The present study seeks to systematically describe how humanitarian aid organizations use visuals in their natural disaster-related social media messages and to analyze their effects on social media engagement. Using Rodriguez and Dimitrova’s (2011) four levels of visual framing, we performed a content analysis of 810 tweets from 38 aid organizations. The results showed that, overall, the organizations’ visuals had an emphasis on victims and on disaster relief efforts. The most effective types of visual framing, however, were not those the aid organizations most commonly used. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications.
AbitbolA.LeeS. Y. (2017). Messages on CSR-dedicated Facebook pages: What works and what doesn’t. Public Relations Review, 43(4), 796–808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.05.002
2.
BergerA. A. (1991). Media USA: Process and effect. Longman.
3.
BicaM.PalenL.BoppC. (2017). Visual representations of disaster. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (pp. 1262–1276). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998212
4.
BorahP. (2009). Comparing visual framing in newspapers: Hurricane Katrina versus tsunami. Newspaper Research Journal, 30(1), 50–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/073953290903000106
5.
BoukesM.BoomgaardenH. G.MoormanM.de VreeseC. H. (2015). Political news with a personal touch: How human interest framing indirectly affects policy attitudes. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92(1), 121–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699014558554
6.
BrantnerC.LobingerK.WetzsteinI. (2011). Effects of visual framing on emotional responses and evaluations of news stories about the Gaza conflict 2009. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 88(3), 523–540. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769901108800304
BrubakerP. J.WilsonC. (2018). Let’s give them something to talk about: Global brands’ use of visual content to drive engagement and build relationships. Public Relations Review, 44(3), 342–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.04.010
9.
BuntainC. L.LimJ. R. (2018). #pray4victims: Consistencies in response to disaster on Twitter. Proceedings of the ACM on Human–Computer Interaction, 2, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274294
Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters. (2020). Emergency events database (EM-DAT): The international disaster database. https://www.emdat.be/
12.
ChouliarakiL. (2006). The spectatorship of suffering. SAGE.
13.
ChungS.LeeS. Y. (2019). Visual CSR messages and the effects of emotional valence and arousal on perceived CSR motives, attitude, and behavioral intentions. Communication Research, 46(7), 926–947. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650216689161
14.
CoombsW. T.HolladayS. J. (2011). An exploration of the effects of victim visuals on perceptions and reactions to crisis events. Public Relations Review, 37(2), 115–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.01.006
15.
DhaneshG. S.RahmanN. (2021). Visual communication and public relations: Visual frame building strategies in war and conflict stories. Public Relations Review, 47(1), Article 102003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.102003
ErjansolaA.-M.LipponenJ.VehkalahtiK.AulaH.-M.Pirttilä-BackmanA.-M. (2021). From the brand logo to brand associations and the corporate identity: Visual and identity-based logo associations in a university merger. Journal of Brand Management, 28(3), 241–253. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-020-00223-5
18.
FahmyS.KellyJ. D.KimY. S. (2007). What Katrina revealed: A visual analysis of the hurricane coverage by news wires and U.S. newspapers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(3), 546–561. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900708400309
ForoudiP. (2019). Influence of brand signature, brand awareness, brand attitude, brand reputation on hotel industry’s brand performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 76, 271–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.05.016
21.
GaleA.LewisM. B. (2019). When the camera does lie: Selfies are dishonest indicators of dominance. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 94, 447–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000260
22.
GeiseS. (2017). Visual framing. In RösslerP. (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of media effects (pp. 1–12). John Wiley.
GuidryJ. P.JinY.OrrC. A.MessnerM.MeganckS. (2017). Ebola on Instagram and Twitter: How health organizations address the health crisis in their social media engagement. Public Relations Review, 43(3), 477–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.04.009
25.
HardinM.LynnS.WalsdorfK.HardinB. (2002). The framing of sexual difference in SI for Kids editorial photos. Mass Communication & Society, 5(3), 341–359. http://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0503_6
26.
HellmuellerL.ZhangX. (2019). Shifting toward a humanized perspective? Visual framing analysis of the coverage of refugees on CNN and Spiegel Online before and after the iconic photo publication of Alan Kurdi. Visual Communication. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357219832790
27.
HongH. (2013). The effects of human interest framing in television news coverage of medical advances. Health Communication, 28(5), 452–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2012.693013
28.
HoustonJ. B.PfefferbaumB.RosenholtzC. E. (2012). Disaster news: Framing and frame changing in coverage of major U.S. natural disasters, 2000–2010. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 89(4), 606–623. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699012456022
29.
JavornikA.MandelliA. (2012). Behavioral perspectives of customer engagement: An exploratory study of customer engagement with three Swiss FMCG brands. Journal of Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management, 19(4), 300–310. http://doi.org/10.1057/dbm.2012.29
JiangH.LuoY.KulemekaO. (2016). Social media engagement as an evaluation barometer: Insights from communication executives. Public Relations Review, 42(4), 679–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.12.004
32.
JoyeS. (2009). The hierarchy of global suffering. Journal of International Communication, 15(2), 45–61. http://doi.org/10.1080/13216597.2009.9674750
33.
JoyeS. (2010). News media and the (de)construction of risk: How Flemish newspapers select and cover international disaster. Catalan Journal of Communication & Cultural Studies, 2(2), 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1386/cjcs.2.2.253_1
34.
KimC.YangS. U. (2017). Like, comment, and share on Facebook: How each behavior differs from the other. Public Relations Review, 43(2), 441–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.02.006
35.
KrippendorffK. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). SAGE.
36.
