- 1. Public Affairs in the E U Portoroz 24 September 2004 -
May-May Meijer Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam Does Success Breed
Success? Effects of news and advertising on corporate reputation
May 20 2005
2. Outline
-
- Hypotheses of the present study
-
- News in newspapers and on television: content analysis (Media
profile or media reputation Deephouse, 1997)
-
- Public opinion: panel survey (corporate reputation)
3. Effects of the amount of media coverage on corporate
reputation (1)
-
- Inverted U-shape (Miller, 1976)
- RAS model (Receive Accept Sample) of Zaller, 1992
-
- The greater a persons level of cognitive engagement (or
political awareness) with an issue, the more likely that he/she
will receive the message about that issue.
-
- The greater a persons level of organizational awareness the
more likely that he/she will receive that message.
4. Effects of the amount of media coverage on corporate
reputation (2)
- Two stage familiarity-then-something wrong
- It is assumed that tv-watchers possess lower level of
organizational awareness than newspaper readers.
- Hypothesis 1a: The amount of tv news about a certain
organization is positively related to its reputation
- Hypothesis 1b: If the amount of print news about an
organization is low to medium, there will be a positive
relationship between amount of print news and reputation. If the
amount of print news goes beyond a certain point, the relationship
will be negative
5. Three types of news
- Success & failure news (e.g. Shell took a beating)
- Support & criticism news (e.g. BP and Amoco are joining
forces)
- Issue news (e.g. Shell invests in the environment)
- Effects of each of these types of news can be discussed from
different theoretical perspectives
6. Effects of success & failure news on reputation
- Bandwagon effect (everybody loves the winner
-
- Patterson (1993) when a political candidates support in the
poll increases sharply, the news of his candidacy becomes more
favorable
-
- Marsh (1984), vote for a loosing party out of compassion.
- Kleinnijenhuis et al. (1997, 1998, 2003) mainly found bandwagon
effects.
- H2a: The tone of success & failure news is positively
related with reputation
- H2b: The tone of success & failure news is positively
related with the perception of the success of the policy
7. Effects of support & criticism news on reputation
- Several political communication studies found a negative effect
on the popularity of the political party or president
(Kleinnijenhuis & De Ridder 1997, Shah et al., 2003,
Kleinnijenhuis et al., 2003) a boomerang effect.
- H3a: The tone of support & criticism news will be
negatively related to reputation if its competitors criticize the
organization. The tone of support & criticism news will be
positively related to reputation if impartial actors criticize the
organization.
- H3b: The tone of support & criticism news will be
negatively related to the agreement with the policy of the
organization or sector if its competitors criticize the
organization.
8. Effects of issue news on reputation
- Three perspectives: agenda setting, priming and issue
ownership
- In the agenda setting hypothesis, relationship between the
issue news and salience of an issue is studied
- H4: The amount of media coverage devoted to particular issues
is positively related to the proportion of the public that defines
the organization by those issues.
- Priming and issue ownership are consequences of agenda setting,
focus on the overall evaluation of the organization
9. Research method
- Eight Dutch companies, two sectors:
-
- Shell, BP (oil companies)
-
- ABN AMRO, Rabobank (banks)
-
- Schiphol airport (Dutch airport), NS (Dutch railway),
-
- police,agricultural sector
- - Network analysis of Evaluative Texts (NET)-method
- - Period July 24, 1997 till August 1, 2000.
- - NIPO Telepanel ( n= approx. 500, subsample)
- - Summer 1998, 1999 and 2000
10. NET-method (content analysis)
- Network analysis of Evaluative Texts (NET)-method (De Ridder
1994a, 1994b)
- Assertion: subject, predicate, object
- different types of news: news about issues, support &
criticism, success & failure
11. Oilcompany endangers environment environment oilcompany
Positive, association negative, dissociation 12. Oilcompany
endangers environment environment oilcompany endangers Positive,
association negative, dissociation 13. Oilcompany endangers
environment (issue news) Clinton criticizes oilcompany(support
& criticism) environment oilcompany endangers Clinton Positive,
association negative, dissociation 14. Oilcompany endangers
environment (issue news) Clinton criticizes oilcompany(support
& criticism) environment oilcompany endangers Clinton Positive,
association negative, dissociation 15. Oilcompany endangers
environment (issue news) Clinton criticizes oilcompany(support
& criticism) Oilcompanymakes big profit (success & failure)
environment oilcompany endangers Clinton Reality Positive,
association negative, dissociation 16. Oilcompany endangers
environment (issue news) Clinton criticizes oilcompany(support
& criticism) Oilcompanymakes big profit (success & failure)
environment oilcompany endangers Clinton Reality Positive,
association negative, dissociation 17. Measures of the media
variables (1) The summed direction of success & failure news
with the focal organization in object position
The average direction of success & failure news with the
focal organization in object position
The cumulated number of times the focal organization was
mentioned in the headlines of the newspaper Amount of print
coverage The cumulated number of times the focal organization or
sector was mentioned in the news Amount of tv coverage Measures
Variable name 18. Measures of the media variables (2) The summed
direction of support & criticism news with the focal
organization in object position
The cumulated advertising expenditures by the focal
organizationAdvertising intensity The average direction of support
& criticism news with the focal organization in object
position
Measures Variable name 19. Opinion polling
- Reputation: Attitude towards an organization
-
- Salience: what do you think of first when you think off
organization X?
