Ethical Stakeholder Engagement

From inactive publics to brand ambassadors, organizations must consider how best to communicate with a variety of stakeholders. With the growth of social media, ethical engagement with stakeholders has become more challenging. Engagement implies a two-way exchange, if not necessarily a meeting of minds, then certainly a swapping of ideas and opinions, listening and talking, and stakeholders have expectations that require ethical standards.

The Arthur W. Page Center seeks grant proposals that address the issues of ethical stakeholder engagement. Research projects should deepen the field’s understanding of the issues with a focus on real-world solutions for practitioners. Submissions should clearly demonstrate how the research will benefit the practice of public relations and how the authors intend to disseminate findings to the field. Grants will range from $1,000 to $5,000.

Possible topics include (but are not limited to):

• Measuring the impact of stakeholder engagement
• Benefits or challenges of ethical stakeholder engagement
• Online stakeholder engagement
• Engagement with specific audiences such as:

– Activists
– Community
– Elderly
– Employees
– Influencers
– Investors
– International groups
– LGBT
– Youth

The research conducted from approved proposals will be evaluated for a special issue of the Public Relations Journal guest edited by Dr. Marcia W. DiStaso. Authors of successful submissions may also be asked to participate in a webinar or conference panel and/or make their work available for distribution through a website.

Deadline for proposal submission is September 1, 2013. Proposals should be submitted through the Page Center website (http://thepagecenter.comm.psu.edu/, click on Page Legacy Scholar Grants). Questions should be directed to Dr. Marcia W. DiStaso at mwd10@psu.edu or (814) 863-9874.

<<Related Calls

[January 26, 2010]

Playing violent video games can make young adults behave more violently, but the game features selected during play are responsible for the resulting aggression according to a new study published this month in Mass Communication and Society.

Modern video game systems often give the player options to choose to turn blood effects on or off and to change the color of the blood. They also allow players to change their own perspective from being a first person shooter to a third person observer of the character doing the shooting in violent video games like Hitman II, Silent Assassin, which was used in this study.

One might think that being the actual shooter or aggressor from a first person perspective would make the game player more aggressive in real life. But a study called Retaliatory Aggression and the Effects of Point of View Blood in Violent Video Games, conducted by Marina Krcmar from Wake Forest University and Kirstie Farrar from the University of Connecticut, found the opposite.

Players who see their avatar shooting and killing are more likely to express subsequent verbal or physical hostility than someone who sees the violence in the game from a first person perspective. This was especially true for people who leaned toward being more aggressive or hostile anyway. In this study, players expressed hostility in part by recommending against continued funding of an experimenter who initially insulted them.

Another variable that led to more aggression from players was the blood. When players had the blood on, they were more likely to act verbally and physically aggressive after playing the game. The reasons for this increase in aggression stem from the players’ active role in the storyline, which causes the player to act out the aggression. Players identify with the aggressors in the video games, because they want to be heroes.

Additionally, since violent behaviors are rewarded in violent video games, such as Hitman II, Silent Assassin, this can contribute to the belief that violent behavior is acceptable. In this study, Krcmar and Farrar explain a process through which aggression is evoked from video game usage.

According to these authors, “Players actively engage in game play, receive points for acting aggressively, attempt and learn various aggressive roles, actions and strategies, and through repeated play, may learn to play the game quite skillfully. Through this repeated exposure and interaction with violence through repeated game play, it is likely that players can establish similarly aggressive knowledge structures.”

Players can enhance these aggressive behaviors through practice, and activate them when faced with a real, aggressive situation as demonstrated in this study. The authors conclude that playing violent games, both in the short term and over time, can lead to aggressive behavior.

The presence of new game systems has led to the creation of more graphic, realistic, and violent video games that really draw users into the violent actions displayed in the game. But with all the commotion violent games, such as Mortal Kombat have caused in the media in the past, now many modern games allow the user to deactivate the blood and gore present in the game. These features are appealing to parents who are concerned with the level of gore in the games their kids play.

If this study’s findings on young adults hold true with younger players, parents who have their kids deactivate the blood are justified in such actions, this study shows. But more surprising is the advice that their kids should play the game from the first person perspective as the one who is committing the on-game violence. Parents who have perhaps thought the third-person perspective was better could be asking for trouble and leading their kids to become more aggressive.

CONTACT: Marina Krcmar, Department of Communication, Wake Forest University, krcmarm@wfu.edu, (336) 758-5405; Kirstie Farrar, Department of Communication Studies, University of Connecticut, kirstie.farrar@uconn.edu, (806) 486-2632.

