This study analyzes how corporate organizations responded to changes for reproductive rights in the United States after the Dobbs v. Jackson Supreme Court decision. Qualitative thematic analysis with computer-assisted and manual coding is used to examine brands’ statements related to abortion politics and employees’ reproductive rights. Corporate social advocacy is employed as a theoretical lens to identify concepts and themes from 117 organizational statements issued in 2022 after the leak and final court decision. Brands responded in various ways, such as acknowledging the healthcare implications and offering statements of material support for employees, advocating for reproductive rights and criticizing the Supreme Court, and recognizing the changing legal landscape for key publics with diverse political views. Responses were addressed to blends of internal and external publics, with some brands focusing on healthcare and human resources management while others waded more directly and pointedly into political and values advocacy. Brands continue to wade into social and political issues and this study provides an inquiry on the hotly contested issue of abortion.
Ashby-KingDT (2023) Corporate social advocacy or social issues management? Examining state flagship universities’ responses to the killing of George Floyd. Public Relations Review49(3): 102327.
3.
AustinLGaitherBGaitherTK (2019) Corporate social advocacy as public interest communications: exploring perceptions of corporate involvement in controversial social-political issues. The Journal of Public Interest Communications3(2): 3. DOI: 10.32473/jpic.v3.i2.p3.
4.
BenoitW (1995) Accounts, Excuses, and Apologies: A Theory of Image Restoration Strategies. State University of New York Press.
5.
BrittBCBrittRKHayesJL, et al. (2020) Continuing a community of practice beyond the death of its domain: examining the Tales of Link subreddit. Behaviour & Information Technology41: 159–180. DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2020.1797173.
6.
BrowningNLeeEParkYE, et al. (2020) Muting or meddling? Advocacy as a relational communication strategy affecting organization–public relationships and stakeholder response. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly97(4): 1026–1053.
7.
CapizzoL (2020) The right side of history, inc.: social issues management, social license to operate, and the Obergefell vs. Hodges decision. Public Relations Review46(5): 10.
8.
CapizzoLHarrisonV (2023) Theorizing CSA’s impact on nonprofit stewardship: new challenges for ethical corporate partnerships and issue engagement. Public Relations Review49: 102293. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2023.102293.
9.
CapizzoLIannaconeJL (2023) Citizen brand: the emergence of brandstanding as organizational engagement and civic duty. Public Relations Review49(2): 102307. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2023.102307.
10.
CiszekELoganN (2018) Challenging the dialogic promise: how Ben & Jerry’s support for Black Lives Matter fosters dissensus on social media. Journal of Public Relations Research30(3): 115–127. DOI: 10.1080/1062726X.2018.1498342.
11.
CokerCR (2017) Murder, miscarriage, and women’s choice: prudence in the Colorado personhood debate. Western Journal of Communication81(3): 300–319. DOI: 10.1080/10570314.2016.1245439.
12.
CokerCRFaulstickA (2024) (Re) productive dissent: reproductive justice in Dobbs v. Jackson women’s health organization. Women's Studies in Communication47(1): 22–41.
13.
CokerCRReedJL (2023) A handmaid’s tale: Amy Coney Barrett, originalism, and the specter of religion. Communication and Democracy57: 153–177. DOI: 10.1080/27671127.2023.2228375.
14.
ConditCM (1990) Decoding Abortion Rhetoric: Communicating Social Change. University of Illinois Press.
15.
ConditC (2022) Rhetorical strategies for retrieving abortion rights. Quarterly Journal of Speech108(4): 441–445.
16.
de OnísKM (2015) Lost in translation: challenging (white, monolingual feminism’s) choice with Justicia Reproductiva. Women’s Studies in Communication38(1): 1–19. DOI: 10.1080/07491409.2014.989462.
17.
DenzinNK (1978) Sociological Methods: A Sourcebook. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
18.
DiRussoCBuckleyCDiddiP, et al. (2022) Designing effective corporate social advocacy campaigns using valence, arousal, and issue salience. Public Relations Review48(3): 102207. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2022.102207.
19.
DoddMDSupaDW (2014) Conceptualizing and measuring “corporate social advocacy” communication: examining the impact on corporate financial performance. Public Relations Journal8: 1–23.
20.
EnckSM (2022) Privacy, precarity, and political change: connecting gendered violence to reproductive injustice. Quarterly Journal of Speech108(4): 431–435. DOI: 10.1080/00335630.2022.2128206.
21.
GaitherBMAustinLCollinsM (2018) Examining the case of DICK’s Sporting Goods: realignment of stakeholders through corporate social advocacy. The Journal of Public Interest Communications2(2): 176.
22.
HeathRL (2000) A rhetorical perspective on the values of public relations: crossroads and pathways toward concurrence. Journal of Public Relations Research12(1): 69–91. DOI: 10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1201_5.
23.
HeathRL (2013) The journey to understand and champion OPR takes many roads, some not yet well traveled. Public Relations Review39(5): 426–431. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.05.002.
24.
HeffronERDoddMD (2021) The impact of corporate social advocacy on stakeholders’ issue awareness, attitudes, and voting behaviors. Public Relations Journal12(4): 1–25.
25.
HetheringtonMJWeilerJ (2018) Prius or pickup? how the answers to four simple questions explain America’s great divide. Mariner Books.
26.
HongCLiC (2020) To support or to boycott: a public segmentation model in corporate social advocacy. Journal of Public Relations Research32(5-6): 160–177. DOI: 10.1080/1062726X.2020.1848841.
27.
JenningsFJBramlettJCTurnerK, et al. (2023) How partisan social identity shapes evaluations of candidate brand elements on campaign websites. Communication Quarterly72(1): 79–98. DOI: 10.1080/01463373.2023.2291195.
28.
