Networks of radical contention: The co-constitutive relations between structural conditions and public relations strategies and tactics in the committee in solidarity with the people of El Salvador
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online September, 2018
Networks of radical contention: The co-constitutive relations between structural conditions and public relations strategies and tactics in the committee in solidarity with the people of El Salvador
In the 1980s, the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (CISPES) became a key node in a vast network of political opposition against US foreign policy. In this article, we argue that these webs of political opposition constitute the geographies on which the public relations (PR) strategies deployed by CISPES were pursued and corresponding political opportunities were structured. We use newspaper analysis, interviews, and archival research to map three such networks in an effort to understand the changing climate in which CISPES pursued its political agenda during the 1980s. We conceptualize these networks as ‘networks of contention’ and contend that variations in these networks correspond to CISPES’ efforts to take advantage of unforeseeable political opportunities, which raised the profile of CISPES as well as its overall position as a radical activist organization opposing the Reagan government. We conclude by arguing that an attention to networks of contention is necessary for understanding both the strategies and tactics pursued by PR activists and the political opportunities that shape those tactics and strategies. Our analysis is sympathetic with the sociocultural ‘turn’ in the PR theory that assesses structural and contextual constraints on the strategies and tactics deployed by PR professionals. In the end, this article argues that the networks of contention that organizations find themselves in during particular moments of political crisis play a key role in shaping the kinds of strategies and tactics available to pursue them. We also contend that the collision between relationship management strategies and the contexts in which they are embedded suggests that the tactics and strategies pursued by PR professionals have to be embedded in and are structured by perpetually changing sociopolitical environments, which often refuse management and require constant strategic adaptation and flexibility.
BarkeyKVan RossemR (1997) Networks of contention: Villages and regional structure in the seventeenth century Ottoman Empire. American Journal of Sociology102(5): 1345–1382.
4.
BennettWL (1990) Toward a theory of press-state relations in the United States. Journal of Communication40(2): 103–127.
5.
BruningSD (2002) Axioms of relationship management: Applying interpersonal communication principles to the public relations context. Journal of Promotion Management7(1–2): 3–16.
6.
BuitragoAM (1989) Status Report to CISPES on FOIA Work. New York: Movement Support Network.
7.
BurtR (1983) Network Data from Archival Records. In: BurtRMinorM (eds) Applied Network Analysis: A Methodological Introduction. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 158–174.
8.
CarlsonP (1987) Life in the shadows; Frank Varelli informed for the FBI. Now he’s informing on the FBI. Is he telling the truth?The Washington Post, 19July. Available at: https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-1333604.html
9.
Center for Constitutional Rights (1987) Groups Included in the CISPES Files Obtained from FBI Headquarters. New York: Center for Constitutional Rights.
10.
Center for Constitutional Rights (1988) Second Round of FBI Files Raise New Questions on FBI Misconduct in Central America Probe. New York: Center for Constitutional Rights.
11.
ChadwickA (2013) The Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power. Oxford: Oxford University.
Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (CISPES) (1981a) El Salvador Alert. Washington DC: CISPES.
14.
Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (CISPES) (1981b) US Military involvement in El Salvador 1947–1980. Washington DC: CISPES.
15.
Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (CISPES) (2016) 1980: The Founding of CISPES: Celebrating CISPES Solidarity Since 1980. Available at: http://cispes30years.org/1980/10/founding-of-cispes
16.
CoombsWTHolladaySJ (2012) Fringe public relations: How activism moves critical PR toward the mainstream. Public Relations Review38: 880–887.
17.
CunninghamD (2004) There’s Something Happening Here: The New Left, the Klan, and FBI Counterintelligence. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
18.
CurtinPAGaitherTK (2005) Privileging identity, difference, and power: The circuit of culture as a basis for public relations theory. Journal of Public Relations Research17(2): 91–115.
19.
CurtinPAGaitherTK (2012) Globalization and Public Relations in Postcolonial Nations. New York: Cambria Press.
20.
De FazioG (2013) The radicalization of contention in Northern Ireland, 1968–1972: A relational perspective. Mobilization: An International Quarterly18(4): 475–496.
21.
DervilleT (2005) Radical activist tactics: Overturning public relations conceptualizations. Public Relations Review31: 527–533.
22.
DonaghyJG (1990) Wage a Mighty Struggle: A History of the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador 1980–1990. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
23.
DozierDMLauzenMM (2000) Liberating the intellectual domain from the practice: Public relations, activism, and the role of the scholar. Journal of Public Relations Research12: 3–22.
24.
DuttaM (2015) A postcolonial critique of public relations. In: L’EtangJMcKieDSnowNXifraJ (eds) The Routledge handbook of critical public relations. Abigdon, UK: Routledge, pp. 248–260.
