Introduction
Nobody just talks.
Every speech-action includes the transmission of messages through the &bquo;languages&equo; of gesture, posture, clothing, hair-style, perfume, accent, social context etc., over and above, under and beneath, even at cross-purposes with what words actually say.
And even when we are not speaking or being spoken to, messages from other &bquo;languages&equo; crowd in upon us: horns toot, lights flash, laws restrain, hoardings proclaim, smells attract or repel, tastes delight or disgust, even the &bquo;feel&equo; of objects systematically communicates something meaningful to us.
 Structuralism and Semiotics , London, Methuen, 1977, p 125.
The need to communicate is a key characteristic of human society; it serves basic social functions and it signals the ability to store information and to learn from it.
Communication affects each one of us in every possible way in all our dealings with our fellow humans &mdash; across time (through generations) and space (around the world).
It has therefore become the focus for extensive study and research.
For, in theory at least, if we can improve our standards of communication, we can enrich our personal lives and improve our professional performance.
What is communication?
The very breadth of the field shows the problems inherent in its study.
As Hawkes (above) pointed out, it can be a touch or a whisper: &bquo;Communication&equo; can take the form of a hint of a smile or a shrug of the shoulders, or it can be an angry tirade or whispered words of affection; these are means of communication between individuals, interpersonal communication.
At the other extreme, communication can be sophisticated and technologically advanced satellite transmissions or digitally encoded computer signals; these are tools of mass communication.
Somewhere between these lie the dynamics of group communication and the communications of organisations.
In addition there is verbal communication which involves language and meaning and non-verbal communication in the shape of signals, gestures, expressions, pauses in speech, badges and codes.
Because &bquo;communication&equo; is such a wide-ranging subject, this essay can do little more than survey a few distinct areas of study.
The first three sections will look take a broad  approach to the subject:
1 Communications theory: the use of models as a means of examining the relationships between the elements of communication;
2 Non verbal communication;
3 Language as a means of communication.
In the context of this course, it will be useful to examine the application of the study of communication to the function of public relations, so the final three sections will focus on:
4 Persuasive communication;
5 Organisational communication &mdash; the role of the individual in the organisation and the management of organisational communication;
6 Channels of communication.
1 Communications theory &mdash; the study of communications
The first formal study of the persuasive effect of language was written two and a half thousand years ago.
Recognising the vital importance of persuasive speech in the day to day running of a democracy, Aristotle drafted his Rhetoric, a work which has influenced countless would be orators through the ages.
Yet the study of non verbal communication &mdash; body language, gestures, facial expressions, proximity &mdash; was initiated only this century as the fields of sociology, socio biology and socio psychology developed.
We have reached an understanding that we are never not communicating; whether silent or talking, hunched in a chair or pacing the floor, we are giving signals which may be interpreted by others.
Signals such as smiling or frowning may be common across all cultures.
Other signals may be rooted in our own culture or sub-culture &mdash; our clothes and our hair styles, for example, tell other people as much about us as what we say and the way we behave.
One further area in the study of communication remains: the relationships between the elements of communication.
Around the late 1940s, researchers in this area of communication theory began to develop models &mdash; graphic descriptors &mdash; which attempted to define communication and analyse its basic components.
Such models, being necessarily simple, have obvious limitations.
Early models, for example, made little attempt to show the dynamic forces at play between the elements, while it has always been necessary to question  the basis of the model construction in order to avoid the perpetuation of a flawed assumption.
There are, however, clear advantages in the use of models.
&bquo;Communication&equo; is complex, transitory, often abstract and invisible and its effects frequently difficult to observe.
Yet we know there are links between certain acts of communication and the construction of a model to define those links can be a useful focus for thought.
Models give a general picture, explain relationships in a simple way, organise by ordering and relating elements within a system and may be used to predict the likely outcomes of a course of events by assigning probabilities to known patterns.
Early models
The first attempt to analyse the basic components of communication was made by American political scientist Harold D Lasswell in 1948 in what became known as &bquo;The Lasswell Formula&equo;. 
