Folk devils and moral vigilantes – The occupational branding of public affairs consultants and the management of stigma

Public affairs is a rising field of practise; at the same time, it is reputationally complicated. In view of the widespread concern about the impact of its practise on democracy, this study explores how practitioners construct an occupational identity and present their occupation as meaningful to a wider audience. Using the concepts of occupational branding and stigma management communication, the study unpacks how practitioners manage and understand the stigma associated with their occupation and how the meaning of public affairs work is negotiated, described and framed. Drawing on interviews and free-text answers from a nationwide survey of public affairs consultants, the study illuminates how practitioners utilise a variety of strategies while engaging with and navigating the stigma, as well as the societal and historical discourses associated with their profession. Further, the findings show that practitioners are in no rush to reconfigure their image and instead have found productive ways to live with taint and tensions. These results open for debate not only the professionalisation project of public affairs but also the implications that keeping the status quo has on the development of democratic society.

It has been said that public affairs professionals, often termed as lobbyists, are perceived as 'little better than characters from the underworld' (Milbrath, 1963).The bad image of lobbying is well documented.Studies show that public trust in lobbyists is continually low (see, e.g., Davidson and Rowe, 2016), and malicious portrayals are common in both popular culture (Xifra and Collell, 2015) and in media coverage (Helgesson and Falasca, 2017).Perhaps it is not surprising.While politicians come and go, lobbyists often stay in the political sphere for a long time.They are usually politically versed, well-connected and have insights into the political world (Tyllström and Murray, 2021).The public affairs industry has come to be regarded as a central player in the political landscape (Svallfors, 2016), yet much of public affairs work is hidden and has proved to be challenging to scrutinise (Davidson, 2022;Ihlen et al., 2021).How practitioners should reconcile tensions between the public interest and the special interest of the client fuels the debate on what fundamental values should guide public affairs work (Falasca and Helgesson, 2021) and whether selling public affairs expertise on a contractual basis is reshaping both political participation and policymaking (Hoffmann et al., 2011).One author describes public affairs and lobbying tasks as a form of 'tainted work', that is, work deemed as socially and morally tainted by the public (Grandien, 2017).In view of the widespread mistrust, Davidson and Rowe (2016) concluded that there is a considerable gap between the self-image of public affairs practitioners and the image and reputation of public affairs amongst other stakeholders and the wider public.They also concluded that socially responsible practitioners need to engage with public concerns in order to support democratic legitimacy.
Public affairs is a rising field of practice; at the same time, it is reputationally complicated.These conditions bring to surface how practitioners construct a valuable occupational identity and present their occupation as meaningful to a wider audience (Grandien, 2017;Meisenbach, 2008;Morales and Lambert, 2013).Tailoring an occupational identity is generally regarded as a core of contemporary professionalisation (Ashcraft et al., 2012), successful career development (Slay and Smith, 2011), recruitment and retention of personnel (Meisenbach, 2008) and construction of occupational legitimacy (Murphy and Kreiner, 2020).However, the image put forwards by an occupation and its practitioners can be shattered or undermined when practitioners are faced with tasks that are incompatible with the claimed occupational identity (Morales and Lambert, 2013).Moments of stigma and tension constitute a puzzle in which contradictions between idealised occupational aspirations, the image and actual possibilities have to be managed (Morales and Lambert, 2013).In view of this, scholars have called for further enquiry into how tensions and stigma can inform research on occupational identity construction (Meisenbach, 2008;Morales and Lambert, 2013;Slay and Smith, 2011).
To engage with this process, the current study draws on the notion of occupational branding (Ashcraft et al., 2012) and the communicative management of stigma (Meisenbach, 2010) to address how the tainted image of public affairs possibly serves as a resource and impediment in the construction of an occupational identity.The branding lens acknowledges that an occupational identity does not emerge on its own accord but is rather the result of a strategic work on the representation of work (Ashcraft et al., 2012), and it captures the power games in which different subgroups and stakeholders engage within the branding process (Vásquez et al., 2013).Drawing on interviews and free-text answers from a nationwide survey of public affairs consultants, the current study illuminates practitioner's own accounts of how they manage and understand the taint associated with their occupation and build a legitimate occupational identity.
The results contribute to the study of occupational identity by illustrating how practitioners utilise a variety of strategies while engaging with and navigating the stigma, as well as societal and historical discourses associated with their occupation.The findings also show that practitioners are in no rush to reconfigure their image and have instead found productive ways to live with taint and tensions.These results open for debate not only the professionalisation project of public affairs but also the implications that keeping the status quo has on the development of democratic society.

