Public Relations Review 31 (2005) 31–36

Postcard from the Steppes: a snapshot of publicrelations and culture in Kazakhstan

Valerie Terry

School of Journalism and Communication, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, USA

Received 14 July 2004; received in revised form 10 October 2004; accepted 15 October 2004

Abstract

This article offers one look at the current state of public relations in Kazakhstan. No studies have yet examinedpublic relations practice in Kazakhstan or in Central Asia. The model used as the analytical framework for the studyis borrowed from British cultural studies and called “the circuit of culture.” This model advances our understandingof the relationship among culture and meaning, culture and communication, and of course, culture and publicrelations. More specifically, this analysis illustrates how public relations produces, negotiates and even managescultural meaning, as exemplified in Kazakhstan. The study finds that the language of money is the primary symbolicrepresentation of public relations in Kazakhstan.© 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:Public relations and culture in Kazakhstan; Circuit of culture model; Money as symbolic representation

1. Context and significance of the study

Like a postcard, this article presents a snapshot of the state of public relations vis-a-vis culture inKazakhstan. The focus of this article is the interconnectedness of public relations and culture, usingKazakhstan as a case example for a region not previously studied by public relations scholars. The modelused for this study’s analytical framework borrows concepts from British cultural studies not used in thiscontext before.

E-mail addresses:vsterry41@yahoo.com, valeriet@uoregon.edu (V. Terry).

0363-8111/$ – see front matter © 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2004.11.003

32 V. Terry / Public Relations Review 31 (2005) 31–36

Like its steppes, Kazakhstan’s history is long, sweeping and sometimes harsh to the first time vis-itor. But, to experience its culture firsthand is to learn new meanings for terms such as relationships,communication and, yes, identity.

Kazakhstan is a country still in transition. Its struggle to emerge as wholly independent includesreconciling decades of oppression with newfound liberties. A former Soviet republic in Central Asia,Kazakhstan is the ninth largest country in the world and boasts the largest oil deposit, at Kashagan nearthe Caspian Sea. As a result, Kazakhstan has become an attractive site for foreign capital investment.Almaty, the country’s commercial capital, displays a brisk capitalistic economy, growing industrialization,rampant consumerism and a relatively high standard of living. Kazakhstan’s more rural areas, on the otherhand, are marred by devastating poverty, joblessness, health crises, and violent crime. Citizen activism ison the rise but remains a dangerous proposition, especially for journalists.

Journalists in Kazakhstan are poorly paid. They work primarily for government-controlled media out-lets because few independent channels can survive as political, economic and even physical targets. Withso much international business presence in Almaty especially, interest in public relations is burgeoning,particularly among struggling journalists. Despite this trend, there is confusion about just exactly whatpublic relations is. Many Kazakhstanis still associate public relations with the “black PR” or propagandapromulgated by the Soviets. Others consider it merely a form of advertising. Professionals and educatorsalike are hungry for instruction and research.

2. Analytical framework for the study

Whereas past studies of culture and public relations have had more of a practice orientation,1 this articletakes a critical perspective, shifting the level of analysis away from that of the organization to that of soci-ety (Dozier & Lauzen, 2000). While no longer technically a Communist country, Kazakhstan is ruled by anauthoritarian government, which also is dominated by tribalism. Media and educational institutions are runby hand-picked members of the president’s inner circle. Sadly, most mired in Kazakhstan’s transition are itspeople. A move toward nationalism has created rifts between the country’s two largest population groups:ethnic Kazakhs and indigenous Russians. While the government has declared Kazakh the national lan-guage, ironically, the majority of ethnic Kazakhs do not speak their native tongue, a casualty of decades ofSoviet domination. This new policy seems to be perpetuating illiteracy rather than reclaiming lost culture.

