By Ilias
Bissias (University of the Aegean) ibis@chios.aegean.gr
Greek Economic History Association
University of Thessaly - Department of History, Archaeology and Social Anthropology
2nd International Conference on Economic
and Social History (Volos,
10-12 February 2012) : ‘Markets’ and Politics. Private interests and public authority
(18th-20th centuries)
Interest groups, the Media and politics:
In
January 1975 during the meeting of the Greek Shipping Cooperation Committee in London it was stated that
the Greek Prime Μinister
Konstantinos Karamanlis reminded ship-owners that they do not have a good
reputation among the general public and should thus take measures to make a
good impression on the country! If you don’t do it, we will do it on our
own!…”. At the end of the same year the then Chairman of the Union of Greek
Shipowners, Antonis Chandris, explained to his colleagues that “if we do not
respond to the pressures of the government, Law Decree 2687/53 will be excluded
from the revision of Constitution”.[1]
What
were the reasons behind this negative reputation of Greek ship owners among Greeks?
And for what reason did they try to change their public image and their media
relations? In this paper we will try to investigate the communication strategy
that the Union of Greek Ship-owners developed
under the chairmanship[I1] of
Antonis Chandris, during the period 1975-1981 and their achievements in
changing their social image.
We have
to go some decades back and look closer at the relations between Greek
ship-owners and the state. In the 1940’s, especially after the Second World
War, Greek ship-owners developed an impressive international business activity
that during the following decades was further increased. During the 1940s and
1950s the number of ships carrying the Greek flag shrinked, while the number of
Greek-owned ships under foreign flags (especially so called flags of
convenience) steadily increased. Since the beginning of the 1950s various Greek
governments tried to reorganize the Greek Register in order to make it more
attractive and competitive for Greek ship owners[2].
Political and legislative initiatives offered to Greek owners competitive
advantages. Hence, at the end of the 1960s the Greek flag competed successfully
various ‘attractive’ flags of convenience.[3]
A series of policies developed by the Greek governments since 1951 led to the gradual
repatriation of Greek-owned ships to the Greek registry and the creation of
relations of mutual trust between the Greek state and the ship-owners.[4] Those
political initiatives obviously do not seem to have contributed to the negative
image that Karamanlis describes. Other underlying factors must have led to that
result.
Firstly,
let us be reminded that the above mentioned statement was made in January 1975,
some months after the fall of the dictatorship that lasted for seven years. It
was a period of hope and optimism for a new political era in the country. Any
person or organization who had collaborated with the military regime was the
subject of criticism and distrust. The Chairman of the Union of Greek
Ship-owners Professor Stratis Andreadis, a business tycoon during that period,
was heavily accused in 1975 both by the newly formed government as well as the
Media for collaborating with the junta and for developing strong personal links
with the dictators.
The
public image of ship-owners was, as imagined, stigmatized by most newspapers
and magazines, the state owned TV and radio and the local cinema industry. Despite
the strict government censorship of those times, the image of the ship-owner as
presented in Greek movies was surely negative. Greek films at that particular
period attracted big audiences and had important influence in Greek society. In
most, if not all, Greek movies ship-owners were presented mostly as notoriously
rich and ruthless.