Public affairs as a stigmatised or tainted occupation
Goffman defined stigma as a discrediting attribute connected to someone's identity that leaves the individual tainted (Goffman, 1963).The stigmatised portrayal of public affairs professionals is captured in depictions such as corporate mouthpieces (Tyllström and Murray, 2021), hired guns (Falasca and Helgesson, 2021), and as the dark side of politics (Grant, 2018).It might appear paradoxical that public affairs is portrayed as an emerging field of practice and, at the same time, as surrounded by stigma.However, an occupation can perform a stigmatised or tainted task and still function efficiently (Ashforth, 2019) as there is still a request for the service provided by the stigmatised group.This illustrates the contradictory fact that an actor can be stigmatised and legitimate at the same time because both different audiences and overlapping audiences can view the practice as legitimate.An audience can hence perceive a certain task an actor performs as stigmatised but still view the actor as legitimate (Ashforth, 2019;Helms et al., 2019).Nonetheless, what remains central is that the stigma creates a legitimacy challenge that an occupation must address as the stigma ultimately poses a threat to the occupational identity and undermines the legitimacy of an occupation (Ashforth, 2019;Ashforth and Kreiner, 2014).This could also result in hidden practices to which some audiences have clear access while other do not (Scott, 2015).
The study of occupational stigma has been researched under the notion of 'dirty work'.Dirty work refers to occupations that to some extent carry social, physical or moral taint (Ashforth and Kreiner, 1999).All occupations carry some sort of taint, and knowledgeintensive work, such as consultancy, is no exception (Bouwmeester et al., 2021).Social taint covers occupations that are in contact with stigmatised populations (e.g.prison guards or public defenders) or that appear to have a servile relationship to others (e.g.butlers or maids).Physical taint occurs when an occupation is connected with filthy, offensive or dangerous conditions.Moral taint involves occupations that are regarded as intrusive, deceptive or of questionable virtue (Ashforth and Kreiner, 1999).Occupational stigmas have further been analysed according to the breadth and depth of stigma, which enables occupations to be classified into a four-quadrant model (Kreiner et al., 2006).Breadth pertains to the scope of the work that is classified as dirty, and the significance of the dirt to the occupational identity.Depth refers to the intensity of the taint and the extent to which workers are directly involved in the dirt (Kreiner et al., 2006).Grandien (2017) studied public relations (PR) as a dirty work.The author identified PR as a socially and morally tainted occupation, but the taint is compartmentalised in character and limited to certain tasks.In other words, the breadth of the taint is low, but the depth is high.Moreover, the tarnished image of public relations was especially centred around tasks related to public affairs and lobbying (Grandien, 2017).As the current study is exclusively focused on the PR subgroup of public affairs consultants, who have public affairs and lobbying as a core task, it can be imputed that the depth of dirt for this occupational group ought to be considered a high breadth of taint.This would entail that the stigma becomes viewed as pervasive rather than compartmentalised, which ought to cause practitioners to manage the stigma in a different way (Kreiner et al., 2006).

Occupational branding, identity and image
The perspective that occupations are formed though discursive struggles has received ample support (Ashcraft, 2007(Ashcraft, , 2013;;Ashcraft et al., 2012;McDonald and Kuhn, 2016).The discursive struggle is a communicative or rhetoric endeavour in which the meaning of work, or the occupational identity, is negotiated and contested (Ashcraft, 2007(Ashcraft, , 2013;;Ashcraft et al., 2012;McDonald and Kuhn, 2016;Vásquez et al., 2013). 1 This entails that the meaning of work and what it means to be part of a specific occupation changes over time as new discourses are formed (Ashcraft et al., 2012).Ashcraft et al. (2012) put forward the concept of occupational branding to capture the diffuse processes in which the occupational identity is constructed and reconstructed.The concept captures the different processes in which an occupational identity takes shape.The authors concluded that the 'overriding goal of strategic occupational identity work is the creation of an occupational brand, or a habitual, taken-for-granted association between a line of work and a condensed image' (Ashcraft et al., 2012: 476).This is a discursive work aimed at creating a representation of an occupation and its practitioners in a way that constructs value and worth.Branding is hence a central professionalisation activity that captures practitioner claims to knowledge and jurisdiction (Ashcraft et al., 2012).
Under the branding umbrella, occupational identity merges with the notion of occupational image, that is, the public discourses of occupational identity.The image is the overarching construction of what content, values and likely practitioners are associated with an occupation held by various stakeholders and upon which these stakeholders tend to act (Ashcraft, 2007). 2 Thus, several actors or constituents partake or influence the construction of an occupational brand, including practitioners, clients, labour associations, media and trade education.In view of this, the negotiation also takes place in sites for public discourse, such as representations in popular culture (Ashcraft, 2007;Ashforth et al., 2012). 3The branding endeavour is thus an interplay of 'doing branding and being branded', and it is not only a strategic work but also a collective work that occurs in numerous settings (Vásquez et al., 2013: 136).This entails that the branding discourse be comprised of more than one brand.Several brands and even conflicting brands are simultaneously negotiated as the brand may have diverse meanings to different constituents (McDonald and Kuhn, 2016).The presence of a multitude of brands can constitute a challenge as practitioners must make different and sometimes contradicting brands align (Vásquez et al., 2013).