Certainly, the study of culture2 is inextricably tied to the study of communication and, by extension,public relations. Following this line, this analysis draws upon a model formulated by British culturalstudies scholarsdu Gay, Hall, Janes, Mackay, and Negus (1997)called “the circuit of culture.” Thismodel depicts “the cultural process as a complex and interdependent set of moments. . . of how themeanings associated with a particular cultural product are produced, negotiated, and contested” (Acosta-Alzuru & Kreshel, 2002, p. 142). Meaning conveyed through spoken words and nonverbal symbols is,of course, communication and an integral part of public relations. Thus, the circuit model advances our

1 Notable research on societal culture and public relations as well as international public relations is well documented in theextant literature, beginning with, for example,Sriramesh and White (1992)and, more recently,Moss and DeSanto (2002).

2 The primary data-gathering methodology for this study was the ethnographic approach of participant observation. I spent 10months in Kazakhstan as the 2001–2002 U.S. Fulbright Scholar in Journalism. Information gathered from formally structuredinterviews and informal conversations provided significant supplemental data.

V. Terry / Public Relations Review 31 (2005) 31–36 33

understanding of the relationship among culture and meaning, culture and communication and cultureand public relations. In fact, this analysis will illustrate how public relations produces, negotiates, andeven manages cultural meaning, as exemplified in Kazakhstan.

3. Cultural analysis of public relations in Kazakhstan

The “moments” in the circuit of culture model, where “meaning is transacted” (Acosta-Alzuru &Kreshel, 2002, p. 143), are representation, identity, production, consumption and regulation. Represen-tation refers simply to language use. Stories, jargon, dialects, even gestures can be instances of repre-sentational moments. Identity indicates “how a cultural product—text, object, practice—acts as a markeridentifying a particular group, that is, how meanings create an identity” (Acosta-Alzuru & Kreshel, 2002,p. 139). For example, the yurt in Kazakh culture identifies its roots in the nomadic tradition of the steppes.Other cultural products are encoded with specific meanings in the moment of production and are incor-porated into everyday life (Acosta-Alzuru & Kreshel, 2002). This suggests the important social role ofthe texts, objects and practices a culture produces and according to which it is identified. Consumption“looks at what the product means to those who actually use it” (Acosta-Alzuru & Kreshel, 2002, p. 143),including in person or via mass media. Depictions of all kinds of American-style social interactions arebroadcast and consumed around the world, with varying effects. Finally, regulation is the impact a culturalproduct has on society as a whole.

3.1. Representations of public relations in Kazakhstan

Simply put, there are no words for “public relations” in either Russian or, as far as I learned, inKazakh. The closest direct translation in Russian often is interpreted out of context as sexual intercourse.As a result, the language–meaning–culture–reality linkage is disrupted due to the lack of actual words toconnote what we in the West recognize as the theory and praxis of public relations, including its philosophyand ethics. What connotations can be derived from the rudimentary symbol use regarding public relationsthat is articulated in Kazakhstan is the language of press agentry. Take, for example, the case of freepublicity and the concepts of newsworthiness and journalistic ethic. The content of most Kazakhstanipublicity reads like conventional advertising. These “articles” are not necessarily news-oriented; instead,messages tend toward sales pitches of product attributes rather than public interest activities in which anorganization might be involved. Further, what is said about an organization one day can become somethingelse entirely the next, depending on who is footing the bill. In sum, the exchange that speaks the loudestbetween public relations practitioners and journalists in Kazakhstan is the currency of money. Granted,actual cash payment may not be involved in every aspect of public relations practice there, but it is thebasic foundation upon, and ultimate incentive for, a disturbingly widespread amount of it.

3.2. Identity and production of public relations in Kazakhstan

Consistent with the representational aspect of public relations in Kazakhstan is its primary identifyingmarker there: graft. Consequently, public relations in Kazakhstan is most identified with the elite. Thepowerful in Kazakhstan have money; public relations costs money. Therefore, public relations is a tool ofpower. And, because journalists operate without autonomy or decision-making authority, public relations

34 V. Terry / Public Relations Review 31 (2005) 31–36

becomes more about fostering the economic interests of the paying customer rather than serving thepublic good. Gatekeeping is a monetary proposition; agenda-setting is for-profit.

Trying to produce public relations, then, becomes a vicious cycle. For example, journalists expect to bepaid for positive mentions of an organization in any article. Media outlets expect the same. Public relationspractitioners and their clients pick up the tab. Credible third-party endorsement is all but nonexistent.Consequently, there is no message (representational) quality control. Communication/meaning in thepublic domain becomes, in effect, meaningless.