Those
films reflected another aspect of Greek shipping: the big number of shipwrecks
and maritime accidents. Since the beginning of the 1960s shipwrecks and
maritime accidents multiplied. At the end of the 1960s their number was
extremely high and thus maritime accidents on Greek-owned ships remained the
highest worldwide. This bad record remained unchanged until the beginning of
the 1980s. (See Fig. 1)
Fig 1. Shipwrecks and maritime accidents in
Greek-owned ships over 500 GRT, 1964-1982
Source: Naftika Chronika, 1960-1982
As
indicated in Figure 1, in
1970 Greek-owned ships were involved in 1296 maritime accidents and shipwrecks
that represented 17,37% of the total accidents happened worldwide for that
year. Statistical data refer to ships with Greek flag but also with flag of convenience. But
most maritime accidents happened to ships sailing under the Greek flag. (See Fig. 2)
Fig 2. Maritime accidents of Greek-owned ships
over 500 GRT sailing under various flags, 1960-1982
Source:
Naftika Chronika, 1960-1982
This
record in maritime accidents and shipwrecks for a period of twenty years is
difficult to explain. In the maritime press of the period three main arguments
appear in order to explain this situation: 1. The over aged fleet, 2. The fact
that the Greek-owned fleet is made of tramp ships that sail in unknown waters,
3. The unskilled sea men originating from undeveloped countries who worked on
the ships. Many Greek-owned ships were built during the Second World war and at
the end of the 1960s were already old and bad preserved. (See Table 1)
Antonis
Chandris and the Public Image of the UGS
. In January 1976 the journal ‘Argo’ organized a round table with members of the shipping industry and politicians. The ship-owner Costas
Karras mentioned that for the negative image of shipping in the Greek society
“there is … a big responsibility of the ship-owners who weren’t interested as
much as they should in the security level of their ship”.[5] During
the particular round table the interlocutors ascertained that there was a need
to change the public image of the shipping world in the Greek society. The
initiative in that field would come from the Greek Ship-owners Union after 1975 and the change in its leadership. The
new president adopted a new way of acting and promoting Greek shipping. They
couldn’t reduce the number of maritime accidents but they worked systematically
in changing the public image of shipping and the public opinion towards Greek
ship-owners.
On 8
November 1974,[6]
elections were carried out for the new Board of Directors of the Union of Greek Ship-owners. They were the first elections
to be held after the fall of the junta. In these elections, Professor Stratis
Andreadis, after having chaired the Union for
many consecutive terms, lost his hegemony and was elected tenth in line. A few
weeks later, during the 10 January 1975 elections,[7]
Antonis Chandris was elected new chairman; his presidency signals a new
beginning for Greek ship-owning, a time of great rallying for Greek ship-owners,
but mainly a time of breaking away from the recent past, a past which was based
on silence and “living secretly”[8], that
lasted for five decades.
With
the support of many leading ship-owners, Antonis Chandris formed the presiding
board of the UGS which included new faces, many of whom were only about 30
years of age - a radical move at the time, especially in this particular industry.
Among them were Vassilis Goulandris, Stavros Ntaifas, George Vardinogiannis,
Stathis Gourdomichalis, Aristomenes Karageorghis, John Karras and others. The
new presiding board had to face a number of serious issues.
Internally,
Greek ship-owners – and more specifically, the UGS – had to face: [9]
- The disparity between its members, both in terms of the age of their fleets and of their desire for modernization and renewal - not only of ships, but also of administrative practices and strategies
- the large number of total loses of ships under Greek flag[10],
- the increasing crew shortages [11],
- the desertion within the ranks of Greek seamen, especially among lower rank crew members,
- the intrusion in Greek shipping - and by extension in the UGS - of foreign ship-owners who wanted to secure the tax privileges of the Greek flag.
In the
external environment, the shipping industry’s problems involved[12]:
- The alienation or hostility of the political parties,
- the reluctance of government to enshrine key provisions in the Constitution that would ensure and maintain a long-term, stable economic base for the shipping sector and its investments in the country where it had begun in the 1960's,
- the changing attitudes of the American and British governments towards foreign companies located in their territories under favorable tax conditions,
- the great ignorance and hostility of the Greek media towards the maritime family
- the hostility of the international media and the vilification of the Greek flag in international newspaper columns because of the high rate of shipwrecks
- the prevailing ignorance in a large part of the country about the strengths of the maritime industry and therefore about the prospects presented by the seafaring professions, which led to a continuous decline in the number of students enrolling in Merchant Marine Academies (MMA).
As a
collective body the UGS during this particular period expresses the overall
interests of ship-owners with vessels flying the Greek flag. The UGS had worked
to create a “healthy, stable” constitutional and statutory taxation framework
in order to keep ship-owners located in Piraeus.
New York was no longer a safe haven for the
Greek ship-owner, and London
was being “challenged” by the changing intentions of several prime ministers or
finance ministers that came into office, which for quite a long time created
great annoyance amongst the members of the Greek Shipping Cooperation
Committee. [13]
In this
part of we will focus on the PR policy of UGS under Chandris’ presidencies
(1975-1981). For about six years the UGS focused on the triangular relationship
between the UGS, the state and the society and created long term relationships
of trust with the media, at a time when the business world in Greece was not
aware of the power of public relations, and the science of public relations was
not even born yet.[14] He
develops a coherent communication strategy that reflects the social pressure
for change towards transparency and extroversion of all economic agents in the
country[15].