The communicative management of tensions and stigma
Tensions and contradictions can affect the construction of occupational identities (Meisenbach, 2008).The projected image of an occupation and its practitioners can be disrupted or compromised when practitioners are faced with tasks that are incompatible with the claimed occupational identity (Morales and Lambert, 2013).A tension as such can pose a threat or a challenge to practitioners' occupational legitimacy and fuel their need to engage with stakeholders and justify the practice.When tension emerges, practitioners use different rhetorical strategies to simultaneously embrace and distance themselves from the contradictory demands (Ghadiri et al., 2015).Similar to the management of tension, stigmatised individuals employ different communicative strategies in response to stigma messages and threats.
Drawing upon Kreiner et al.'s (2006) model, practitioners experiencing compartmentalised stigmas tend to use more individualistic defensive strategies.In contrast, individuals managing a pervasive stigma are more likely to come together as a group and evolve shared defensive strategies as the stigma is so closely connected to the group.To further the study of communication management strategies of stigma, Meisenbach (2010) set out to create a comprehensive theory and typology and bring together a range of previous assumptions and theory in stigma research.The author built on the assumption that stigmas are discursively constructed based on the perceptions held and expressed by both the carriers of the stigma and the non-stigmatised individuals (Meisenbach, 2010).Incorporating stigma communication theory from Smith (2007), stigma theory from Goffman (1963), Ashforth and colleagues´(2007) typology of dirty work, and image repair and apologia strategies (e.g.Beoit, 1995) the typology covers and organize core groups of strategies that stigmatized individuals use.Moreover, the author concluded that the choice of stigma management strategies emanates from two conditions: first, whether the stigmatised individual accepts or denies that a stigma exists; and second, if the stigmatised individual accepts or denies that the stigma is applicable to him or her (Meisenbach, 2010).
When practitioners accept that a stigma exists and that the stigma applies to them, they may employ different acceptance strategies, such as being passive, apologetic or isolate themselves.Those who accept that the stigma applies to them but challenge the public's understanding of the stigma use strategies to evade responsibility, or they aim to reduce the offensiveness of the stigma by, for example, minimising or shifting the focus from the stigmatised part of an individual's identity to a non-stigmatised part.In contrast, when practitioners accept the stigma but challenge the stigmas applicability to them, they use avoidance strategies.Avoidance strategies include hiding or denying, distancing the self from the stigma or making favourable comparisons.Lastly, those who both challenge the existence of a stigma and its applicability will deny or ignore the stigma as a strategy (Meisenbach, 2010).Several strategies, sometimes even contradictory ones, may be used in parallel.In turn, the choice of strategy brings about consequences for the stigmatised population, and therefore, the outcome of using a certain strategy ought to be considered.Non-stigmatised individuals and organisations, friends or foes, also engage in the stigma management communication, and Mesienbach (2010) highlighted that these constituents use similar strategies when discussing/relating to the stigmatised individuals.Meisenbach urged future studies to expand the typology and test its usefulness in different fields (Meisenbach, 2010).

Communicative management by professional storytellers
Communicative management by practitioners can not only act as a window to tensions and contradictions inherent in the practice but also shed light on how practitioners live with tensions in a productive way (Meisenbach, 2008).In view of this, public affairs consultants portray an intriguing occupation to study.Public affairs practitioners have been described as professional storytellers (Kantola, 2016;Terry, 2001), and a core function of public affairs is to create discourses of reality and legitimacy (Berg and Bonewits Feldner, 2019;Davidson, 2022).Beyond creating stories about and for clients, public affairs professionals are likely to use their skills in creating discourses about themselves and their professionalism.Terry (2001) argued that their stories can be viewed as explanatory artefacts providing an understanding of professionals' reality and roles.In a similar vein, Kantola (2016) studied how public affairs consultants constructed an image of professionalism using everyday storytelling and provided insight into the living story of public affairs professionals as they build legitimacy in various contexts (Kantola, 2016).Here, the communicative skills held by public affairs practitioners portray an interesting avenue to explore identity construction.
In summary, this study departs from the assumption that public affairs is a stigmatised work (Grandien, 2017).To address the issue, the study will draw on the perspective that an image problem can be viewed as an occupational branding project (Grandien, 2017).Using the concepts of occupational branding (Ashcraft et al., 2012) and stigma management communication (Meisenbach, 2010), the study unpacks how practitioners manage and understand taint associated with their occupation.By analysing public affairs consultants own accounts, the study contributes knowledge about how the meaning of public affairs work is negotiated, described and framed.The study is guided by the following research questions: RQ1.How do public affairs consultants discursively negotiate and construct their occupational identities?
RQ2.How do consultants communicatively manage stigma and tensions?

Method and material
The material comes from a larger study on role conceptions and consists of ten in-depth interviews and free-text answers from an anonymous nationwide survey with public affairs consultants in Sweden.The interview template and the survey questions were designed to address issues such as legitimacy, occupational role conception and role performance as well as the perception of accountability, responsibilities and ethics in the role of representing the public and/or special interests in the political policy process.The interviewees were selected from well-known agencies in the Swedish public affairs industry.Five respondents were women and five were men.The interviews were conducted by two experienced researchers and followed a semi-structured template.The set of questions allowed the respondents to elaborate on their answers and for the interviewer to pose follow-up questions (Lindlof and Taylor, 2019).The interviews were recorded and transcribed, summing up to a total of 102 single-spaced pages.
Additional material was gathered though an anonymous online survey with public affairs consultants fielded in 2019.The survey consisted of Likert-scale questions and free-text answers, with only the latter used as part of the analysis in the current study due to its qualitative approach.The lack of an official record of public affairs practitioners in Sweden resulted in a strategic sampling method, and respondents were located through a number of steps.In the first step, public affairs, communication and PR agencies were located using the membership lists of different trade organisations and an additional Internet search using keywords related to public affairs, lobbying and PR.In total, 105 bureaus were considered, ranging from large national to small local bureaus.In the second step, all of the official websites of the bureaus were visited, and employee job descriptions were examined.All practitioners whose job descriptions explicitly stated that they worked with public affairs or lobbying were selected.Of the bureaus, 27 had consultants who fit the profile.Participation was then solicited from 208 public affairs consultants, 78 of whom left free-text answers, yielding a response rate of 37.5%.Of these 78 respondents, 28.2% were women.The consultants almost exclusively represented private sector organisations (91%).A large part of the respondents had worked more than 10 years in public affairs (39.7%), moreover a majority had a background in politics (65.4%), of which many declared that they had work in politics for more than 10 years prior to entering the public affairs industry (37.3%).
While there are drawbacks to the use of anonymous, web-based surveys, such as low response rates, participants skipping unwanted questions and the inability to ask followup questions, an advantage is that the anonymous setting can increase disclosure of sensitive or stigmatised beliefs, behaviours and topics.The open-ended questions gave respondents an opportunity to give accounts using their own words and, in so doing, capture what they perceived as important as well as their language and terminology (Braun et al., 2021).The survey had unlimited space for comments, and in total 263 answers was gathered and used for analysis.Answers ranged from just a few words up to 200 words in length and summed up to a total of 24 singled spaced pages.
The material was analysed using the Swedish original transcriptions and free-text answers to avoid misinterpretations due to translation.The material was analysed in a number of steps using a thematic approach (Braun et al., 2021;Tracy, 2020).The material was read through several times to identify themes and patterns, as suggested by Tracy (2020).After several close readings, the material was sorted and reorganised to refine the themes that emerged.Each of the themes was further analysed in depth to identify nuances and potential tension.In a final step, illustrative quotes were selected and translated.The quotes are marked to show whether they were collected from the interview material or the survey.