3.3. Consumption of public relations in Kazakhstan

Kazakhstanis are no dummies. They know propaganda when they see it, hear it, read it. Journalistsmight consume press releases, but, again, these communiques have little significance for them except interms of a potential payoff. Clients know that “publicity” as well as most other aspects of public relationshave to be calculated as operating costs deducted from already slim profit margins. Over time, these factorsmay adversely affect Kazakhstan’s desperately needed international trade and investment opportunities,not to mention severely limit efforts toward a higher quality of public relations practice there.

3.4. Regulation of public relations in Kazakhstan

Clearly, the type of public relations practiced in Kazakhstan inhibits its development in the Western tra-dition of “excellent” or symmetrical public relations. Because there are few signs that the situation is likelyto improve soon, some hard questions must be asked: Is there really an “excellent” way to do public rela-tions in emerging nations, where independent and transparent media systems do not exist, or are limited atbest, and authoritarian governments still reign? If so, how? Have public relations scholars and practition-ers lost sight of the fundamental interdependency of symmetrical public relations, a free press, publicityand culture and the devastating effects when one link of the chain is broken? Evidence from Kazakhstanverifies that there are no “generic” givens where these crucial and highly complex concepts are concerned.

3.5. Public relations as a reflection of Kazakhstani culture

If public relations is a paid proposition in Kazakhstan, Kazakhstani culture would seem to value moneyand/or economic gain above what Western socioeconomic cultures call journalistic ethic. At least at thecurrent time, the latter is not in thepracticalKazakhstani vocabulary. As one Kazakhstani public relationspractitioner put it, the media there are not in a position to promote others’ businesses. There is competitionto be sure. But, “competition” there still means “what goes to the highest bidder.” Thus, there are nopublic relationsmeanings yet attached to language that signifies autonomy, independence, and individualdecision-making. The language of oppression is still very much the primary dialect, undoubtedly due tothe authoritarian government system still in place there.

What, then, serve as various markers identifying some of the more distinct characteristics of Kaza-khstani culture? One disturbing trend is a significant decrease in the number of young people choosingjournalism as a career. Make no mistake, journalists are persecuted in Kazakhstan (see, e.g.,www.rferl.org;www.internews.org). Public relations practitioners fare a bit better, but, perhaps, only as long as they stayglorified salespeople.

V. Terry / Public Relations Review 31 (2005) 31–36 35

It must be remembered that public relations remains largely a product, and production, of the power elitein Kazakhstan, especially in government. Without significant change in the socioeconomic and politicalinfrastructure in Kazakhstan, public relations could be used as an ideological bludgeon. Consider the two“requirements for excellence among activists” (p. 10)Dozier and Lauzen (2000)suggest are necessaryto “offset the sophisticated professionals working for the corporations” (p. 11) and, arguably, other deep-pocket entities, such as so-called “beltway bandits” based out of Washington, DC, that operate throughoutthe former Soviet Union. These requirements are fervor and motivation. What this points to is the potentialfor drastic upheaval in the region. One case in point: Among the individuals interviewed for this studywas an American expatriate working for a non-governmental organization in Kazakhstan specializing ingrassroots advocacy. When asked what he thought it would take for significant change to be effected inKazakhstan, to really improve the quality of life there for most of the citizens, his reply was, “revolution.”In today’s global post-9/11 climate, this is a chilling proposition indeed.

Perhaps the best illustration of how public relations practice reflects Kazakhstani culture in terms ofconsumption is how the concept of symmetrical public relations was invariably received when presented tostudents, professionals and scholars alike. The inevitable response to just theconceptwas skepticism andpessimism. On more than one occasion, I witnessed exchanges of knowing glances that communicated,“Well, that might work in America, but. . ..” Heavy was the wry amusement about how Americans inparticular could be so naıve as to think that such a model could work anywhere but in the U.S., much lessin Kazakhstan. People under authoritarian rule have been forced to consume propaganda in the guise of“PR” for so long, it is not so surprising they tend to choke a bit on alternative theories of it.

