IPRA Code of Athens – the first international code of public relations ethics: Its development and implementation since 1965

In 1965, the International Public Relations Association (IPRA) adopted the International Code of Ethics, which became known as the Code of Athens (IPRA 2001). The Code was authored by Lucien Matrat, a French public relations pioneer, and reflected a hopeful, post-World War 2 ethical framework with its strong linkage to the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 (IPRA, 1994). A code of ethics was an early strategic imperative of IPRA, established 10 years before, and was coupled with a Code of Conduct, known as the Code of Venice of 1961 (IPRA, 1961, 2009). Both codes were adopted by many national public relations associations and widely promoted. Amongst the recipients of presentation copies of the Code of Athens were Pope Paul VI and government leaders. The Code was simultaneously adopted by the Centre Européenne des Relations Publiques (CERP). Bowen (2007) says it was based on “general moral principles of ethical behavior, such as the focus on dignity, respect, and human rights” (p. 1). Using sources from the IPRA archive, which only became available in 2011, and an interview with the sole surviving IPRA founder, the paper explores the Code’s evolution and its subsequent implementation and modification. A feature of the debate within IPRA about the Code was whether it was a statement of moral standards or a statement of ideals to which members should aspire. Prominent IPRA members from Anglo-American countries considered that the Code, while laudable, was unenforceable and impractical. In 1968, the Code was amended and made less rigorous. In the late 1990s, IPRA members from Eastern Europe and the Middle East asked for a “simple English” version as the Code’s language, originally translated from French, was considered difficult to comprehend. There was a further revision in 2009. In 2011, IPRA consolidated the Codes of Venice, Athens and Brussels into a single, 18-point code (IPRA, 2011). IPRA’s archive (to 2002), however, does not show any disciplinary application of the Codes to its members and their conduct over 37 years from 1965. The paper also considers the historical issues of preparing and implementing deontological ethical statements for public relations (Bowen, 2007; Budd, 1991; Fitzpatrick and Bronstein, 2006; IPRA, 2007; Parsons, 2005; Seib and Fitzpatrick, 1995)

The evolution of public relations measurement and evaluation

The measurement and evaluation of public relations effectiveness has long been a major professional and research issue. In the first half of the 20th century, there were two research methods applied, opinion polls and basic media analysis. These were used to plan campaigns and monitor progress of media relations activities. In the second half of the century, as the practices of public relations expanded, greater emphasis was given to media analysis but the evidence of many practitioner studies was that measurement and evaluation was more discussed than undertaken. In the final 25 years of the century, the academic voice began to become more prominent in the discussion and development of methodologies and in nationally-based education programmes aimed at practitioners. The Internet and social media also began to change practices. There were mixed results from this clamour: more practitioners began to evaluate public relations activity (but many still applied discredited measures) whilst new techniques began to be introduced. Document analysis has prepared a timeline of the development of public relations measurement and evaluation. This paper explores the academic and professional themes that have characterised the development of this important public relations practice over the past 110 years