Results
The final sorting consisted of five salient themes that displayed how the occupational identity is managed and negotiated.Each theme is addressed in turn and shows how practitioners engage and navigate through a variety of discourses centred around the themes: (1) fictionality and folk devils, (2) management of visibility, (3) sibling rivalry and boundary work, (4) moral vigilantes and ethical roadmaps, and (5) working despite chronic distrust.

Fictionality and folk devils
The first theme captures how public affairs consultants discuss and relate to popular culture representations of lobbyist.It is evident that the respondents are aware of and have encountered in their work the often stereotypical portrait of lobbyists established in popular culture.The notion of the power hungry, unethical and relentless lobbyist in cinema and TV shows was frequently mentioned and brought up by the respondents themselves.The fictional characters were denoted as a 'cultural cliché'.Most often, the TV series House of Cards was referenced, but also other series such as Mad Men and Yes Minister.In short, the fictional lobbyist is an overall villain.The respondents rarely explained what they meant when they described lobbying as 'like House of Cards'; rather, it was assumed that there is some general understanding of the notion.At times, the lobbyists were a symbol of deviance for a much larger issue than lobbying alone, and they became a representation for overall rotten politics.In this context, they become tainted, and they inherited the bad reputation of corrupt politicians and the mistrust towards political institutions.Using Stanley Cohens (2002) illustrative and classic concept, lobbyists were depicted as 'folk devils'.Whether constructed or mis-constructed as a form of folk devil, they are defined as a threat to societal values and interests (Cohen, 2002;Goode and Ben-Yehuda, 2009).The devil becomes a personification or symbol of deviance and is presented in a stereotypical manner.The group is associated with negative characteristics and disapproved behaviour in both media and the public discourse and becomes stigmatised (Goode and Ben-Yehuda, 2009).
The villainous fictional lobbyist is brought forwards in discussions about ethics, transparency and regulations.The fictional lobbyist is perceived as far-fetched, exaggerated and not representing what 'real lobbying' looks like.In parallel, the consultants described how the narrative in popular culture is not pure fiction but based on real lobbyists in Washington.The fictional lobbyist is perceived as an American lobbyist, and the consultants painted a picture of a peculiar and corrupt political system in the US, a system that greatly differs from the Swedish setting.
There is an image in, for example, American movies of how lobbyist blackmail those in power in favour of questionable interests.This is not how it works in Sweden in reality.Swedish politicians have very high integrity and autonomy.We cannot change their opinion without them being in on it.(Survey, respondent 61) Whether real or not, the villains found in popular culture are useful characters and appear to have an explanatory value.At times, the image is used to shift focus from complex debates and to simplify issues by talking about what lobbying isn't rather than what it is.By shedding light on the fictional representation, the actual lobbyists and their work are not up for scrutiny.Using the villain as a counterpart, the consultants distance themselves from the negative associations, deflect criticism and justify their presence in the political system.
The fictional lobbyist also appears to be part of the commodification of knowledge in public affairs.The discourse of an elusive, mysterious knowledge that the consultants hold helps create job opportunities.
Public affairs is not a fully established branch in most organisations practice./…/ This contributes to a certain 'mystery' about what it is we (consultants) actually do and how we do it.A mystery that we often contribute to ourselves, with the purpose to be able to charge more.(Survey, respondent 26) Some consultants expressed that by reinforcing the image of public affairs as something mysterious, the clients feel that it is something they cannot perform themselves, and consultancies can then charge more for their services.The fictionality contributes to the image that consultants have expert knowledge and the keys to the political game.One respondent explained that among a variety of stakeholders, such as clients, 'there is a grand overconfidence in what consultants are capable to do'.The respondents expressed that there is a sort of magical quality about hiring public affairs consultants in the eyes of certain clients.The clients are unsure of what they are purchasing and what the consultants will actually do, but they will do something.Clients often 'want more than what is possible'.But the magic is a form of dark art, and there are dangerous connotations to the elusive practices of public affairs consultants.One respondent declared that 'lobbying for money is not popular in general but obviously something that clients are willing to pay for'.

