Professionalism, not just politics: the case for a communication-led PRO portfolio

The professional standard of an institution is often measured by the integrity of its governance. In a university dedicated to professional excellence, every leadership role should reflect the academic discipline it represents. Yet, a glaring contradiction exists within the heartbeat of student governance: the Student Representative Council (SRC) Public Relations Officer (PRO) portfolio. For years, a tradition has persisted where this vital role: the bridge between the student body, the administration, and the public is treated as a political appointment rather than a professional placement. As the current administration prepares to hand over the baton and the 60th administration prepares to assume office fully, we are presented with a unique opportunity to rectify this structural misalignment and return to the core values of specialized competence. The primary argument restricting the PRO portfolio is the belief that public relations is merely “talking” or “being popular.” This is a dangerous oversimplification. In the modern era, public relations is a sophisticated social science involving strategic image management, audience psychology, media ethics, and crisis communication. A student in the Communication department spends years mastering the art of press releases, the nuances of brand positioning, and the legal implications of public speech. When we appoint an Accounting or a Business Administration student to this role, we are essentially saying that the professional training in these areas is optional. We would never allow a Communication student to be appointed to a technical financial role; those are highly reserved for those who understand balance sheets and fiscal law. Why, then, do we allow the reverse when it comes to the university’s most visible brand? In 2026, the stakes for organizational reputation are higher than ever. A single ill-worded social media post or a mishandled interview can spark a campus-wide protest or tarnish an institution's reputation in the national media. A Communication student is trained to anticipate these “firestorms.” They understand the gatekeeping theory of media and know how to frame narratives that protect the SRC's integrity. An untrained PRO operates on instinct; a trained Communication PRO operates on strategy. The practice of having a liaison who lacks a background in media handling often results in a “reactive” instead of a “proactive” SRC. Communication students are taught to build relationships with stakeholders long before a crisis hits. By keeping this portfolio open to all, the SRC denies itself the benefit of high-level strategic advocacy. There is a fundamental difference between a voted position and an appointed one. Positions like the Financial Controller and the General Secretary are subject to the will of the voters. In those instances, the student body exercises its democratic right to choose based on trust and popularity. However, the PRO role, at its core, is an administrative appointment. Appointments are intended to ensure that specific technical and professional gaps are filled by experts. When an appointing authority selects a student from outside the Communication discipline, they are bypassing the very pool of experts the university is training. This undermines the academic credibility of the Communication Department and suggests that specialized study can be replaced with personal preference or political loyalty. The university environment is meant to be a laboratory for the professional world. In the corporate world, no reputable company would hire a Chief Communications Officer who has a background in millwork or logistics but “likes to talk.” They hire PR professionals. By reserving the PRO portfolio for Communication students, the university would be aligning its student governance with global professional standards. It allows Communication students to use their tenure as a “clinical placement,” applying the theories of their courses to real-world scenarios. This does not just benefit the student; it ensures that the SRC is served by someone who is academically invested in the success of the portfolio. The PRO is the “face” and the “voice” of the students. Image management is not just about looking good; it is about building trust. When a student body feels that the SRC is distant, elitist, or silent, it is usually a failure of communication. Communication students are schooled in the “excellence theory” of public relations, which emphasizes two-way symmetrical communication. This means they are trained not to just talk at students but to create channels where the student body feels heard. An Accounting student is trained to look at numbers and figures; a Communication student is trained to look at perceptions and sentiments. To ignore this distinction is to undermine the very essence of student representation. As the 60th administration prepares to take the helm, they have a historic chance to redefine the standard of student leadership. The current state of affairs is a relic of a time when student politics was based solely on personality. As we continue to grow as a global leader in professional education, our governance structures must evolve. The SRC should establish a clear policy of departmental alignment for appointed portfolios. This is not about exclusion; it is about specialization. It is about ensuring that when a student pays their SRC dues, they are being represented by a “staff” that is as professional as the career they are studying for. The “vocal candidate” is not always the “professional candidate.” It is time we stop treating the PRO portfolio as a platform for the loudest voice and start treating it as a desk for the most trained mind. The Communication department is filled with brilliant future journalists, PR practitioners, and media scholars who are eager to put their skills to work. By reserving the PRO portfolio for these students, the SRC will not only improve its communication and image management but will also uphold the very “professional” standard that our university’s name demands. Let us put the experts where they belong. It is just fair. It is professional. It is overdue.