25.
EdwardsL (2012) Introduction: Implications of a (radical) socio-cultural ‘turn’ in public relations scholarship. In: EdwardsLCarolineE (eds) Public Relations, Society & Culture Theoretical and Empirical Explorations. London: Routledge, pp. 1–14.
26.
GerbaudoP (2012) Tweets and the Streets: Social Media and Contemporary Activism. London: Pluto Press.
27.
GoldstoneJA (2004) More social movements or fewer? Beyond political opportunity structures to relational fields. Theory and Society33(3–4): 333–365.
28.
GoodwinJJasperJM (1999) Caught in a winding snarling vine: The structural bias of political process theory. Sociological Forum14(1): 27–54.
29.
GrunigJEGrunigLADozierDM (2006) The excellence theory. In: BotanCHHazletonV (eds) Public Relations Theory II. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 21–63.
30.
GutmanR (1988) Banana Diplomacy: The Making of American Policy in Nicaragua, 1981–1987. New York: Simon & Schuster.
31.
HonL (2016) Social media framing within the Million Hoodies movement for justice. Public Relations Review42(1): 9–19.
32.
HungCJF (2005) Exploring types of organization–public relationships and their implications for relationship management in public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research17(4): 393–426.
33.
JacksonP (1982) Tactics of confrontation. In: NagelschmidtJ (ed.) The Public Affairs Handbook. New York: AMACON, pp. 211–220.
34.
JahngMRHongSParkEH (2014) How radical is radical? Understanding the role of activists’ communication strategies on the formation of public attitude and evaluation. Public Relations Review40: 119–121.
35.
JenkinsJCPerrowC (1977) Insurgency of the powerless: Farm worker movements (1946–1972). American Sociological Review42: 249–268.
36.
KiousisSLaskinAKimJY (2011) Congressional agenda-building: Examining the influence of congressional communications from the speaker of the House. Public Relations Journal5: 151–14.
KoopmansR (2004) Movements and media: Selection processes and evolutionary dynamics in the public sphere. Theory & Society33(3–4): 367–391.
39.
KrippendorffK (2004) Reliability in content analysis. Human Communication Research30: 411–433.
40.
LancasterJ (1990) Talk of war stirs dissent; disparate groups voice opposition to build-up. The Washington Post, 10November. pp. A1.
41.
LaumannEMarsdenPPrenskyD (1983) The boundary specification problem in network analysis. In: BurtRMinorM (eds) Applied Network Analysis: A Methodological Introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 18–34.
42.
LedinghamJA (2001) Government-community relationships: Extending the relational theory of public relations. Public Relations Review2: 285–295.
43.
LedinghamJA (2003) Explicating relationship management as a general theory of public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research15(2): 181–198.
44.
LedinghamJABruningSD (1998) Relationship management in public relations: Dimensions of an organization-public relationship. Public Relations Review24: 55–65.
45.
LenartSTargHR (1992) Framing the enemy. Peace & Change17(3): 341–362.
46.
LenartSTargHR (1995) The media war against Nicaragua. Peace Review7(3–4): 347–353.
47.
LevenshusA (2010) Online relationship management in a presidential campaign: A case study of the Obama campaign’s management of its internet-integrated grassroots effort. Journal of Public Relations Research22: 313–335.
48.
LimM (2012) Clicks, cabs, and coffee houses: Social media and oppositional movements in Egypt, 2004–2011. Journal of Communication62(2): 231–248.
49.
LindenbergS (1976) Actor analysis and depersonalization. Mens en Maatschappij51(2): 152–178.
50.
LittleMR (1994) A War of Information: The Conflict between Public and Private US Foreign Policy on El Salvador, 1979–1992. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
51.
McAdamD (1982) Political Process and the Politics of Black Insurgency, 1930–1970. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
52.
McGroryM (1988) Indifferent to death. The Washington Post, 9February. pp. A2.
53.
MaddenSJanoskeMBrionesRL (2015) The double-edged crisis: Invisible children’s social media response to the Kony 2012 campaign. Public Relations Review42: 38–48.
54.
MairederASchwarzeneggerC (2012) A movement of connected individuals: Social media in the Austrian student protests 2009. Information, Communication & Society15(2): 171–195.
55.
MarinAWellmanB (2011) Social network analysis: An introduction. In: ScottJCarringtonP (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis. London: Sage, pp. 11–25.
56.
MeyerDS (2004) Protest and political opportunities. Annual Review of Sociology30: 125–145.
57.
MeyerDSMinkoffDC (2004) Conceptualizing political opportunity. Social Forces82(4): 1457–1492.
58.
MundyD (2010) The equality agenda: How state-based LGBT advocacy organizations define a 21st century movement while campaigning for change from the ground up. Available at: Carolina Digital Repository.