-
- Reputation: can you give a report mark from 1 to 10 to the
focall organization?
- Limited number of salient beliefs (Fishbein and Azjen, 1975;
Wolsink, 1991; Eysenck en Van der Pligt, 1988)
20. Results, H1a, H1b, H2a, and H7(1)
- PooledCrossectional model
Reputation i,t,o= b 0+ b1 (Amount of TV news o) + b2 (Amount of
print news o ) + b3 (Direction success & failure TV news o ) +
b4 (Direction success & failure print news o ) + b5
(Favorability of success & failure TV news o) + b6
(Favorability of success & failure print news o ) + b7
(Advertising intensity TV o ) + b8 (Advertising intensity
newspapers o) + e i .11*** -.04*** .01 .01 .07** .01 .06*** .03
9,157 Amount of TV news Amount of print news Direction of s&f
TV news Direction of s&f print news Favorability of s&f TV
news Favorability of s&f print news Advertising intensity
newspapers Advertising intensity TV Control variables
(organization) N 21. Results, H1a, H1b, H3a, and H7(1)
- Reputation i,t,o= b 0+ b1 (Amount of TV news o) + b2 (Amount of
print news o ) + b3 (Directionsupport & criticismTV news o ) +
b4 (Direction support & criticism print news o ) + b5
(Favorability of support & criticism TV news o) + b6
(Favorability of support & criticism print news o ) + b7
(Advertising intensity TV o ) + b8 (Advertising intensity
newspapers o) + e i
Crossectional models .08* Advertising intensity TV S de B -.08**
.09** Direction of s&c print news Advertising intensity
newspapers AH .09** Advertising intensity newspapers BP .10** -.09*
Amount of TV news Favorability of s&c TV news Shell 22.
Results, H1a, H1b, H3a, and H7(2)
- Continued,Crossectional models
.18*** -.07* Amount of TV news Amount of print news Police .11**
.07* .10** Favorability of s&c news Advertising intensity
TVAdvertising intensity newspapers Agricultural sector .08*
Advertising intensity newspapers Rabobank -.08* Direction of
s&c print news Schiphol .07* Amount of TV news NS 23. Results,
H4(1)
- Salience i,t,o= b 0+ b1 (Frequency of issues TV news o) + b2
(Frequency of issue print news o ) + e i
Crossectional models, binary logistic regression .07*** -.36**
Freq of issue tv news Freq of issue print news S de B .06*** Freq
of issue tv news NS -.05*** .23*** Freq of issue tv news Freq of
issue print news AH .01*** .02** Frequency of issues tv news
Frequency of issues print news Shell 24. Results, H4(2)
- Salience i,t,o= b 0+ b1 (Frequency of issues TV news o) + b2
(Frequency of issue print news o ) + e i
Crossectional models, binary logistic regression .01*** .01**
Freq of issues tv news Freq of issues print news Police .03***
.05*** Freq of issues tv news Freq of issues print news Rabobank
.06** -.04* Freq of issues tv news Freq of issues print news
Agricultural sector .02*** .03*** Freq of issues tv news Freq of
issues print news ABN .003*** .04*** Freq of issues tv news Freq of
issues print news Schiphol 25. Conclusions
- The more tv news about an organization, the better its
reputation
- At a certain point, more print news worsens reputation
- The effects of success & failure news: TV viewers jump on
the bandwagon
- The effects of support & criticism news: criticism by
competitors improves reputation
- News about a certain issue in relation to the organization
stimulated the salience of that issue
- The higher the advertising intensity of a company, the better
its reputation
26. Conclusions about a media monitor
- A media monitor provides insights into which issues are crucial
for the organization, which stakeholders support or criticize the
organization in the media, and how successfully the organization is
depicted in the media.
- It cannot always prevent bad news, like a financial annual
report can not always prevent losses.
27. May-May Meijer Assistant professor E-mail :
[email protected] Book:[email_address]