Public Image and the
Delta Model
The UGS, under the
leadership of Anthony Chandris were pioneers and innovators in PR management [16]as
their long-term strategy focused on a systems lock in approach with the media
industry. The system lock approach as defined by Arnoldo Hax in
his Delta Model allows us to better understand how an organization chooses to
communicate with the Press, and more importantly how an Organization decides to
act, react, approach or even satisfy the Press and its demands or aspirations. The Delta Model presents a new approach to strategic
management. [17]
Focusing
on the triangle, we revisit the notions of one way or two way communication as
developed by Gruning and Hunt[18].
The
triangle of the Delta Model mainly describes corporate strategies on
business–client relations, pricing policies and innovation as well as horizontal
and vertical collaboration. Expanding this theory we analyse three distinct
strategies in PR:
- The Best Message Positioning builds upon the most simple form of transmittal of messages, eloquently described by scholars as standardized One way Communication. Here emphasis is given on the simple transmission of messages to the Press, on a centrally controlled basis where extremely limited bonding is accomplished or indeed intended by the Organization with the press,
- The Total Media Solutions builds upon communication with the Press on a two way asymmetrical basis where exchange of information takes place in a more flexible and targeted system. Here emphasis is given on long term bonding with the Press and focus is given on media satisfaction and understanding,
- The System Lock is the strategic option that bonds an organization with the Press not only in a narrow sense but as part of an organization’s extended corporate social responsibility where synergies with the Press as well as stakeholders are pivotal. It is a complete reversal from the Best Message approach. The organization communicates with stakeholders and society not by but through the Press while introducing innovative PR techniques. The organization is outward driven, and redefines ways to communicate with society as a whole. In this respect continuous two way symmetrical flows of communication with the members of the Press. Massive direct channels and more importantly open and direct communication patterns reinforce mutual understanding between an organization and journalists. Strategy is not war with our enemies but love with our stakeholders.
The
Delta model, as described by Hax, constitutes “a new approach and a new
discipline for strategic management”. Table 1 describes an analytical
summarization of the differences between the three strategic positioning and
perspectives of the triangle. The chart thus analytically describes not only
the positioning adopted in PR and Media Relations by an organization but more
importantly the consequences and results both for the company, the media and
its relevant stakeholders. In this repsect image building is based on totally
different aspirations and methods.
In the Best Message positioning an organization’s
image is built according to its own needs
and beliefs and is redeveloped internally, with limited innovative techniques. In
the total Media Solutions
positioning, that targets the media in a direct yet again two way asymmetrical
methodology, emphasis is given to the Press’s needs and aspirations. An
organization’s image rebuilding strategy is thus jointly redesigned and
formulated with the media Industry and is adaptive to a journalist’ needs.
Targeted and focused channels of communication are mainly used in most PR policies
and techniques. In System Lock
innovation in PR management is of paramount importance. Image is thus
harmonized and redeveloped around the stakeholders’ needs and aspirations and
not exclusively according to the Press’ needs and demands. Here Organizations
are key innovators and introduce break-through development of PR tactics
through massive direct channels of communication with the general public (eg participation
in public conferences, exhibitions, social events) and introduction of
extensive social corporate responsibilities programs.