Figure 1: The Lasswell Formula
Lasswells model was speedily recognised to be flawed &mdash; it assumed that the communicator had the intention of influencing the receiver and made no allowance for a feedback element in the communication process &mdash; but it provided a new method for the study of communication and was the stimulus for further analysis.
Shannon and Weaver (1949) modified Lasswells model by looking at communication as a chain of messages to be communicated: 
Figure 2: Shannon and Weavers model
Again, the premise is that communication is linear and one-way.
This model assumes that communication involves a transmitter who forms his message from the information source into signals to be reconstructed by the receiver to allow the message to reach its destination.
It introduces, however, a new element in recognising that between transmitter and receiver there may be interference from an outside source &mdash; &bquo;noise&equo; &mdash; which may distort the message.
An early challenge to models which presented communication as a linear process was made by Osgood and Schramm (1954).
They constructed a circular model, where both parties in a conversation are shown as having virtually the same functions.
Schramm wrote: &bquo;&hellip; it is misleading to think of the communication process as starting somewhere and ending somewhere.
It is really endless.
We are little switchboard centres handling and rerouting the great endless current of information.&equo;
The model serves well for interpersonal relationships but is less useful for looking at mass communications where opportunities for feedback are not always present and where the power and resources of the two parties may be vastly disproportionate.
The circular model was, in turn, challenged by Dance (1967), who constructed a helical model to demonstrate that the communication process, by affecting the receiver, moves forward and further affects the communication which follows.
Dances model demonstrates that man is not merely passive, but learns and is creative.
The model was capable of taking on different shapes and widening as knowledge increases, to show this dynamic nature of communication.
However, as a model, it has little detail and is not a suitable tool for analytical work.
DeFleur, in 1970, saw a further element in the chain &mdash; feedback &mdash; which allows the transmitter to adapt his message in order to make it more effective and thus increase the chance of it reaching its destination clearly.
In interpersonal communications, feedback may stem from questions, gestures, nods or shrugs.
It can be instantaneous, and interpretation may depend to a large extent on the alertness of the receiver.
A skilled speaker or a stand-up comic, for example, will be able to &bquo;read&equo; his audience and change his material in response to applause, laughter &mdash; or silence.
In mass communication, feedback is more likely to take the form of audience research or sales figures, phone calls or letters.
Phone-ins on radio can provide speedy feedback, but by and large feedback is much slower in the mass media than in interpersonal communications. 
Relating the models to &bquo;real life&equo; situations
It became clear that the early models, while providing useful tools for progress in the study of communication theory, were limited in their application.
In 1956, George Gerbner constructed a model which was able to cope with complex processes and with the production of messages and with the perception of messages and events.
Why, for example, can one persons impression of an event differ from another?
Between sender and receiver lies a process &mdash; channels of communication over which the sender may have little control.
The channel used to transmit the message is usually less direct and often involves sophisticated modern technology, but the system still depends on recognised codes, custom and expectations.
Gerbner recognised this &bquo;transactional&equo; method of communication, showing that meaning depends on the assumptions of the receiver and the context of the transmission.
As Hartley puts it, &bquo;Meaning is the product of the dialogic interaction that occurs between speaker (or text) and hearer (or reader/viewer).
Therefore every utterance or text is incomplete &mdash; it is a &bquo;moment&equo; in the continuous generative process of language.
Where mass communication is concerned, models become ever more complex, each adapting as it must to the particular situation or circumstance and reflecting the complexity of the situation.
Certain elements, however, normally remain constant.
There is always a source of communication, a message, a channel for the communication and a receiver.
The &bquo;sender&equo; is usually part of an organisation or large institution, while the &bquo;receiver&equo; is always an individual &mdash; or a group of individuals with certain common attributes.
The 1970s and 80s saw the development of models which took up the thesis that the mass media were not passive or neutral channels but exerted active influence to the advantage of select social groups.
