Corporate Social Advocacy as Public Interest Communications: Exploring Perceptions of Corporate Involvement in Controversial Social-Political Issues
Through a nationally representative U.S. survey of 1,214 participants, this study examined attitudes toward the role of corporations in public interest communications and response to a series of recent high-profile corporate social advocacy cases. Findings provide preliminary evidence for what types of public interests are most appropriate for organizations to address, based on perceived motivations, commitment to advocacy, and dimension of corporations as actors for social change. Results from this study suggest demographic differences by political viewpoints, age, income, education, and gender. However, an overall level of agreement across all respondents indicates that corporations should engage in addressing important social issues, which is particularly noteworthy given that the U.S. population skews conservative.
Austin, L. L., & Gaither, B. M. (2016). Examining public response to corporate social initiative types: A quantitative content analysis of Coca-Cola’s social media. Social Marketing Quarterly, 22(4), 290-306. DOI: 10.1177/1524500416642441
Campbell, H. & Marshall, R. (2002). Utilitarianism’s bad breath? A re-evaluation of the public interest justification for planning. Planning Theory (1)2, 163-187.
Carah, N. (2019). Commercial media platforms and the challenges to public expression and scrutiny. In J. Johnston & M. Pieczka (Eds.), Public interest communication: Critical debates and global contexts (pp. 92-110). Routledge: New York, NY.
Clemensen, M. (2017). Corporate political activism: When and how should companies take a political stand? University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11299/189490.
de Bakker, F.G.A., & den Hond, F. (2008). Activists’ influence tactics and corporate policies. Business Communication Quarterly, 71, 107-111.
Dewey, J. (1927). The public and its problems. Athens: Swallow Press.
Dodd, M. (2018). Globalization, pluralization, and erosion: The impact of shifting societal expectations for advocacy and public good. Journal of Public Interest Communication 2(2).
Dodd, M. D., & Supa, D. W. (2014). Conceptualizing and measuring “corporate social advocacy” communication: Examining the impact on corporate financial performance. Public Relations Journal, 8(3).
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8–19.
Dutta, M. J. (2019). Communicating public engagement, public interest and participation: Culturally centering community voices. In J. Johnston & M. Pieczka, M. (Eds.), Public interest communication: Critical debates and global contexts (pp. 52-71). Routledge: New York, NY.
Edelman Trust Barometer (2017). Retrieved from https://www.edelman.com/research/2017-edelman-trust-barometer
Edwards, L. (2016). The role of public relations in deliberative systems. Journal of Communication, 66, 60–81.
Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (2006). Building corporate associations: Consumer attributions for corporate socially responsible programs. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 147-157. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070305284976.
Elving, W. (2013). Scepticism and corporate social responsibility communications: The influence of fit and reputation. Journal of Marketing Communications, 19(4), 277-292.
Etter, M. (2013). Reasons for low levels of interactivity: (Non-) interactive CSR communication in Twitter. Public Relations Review, 39, 606–608.
Forehand, M. R., & Grier, S. (2003). When is honesty the best policy? The effect of stated intent on consumer skepticism. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13, 349–356. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327663JCP1303
Fott, D. (1998) John Dewey: American philosopher of democracy. Oxford, UK: Rowan & Littlefield.
Fyke, J. P., Feldner, S. B., & May, S. K. (2016). Discourses about righting the business society relationship. Business and Society Review, 121, 217-245.
Gaither, B. M., Austin, L., & Collins, M. (2018). Examining the case of DICK’S Sporting Goods: Realignment of Stakeholders through Corporate Social Advocacy. Journal of Public Interest Communication 2(2). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.32473/jpic.v2.i2
Gaither, B. M., Austin, L. L., & Schulz, M. (2018). Delineating CSR and social change: Querying corporations as actors for social good. PR Inquiry 7(1). doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/2046147X17743544
Gaither, T. K., & Curtin, P. A. (2019). Articulating national identity in postcolonial democracies: Defining relations and interests through competing publics. In J. Johnston & M. Pieczka (Eds.), Public interest communication: Critical debates and global contexts (pp. 113-132). New York, NY: Routledge.
Gupta, S., & J. Pirsch. (2006). The company-cause-customer fit decision in cause-related marketing. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23(6), 314–326.
Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action vol. 1. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Heath, R. L., & Waymer, D. (2019). Terministic dialectics of individual and community agency: Co-creating and co-enacting public interest. In J.
Johnston & M. Pieczka (Eds.), Public interest communication: Critical debates and global contexts (pp. 32-51). Routledge: New York, NY.