Ladrido-IgnacioL.PerlasA. P. (1995). From victims to survivors: Psychosocial intervention in disaster management in the Philippines. International Journal of Mental Health, 24(4), 3–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207411.1995.11449321
37.
LangA. (2006). Using the limited capacity model of motivated mediated message processing to design effective cancer communication messages. Journal of Communication, 56(Suppl. 1), S57–S80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00283.x
38.
LangS. (2013). NGOs, civil society, and the public sphere. Cambridge University Press.
39.
LiY.XieY. (2020). Is a picture worth a thousand words? An empirical study of image content and social media engagement. Journal of Marketing Research, 57(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022243719881113
40.
LimJ. R.LiuB. F.EgnotoM.RobertsH. A. (2019). Individuals’ religiosity and emotional coping in response to disasters. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 27(4), 331–345. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12263
NeuendorfK. A. (2010). Reliability for content analysis. In JordanA. B.KunkelD.ManganelloJ.FishbeinM. (Eds.), Media messages and public health: A decision approach to content analysis (1st ed., pp. 67–85). Routledge.
43.
OlteanuA.ViewegS.CastilloC. (2015). What to expect when the unexpected happens: Social media communications across crises. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (pp. 994–1009). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675242
44.
OrdenesF. V.GrewalD.LudwigS.RuyterK. D.MahrD.WetzelsM. (2019). Cutting through content clutter: How speech and image acts drive consumer sharing of social media brand messages. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(5), 988–1012. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucy032
PanofskyE. (1970). Meaning in the visual arts. Penguin.
47.
ParryK. (2011). Images of liberation? Visual framing, humanitarianism and British press photography during the 2003 Iraq invasion. Media, Culture & Society, 33(8), 1185–1201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443711418274
48.
PowellT. E.BoomgaardenH. G.De SwertK.de VreeseC. H. (2015). A clearer picture: The contribution of visuals and text to framing effects. Journal of Communication, 65(6), 997–1017. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12184
49.
PowersM. (2018). NGOs as newsmakers: The changing landscape of international news. Columbia University Press.
Rebich-HespanhaS.RiceR. E.MontelloD. R.RetzloffS.TienS.HespanhaJ. P. (2015). Image themes and frames in U.S. print news stories about climate change. Environmental Communication, 9(4), 491–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.983534
52.
RiffeD.LacyS.WatsonB. R.FicoF. (2019). Analyzing media messages: Using quantitative content analysis in research (4th ed.). Routledge.
RogersS.ThorsonE. (2000). “Fixing” stereotypes in news photos: A synergistic approach with the Los Angeles Times. Visual Communication Quarterly, 7(3), 8–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/15551390009363436
55.
SaxtonG. D.WatersR. D. (2014). What do stakeholders like on Facebook? Examining public reactions to nonprofit organizations’ informational, promotional, and community-building messages. Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(3), 280–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2014.908721
56.
SchlimbachH. J. (2013). How disaster relief organizations solicit funds: The effects of disaster presence, message framing, and source credibility on an individual’s intention to donate [Master’s thesis, University of Texas at Austin]. UT Electronic Theses and Dissertations.
57.
SeoH.VuH. T. (2020). Transnational nonprofits’ social media use: A survey of communications professional and an analysis of organizational characteristics. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 49(4), 849–870. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764020908340
58.
SmithB. G.GallicanoT. D. (2015). Terms of engagement: Analyzing public engagement with organizations through social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.060
59.
SpenceP. R.LachlanK. A.LinX.del GrecoM. (2015). Variability in Twitter content across the stages of a natural disaster: Implications for crisis communication. Communication Quarterly, 63(2), 171–186. http://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2015.1012219
60.
StoddardA. (2003). Humanitarian NGOs: Challenges and trends. In MacraeJ.HarmerA. (Eds.), Humanitarian action and the “Global War on Terror”: A review of trends and issues, HPG Report 14 (pp. 25–36). Overseas Development Institute. https://cdn.odi.org/media/documents/287.pdf
61.
ThrallA. T.SteculaD.SweetD. (2014). Maywe have your attention please? Human-rights NGOs and the problem of global communication. International Journal of Press/Politics, 19(2), 135–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161213519132
van GrinsvenG. B.DasE. (2016). Logo design in marketing communications: Brand logo complexity moderates exposure effects on brand recognition and brand attitude. Journal of Marketing Communications, 22(3), 256–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2013.866593
64.
van LeeuwenT. (2001). Semiotics and iconography. In van LeeuwenT.JewittC. (Eds.), Handbook of visual analysis (pp. 92–118). SAGE.
WozniakA.LückJ.WesslerH. (2015). Frames, stories, and images: The advantages of a multimodal approach in comparative media content research on climate change. Environmental Communication, 9(4), 469–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.981559
69.
YangZ. J.McComasK. A.GayG.LeonardJ. P.DannenbergA. J.DillonH. (2010). Motivation for health information seeking and processing about clinical trial enrollment. Health Communication, 25(5), 423–436. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2010.483338
70.
YangZ. J.McComasK. A.GayG.LeonardJ. P.DannenbergA. J.DillonH. (2011). Information seeking related to clinical trial enrollment. Communication Research, 38(6), 856–882. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210380411
71.
ZhangX.HellmuellerL. (2017). Visual framing of the European refugee crisis in Der Spiegel and CNN International: Global journalism in news photographs. International Communication Gazette, 79(5), 483–510. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048516688134
72.
ZillmannD.BrosiusH.-B. (2000). Exemplification in communication: The influence of case reports on the perception of issues. Routledge.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