And as &bquo;mass communication&equo; changes technologically and fragments (we are already seeing &bquo;broadcasting&equo; diminish and &bquo;narrow casting&equo; &mdash; the targeting of specialist publics grow), communications theorists continue to develop models which have both an analytical and a predictive function.
2 Non verbal communication
&bquo;A nod is as good as a wink to a blind man&equo; the saying goes &mdash; and so it may be, for the man can see neither.
But visual signals can be rich in meaning and silences can sometimes convey  as much as words.
Imagine walking into a room for a meeting with the head of your organisation.
You suspect he is displeased with your work.
He is sitting behind his large desk and does not gesture you to sit.
As he talks, his actions serve to emphasise his words; he pounds the table (researchers Ekman and Friesen described this kind of action as an illustrator ); he frowns at you ( an affect display ); he lifts an eyebrow indicating he requires an answer to his question ( a regulator ); finally, he waves you to the door ( an emblem ).
You, meanwhile, have been biting your nails (an adaptor) betraying your anxiety at the situation.
As you turn to leave, he comes round from behind his desk and thrusts his face next to yours.
Just as you felt intimidated by his distancing behind his desk, you now feel threatened by his proximity.
Now imagine that instead of sitting behind his desk your boss had met you at the door and ushered you to a seat, then pulled up a chair next to you.
Instead of frowning while listening to your explanations he had nodded and smiled.
Even if he had used the same words, his non verbal communication in the two situations would have conveyed a very different attitude.
In both of these scenarios the non-verbal signals of neither party would not necessarily have been conscious.
We convey considerable information about the way we are thinking and feeling by these types of non-verbal movements and gestures.
We also reveal much about ourselves by the way we dress and by our hair styles.
&bquo;In our urban society&hellip; cheating in our presentation of self is all part of the game of life.&equo;
We try &mdash; often consciously &mdash; to reinforce the image of our selves we are trying to convey by adopting codes which are recognised by others within a cultural framework.
It may be that, therefore, &bquo;our assessments are built upon stereotypes and unproven prejudices,&equo; but it is, nevertheless, &bquo;an incredibly efficient system.&equo;
While non-verbal communication of the kinds described above have a powerful role in underlining, reinforcing or betraying our feelings and aspirations, the moment we try to communicate on a wider scale than inter-personal, we must look at other sign systems to convey meaning. 
3 Language and meaning
Language has developed as a sign system &mdash; one of the ways in which humans communicate and make sense of the world around them.
The objects or concepts referred to are known as signs  or the signified , while the words (written or spoken) are called signifiers .
The links between sound, language and meaning can be complex and sometimes apparently arbitrary.
Thus &bquo;a language can signify the sound-concept by whatever sound image it likes, though you as a person cant &mdash; these relations are not under individual control.
Any sound image will do, as long as it is distinguished from others in the system.&equo;
Every culture will organise the world according to its own perceptions of reality; thus one language may have words which have no equivalent concept in another.
(Where sounds correspond aurally yet the concept differs depending on the context, further confusion can arise.
In one of my own journals recently, a report featured a European conference on dairy cattle.
English delegates were puzzled by the Dutch translators constant references to frozen sailors, until they realised they meant &bquo;frozen semen&equo;.)
The meaning itself, Hartley proposes, is not inherent in the sign or the text.
&bquo;Meaning is the product of the dialogic interaction between speaker (or text) and hearer (or reader/viewer).
&hellip; It is impossible to understand &bquo;passively&equo;.
All verbal interaction is an active negotiation  between speaker/text and hearer/reader, an active transformation  of the raw materials of signs into the product of meaning&equo;.
Different communities, then, may bring different interpretations to the words or signifiers they hear or read.
While &bquo;bird&equo; may be recognised as &bquo;bird&equo; in Orkney or in Australia, an Orcadian is more likely to think of an owl or a gannet and an Australian of a kiwi or some other exotic species.
And while &bquo;rain&equo; to the Orcadian might signify a daily fact of nature to be tolerated or combatted, to the drought-ridden of Ethiopia or Somalia &bquo;rain&equo; would be a life-giver, a cause for joyous celebration.