Table 1. Media
Relations: Strategic Options of the Triangle
Competitive Positioning
|
Best Message
(Operational Effectiveness)
|
Total Media Solutions
(Media Targeting)
|
System Lock in
(Innovation)
|
Strategic Focus
|
Transmission of Message to the Press
|
Communication
of Message with
the Press
|
Engagement
with Stakeholders
through the Press
|
Relevant Benchmarking
|
Competitors, Rivals
|
Journalists
|
Synergies with Stakeholders
|
the Media Value
Proposition
|
Message Focus
|
Media Focus
|
Society Focus-
Corporate Social Responsibility
|
PR Policies and Tactics
|
Standardized, one way
communication
|
Customized
two way communication
(asymmetrical or in specific cases symmetrical)
composition according
to Media demands/ needs
|
Portfolio of Media
Services
two way communication
(mostly symmetrical)
|
Relevant Supply of
Information (Chain of Information)
|
Centrally and strictly
controlled, through one single and limited channel of transmission
|
Flexible, through
direct pathways of Communication between an Organization’s PR Committee and
the Press
|
Open, direct and
continuous through an Organization’s Members and the Press
|
Relevant Communication
Channels
|
Generic, non focused
|
Targeted, focused
Channels of Communication
|
Massive Direct Channels
|
PR- Innovation focus
|
Internal formulation.
limited innovation
|
Joint formulation with
the Media Industry, adaptive to media needs
|
Key innovators and
break- through development of PR tactics
|
Impact on
Organization’s
Image
|
Image harmonized and
redeveloped around the Organization’s needs and beliefs
|
Image harmonized and
redeveloped around the Media’s needs and aspirations
|
Image harmonized and
redeveloped around Stakeholder’s needs and aspirations
|
Degree of Media Bonding
|
Limited, depends exclusively
on Media’s aspirations/ sympathies
|
Potentially high,
reinforced by customization and mutual learning (mainly through asymmetrical
two way communication) between the Organization and the Press
|
Potentially the
highest, reinforced by mutual understanding (mainly symmetrical two way
communication) especially through Corporate Social Responsibility programs
|
Antonis
Chandris and the Delta Model
Where did Chandris’ Presidency strategically position
itself according to the above chart?
Firstly, it is well understood that image restoration
was a strategic decision for the Board as the members promoted the improvement
of the UGS public image as a priority of the utmost importance. In this respect
they undertook significant risk through innovative actions that were based on
openness and continuous dialogue with all stakeholders, developed and
implemented a long term plan, and delegated specific responsibilities in PR to
important people[19].
Through
a series of initiatives both Chandris and the members of the UGS Board of
Directors elevated the improvement of the Union’s
public image to a strategic objective and chose the System Lock in as a
strategic Option:
1.
The UGS’s Strategic Focus was to engage with society through the
Press. The Union’s Relevant Benchmarking was based on creating synergies with social groups
and associations, both locally and internationally: Chandris reestablished
Intercargo (an international association of bulk carrier operators), developed
strong ties with ECSa (the European Ship-owners Association), the International
Chamber of Shipping and other organizations. The UGS also supported the
upgrading and financial assistance of the Hellenic Chamber of Shipping.
2.
In
respect to PR Policies and Tactics [20]the relevant PR committee introduced and developed
a Portfolio of Media Services based on two way communication (mostly symmetrical). In this respect we have now collected
numerous regular press releases
newsletters and Annual Reports, we have come upon a considerable amount of
press articles on the organization of press lunches, of meetings (both formal
and informal) with journalists. One-to-one direct communication channels with
all members of the Press were introduced for the first time.
3.
The Relevant
Supply of Information (Chain of Information) both to the Press and to all
major stakeholders were open, direct and continuous. All UGS Members were
encouraged to maintain an open and direct relation with members of the Press.
Never before had the Greek shipping community both collectively and independently
accept so many interviews by the Press and never had the Union
participate in such a unified and extensive manner in conferences and
workshops. Numerous articles by ship-owners of that period in all maritime
journals describe openness and extroversion as the most acceptable methodology
to bond with the general public. The Union thus used massive direct channels of
communication with the general public, inviting for the first time all members
of the Mediato attend press meetings, irrespective of political affiliations
and participated in major exhibitions and fairs both in Athens
and Thessaloniki.
They were firm supporters of the Posidonia exhibition in Piraeus,
a fair that since then became the biggest shipping event in Europe and America.
4.
