Publics’ Views of Corporate Social Advocacy Initiatives: Exploring Prior Issue Stance,Attitude Toward a Company,and News Credibility

Abstract

Corporate social advocacy (CSA) has emerged to promote change on social issues in response to publics’ expectations and demands, but how different publics might respond to CSA differently is little understood. Grounded in Du et al.’s (2010) corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication framework, social judgment theory (SJT), and the elaboration likelihood model (ELM), we conducted an online survey (N = 505) to examine whether publics perceived CSA differently depending on their existing stance on an issue and whether the existing stance interacted with their attitude toward the company and news credibility. The results showed that individuals’ reaction to the CSA differed in light of their existing stance on an issue. Furthermore, when an individual's stance was undecided, attitude toward the company and news credibility were significantly related to change in issue stance, attitude toward the CSA campaign, and skepticism toward the company’s motives. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications.

Keywords

corporate social advocacy social judgment theory elaboration likelihood model

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abitbol

Lee

Seltzer

Lee

S. Y.

(2018). #RaceTogether: Starbucks’ attempt to discuss race in America and its impact on company reputation and employees. Public Relations Journal, 12(1), 1–28. https://prjournal.instituteforpr.org/wp-content/uploads/Abitbol_Lee_Seltzer_Lee_RaceTogetherStarbucks1.pdf

Ad Fontes Media . (n.d.). Interactive media bias Chart® 5.0. https://www.adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/

Andrews

J. C.

Shimp

T. A.

(1990). Effects of involvement, argument strength, and source characteristics on central and peripheral processing of advertising. Psychology & Marketing, 7(3), 195–214. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.4220070305

Austin

Gaither

B. M.

Gaither

(2019). Corporate social advocacy as public interest communications: Exploring perceptions of corporate involvement in controversial social-political issues. Journal of Public Interest Communications, 3(2), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.32473/jpic.v3.i2.p3

Bae

Cameron

G. T.

(2006). Conditioning effect of prior reputation on perception of corporate giving. Public Relations Review, 32(2), 144–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2006.02.007

Bhattacharya

C. B.

Korschun

Sen

(2009). Strengthen stakeholder–company relationships through mutually beneficial corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 257–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9730-3

Browning

Lee

Park

Y. E.

Kim

Collins

(2020). Muting or meddling? Advocacy as a relational communication strategy affecting organization-public relationships and stakeholder response. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 97(4), 1026–1053. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699020916810

Cain

Á.

(2018, March 4). The 30 Fortune 500 companies that have thrown the most money at Republicans and Democrats in the last decade. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/fortune-500-companies-republican-democrat-political-donations-2018-2

Carpenter

C. J.

(2015). A meta-analysis of the ELM’s argument quality × processing type predictions. Human Communication Research, 41(4), 501–534. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12054

10.

Carrington

Boykoff

(2018, September 6). Is Colin Kaepernick’s Nike deal activism—or just capitalism? The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/06/colin-kaepernick-nike-activism-capitalism-nfl

11.

Chaiken

Liberman

Eagly

A. H.

(1989). Heuristic and systematic processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In Uleman

J. S.

Bargh

J. A.

(Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212–252). Guilford Press.

12.

Chatterji

A. K.

Toffel

M. W.

(2018). The new CEO activists: A playbook for polarized political times. Harvard Business Review, 96(1), 78–89. https://hbr.org/2018/01/the-new-ceo-activists

13.

Cheng

Z.-H.

Chang

C.-T.

Lee

Y.-K.

(2020). Linking hedonic and utilitarian shopping values to consumer skepticism and green consumption: The roles of environmental involvement and locus of control. Review of Managerial Science, 14(1), 61–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-018-0286-z

14.

Chéron

Kohlbacher

Kusuma

(2012). The effects of brand–cause fit and campaign duration on consumer perception of cause-related marketing in Japan. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 29(5), 357–368. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363761211247479

15.

Clark

(2009, September 15). The marmite effect: It’s better to be a polarising brand that people love or hate than to be ignored. Campaign. https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/marmite-effect-its-better-polarising-brand-people-love-hate-ignored/938559?src_site=marketingmagazine

16.

Dodd

(2018). Globalization, pluralization, and erosion: The impact of shifting societal expectations for advocacy and public good. Journal of Public Interest Communications, 2(2), 221–238. https://doi.org/10.32473/jpic.v2.i2.p221

17.

Dodd

M. D.

Supa

(2015). Testing the viability of corporate social advocacy as a predictor of purchase intention. Communication Research Reports, 32(4), 287–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2015.1089853

18.

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), 1–23. https://prjournal.instituteforpr.org/wp-content/uploads/2014DoddSupa.pdf

19.

Dolbec

P. Y.

Chebat

J. C.

(2013). The impact of a flagship vs. A brand store on brand attitude, brand attachment and brand equity. Journal of Retailing, 89(4), 460–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2013.06.003

20.

Bhattacharya

C. B.

Sen

(2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Review, 12(1), 8–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x

21.