The denotation  may be the same (both Orcadian and Ethiopian would recognise the water falling from the sky) but the connotation  &mdash; the feelings and values it evokes &mdash; would be very different.
The public relations professional would do well to consider the communications research which has demonstrated the effect of demographic factors such as age, class, gender and occupation on the development of meaning.
A feminist might interpret a text very differently  from an army officer, for example; or a teenager from his parent.
To achieve maximum effect and clarity, the structure and content of a message should be targeted at the relevant audience wherever possible (see Persuasive Communication below).
Codes and signs, their frame of reference and their use together form a discourse .
Discourses gain status from the relative power of the group with which they are associated &mdash; and as a general rule the media tend to favour the discourses of the elite.
Thus discourses associated with government will receive more coverage than those associated with, for example, the Green Party, although in Britain at least there are alternative publications which favour the &bquo;green&equo; view, and newspapers which, if they don't publish official Green discourses, do attempt to cover environmental issues from other approaches.
Again, an understanding of encoded texts  &mdash; the way in which a sender selects and combines signs &mdash; is of great importance to the public relations practitioner: a press release written specially for the tabloid sector, for example, may have more chance of being published than a blanket release designed to interest the serious press as well.
Appreciating the suitability of the register  (content, style and tone) of a discourse for a particular audience is part and parcel of persuasive communication.
4 Persuasive communication
Moving from the broad elements of communication to the particular, I have for the purposes of this assignment chosen to look at some applications of communication relevant to the practice of public relations.
I propose, therefore, to look briefly at communications &bquo;designed to elicit a desired response&equo;, how communication takes place within organisations and channels of communication.
&bquo;Persuasion involves a conscious attempt by one individual to change the attitudes, beliefs, or behaviour of another individual or group of individuals through the transmission of some message,&equo; say Bettinghaus and Cody.
Beliefs, they suggest, may be peripheral  (the University of Stirling MSc PR course is excellent); such beliefs are not impossible to change.
They may be derived from authority  &mdash; in other words, learned from teachers, the State, the  Bible and so on.
Such beliefs are slow to change, a fact which underlines that identifying the source is important in persuasive communication.
Central  beliefs are primitive beliefs acquired early in life and confirmed by our daily experiences.
Such beliefs are very difficult to change, but once changed, may have a massive knock-on effect in the rest of an individuals framework of reference.
Thus, an individual who has always been an atheist and who is &bquo;converted&equo; to Christianity may also give up his beliefs that indulging in alcohol, licentious sex, drugs and beating up little old ladies are acceptable elements of every-day behaviour.
How, then, to set about constructing a persuasive message?
Prior research of the target audience is important so that the message can be drafted in the appropriate register and directed along suitable channels.
Targeting is also important because in the competitive modern environment the message will have to fight for attention with many other conflicting or parallel messages and the &bquo;noise&equo; will dilute or distort the content and effect.
An understanding of the processes involved in attitudinal change is useful: what are the different levels of involvement of a receiver, for example, and does repetition of the message help?
(The answer is, yes, it does because it helps the receiver to move up a scale in their involvement level.)
Other elements in the style and content, such as humour, warmth and fear, can also be effective (&bquo;smoking kills&equo;).
A knowledge of the relationship of sender and receiver are also important.
It is very difficult persuading someone to lend you money when they know that you have never in the past paid it back.
It will be equally difficult to persuade them of your need when they know you spent a lot of money last week on a new car.
But other factors come into play.
If you are a well-known personality, attractive looking and charming, you will find your task much easier: people tend to respond to such individuals rather than reacting to the content of their message.
Influential opinion leaders, notably, are better informed, better read, they listen more, watch more and move in a number of different circles of friends.
Clearly, you may also be able to persuade someone to lend you money if you have power of some sort &mdash; if they owe you a favour or if you are their boss or if you are in a position of some authority for example.
In fact, &bquo;Regardless of whether it is called ethos, source credibility, status differential, opinion leadership, charisma or power, the conclusion seems inescapable &mdash; who you are can influence how your messages are received.