When
examining the notion of innovation the PR Committee developed ground
breaking policies that were unfamiliar not only for the shipping industry but
in other sectors of the Greek economy as well: the organization of conferences
and public meetings of such a magnitude and participation were not the only
innovative approach to the general public. The PR Committee of
the UGS organized monthly and well advertised press conferences with all
members of the Media, irrespective of political aspirations. Never before had the
shipping community hold so many regular and thorough meetings with the Press. Accordingly open business
lunch talks were introduced with representatives of political parties and the
media, yet again of all parties and ideologies. More importantly in 1978,
Antonis Chandris held discussions for the first time with the Secretary of the
Communist Party of Greece and had thus the opportunity to exchange constructive
views and suggestions.
As Greek Shipping was continuously and badly
portrayed by the foreign press regular updates of foreign press
correspondents as well as regular meetings with them were held in Athens. Lastly Chandris and the Board supported for
the first time in the history of the Union, total openness
of all Members towards the Media. Advertising campaigns to attract young people
to the seafarer’s profession were also introduced for the first time.
5.
Image rebuilding for the UGS was harmonized and redeveloped around society’s
needs and aspirations. Regular and direct discussions with all stakeholders
with open access for the Press. The UGS’s extensive involvement in special and
general exhibitions allowed direct bonding with all stakeholders and the general
public, for the first time in its history. Never again had the Union
participated in the International Fair of Thessalonica, the biggest Commercial
Fair in Greece, with a booth
in order to keep Northern Greece updated on
the progress in shipping,
6.
More importantly in the field of Corporate
Social Responsibility (a notion and strategy undiscovered at that time) the
UGS encouraged the upgrading of maritime education, which was hence funded to a
large extent solely by the shipping industry.[21] The
economic support of charities and organizations as well as specific
scholarships and prizes towards mariners and their families, the UGS member’s
individual support towards local communities and organizations and bonding with
national and international NGOs.
7.
The
Degree of Media Bonding was
the highest possible and never had it become so successful as it was,
reinforced by mutual understanding between the Union and the Press, especially
through Corporate Social Responsibility programs.
As
Epilogue
Was the
UGS finally able with these moves to break the ‘path dependence’ and move away
from the old theorem of "living secretly"? It seems that during those
years of high extroversion, Chandris influenced nearly all Greek ship-owners to
follow in his path.
Chandris
was able through his leadership to succeed in the bonding of the UGS with the
Media world, the highest since the Union’s
formation. Through innovative and carefully designed strategic decisions and
actions the UGS maintained an open, continuous and direct two way symmetrical
flow of Communication between its Media and the Press and more importantly
developed an extended CSR program that reshaped its image through the Press’
involvement.
Although
Greek shipping accidents and disasters still remained regular cover page
stories in local, national and international press of the time during Chandris’
presidency, the UGS was successful in developing a socially acceptable PR
strategy that encompassed press relations and stakeholder bonding. According to
a research carried out by the author, 14 out of 18 maritime journalists of that
period strongly support today the notion that Chandris was “an innovator and a
unifying personality”, a “charismatic leader, way ahead of his time” and a “successful
President who was the best among his peers in order to change the bad image of
his industry at the time”. His leadership and PR strategy are still considered
by those interviewed as the most open yet again successful in the modern era of
Greek Shipping.
Bibliography
and Sources
Batis E. (2006) Life and
Journalism at Sea, Βίος και ΔΗμοσιογραφία εν πλω, Athens, pp. 24, 51, 110, 130, 165,
168-173
Batis E.,
(1995) ΤHe road to
success: Ten round table discussions on shipping Ο δρόμος για τον επισείοντα. Δέκα ιστορικές συζητήσεις στρογγυλής τράπεζας περί ναυτιλίας. [The road to the ribbon. Ten round
table conversations on shippin]. Athens, vol. 1, 70
Batis E.(1999)
Portraits in Blue Fond (Πορτρέτα σε Μπλέ φόντο), Finatec
Publications
Bishop B.(2006)«Theory
and practice converge: a proposed set of corporate communication principles»,
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 11/3 ,p. 214-231,
. Grunnig- J.E.
and T. Hunt, (1984) Managing public relations. New
York (Holt, Rinehart & Winston),
Grunig, J.
E. (1992) Communication, public relations, and effective organizations: An overview of the book', in
Grunig, J. E. (ed.) `Excellence in public relations and communication
management', Erlbaum,Hillsdale, NJ,
`
Grunig, J.
