Visually Framing Disasters: Humanitarian Aid Organizations’ Use of Visuals on Social Media

Abstract

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.

Keywords

humanitarian aid organization visual framing natural disaster social media engagement Twitter ad creative image

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abitbol

Lee

S. 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

Berger

A. A.

(1991). Media USA: Process and effect. Longman.

Bica

Palen

Bopp

(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

Borah

(2009). Comparing visual framing in newspapers: Hurricane Katrina versus tsunami. Newspaper Research Journal, 30(1), 50–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/073953290903000106

Boukes

Boomgaarden

H. G.

Moorman

de Vreese

C. 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

Brantner

Lobinger

Wetzstein

(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

Brecht

Deichmann

Wang

H. G.

(2013). A global urban risk index. The World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-6506

Brubaker

P. J.

Wilson

(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

Buntain

C. L.

Lim

J. 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

10.

CARE International. (2018). Suffering in silence: The 10 most under-reported humanitarian crises of 2017. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/72486f6-7858-02072019_Report_Suffering-I.pdf

11.

Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters. (2020). Emergency events database (EM-DAT): The international disaster database. https://www.emdat.be/

12.

Chouliaraki

(2006). The spectatorship of suffering. SAGE.

13.

Chung

Lee

S. 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.

Coombs

W. T.

Holladay

S. 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.

Dhanesh

G. S.

Rahman

(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

16.

Entman

R. M.

(1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x

17.

Erjansola

A.-M.

Lipponen

Vehkalahti

Aula

H.-M.

Pirttilä-Backman

A.-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.

Fahmy

Kelly

J. D.

Kim

Y. 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

19.

Fisher

Hagon

Lattimer

O’Callaghan

Swithern

Walmsley

(2018). World disasters report: Leaving no one behind. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/B-WDR-2018-EN-LR-compressed.pdf

20.

Foroudi

(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.

Gale

Lewis

M. 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.

Geise

(2017). Visual framing. In Rössler

(Ed.), The international encyclopedia of media effects (pp. 1–12). John Wiley.

23.

Government of India. (2021). Lines of credit for development projects. https://mea.gov.in/Lines-of-Credit-for-Development-Projects.htm#:~:text=Development%20assistance%20in%20the%20form, been%20extended%20to%2064%20countries

24.

Guidry

J. P.

Jin

Orr

C. A.

Messner

Meganck

(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.

Hardin

Lynn

Walsdorf

Hardin

(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.

Hellmueller

Zhang

(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.

Hong

(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.

Houston

J. B.

Pfefferbaum

Rosenholtz

C. 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.

Javornik

Mandelli

(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

30.

Jennings

(2017, December 22). China is giving more foreign aid than it gets. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphjennings/2017/12/22/china-is-giving-more-foreign-aid-than-it-gets/?sh=256622af4f35

31.

Jiang

Luo

Kulemeka

(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.

Joye

(2009). The hierarchy of global suffering. Journal of International Communication, 15(2), 45–61. http://doi.org/10.1080/13216597.2009.9674750

33.

Joye

(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.

Kim

Yang

S. 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.

Krippendorff

(2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). SAGE.

36.

Ladrido-Ignacio

Perlas

A. 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.

Lang

(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.

Lang

(2013). NGOs, civil society, and the public sphere. Cambridge University Press.

39.

Xie

(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.

Lim

J. R.

Liu

B. F.

Egnoto

Roberts

H. 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

41.

Miller

LaPoe

(2016). Visual agenda-setting, emotion, and the BP oil disaster. Visual Communication Quarterly, 23(1), 53–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/15551393.2015.1128335

42.

Neuendorf

K. A.

(2010). Reliability for content analysis. In Jordan

A. B.

Kunkel

Manganello

Fishbein

(Eds.), Media messages and public health: A decision approach to content analysis (1st ed., pp. 67–85). Routledge.

43.

Olteanu

Vieweg

Castillo

(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.

Ordenes

F. V.

Grewal

Ludwig

Ruyter

K. D.

Mahr

Wetzels

(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

45.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). Aid by DAC members increases in 2019 with more aid to the poorest countries. https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-data/ODA-2019-detailed-summary.pdf

46.

Panofsky

(1970). Meaning in the visual arts. Penguin.

47.

Parry

(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.

Powell

T. E.

Boomgaarden

H. G.

De Swert

de Vreese

C. 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.

Powers

(2018). NGOs as newsmakers: The changing landscape of international news. Columbia University Press.

50.

PRovoke. (2017). International organizations increasingly use visual content to engage followers. https://www.provokemedia.com/latest/article/international-organizations-increasingly-use-visual-content-to-engage-followers

51.

Rebich-Hespanha

Rice

R. E.

Montello

D. R.

Retzloff

Tien

Hespanha

J. 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.

Riffe

Lacy

Watson

B. R.

Fico

(2019). Analyzing media messages: Using quantitative content analysis in research (4th ed.). Routledge.

53.

Rodriguez

Dimitrova

D. V.

(2011). The levels of visual framing. Journal of Visual Literacy, 301(1), 48–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/23796529.2011.11674684

54.

Rogers

Thorson

(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.

Saxton

G. D.

Waters

R. 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.

Schlimbach

H. 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.

Seo

H. 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.

Smith

B. G.

Gallicano

T. 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.

Spence

P. R.

Lachlan

K. A.

Lin

del Greco

(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.

Stoddard

(2003). Humanitarian NGOs: Challenges and trends. In Macrae

Harmer

(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.

Thrall

A. T.

Stecula

Sweet

(2014). May we 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

62.

Twitter. (2020). Get Tweet timelines. https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/twitter-api/v1/tweets/timelines/api-reference/get-statuses-user_timeline

63.

van Grinsven

G. B.

Das

. (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 Leeuwen

. (2001). Semiotics and iconography. In van Leeuwen

Jewitt

(Eds.), Handbook of visual analysis (pp. 92–118). SAGE.

65.

Wallemacq

House

(2018). Economic losses, poverty, & disasters, 1998–2017. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. https://www.undrr.org/publication/economic-losses-poverty-disasters-1998-2017

66.

Walter

Gioglio

(2014). The power of visual storytelling. McGraw-Hill.

67.

World Confederation of Physical Therapy. (2019). Organisations involved in disaster management. https://web.archive.org/web/20180324132316/https://www.wcpt.org/disaster-management/Organisations-involved-in-disaster-management

68.

Wozniak

Lück

Wessler

(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.

Yang

Z. J.

McComas

K. A.

Gay

Leonard

J. P.

Dannenberg

A. J.

Dillon

(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.

Yang

Z. J.

McComas

K. A.

Gay

Leonard

J. P.

Dannenberg

A. J.

Dillon

(2011). Information seeking related to clinical trial enrollment. Communication Research, 38(6), 856–882. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210380411

71.

Zhang

Hellmueller

(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.

Zillmann

Brosius

H.-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.

0.00 MB

31.47 MB