Finally, for the public relations practitioner, sending the messages through the right channel will also be of critical importance; which to choose &mdash; video, broadcast media, public  meeting/speech, news release, printed media?
These matters must be weighed before detailed attention to the style and content of the message can be made.
5 Organisational communication
The &bquo;boundary&equo; role of public relations &mdash; at the interface between an organisation and its internal and external publics &mdash; suggests that an understanding of communication will be a key element in the practitioners portfolio of management skills.
These will need to cover not only written and verbal communication expertise and a knowledge of the suitable channels of communication, but also an awareness of patterns of social interaction.
Put at its most simple, this means knowing how to listen, being aware of how messages might be received, presenting oneself clearly so that others know how to react to us and rewarding achievement.
All organisations are made up of individuals and problems occur most frequently when the needs of the individual become lost in the needs and goals of the organisation.
Many organisations fail to take account of this and the importance of personal contact becomes lost in techno-culture or the &bquo;memo culture&equo; of the organisation, while the individual has no sense of where he fits in or how he can contribute.
The &bquo;culture&equo; of an organisation, like &bquo;culture&equo; in any other context, is a complex mixture of attitudes and beliefs, behaviour, codes and patterns.
Traditionally, organisations are constructed pyramidally, with a hierarchy most powerful at the top and progressively less so as the pyramid spreads downwards.
In &bquo;flat&equo; organisations such as large professional practices, a number of people are notionally equal in terms of power, fee-earning ability and status.
Growing in number are matrix  organisations where power is delegated to large project groups or departments.
Such organisations try to harness the energy and creativity of their workforce by allowing far greater numbers to participate in contributing ideas and in decision-making.
Whatever the structure of the organisation, good communication lies at the heart of success &mdash; and, because of the complexities we have already looked at and the many factors which influence the way in which messages circulate and are received good communication is perhaps more difficult to achieve than good product design, manufacturing productivity or success in the market place. 
A clear communications policy is necessary for both external and internal communications &mdash; and the more hierarchical the structure of the organisation, the more inflexible the communications are likely to be.
Weak managers tend to &bquo;play the power game&equo;, retaining information in the belief that knowledge is power.
And so, it some ways, it is: &bquo;In any communication situation, the individual who can monopolize the communication is likely to have more power, and thus exert more influence.&equo;
Yet in an organisation, which is effectively a large group, retention of power in this way by individuals can build up resentment and thus demotivate: &bquo;Groups with very sharp perceived power differences between members are likely to have poor social-emotional climates&hellip;.
This suggests that it may be difficult to maintain large power differences and still hope to keep a group happy.&equo;
A &bquo;position check&equo; of the effectiveness of the communication network can be made using measurement tools such as communication audits.
This kind of research can be viewed in two ways: &bquo;One argues that the audit is a tool to help communicators manage and the other argues that it is a tool to help managers communicate.&equo;
Either way, research of this kind can provide invaluable information, &bquo;a way of evaluating the effectiveness of the organisation in conveying its goals, mission and code of conduct to the target publics upon whose support the organisation is dependent for continued existence.&equo;
Finally in this section, it is worth pointing out that in the first Unit of this course we learnt that organisations which were based on an open system (where information flowed in and out through a &bquo;permeable boundary&equo; to its environment and publics and where adjustment was made in the light of feedback), were more able to adapt to change and continue to prosper.
In the same way, it seems clear that there is a positive connection between an open style of communication and organisational performance: &bquo;When communication is open, organisations are able to identify their problems early and solve them before they get out of hand.
When communication is closed, organisations do not identify problems until they become crises.&equo; 
6: Channels of communication
A study of the news media is not properly within the scope of this assignment, but the topic of channels is necessary to a consideration of communication and a cursory look at the nature and availability of various media seemed in order.
It has already been suggested that using an appropriate channel and finding a suitable register will contribute greatly to the clarity of any communication.
Public relations departments in large organisations have a number of channels open to them and they should utilise a mixture of these to disseminate information &mdash; notice boards, in-house journals, videos, briefings and meetings.