The harshest aspect of the current state of public relations in Kazakhstan may be the snail’s pace of itstransitional progress. The country may have become so mired in political infighting, tribalism, corruption,and nationalism that its movement forward has been thwarted, if not stopped altogether. For example,according to an International Research and Exchanges Board (IREX) study completed in mid-2001 onthe status of media development in Kazakhstan, Kazakhstan can be described as having a government notsupportive of change, especially in the areas of free speech protections and access to public information.In fact, the study evaluated the Kazakhstani government (or “social forces”) as potentially being “activelyopposed” to, among other things, multiple news sources of reliable and objective information for citizensand the establishment of independent media as well-managed businesses that would allow editorialindependence as well as support institutions, such as universities, government and corporations, thatfoster the professional interests of independent media (seewww.irex.org/msi).

As Ferguson (1998)stated, “independent, free media and an environment conducive to the formationof activist publics are elements necessary for the practice of socially responsible public relations. Bothelements, likewise, form important pillars in Western democratic societies” (p. 165). Conditions do seemripe for activism to emerge in Kazakhstan; however, indications are that this activism could be moredestructive than productive, further diminishing the likelihood of Kazakhstan fulfilling its promise ofbecoming a fully democratized political system and, thus, a site for the practice of a more progressivebrand of public relations.

4. Concluding observations

Can we reverse the snapshot and look at a picture of how public relations might make significantcontributions to Kazakhstan’s culture in terms of representation, identity, production, consumption and

36 V. Terry / Public Relations Review 31 (2005) 31–36

regulation? Tentatively, continued education and cultural exchange programs might help alter the languageof public relations in Kazakhstan, but to what dialect and fluency remain to be seen. Conversely, ourunderstanding (identification) of countries of the former Soviet Union and elsewhere outside the Westcould improve, discouraging a tendency to lump groups according to inaccurate and oversimplifiedpreconceptions. Research and teaching efforts might be better served if generalizations are transcendedand differences celebrated.

Ongoing support from the international community is crucial for emerging nations. International pres-sure must be consistently exerted on delinquent countries to produce improvements in their records onhuman rights and other issues of individual and institutional freedoms. Guaranteed protections of jour-nalists in unstable areas could yield productive consequences for both journalism and public relationsin troubled regions. To this end, the U.S. may have to make serious foreign policy choices. Activism onbehalf of these issuesfrom the American publiccould quicken such change, especially in election years.

Public relations practitioners and journalists in Kazakhstan have got to be rewarded for practices basedon symmetry. Only then will the consumption of this concept be made more palatable. How can this reformbe achieved? Increased funding for innovative education and practice-oriented initiatives in internationalpublic relations and journalism is one place to start.

Finally, Kazakhstan must be able to see the long-term benefits (i.e., regulatory effects) of a sociopoliticalsystem based on democracy. To date, U.S. geopolitical and economic strategies toward Kazakhstan haveprevented that country from being penalized for its lack of progress in such areas as human rights and thedevelopment of a transparent, independent media system. Until this changes, the state of public relationsin Kazakhstan, as depicted by this postcard from the steppes, may remain a snapshot of lost opportunities.

Acknowledgements

The author thanks the reviewers and, especially, the editors of this journal for their helpful directionin the preparation of this manuscript.

References

Acosta-Alzuru, C., & Kreshel, P. (2002). I’m an American girl. . . whatever that means.Journal of Communication,52, 139–161.Dozier, D., & Lauzen, M. (2000). Liberating the intellectual domain from the practice: Public relations, activism, and the role

of the scholar.Journal of Public Relations Research, 12, 3–22.du Gay, P., Hall, S., Janes, L., Mackay, H., & Negus, K. (1997).Doing cultural studies: The story of the Sony walkman. London:

Sage.Ferguson, D. (1998). From communist control to glasnost and back? Media freedom and control in the former Soviet Union.Public Relations Review, 2, 165–189.

Moss, D., & DeSanto, B. (2002).Public relations cases: International perspectives. London: Routledge.Sriramesh, K., & White, J. (1992). Societal culture and public relations. In J. Grunig (Ed.),Excellence in public relations andcommunication management(pp. 597–614). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.