Management of visibility
The second theme illustrate how practitioners manage, argue for and appeal to transparency and secrecy as ideals and values in their occupation.The respondents in the current study mirror the need for secrecy, on the one hand, and the call for transparency, on the other hand.This is captured in accounts where the consultants tell anecdotes and stories about historical development and traditions in Sweden, yet a tension emerges in how the respondents angle this legacy.Many emphasise the strong transparency, integrity and stability of Swedish politics and talk of the Swedish political model with pride.The consultants use descriptions such as 'blue-yellow model' (referring to the blue and yellow national flag of Sweden), down-to-earth and that Sweden is 'world unique'.As one respondent declared, public affairs is simply the modern version of 'approaching the king', explaining the ancient right during the Middle Ages for citizens and organisations to bring forward their interests to the decision makers.A special emphasis was put on the long tradition of corporativism and the high amount of formal transparency that Sweden has had, which is the reason that there has been 'remarkably little hush-hush in Sweden'.Based on this, the consultants argued that as the political process is already uniquely transparent, there is no need to regulate the lobbying industry by, for example, placing demands for transparency on them.Regulations might instead hamper the transparency that is already in place.
… in our democratic system and in our political model or tradition, I actually believe we have important values to care about when it comes to specifically the formal and the openness which I think are at risk to be inhibited by too much institutionalisation, registration.(Interview, respondent 5) In parallel, the same consultants tell a different story of how Swedish politics have collapsed.The lobbyists depict the old political systems in Sweden and their corporatist forms as biased and lacking in transparency.In the old days, decisions were made by a few individuals behind closed doors, with descriptions such as 'off the record' and 'wining and dining'.One respondent told anecdotes from the diaries of Tage Erlander, Prime Minister in Sweden in the 1960s, and emphasised that the lobbying depicted in those books never could take place today.This 'old' political setting has eroded to be replaced by a new modern and transparent system.In this new era, an increasing number of actors aim to participate in a political process in a more transparent fashion.As Sweden is experiencing an all-time high regarding transparency, further regulations of transparency are not necessary.The historical perspectives place the respondents in a macro perspective and can be seen as a way to build or underpin legitimacy and, at the same time, argue against the need for rules on transparency.
The contradiction is further found when the respondents bring the conversation to the topic of secrecy.The discourse of secrecy as an attractive value in a business context goes against the need for transparency in a larger political context.First, according to the respondents, the label of secretive is well established: Lobbyists has a well-deserved bad reputation, since almost all agencies are untransparent and has weak values about contributing to the public good.Therefore, they are perceived by the public as secretive and running the big companies errands in the corridors of power, which partly is true.(Survey, respondent 4) Another respondent concluded that 'The occupations would get a better reputation if more were open with their employers and methods'.In relation to the acknowledgement that there are certain degrees of secrecy in the industry, it became clear that a majority of the consultants were reluctant to see an introduction of any regulation on the matter.A common discourse is that while regulations, such as public lists of clients, could provide legitimacy, it is not necessary.In the business world, secrecy is not a bad omen; it is just part of business.One respondent explained that 'there are legitimate reasons to contact a communication agency without it being publicly known', secrecy is not per se an unethical practice.By positioning themselves as 'any other businesses' working under a market logic, the consultants justified secrecy as a principle and the centrality of the business-client relationship rather than the societal discourse on the impact of the practice.Furthermore, it was perceived as unfair that lobbyist-client confidentiality is questioned while other occupations, such as lawyers and doctors, also have secrecy interwoven into their practice while remaining in the clear from scrutiny.

Sibling rivalry and boundary work
The third theme address the public affairs consultants complex relationship with the media, one that is necessary but also problematic.To begin with, the importance of the media as an arena for lobbying work and as a cornerstone in democracy is obvious throughout the material.Yet, most consultants expressed a long-lasting tension between lobbyists and the media.The consultants described the conflict between journalist and lobbyist as a 'tradition', and a natural result of the media's role to critically examine actors and be objective in contrast to the lobbyists role of representing special interests and being subjective.The conflict is described more in terms of a sibling rivalry and that lobbyist and journalist ultimately work together despite this occasional bickering.
Media's foundational role is to report in a balanced way and in some way contribute with objective perspectives on current affairs, which goes in clinch with the lobbyist assignment to reward their client's interest.(Survey,respondent 73) However, this built-in conflict appears to have become increasingly coloured by bitterness.The accounts capture the changing circumstances of both Swedish politics and the media: while the public affairs industry is blooming, the field of journalism buckles under pressure.With fewer resources and staff, journalists rely on input from other actors for information and news, a service that communication professionals and public affairs practitioners often provide.The increased dependence is described as a factor that has ignited the conflict between the actors and given it a different angle.One lobbyist described the journalists as 'the princess on the pea', explaining that journalists nowadays want monopoly on everything communication related and become sulky when someone else enters what they deem as 'their territory'.As public affairs professionals constitute a threat to the journalists territory public affairs practitioners are portrayed as evil, especially since an increasing number of journalists have transferred to a PR-sector and come to work as lobbyists.

Helgesson
Some even argued the changing dependency between journalists and public affairs professionals has warped some journalist's ability to be objective when writing about public affairs.Moreover, the respondents expressed that journalists have poor knowledge of what public affairs consultants do.The knowledge of journalists varies greatly, yet a 'good journalist' or a 'real journalist' knows what public affairs is about.
A common argument is that the media is much to blame for the widespread, negative image of lobbying in Sweden.The consultants reasoned that portraying public affairs professionals as villains suits the media logic and, hence, is an angle that sells.
There is an ambivalent attitude to both PA and PR amongst journalists.On the one hand, they get many ideas from consultants.On the other hand, they cultivate the image of mystery in news sites.(Survey,respondent 50) The respondents, moreover, expressed that they feel that the media image is unfair and contributes to the demonization of lobbyists.The toxic portrayal of lobbyists is continually present in the work life of the respondents.At the same time, several consultants gave the impression that even though the smearing of public affairs by journalists is persistent, it doesn't bother them too much.One respondent explained: 'News media's attitude is mostly negative, but their influence is not a large as they themselves imagine'.