The production of  a house  journal is common in most large organisations, but it is important to ensure that the style and tone of the journal is apt.
This is no easy task when it is aimed at an entire work force and when the normal reading habits of the employees may range from The Times  at one end to The Sun  at the other.
A number of questions should be asked: what is the objective of the journal? who will drive the publication, managers, shop floor workers, the unions, project groups? how much power will the editor have? who has the final power of veto?
A glossy magazine designed to satisfy the CEOs ego may go wide of the mark with the factory workers.
Externally, a range of print media is available for the insertion of company propaganda, should the occasion arise.
Careful thought regarding suitable journals for advertisements, advertorials or articles may help to dissuade workers considering strike action, for example, while good on-going press relations can do much to fortify not only the publics image of a company but also reinforce the workers sense of pride in belonging to such an organisation.
The political affiliations of a newspaper, its locality and the demographics of its readership should all be taken into account.
Video is a relatively new medium for in-house communications and is used by some companies to great effect.
It is still relatively expensive and cannot go into subjects in depth in the same way as print, but has the advantage of being easy to watch, in an idiom or genre which is very familiar to most people, and it can be viewed by groups of staff simultaneously.
In addition, it can utilise the power of non-verbal signals as discussed in section 2 of this assignment. 
Finally, a good public relations officer will be aware of how to feed stories, articles and photo opportunities into the media to the benefit of his organisation.
Success depends on many factors, including fostering good relations with the relevant journalists, a sound knowledge of the characteristics of the channel, its limitations and possibilities in addition to factors such as deadlines and gatekeepers and the amount of &bquo;noise&equo; likely to occur.
In briefing senior managers about appearing on television, for example, attention must be paid to many of the aspects of communication which have been considered in this assignment &mdash; the importance of appearance and hair style, the use of non-verbal language, choice of words, tone, pauses and so on: some of the many and complex elements that combine as part of what we call &bquo;communication&equo;.
Conclusion
An understanding of communication in the context of public relations is made easier by the construction of simple, diagrammatic &bquo;models&equo;.
These can be a useful introduction to an extremely complex subject.
While models can give a general picture and may be used to focus thought on a particular situation &mdash; and have the advantage of crystallising a highly abstract process &mdash; their simplicity can be a limiting factor.
The study of non-verbal communication is highly relevant: every signal we send out, consciously or, more usually, unconsciously can convey a richness of signals and meaning which can greatly add to and enhance &mdash; or indeed, detract from &mdash; our presentation of our selves and the success of our message delivery.
Language itself is even more complex, rooted in culture and context and involving an active negotiation between sender and receiver in terms of the transformation of signs into meaning.
The way in which messages are encoded &mdash; the particular selection and combination of signs &mdash; has a direct effect on the way in which they are received, and meaning is also conveyed through the content, style and tone of the signifiers.
A further factor to consider is the &bquo;noise&equo; or interference from other sources which may affect the clarity of the message, while the channel through which the message is  directed must also be selected with care to ensure clear communication.
Persuasive communication &mdash; communication designed to provoke a specific response &mdash; has been much researched and many factors may come into play.
These include many noted above, as well as the role of opinion leaders and charismatic figures, the type of attitude or belief which is in question, the profile of the audience targeted, the number of times the message is repeated and the relationship between the sender and the receiver.
Communication in organisations can multiply all the problems inherent in clear communication by a factor of thousands.
For the public relations department, a thorough understanding of the structure of the organisation, sound information and an agreed communications policy will all aid clarity of communication.
An open communication style, it seems, can help in the early identification and swift solution of problems.
Finally, a thorough understanding of the characteristics and potential of all the channels available is essential for good communication.
It is, above all, important to bear in mind what McQuail and Windahl have called the &bquo;inter subjectivity&equo; of communication&hellip; &bquo;since all communication involves more or less elaborate exchange and bargaining between senders and receivers.&equo;
The unpredictability of the outcome of any communication is what makes the subject a matter of endless fascination, speculation and research.