public Relations

Discrimination and its effects on the public relations workforce are concerns of scholars who examine the roles of gender, race, ethnicity, and sexual preference on practitioner experiences and perceptions of organizational discrimination.

As an issue of gender, the glass ceiling is a subtle but powerful barrier that prevents women in organizations from escalating into the upper management hierarchy. Lack of mentoring, gender stereotypes, and appropriate selection and recruitment, as well as leadership perceptions of certain groups, blend to form the obstacle course that keep women out of management.

Among the earliest studies to examine gender issues in public relations were the Velvet Ghetto studies. This research found that women were limited to lower organizational ranks due to societal and organizational socialization. Female practitioners experienced tension between their roles—a career professional, a mother, a wife, and a supervisor. Women opted for the technician role, carving out a clearer path of nonexecutive duties and responsibilities “because of societal expectations that women be ‘less managerial’—less serious-minded, less aggressive, and less likely to be part of the ‘good old boys’” (L. A. Grunig, Toth, & Hon, 2001, p. 262). According to Brenda J. Wrigley (2002), when faced with the glass ceiling, women devised “negotiated resignation” strategies that allowed them to justify the existence of those structural barriers or demote the perceived impact of the glass ceiling's limitations on their careers. The refusal to confront the structure meant that a woman turned the blame inward, placing the burden of blame “on herself, on a lack of experience or credentials, or not working hard enough. The structure is not questioned” (p. 43).

Scholars believe that feminization of the field leads to decreased prestige for the field and lowered salaries for practitioners. Income gaps between male and female practitioners have been documented since the 1980s. The seminal Velvet Ghetto studies found that female practitioners did not have comparable negotiation skills, which would help them gain higher salaries and full value as workers. The gap remains as Bey-Ling Sha and David M. Dozier (2010) found after controlling for professional experience; women were still earning less than male practitioners.

Pigeonholing is another concern. That includes, in the case of African Americans for instance, being hired into a stereotypical role especially to fill a hiring quota. Such practices, as investigated by [Page 268]Marilyn Kern-Foxworth (1989) and other academics, often result in limited upward mobility and less access to decision-making power as well as relegation to functionary positions. Pigeonholing often results from being limited to working on race-related projects.

Although pigeonholing can take several forms, the practice of pigeonholing creates organizational tokens who are there for show, are there to handle certain audiences based on the plans of others, and who do not have any policy-making authority. Hispanic and Asian American practitioners often experience the “gap-filling model” of public relations. As gap fillers, these practitioners are selected and assigned to work with specific publics that are demographically similar to the practitioner. Asian or Asian American practitioners may well be hired to communicate solely with their ethnic or racial group; their capacity in the organizations is limited to certain duties such as interpreting or translating. Even if these practitioners want to stop or limit their gap-filling duties and move into another position, they cannot because of the organization's need and expectations for them to be cultural interpreters.

...