KimJKOvertonHBhallaN, et al. (2020) Nike, Colin Kaepernick, and the politicization of sports: examining perceived organizational motives and public responses. Public Relations Review46(2): 101856.
29.
LawlessBChenYW (2019) Developing a method of critical thematic analysis for qualitative communication inquiry. Howard Journal of Communications30(1): 92–106.
30.
LeeEYangSU (2024) Effects of authenticity in organizational advocacy for polarizing issues. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly10776990241297167.
31.
LemonLL (2019) The employee experience: how employees make meaning of employee engagement. Journal of Public Relations Research31(5-6): 176–199. DOI: 10.1080/1062726x.2019.1704288.
32.
LemonLLBomanCD (2022) Ethics of care in action: overview of holistic framework with application to employee engagement. Public Relations Review48: 102232. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2022.102232.
33.
LemonLLHayesJ (2020) Enhancing trustworthiness of qualitative findings: using Leximancer for qualitative data analysis triangulation. Qualitative Report25(3): 604–614.
34.
LiJYKimJKAlharbiK (2022) Exploring the role of issue involvement and brand attachment in shaping consumer response toward corporate social advocacy (CSA) initiatives: the case of Nike’s Colin Kaepernick campaign. International Journal of Advertising41(2): 233–257.
35.
LimJSYoungC (2021) Effects of issue ownership, perceived fit, and authenticity in corporate social advocacy on corporate reputation. Public Relations Review47(4): 102071.
McBrideDEKeysJL (2018) Abortion in the United States: A Reference Handbook. ABC-CLIO.
38.
MoormanC (2020) Commentary: brand activism in a political world. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing39(4): 388–392. DOI: 10.1177/0743915620945260.
39.
NicoliniKMHansenSS (2018) Framing the Women’s March on Washington: media coverage and organizational messaging alignment. Public Relations Review44(1): 1–10. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.12.005.
40.
ParchaJMKingsley WestermanCY (2020) How corporate social advocacy affects attitude change toward controversial social issues. Management Communication Quarterly34(3): 350–383. DOI: 10.1177/0893318920912196.
41.
ParkKJiangH (2023) Signaling, verification, and identification: the way corporate social advocacy generates brand loyalty on social media. International Journal of Business Communication60(2): 439–463. DOI: 10.1177/2329488420907121.
42.
PattonMQ (1999) Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. Health Services Research34(5): 1189–1208.
QuickMBramlettJC (2024) Post-roe political communication: examining activist campaign strategies in the 2022 Kansas abortion referendum. Western Journal of Communication88(5): 1110–1132. DOI: 10.1080/10570314.2024.2355962.
SaldanaJ (2021) The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. 4th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage.
47.
SmithAEHumphreysMS (2006) Evaluation of unsupervised semantic mapping of natural language with Leximancer concept mapping. Behavior Research Methods38(2): 262–279. DOI: 10.3758/BF03192778.
48.
StormerN (2001) Why Not? Memory and counter-memory in 19th-century abortion rhetoric. Women's Studies in Communication24(1): 1–29. DOI: 10.1080/07491409.2001.10162425.
49.
StormerN (2002) In living memory: abortion as cultural amnesia. Quarterly Journal of Speech88(3): 265–283. DOI: 10.1080/00335630209384377.
50.
TackettT (2022) Burning out like dying stars: why agencies need to build more supportive work environments for women in advertising. Advertising & Society Quarterly23(3): 26. DOI: 10.1353/asr.2022.0029.
51.
TackettT (2023) A textual analysis of gender diversity and creativity in award-winning agencies’ self-representations. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising44(2): 212–224. DOI: 10.1080/10641734.2022.2155890.
52.
TackettTLemonLL (2025) A balanced approach: remote employees’ experiences with employee engagement and well-being. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Ahead-of-print. DOI: 10.1108/CCIJ-08-2024-0154.
53.
WatsonK (2022) The ethics of access: reframing the need for abortion care as a health disparity. The American Journal of Bioethics: AJOB22(8): 22–30. DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2022.2075976.
54.
WaymerDLoganN (2021) Corporate social advocacy as engagement: Nike’s social justice communication. Public Relations Review47(1): 102005. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.102005.
55.
WellmanMLStoldtRTullyM, et al. (2020) Ethics of authenticity: social media influencers and the production of sponsored content. Journal of Media Ethics35(2): 68–82. DOI: 10.1080/23736992.2020.1736078.
56.
WilcoxDL (2019) Dialogic communication theory in the age of corporate activism: a postmodern perspective. Communication and Media in Asia Pacific (CMAP)2(1): 1–10.
57.
WoodruffK (2019) Coverage of abortion in select US newspapers. Women’s Health Issues: Official Publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women’s Health29(1): 80–86.
58.
XuHLeeERimH (2022) Should businesses take a stand? Effects of perceived psychological distance on consumers’ expectation and evaluation of corporate social advocacy. Journal of Marketing Communications28(8): 840–863. DOI: 10.1080/13527266.2021.1969588.
59.
Yale School of Management Chief Executive Leadership Institute. (2022, October 14). Companies with Extended Women’s Health Benefits. https://yaleceli.wixsite.com/website
60.
YimMC (2021) Fake, faulty, and authentic stand-taking: what determines the legitimacy of corporate social advocacy?International Journal of Strategic Communication15(1): 60–76. DOI: 10.1080/1553118X.2020.1856853.
61.
ZhangXABordenJ (2022) How legitimate are corporate social advocacy campaigns? An examination of the role of legitimacy in shareholder perceptions of CSA. Journal of Marketing Communications30: 123–147. DOI: 10.1080/13527266.2022.2105931.
62.
ZieglerM (2015) After Roe: The Lost History of the Abortion Debate. Harvard University Press.