Moral vigilantes and ethical roadmaps
Perhaps the biggest indicator that ethics in lobbying is an important topic is that it is controversial.There is a general tendency amongst the consultants to acknowledge that there are ethically questionable actors in the industry and that there is no smoke without fire.However, most respondents emphasised that they are found in one of the few ethical firms in Sweden and are not part of the problem.An issue touched upon by several respondents was taking a stance in relation to clients.A majority of respondents stressed that they choose clients based on their own ethics and values.By doing this, the consultants made sure that they contributed to the public good.
I only work with clients whose opinion I myself can stand for.Given this, I reckon I contribute so that decision makers can make 'good' decisions.(Survey,respondent 70) To the contrary, some consultants focused on the consultant's role as an expert for hire who does not choose clients based on their personal values and beliefs but provides their services to whomever is paying and staying unbiased or retaining from judging the client, comparing themselves to lawyers.
My work has as a purpose to strategically and operatively execute assignment for the actors who can afford to hire me.(Survey,respondent 38) The debate on ethics and what is 'good' and bad is complex, as highlighted by a respondent who wrote: Naturally, an ethical compass is importantbut we cannot let the surrounding world's opinions about a business determine whether they ought to get advice.Opposing interest will always exist, and different driving forces often play an important role for what perspective you have on an issue.If you are to abide to any guiding principle, it is to stay in the right side of legal/illegal.The rest issomewhat hard-drawnopinions.(Survey,respondent 46) Another theme highlights how the consultants can 'help' the client to be more ethical.One respondent declared that 'if the interest a client has does not align with the public welfare, we have the opportunity to come up with a better material and twist the interest'.Some respondents even put it in terms of having an occupational duty to aid the client to be ethical.
We also have a responsibility to 'lead' the client to the 'right track' by arguing that their wishes are inappropriate to pursue.In our agency, we can also say no to working with clients if we do not believe in their demands.(Survey,respondent 14) In short, there are several interpretations of what constitutes ethical lobbying and how it should be practised.Much of the argumentation is anchored in appeals to the public interest, and shows varying perspectives on how to cater to public interests.
A large part of the respondents appeared to have an ambition to be active in making choices.This requires an individual lobbyist to take on the mantel of deciding what is ethically responsible and good.The impression of agency is further seen when the consultants talk about their work and clients they choose to represent.Several respondents expressed an ambition to make a change by working in public affairs.'For me, it's about taking a shovel and starting to dig, instead of just complaining about in what direction society is going' one respondent expressed.
I do this because I think its super important, I think is really fun, I think there is a drive amongst us (public affairs consultants) that is a wish to do good things for society and the social development.And therefore, I found I place where I can do that.(Interview, respondent 9)

Working despite chronic distrust
A permeating theme throughout the material is mistrust, scepticism and delusions about the public affairs industry.The respondents attributed the misconceptions to a widespread lack of knowledge of the nature of public affairs and what public affairs consultants do in society.The consultants expressed that the people in general do not know what public affairs is, and do not talk about it other than when the media publishes some story of a lobbying-scandal, and a moral panic breaks out.The uncertainty and elusiveness of public affairs appears to create a sort of apprehensiveness among stakeholders.One respondent put it in terms of 'guilt by association', in which the tainted image of public affairs spreads fear among actors of being associated with them.This goes for clients, politicians and journalists.However, despite a tainted image, it becomes clear that the respondents don't feel overly affected by the poor image.At times, they explain, the bad distrust can make their work easier or harder.For example, some politicians 'refuse to respond when spoken to' by lobbyists, which can be problematic from a strategic point of view.The main relationship in which the mistrust is managed is towards the client.It is the client's impression that matters as they are the ones who pay.One consultant explains: 'The client's perception is the alpha and the omegawithout clients, there are no business deals, without business deals there is no business left'.
Firstly it is the client's satisfaction and the decision makers willingness to change viewpoint that is important.Good relations with the media is necessary for communication to get through.The public's perception of my job is largely uninteresting, it is how they view the client that is important.(Survey,respondent 47) In relation to the topic of educating other stakeholders on the practice of public affairs, several respondents mentioned in passing that the public affairs industry could be better at telling what they are doing but leave the subject alone after that, indicating that it is perhaps not a job the respondents feel they are up to or want to claim.One respondent declared that public affairs professionals ought to 'dare to tell' what they are doing in a better way, a statement that insinuates that doing so constitutes a certain risk or inconvenience.
But the ability to build confidence appears to be obstructed by distrust.When the consultants explained what their work entails, stakeholders, such as the public, media and politicians, did not believe them.Due to this, the consultants explained that they were unable to alter the bad image of the occupation, and partly to spread knowledge of what public affairs is about.One consultant expressed that not even the respondent's own family believed that there are reasons other than money for the choice of occupation.
After I tell someone that I switched from politics to being a public affairs consultant I have never met anyone who believes I do it for anything other than the money.Journalists have the same perception about colleagues who transfer from the field of journalism to become communication directors or public affairs or PR-consultantsthey do it for the money.They sell themselves.You often see comments of the character that there is a good side and a bad side.And it builds on the belief that there is no positive motivation for it, it is pure prostitution, we do it for the money.(Interview,respondent 9) Unable to shake the preconceived notion of 'big business' and poor ethics relating to public affairs, the consultants expressed that it is a challenge to draw attention to the good aspects of public affairs rather than the money.

Discussion
The results presented here show the different strategies consultants use to justify their work, construct empowerment and portray the occupation as good in relation to a variety of stakeholders (Ashcraft et al., 2012).The different themes act as a window to what is taking place and changing in public affairs, and the how consultants continually work with their occupational image and identity.The consultants in the current study were conscious of their tainted image and employed diverse strategies as they accepted, challenged and interacted with the stigma and the societal and historical discourses surrounding their practice (Meisenbach, 2010).This is a situation that puts the consultants in a position in which they contradict themselves at times.Analysed as occupational branding, a multitude of brands are seen at work, which can be the root for increased and continual uncertainty about the occupation both internally in the occupational group and externally among stakeholders (Ashcraft et al., 2012).