Edelman (2020). Edelman trust barometer 2020. https://www.edelman.com/sites/g/files/aatuss191/files/2020-01/2020%20Edelman%20Trust%20Barometer%20Global%20Report_LIVE.pdf

22.

Elving

J. L.

(2013). Scepticism and corporate social responsibility communications: The influence of fit and reputation. Journal of Marketing Communications, 19(4), 277–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2011.631569

23.

Fombrun

C. F.

(1996). Reputation: Realizing value from the corporate image. Harvard Business School Press.

24.

Furman

Maison

Sekścińska

(2020). Segmentation based on attitudes toward corporate social responsibility in relation to demographic variables and personal values: Quantitative and qualitative study of Polish consumers. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 450. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00450.

25.

Gaither

B. M.

Austin

Schulz

(2018). Delineating CSR and social change: Querying corporations as actors for social good. Public Relations Inquiry, 7(1), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/2046147X17743544

26.

Gallup . (2020). Party affiliation. https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

27.

Gelles

(2017, August 19). The moral voice of corporate America. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/19/business/moral-voice-ceos.html

28.

Governing . (2019). Issues to watch: 18 of the biggest policies and problems legislatures will confront in 2019. https://www.governing.com/topics/politics/gov-2019-legislative-issues-to-watch.html

29.

Greer

J. D.

(2003). Evaluating the credibility of online information: A test of source and advertising influence. Mass Communication and Society, 6(1), 11–28. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0601_3

30.

Gupta

Pirsch

(2006). The company–cause–customer fit decision in cause-related marketing. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23(6), 314–326. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760610701850

31.

Hillman

A. J.

Keim

G. D.

Schuler

(2004). Corporate political activity: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 30(6), 837–857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.003

32.

Hooper

Coughlan

Mullen

M. R.

(2008). Structural equation modeling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.

33.

Hsu

(2020, May 31). Corporate voices get behind ‘Black lives matter’ cause. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/31/business/media/companies-marketing-black-lives-matter-george-floyd.html

34.

Hydock

Paharia

Blair

(2020). Should your brand pick a side? How market share determines the impact of corporate political advocacy. Journal of Marketing Research, 57(6), 1135–1151. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022243720947682

35.

ISideWith . (n.d.). Big {political} data. https://www.isidewith.com/polls

36.

Jackob

(2008). Credibility effects. In Donsbach

(Ed.), International encyclopedia of communication (pp. 1044–1047). Blackwell.

37.

Kim

J. K.

Overton

Bhalla

J.-Y.

(2020). Nike, Colin Kaepernick, and the politicization of sports: Examining perceived organizational motives and public responses. Public Relations Review, 46(2), Article 101856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101856

38.

Kim

S. H.

Kim

S. H.

(2014). Talking about genetically modified (GM) foods in South Korea: The role of the internet in the spiral of silence process. Mass Communication and Society, 17(5), 713–732. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2013.847460

39.

Kosloff

Greenberg

Weise

Solomon

(2010). The effects of mortality salience on political preferences: The roles of charisma and political orientation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(1), 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.09.002

40.

Lafferty

B. A.

(2007). The relevance of fit in a cause–brand alliance when consumers evaluate corporate credibility. Journal of Business Research, 60(5), 447–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.09.030

41.

Ledgerwood

Chaiken

(2007). Priming us and them: Automatic assimilation and contrast in group attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(6), 940–956. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.6.940

42.

Leonidou

C. N.

Skarmeas

(2017). Gray shades of green: Causes and consequences of green skepticism. Journal of Business Ethics, 144(2), 401–415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2829-4

43.

Liao

T. F.

(2004). Comparing social groups: Wald statistics for testing equality among multiple logit models. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 45(1–2), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020715204048308.

44.

Lock

Schulz-Knappe

(2019). Credible corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication predicts legitimacy: Evidence from an experimental study. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 24(1), 2–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-07-2018-0071

45.

Logan

(2016). The Starbucks Race Together initiative: Analyzing a public relations campaign with critical race theory. Public Relations Inquiry, 5(1), 93–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/2046147X15626969

46.

MacCallum

R. C.

Browne

M. W.

Sugawara

H. M.

(1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130

47.

McKeever

B. W.

McKeever

Holton

A. E.

J.-Y.

(2016). Silent majority: Childhood vaccinations and antecedents to communicative action. Mass Communication and Society, 19(4), 476–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2016.1148172

48.

Moreno

Kang

(2020). How to alleviate consumer skepticism concerning corporate responsibility: The role of content and delivery in CSR communications. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(6), 2477–2490. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1969

49.

Morris

J. D.

Woo

Singh

A. J.

(2005). Elaboration likelihood model: A missing intrinsic emotional implication. Journal of Targeting Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 14(1), 79–98. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jt.5740171

50.

Nan

Heo

(2007). Consumer responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives: Examining the role of brand–cause fit in cause-related marketing. Journal of Advertising, 36(2), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.2753/JOA0091-3367360204

51.