59.
MunshiDKurianP (2005) Imperializing spin cycles: A postcolonial look at public relations, greenwashing, and the separation of publics. Public Relations Review31(4): 513–520.
60.
MunshiDKurianP (2016) Public relations and sustainable citizenship. In: L’EtangJMcKieDSnowNet al (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Critical Public Relations. London: Routledge, pp. 405–414.
61.
MurphyPDeeJ (1992) Du Pont and greenpeace: The dynamics of conflict between corporations and activist groups. Journal of Public Relations Research4: 343–20.
62.
OmangJ (1987) U.S. groups counter contra aid with private ‘quest for peace’; multimillion-dollar effort includes medicine, school supplies. The Washington Post, 19April. pp. A20.
63.
PaekHJHoveTJungYet al. (2013) Engagement across three social media platforms: An exploratory study of a cause-related PR campaign. Public Relations Review39(5): 526–533.
64.
PerlaH (2013) Central American counterpublic mobilization: Transnational social movement opposition to Reagan’s foreign policy toward Central America. Latino Studies11: 167–189.
65.
PhillipsD (2006) Towards relationship management: Public relations at the core of organisational development. Journal of Communication Management10(2): 211–226.
RodriguezNS (2016) Communicating global inequalities: How LGBTI asylum-specific NGOs use social media as public relations. Public Relations Review422(2): 322–332.
68.
RothbauerP (2008) Triangulation. In: GivenL (ed.) The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. New York: Sage, pp. 892–894.
69.
SafferAJTaylorMYangA (2013) Political public relations in advocacy: Building online influence and social capital. Public Relations Journal7: 1–35.
70.
ScottJ (2013) Social Network Analysis. London: Sage.
71.
SegerbergABennettWL (2012) The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society15(5): 739–768.
SmithC (2010) Resisting Reagan: The US Central America Peace Movement. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
75.
SmithM (2013) Activism. In: HeathRL (ed.) Encyclopedia of Public Relations. London: Sage, pp. 5–8.
76.
SmithMFFergusonDP (2010) Activism 2.0. In: HeathRL (ed.) The SAGE Handbook of Public Relations. London, UK: Sage, pp. 395–408.
77.
SommerfeldtEJ (2013a) Networks of social capital: Extending a public relations model of civil society in Peru. Public Relations Review39(1): 1–12.
78.
SommerfeldtEJ (2013b) Online power resource management: Activist resource mobilization, communication strategy, and organizational structure. Journal of Public Relations Research254(4): 347–367.
79.
SommerfeldtEJ (2013c) The civility of social capital: Public relations in the public sphere, civil society, and democracy. Public Relations Review39(4): 280–289.
80.
SommerfeldtEJKentMLTaylorM (2012) Activist practitioner perspectives of website public relations: Why aren’t activist websites fulfilling the dialogic promise?Public Relations Review38(2): 303–312.
81.
StacksDW (2011) Primer of Public Relations Research. New York: Guilford Press.
82.
StrömbäckJKiousisS (2013) Political public relations: Old practice, new theory-building. Public Relations Journal7(4): 1–17.
83.
SweetserKDMetzgarE (2007) Communicating during crisis: Use of blogs as a relationship management tool. Public Relations Review33(3): 340–342.
84.
TarrowSG (2011) Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
85.
TheocharisYLoweWvan DethJWet al. (2015) Using Twitter to mobilize protest action: online mobilization patterns and action repertoires in the occupy Wall Street, Indignados, and Aganaktismenoi movements. Information, Communication & Society18(2): 202–220.
86.
ThorntonM (1988) FBI probed foes of U.S. Policy in Central America, documents show. The Washington Post, 28January.
UysalNYangA (2013) The power of activist networks in the mass self-communication era: A triangulation study of the impact of WikiLeaks on the stock value of Bank of America. Public Relations Review39(5): 459–469.
89.
VeilSRRenoJFreihautRet al. (2015) Online activists vs. Kraft foods: A case of social media hijacking. Public Relations Review41: 103–108.
90.
VicariS (2014) Networks of contention: The shape of online transnationalism in early twenty-first century social movement coalitions. Social Movement Studies13(1): 92–109.
91.
WantaWGolanGLeeC (2004) Agenda setting and international news: Media influence on public perceptions of foreign nations. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly81(2): 364–377.
92.
WeaverCK (2010) Carnivalesque activism as a public relations genre: A case study of the New Zealand group mothers against genetic engineering. Public Relations Review36: 35–41.
93.
WhiteHDWellmanBNazerN (2004) Does citation reflect social structure? Longitudinal evidence from the ‘globenet’ interdisciplinary research group. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology55(2): 111–126.