The management of taint
Rather than dodge the topic of their tainted image, the consultants often approached the stigma head on, bringing the negative image up for debate.This can be seen as a method to claim the narrative of the stigma and be proactive in the management of the taint.It can also be seen as a sign of how intertwined that stigma is with public affairs consultancy and that the consultants know in advance that they in some way will have to address moments of stigma.The study also shows a group of practitioners who are united in some instances and, at other points, fragmented with practitioners who are keen to stand out from the group.This duality is visible, for example, when the consultants come together as an occupational group that feels type cast in popular culture, while at the same time, they are distancing themselves from other practitioners by ascribing wrongdoings to other lobbyists.Related to Kreiner et al.'s (2006) model of breadth and depth of the stigma, the different strategies could be a sign that practitioners switch between treating moments of stigma as either compartmentalised or persuasive in nature.
In managing moments of stigma, several strategies were utilised.For example, the consultants made favourable comparisons (Meisenbach, 2010) to old, established and regulated professions, such as lawyers, which can be seen as a strategy to borrow legitimacy and professional status.Moreover, strategies of shifting focus and distancing the self from stigma, for example by talking about lobbyist in movies rather than their own practice, was used.In relation to the long-lasting quarrel with journalists, the consultants deploy what can be regarded as discredit strategies (Meisenbach, 2010) by connoting that journalist who do not posses what the respondent denotes as knowledge about real lobbying are "bad journalists".The choice of strategy could be a sign of the interdependence and rivalry between the two occupational fields, where the consults need to maintain the relationship with the media and at the same time defend themselves against critique by making certain journalists' stance on lobbying seem less credible and convincing.Analysed as a form "boundary work", whereby occupations negotiate boundaries against adjacent fields to guard their terrain, authority and expertise (Bourne, 2019), the stigma management becomes a signifier of the friction and tension in the boundary work which can emerge when adjacent occupational groups need to cooperate and, at the same time, protect their expertise (Langley et al., 2019).The ambivalent relationship with the medias is further found in different account of the common toxic portrayal of in the media.In previous research, Rommetvedt (2014( , as cited in Ihlen et al., 2021 :311) :311) argued that the strong media attention given to public affairs consultancies exaggerates their influence, a stance with which the respondents in the current study concur.Yet, the consultants are not actively working to change this situation.Perhaps the framing of lobbyists as villains suits both sides in the end; the journalists fulfil their role to critically scrutinise powerful actors, by themselves contributing in the creation of the discourse of lobbyist as powerful and treacherous, and lobbyist can use the media portrayal of themselves as a powerful actor to market their expertise.
The different appeals to transparency and/or secrecy in different discourses can be seen as a strategy to associate the practice with socially attractive values (Ihlen and Raknes, 2020) and, as such, a way to achieve higher professional status (Grandien, 2017).Secrecy and transparency are frequently mentioned words in relation to public affairs (Cronin, 2020).The lack of transparency together with the potential for influencing political decisions raises concerns about how lobbyists in fact take part in the political sphere yet seldom get scrutinised.Garsten et al. (2015) called it 'power without mandate', stressing the contradictory situation in which a lobbyist acts as politicians but lacks the formal demands of transparency and accountability put on those in elected office.Yet the transparency-secrecy dynamic is complex, and contemporary literature highlights that all sorts of organisations are governed by both transparency and secrecy as an idea (Edwards, 2020).As such, an understanding of the interface between secrecy and transparency in contemporary practice has been described as necessary to further public relations research (Cronin, 2020).In the current study the clash and interface between transparency and secrecy is visible as the consultants 'tweak available discourse as they navigate such lived frictions' (Ashcraft, 2007: 28) and manage the issue of visibility.
Similar to the finding of Kantolas' (2016) enquiry to consultants as storytelling professionals, the consultants use anecdotes and stories to connect historical images to the contemporary role.The consultants tell stories, myths and examples to manage the taint and to position their work within the political sphere.They embedded the public affairs industry in popular culture references and historical accounts.Moreover, the respondents shifted between frames to manage tensions tied to different discourses (Meisenbach, 2008), for example, when discussing the historical context of public affairs.This result resonates with Meseinbach's (2008) suggestion that the negotiation of a multitude of discourses creates moments of constructive and empowered identities.