O’Keefe

D. J.

(1990). Persuasion: Theory and research. Sage.

52.

O'Keefe

D. J.

(2013). The elaboration likelihood model. In Dillard

J. P.

Shen

(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of persuasion: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 137–149). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452218410.n9

53.

Parcha

J. M.

Westerman

C. Y. K.

(2020). How corporate social advocacy affects attitude change toward controversial social issues. Management Communication Quarterly, 34(3), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318920912196

54.

Park

D. H.

Lee

Han

(2007a). The effect of on-line consumer reviews on consumer purchasing intention: The moderating role of involvement. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 11(4), 125–148. https://doi.org/10.2753/JEC1086-4415110405.

55.

Park

Jiang

(2020). Signaling, verification, and identification: The way corporate social advocacy generates brand loyalty on social media. International Journal of Business Communication, 232948842090712. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488420907121

56.

Park

H. S.

Levine

T. R.

Westerman

C. Y. K.

Orfgen

Foregger

(2007b). The effects of argument quality and involvement type on attitude formation and attitude change: A test of dual-process and social judgment predictions. Human Communication Research, 33(1), 81–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00290.x.

57.

Pérez

del Bosque

I. R.

(2013). Extending on the formation process of CSR image. Social Marketing Quarterly, 19(2), 156–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524500413489287

58.

Peters

(2020, June 5). Big tech companies are responding to George Floyd in a way they never did for Michael Brown. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/5/21281017/amazon-apple-facebook-response-george-floyd-michael-brown-tech-companies-google

59.

Petty

R. E.

Cacioppo

J. T.

(1979). Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(10), 1915–1926. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.10.1915

60.

Petty

R. E.

Cacioppo

J. T.

(1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. Springer-Verlag.

61.

Petty

R. E.

Cacioppo

J. T.

Schumann

D. W.

(1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135–146. https://doi.org/10.1086/208954

62.

Reichert

Heckler

S. E.

Jackson

(2001). The effects of sexual social marketing appeals on cognitive processing and persuasion. Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2001.10673628

63.

Rhine

R. J.

Severance

L. J.

(1970). Ego-involvement, discrepancy, source credibility, and attitude change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16(2), 175–190. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0029832

64.

Rifon

N. J.

Choi

S. M.

Trimble

C. S.

(2004). Congruence effects of sponsorship: The mediating role of sponsor credibility and consumer attribution of sponsor motive. Journal of Advertising, 33(1), 30–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2004.10639151

65.

Rim

Kim

(2016). Dimensions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) skepticism and their impacts on public evaluations toward CSR. Journal of Public Relations Research, 28(5–6), 248–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726x.2016.1261702

66.

Rim

Lee

Yoo

(2020). Polarized public opinion responding to corporate social advocacy: Social network analysis of boycotters and advocators. Public Relations Review, 46(2), 101869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101869

67.

Romani

Grappi

Bagozzi

R. P.

(2016). Corporate socially responsible initiatives and their effects on consumption of green products. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(2), 253–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2485-0

68.

Savchuk

(2014). Are America’s richest families Republicans or Democrats? Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/katiasavchuk/2014/07/09/are-americas-richest-families-republicans-or-democrats/#26af71cd3e83

69.

Sherif

C. W.

Sherif

M. S.

Nebergall

R. E.

(1965). Attitude and attitude change. W. B. Saunders.

70.

Sherif

Hovland

C. I.

(1961). Social judgment: Assimilation and contrast effects in communication and attitude change. Yale University Press.

71.

Simmons

C. J.

Becker-Olsen

K. L.

(2006). Achieving marketing objectives through social sponsorships. Journal of Marketing, 70(4), 154–169. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.70.4.154

72.

Stiff

J. B.

(1986). Cognitive processing of persuasive message cues: A meta‐analytic review of the effects of supporting information on attitudes. Communication Monographs, 53(1), 75–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758609376128

73.

Sung

K. H.

Lee

M. J.

(2015). Do online comments influence the public’s attitudes toward an organization? Effects of online comments based on individuals’ prior attitudes. The Journal of Psychology, 149(4), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2013.879847

74.

TheBestSchools . (2020, April 15). 25 Controversial topics to help you start your research. https://thebestschools.org/magazine/controversial-topics-research-starter/

75.

Weinzimmer

Esken

C. A.

(2016). Risky business: Taking a stand on social issues. Business Horizons, 59(3), 331–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2016.01.007

76.

Wettstein

Baur

(2016). Why should we care about marriage equality?”: Political advocacy as a part of corporate responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(2), 199–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2631-3

77.

Wheaton

Muthen

Alwin

D. F.

Summers

(1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. Sociological Methodology, 8(1), 84–136. https://doi.org/10.2307/270754

78.

Xiong

(2020). Setting socially mediated engagement parameters: A topic modeling and text analytic approach to examining polarized discourses on Gillette’s campaign. Public Relations Review, 46(5), Article 101959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.101959