E.and Grunig, L. A. (1989)`Toward a theory of the public relations beha vior of organizations: Review of a program of
research', in Grunig, J. E. and Grunig, L. A. (eds) Public Relations Research
Annual, Vol. 1,
Grunig, J.
E. and Grunig, L. A. (1990) `Models of public relations: A review and reconcentualization', paper
presented to the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication, Minneapolis,
MN;
Gelina
Harlaftis, (1993) Greek shiponwers and Greece
1945-1975. From separate development to mutual interdependence. London
and Atlantic Highlands, NJ (The Athlone Press), 166,
Gelina Harlaftis, ( 2008)Greek shipowners and Konstantinos
Karamanlis «Οι Έλληνες εφοπλιστές και ο Κωνσταντίνος Καραμανλής, 1945-1975» in
K. Svolopoulos, K. Botsiou, Ev. Hatzivasileiou (ed.) Ο Κωνσταντίνος Καραμανλής
στον εικοστό αιώνα. Διεθνές επιστημονικό συνέδριο, Ζάππειο Μέγαρο, 5-9 Ιουνίου
2007 [Konstantinos Karamalis in the twentieth century: International conference
at Zapeion Megaron, 5-9 June 2007.] Athens (Ίδρυμα «Κωνσταντίνος Γ. Καραμανλής»), p. 110.
Hax A., (2001),
“The Delta Model — discovering new sources of profitability in a networked
economy”, European Management Journal 19/ 4, 379-391.
Hax A.,,
Wilde D.L. II (2003)“The Delta Model- A New Framework of Strategy
Journal of Strategic Management Education 1(1),
Hax A.(2010,)Reinventing
your business Strategy, Springer ISBN: 978-1-4419-1479-8 (Print)
Korres A.J (2007) in Maritime Transport: The
Greek Paradigm, Athanasios A. Pallis eds,
Elsevier, -
Lemos A.G.,
"Make known the great unknown" Naftika Chronika, Issue No 976/735 (1
February 1976), p. 15., Optimistic outlook", Naftika Chronika, Issue No.
975/734 (15 January 1976), p. 27.
Leichty, G.
and Springston, J. (1993) `Reconsidering
public relations models', Public Relations Review, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 327±339;
Naftika
Chronika magazine, Issue No 928 / 687 (1 February 1974), p.3 Issue No. 932 / 61
(1 April 1974), p.1. , Issue No. 934 / 693 (1 May 1974), p.7.,. Issue No.
947/706 (15 November 1974), p.13., Issue No 951/710 (15 January 1975), p. 1.,
Pavlik, J.V.
(1996), ``Review of corporate public relations'', Public Relations Review, Vol.
22, p. 58.
Seitel, F.
P. (1995) ‘The practice of public relations’, Sixth ed., Prentice-Hall,
New Jersey, pp. 146–147.
Theotokas G. and Harlaftis G.
(2009) Leadership in World Shipping – Greek Family Firms in International
Business, Palgrave/MacMillan,
Union
of Greek Ship-owners Annual Reports (1977-1982)
Union
of Greek Ship-Owners’ Annual Public Relations Committee Reports (1979-1980)
[1] Gelina Harlaftis, Greek shiponwers and Greece 1945-1975. From separate
development to mutual interdependence. London and Atlantic Highlands, NJ (The
Athlone Press) 1993, 166, Gelina Harlaftis, Greek shipowners and Konstantinos
Karamanlis «Οι Έλληνες εφοπλιστές και ο Κωνσταντίνος Καραμανλής, 1945-1975» in K. Svolopoulos, K. Botsiou, Ev.
Hatzivasileiou (ed.) Ο Κωνσταντίνος Καραμανλής στον εικοστό αιώνα. Διεθνές επιστημονικό συνέδριο, Ζάππειο Μέγαρο, 5-9 Ιουνίου 2007 [Konstantinos
Karamalis in the twentieth century: International conference at Zapeion Megaron,
5-9 June 2007.] Athens (Ίδρυμα «Κωνσταντίνος Γ. Καραμανλής») 2008, 110.