Keeping the status quo
At the same time that the consultants appeared to be conscious of the stigma associated with their practice, and not hesitant to address it, they did not appear in a haste nor especially engaged in altering their negative image.Instead, they have found ways to manage the image and still be a lucrative business.The perception amongst the consultants is that there appears to be a lack of knowledge along with stereotypical representations, misunderstandings and widespread scepticism about the motives behind public affairs work.This is captured in respondents accounts concerning popular culture representation.Representation of public relations professionals in popular culture is an area that has received scholarly attention (Fitch and Chorazy, 2022;Tsetsura et al., 2015;Xifra and Collell, 2015).These mainstream representations, especially those found in highly accessible outlets such as TV shows and movies, constitute sites where the meaning of public relations is constructed and negotiated (Fitch and Chorazy, 2022).The fictional representation becomes a common ground for debate and reflection, and it thus shape the understanding and attitudes amongst audiences of the practice (Tsetsura et al., 2015).A series of studies starting in the 1930s and ranging to the present time illustrates that public relations, in general, and public affairs and lobbying, in particular, have continually been depicted in a negative manner (Tsetsura et al., 2015;Xifra and Collell, 2015).This situation has caused scholars to question how these fictional representations influence the construction of occupational identities as well as the everyday work of public relations practitioners (Tsetsura et al., 2015).Trestusa et al. concluded that the fictional characters damaged the image of the occupation, and they presented several strategies for how public relations practitioners can work to counter the negative image (Tsetsura et al., 2015).However, the result from the current study implies that lobbyists are in no rush to alter their image but have instead found strategies to integrate the fictionality in their work and engage with the negative depictions in a useful way.However, keeping the current state entails that the practice is concealed to various degrees from different audiences and that the work on multitudes of identities, or brands, creates means to remain in the shadows (Scott, 2015).This result invites further discussion on how keeping the current image may influence professionalisation and legitimacy in the practice in the long run.This result is further of interest from the perspective of the low levels of levels of trust and legitimacy in public affairs which, to reiterate, may have great ramifications on the public trust in democratic processes, as well as to Davison and Rowes' (2016) statement that socially responsible practitioners ought to engage with public concerns in order to support democratic legitimacy.
Keeping the stigmatised image is further of interest in relation to the development of expertise-professions.Occupations or professions who sell expertise are often characterised by a degree of uncertainty concerning their knowledge base (Furusten and Werr, 2005).For advisory providers, there is a need to be identified as trustworthy and competent to attract clients.Furusten and Werr (2005) put it in terms of 'dealing with confidence', as the client aims to be confident in their need to buy a particular service and to have faith in the chosen consultancy.It is a challenge in the expertise market to do business when there is distrust and uncertainty (Engwall and Eriksson, 2005) a challenge that the respondents acknowledge even though it, at the moment, is deemed as manageable.

Consultants taking a stance
Whereas lobbyists have generally been researched as mere mediators or actors working solely according to corporate culture, recent studies have explored lobbyists as more active and following their own agendas (Barron and Skountridaki, 2020;Tyllström and Murray, 2021).This tentative new branch of research portrays lobbyists as more active and entrepreneurial and accentuates their relation to the clients who hired them.Part of the material mirrors a sense of agency and an ambition to influence society in a positive way, a result that relates to the perspective that consultants are more than passive intermediaries (Tyllström and Murray, 2021).The consultants want to do more than act as mere advisors; they want to take on the role of representing issues they believe in and to shape society for the better.This approach can be explored as a discourse in the occupational branding of public affairs, and it connects to a larger discussion on whether consultants should act as impartial advocates or political agents (Van Es, 2002), how ethical lobbying should be assessed, and whether this is a role that can or ought to be allocated to professionals (Helgesson, 2023).What constitutes ethical or responsible lobbying is an area that has receive much attention but still remains under debate (Barron and Skountridaki, 2020).Guidelines and regulations on ethics vary greatly, and as such, many communication practitioners rely on their own ethical compass to manage challenges (Bridge and Tench, 2022).A result which is reflected amongst the consultants in the current study.

Limitations and future research
One limitation to the current study is that it draws on self-perceptions and accounts of practitioners, which entails that further studies are required to explore whether the negotiation captured here is reflected in actual practice.The study is limited to the case of Sweden, to the strategic sampling method and to the specific group of public affairs practitioners working in a consultancy setting, which impedes the generalisability of results.In view of this, additional studies are needed to explore the issue and compare whether the results found here are mirrored in other contexts.An interesting avenue for future studies is to explore the perspectives of other stakeholders such as politicians, the media, and public affairs trade associations who represent the occupation.This avenue could contribute knowledge of how other stakeholders partake in the branding project and employ stigma management strategies as they interact with public affairs consultants.This could provide relevant pieces of how public affairs is negotiated and perceived as well as the consequences that the shifting of strategies and frames could have for the brand in a larger sense.Exploring public affairs as a stigmatised occupation could further be extended by studying sigma reappropriation, entailing the act in which a stigmatised groups reclaim derogatory terms or label associated with them to weaken their stigmatising force (Galinsky et al., 2013)

Conclusion
As a sought-after expertise yet reputationally challenged occupational group, this article sets out to study public affairs consultants.The aim of the article was to study the occupational branding of public affairs and how public affairs consultants make sense of their work identity and communicatively manage stigma.The goal was to both answer the call for more research on reputationally challenged occupations (Meisenbach, 2008) and to explore how a stigma can act as a resource and impediment in the construction of an occupational identity.
Overall, the work of public affairs consultants is to a large extent coloured by a widespread negative image, which at times is an obstacle and at times a steppingstone in the everyday work.A lasting impression is that the consultants are working in a counter current, and they must break through a stream of scepticism in order to come to a point at which a neutral debate on public affairs can take place.At the same time, this can be inconvenient; however, this does not constitute a large problem because the consultants are in no rush to reconfigure their image.Instead, they have found productive ways to live with the taint and tension and sit calmly in the boat and continue to navigate in the wake of suspicion.Relating to Davison and Rowe's (2016) conclusion that there is a gap between the image and self-image of public affairs, the study shows that practitioners are in no need to breach the gap.This opens up interesting discussion and invites further study on whether closing the gap is necessary, especially if the occupational branding is analysed as a professionalisation activity (Ashcraft et al., 2012), as well as further study on the implications that keeping the status quo may have on the development of democratic society.

Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/ or publication of this article.
There are a lot of preconceptions and delusion based on what has occurred in other countries.Most people have no idea about what we actually do.Their image of our practice is based on movies and TV shows, mainly from the United States.(Survey,respondent 76) The level of knowledge about what a PA-consultant does is small for obvious reasons.And it is nothing wrong with that, everyone does not know or understand what everyone else works with in society.What does a back-office IT consultant do?No idea.If you don't know what someone does, it is hard to have a favourable perception of an occupation.(Survey, respondent 60)