Academic Theories in Public Relations - J.P. Cornelissen

Here is a conclusion/my opinion about the first article written by Cornelissen. 
His article explores the relationship between academic PR and proffessional PR.

Good point: A good deal of Public Relations work appears to have been based on intuitive or experimental learning rather than grounded in or drawing an academic knowledge.
It is argued that academic PR theories might not be used in real PR practice as the way they were suppose to work. In this sense PR practitioners use their own intuition more than the academic theories taught.

Cornelissen writes about different thories. For example: practical experience and common sense knowledge in preference for academic knowledge which is seen more sophisticated and rational. PR practitioners are face to face with many different problems every day in their PR work, which are not all put in to theories, but might be fixed also with common sense or creativity.
In the same time another theory says that these academic PR theories are not used in a direct way, but looking at the bigger picture, the solution for one problem can be for example a segment of one academic theory.

In my opinion the academic theories and actual PR practice work in favour of one and another, because, we can use the theories in these problems/issues that the theory is made for (or looking at the big picture again-maybe a theory can only be useful by not looking the whole theory, but only part of it), and in the other way, make new theories about new uprising issues, which are seen in practice every single day. In the same time every situation fortunately or unfortunately is different and therefor should be handeled differently. But, the more experience we have the better we can solve different problems.

"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is." (Jan L.A. van de Snepscheut and/or Yogi Berra)