[2] Alkis
J. Korres (2007) in Maritime Transport: The Greek Paradigm, Athanasios A. Pallis eds,
Elsevier,and Giannis Theotokas and
Gelina Harlaftis (2009) Leadership in World Shipping – Greek Family Firms in
International Business, Palgrave/MacMillan,
[3] Gelina Harlaftis , Greek shiponwers and Greece, 175, Harlaftis, Οι Έλληνες εφοπλιστές και ο Κωνσταντίνος Καραμανλής, 107.
[4] Gelina Harlaftis,Greek Shipwoners and Konstantinos
Karamanlis Οι Έλληνες εφοπλιστές και ο
Κωνσταντίνος Καραμανλής, 105 ff.
[5] Efstathios Batis,. The road to success. Ten round table
conversations on shipping. Athens
1995, vol. 1, 70.
[6] "The Elections", Naftika Chronika, Issue No. 947/706 (15 November 1974), p.13.
[7] Naftika Chronika, Issue No 951/710 (15 January 1975), p. 1.
[8] Efstathios Batis,
Life and Journalism at Sea, Athens
2006, pp. 24, 51, 110, 130, 165, 168-173 and Andreas G. Lemos, "Make known the great unknown"
Naftika Chronika, Issue No 976/735 (1 February 1976), p. 15.
[9] Regarding the challenges faced by
Greek shipping during this period, see "The opposite forces", Naftika
Chronika, Issue No. 932 / 61 (1 April 1974), p.1. and Andreas G. Lemos,
"Optimistic outlook", Naftika Chronika, Issue No. 975/734 (15
January 1976), p. 27.
[10] «We are concerned», Naftika Chronika, Issue No. 934 / 693 (1
May 1974), p.7.
[11] « They are returning ...», Naftika Chronika, Issue No 928 / 687 (1
February 1974), p.3. and in the same «Mostly the young«, p.3.
[12] [12] Union of Greek
Ship-owners Annual Reports (1977-1982) and Union
of Greek Ship-Owners’ Annual Public Relations Committee Reports (1979-1980)
[13] «The Greeks of London», Naftika Chronika, Issue No. 935/64, (15 May
1974), p.1.
[14] Krishnamurthy
Sriramesh, «The models of public relations in India», Journal of Communication Management, 4/ 3 (2000), σ. 225-239,
Jacquie L’Etang, “Writing PR history: issues, methods and politics”, Journal
of Communication Management, 12/4 (2008), p. 319-335.
[15] Union of Greek Ship-owners Annual Reports (1977-1982) and Union of Greek Ship-Owners’ Annual Public Relations
Committee Reports (1979-1980)
[16] Pavlik, J.V. (1996), ``Review of
corporate public relations'', Public
Relations Review, Vol. 22, p. 58 and
Seitel, F.
P. (1995) ‘The practice of public
relations’, Sixth ed., Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, pp. 146–147.
[17] Arnoldo Hax, “The Delta Model —
discovering new sources of profitability in a networked economy”, European Management Journal 19/ 4, (2001), 379-391.
[18] The
two scientists were the first to analyse in the 1980s corporate communication
strategies and formulated four distinct models, that have been heavily hence
criticized but still remain a sound model for approaching the science of PR. Gruning
and Hunt describe the following four models: 1. Press
Agentry – publicity, celebrity PR etc. Accuracy and credibility not important,
2. Public Information – one way communication. Not a lot known about audience,
but accuracy essential, 3. Two Way
Asymmetric – receives feedback but aims to change attitudes not organizational
practices, 4. Two Way
Symmetric – gets feedback with view to changing practices; dialogue not
monologue, in J.
E. Grunnig- T. Hunt, Managing public
relations. New York
(Holt, Rinehart & Winston), 1984.
[19] [19] Union of Greek
Ship-owners Annual Reports (1977-1982) and Union
of Greek Ship-Owners’ Annual Public Relations Committee Reports (1979-1980)
[20] Leichty, G. and Springston, J. (1993) `Reconsidering public
relations models', Public Relations
Review, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 327±339;
[21] Regarding the Public Relations tactics, see
Bojinka Bishop, «Theory and practice converge: a proposed set of
corporate communication principles», Corporate
Communications: An International Journal, 11/3 (2006), 214-231 and Cameron,