Iqbal, N. (2019, January 19). Woke washing? How brands like Gillette turn profits by creating a conscience. The Observer: The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/jan/19/gillette-ad-campaign-woke-advertising-salving-consciences
Kaneva, N. & Popescu, D. (2014). We are Romanian, not Roma: Nation branding and post socialist discourses of alterity. Communication, Culture & Critique, 7, 506-523.
Kim, S. Y. & Reber, B. H. (2008). Public relations’ place in corporate social responsibility: Practitioners define their role. Public Relations Review 34(4), 337-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2008.07.003
Korschun, D., Aggarwal, A., Rafieian, H., & Swain, S. D. (2016). Taking a stand: Consumer responses to corporate political activism. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2806476 doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2806476.
Kotler, P. & Sarkar, C. (2017). Finally, brand activism! Marketing Journal. Retrieved from http://www.marketingjournal.org/finally-brand-activism-philip-kotler-and-christian-sarkar
L’Etang, J. (2004). Public relations in Britain: A history of professional practice in the 20th century. London: Erlbaum.
L’Etang, J. (2013). Public relations: A discipline in transformation. Sociology Compass, 7(10), 799–817.
Lee, T. H. (2017). The status of corporate social responsibility research in public relations: A content analysis of published articles in eleven scholarly journals from 1980 to 2015. Public Relations Review, 43, 211-218.
Lippmann, W. (1927). The phantom public. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Matten, D. & Crane, A. (2005). Corporate citizenship: Toward an extended theoretical conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 166-179.
Mayhew, L. H. (1997). The new public: Professional communication and the means of social influence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Munshi, D. & Kurian, P. (2005). Imperializing spin cycles: A postcolonial look at public relations, greenwashing, and the separation of publics. Public Relations Review, 31(4), pp. 513-520.
Novartis. (2016). Novartis social ventures. Retrieved from https://www.novartis.com/about-us/corporate-responsibility/expanding-access-healthcare/novartis-social-ventures
Novartis. (2014). Arogya Parivar: Healthy family in rural India Commercial innovation to address health needs at the bottom of the pyramid. Retrieved from https://www.novartis.com/sites/www.novartis.com/files/Arogya-Parivar-fact-sheet_2014_final.pdf
Pal, M., & Dutta, M. J. (2011). Public relations and marginalization in a global context. In N. Bardhan & C. K. Weaver (Eds.), Public relations in global cultural constructs: Multi-paradigmatic perspectives (pp. 195-225). New York, NY: Routledge.
Reisinger, D. (2017, April). Major tech companies line up against Trump’s revised travel ban. Fortune. Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2017/04/20/tech-company-travel-ban/
Sarkar, C. & Kotler, P. (2018). Stand for something: Brand activism at Nike. Marketing Journal. Retrieved from http://www.marketingjournal.org/stand-for-something-brand-activism-at-nike-christian-sarkar-and-philip-kotler/
Snider, J., Hill, R. P.., & Martin, D. (2003). Corporate social responsibility in the 21st century: A view from the world’s most successful firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(2), 175–187.
Somerville, I., & Davidson, S. (2019). Security, democratic legitimacy, and the public interest: Policing and the communicative ritual in deeply divided societies. In J. Johnson & M. Pieczka (Eds.), Public interest communication: Critical debates and global contexts. New York, NY: Routledge.
Spry, A., Vredenburg, J., Kemper, J., & Kapitan, S. (2018, December). Woke washing: What happens when marketing communications don’t match corporate practice. The Conversation. Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/woke-washing-what-happens-when-marketing-communications-dont-match-corporate-practice-108035
Taylor, M. & Kent, M. (2014). Dialogic engagement: Clarifying foundational concepts. Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(5), 384-398.
Uzunoğlu, E., Türkel, S., & Yaman Akyar, B. (2017). Engaging consumers through corporate social responsibility messages on social media: An experimental study. Public Relations Review, 43(5), 989–997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.03.013
Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (1998). A typology of consumer responses to cause-related marketing: From skeptics to socially concerned. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 17, pp. 226–238.
Authors publishing their work in the Journal of Public Interest Communications retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY NC) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. By agreeing to these terms, the author(s) grant and assign the following rights to the Publisher:
- The irrevocable, royalty-free right to publish, reproduce, publicly display, publicly perform, and distribute the Work in perpetuity throughout the world in all means of expression by any method or media now known or hereafter discovered, including electronic format.
- The irrevocable, royalty-free right to use the Author’s name and likeness in association with the Work in published form and in advertising and promotional materials, and
- The irrevocable, royalty-free right to license others to do any or all of the above.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website).