<<RYCU

[January 26, 2010]

A study that was just published in the scholarly journal Mass Communication and Society, which is edited at Illinois State University, suggests that structural bias was apparent on many of the major television networks during the 2004 presidential election in a direction that may surprise many.

Frederick Fico, professor of journalism at Michigan State University, and his co-authors of the article Broadcast and Cable Network News Coverage of the 2004 Presidential Election, compare news coverage of Presidential candidates John Kerry and George Bush on ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, Fox News, and CNN. They find that Fox News showed more structural bias toward Democratic candidate John Kerry than any other network, and that its bias was stronger than that on other networks. This was true contrary to criticism cited by Fico in which former CBS anchor Walter Cronkite labels Fox News as a “far-rightwing organization.”

That means Kerry and his supporters received more air time on Fox and were more likely to receive primary placement in stories. The four determinants of structural bias were the number of supporters quoted or given a chance to speak, the candidate whose supporters spoke first, the time they spent speaking, and whether there were visuals of both candidates or only of one. Neither the tone of the quotes used nor talk and commentary were analyzed, but only packaged news stories and segments.

Bush, on the other hand, received favorable coverage from NBC and MSNBC.

CBS, which broke the story questioning Bush’s National Guard service attributed to a source that was later discredited, favored Kerry.

CNN’s structural bias leaned somewhat toward Kerry, while ABC’s bias is less clear, leaning toward Bush in some measures and Kerry in others.

Most journalists would emphasize the importance of remaining impartial, unbiased, and reporting only factual and accurate information when covering a story.  However, structural bias can show patterns of bias that are harder to measure objectively in areas like a reporter’s tone about a candidate.

According to Fico there is no question of the presence of bias in the newsroom. He describes it as something that is “inevitable and ever-present.” However, he feels the real question of news bias lies in how systematic or predictable networks are in presenting certain information.

In this research, Fico and his co-authors, Geri Alumit Zeldes from Michigan State, Serena Carpenter from Arizona State University, and Arvind Diddi from the State University of New York at Oswego, assess both the aggregate partisan structural balance of stories and of multi-story segments, determining whether they favored the Republican or the Democrat. The study examined stories aired from Labor Day to the November 2 Election Day of 2004. Both the National Guard stories and coverage of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign against John Kerry were in the media during the period of analysis.

CONTACT: Frederick Fico, School of Journalism, Michigan State University,  fredfico@msu.edu, (517) 355-4489; Geri Alumit Zeldes, Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication, Arizona Sate University; Serena Carpenter, Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication, Arizona State University; Arvind Diddi, Department of Communication Studies, SUNY, Oswego.

<<RYCU

[January 26, 2010]

As John McCain seeks the presidential nod in the general election, his vice presidential pick clearly emphasizes his need to reach the conservative voter, the powerful political voting block that emerged from a coalition of splinter groups pulled together in the 1950s by the writers of National Review magazine according to a recent study.

National Review is a political magazine that is known for its conservative perspective. In an article just released in the scholarly journal Mass Communication and Society, Susan Currie Sivek, assistant professor of mass communication and journalism at California State University, Fresno, credited National Review for its impeccable ability to strategically construct media frames that influenced Americans from three smaller subgroups to merge under the conservative banner.

William F. Buckley, Jr., the magazine’s founder, brought together anti-Communists, Libertarians, and Christian conservatives. He gathered writers who saw the common threads across these groups, emphasized their common values, and de-emphasized more divisive leanings.

One tool that brought these groups together was the framing of “liberalism” as the common enemy, a strategy often employed later by President Ronald Reagan. In National Review’s first issue, it employed the language often used by anti-Communists but applied it in attacking liberalism.

In addition to appealing to anti-Communists, the magazine reached out to Libertarians in its philosophical statement in the opening issue. It said “The growth of government . . . must be fought relentlessly. In this great social conflict of the era, we are, without reservations, on the libertarian side.

To appeal to Christian conservatives, Sivek notes that the magazine “frequently invoked the philosophical nature and history of ‘Western Civilization’ and . . . the existence of moral absolutes.” National Review constructed a historical and religious foundation for conservatism and argued against the relativism of social engineers that “had taken over America.”

Sivek further explains how National Review was more influential than other conservative magazine attempts of the time. By refusing to join in with anti-Semitic voices of the 1950s and employing Jewish writers, the magazine eschewed one fringe branch that tried to identify itself as conservative. It also avoided McCarthyism’s vitriolic vocabulary of anti-Communism conspiracy that was later embraced by the John Birch Society. There is no question National Review still remained solidly anti-Communist.

The magazine influenced 1964 Presidential candidate Barry Goldwater who often used the language of the National Review to appeal to constituents. Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush acknowledged the impact it had on American political view points, am impact that seems to have been reincarnated in talk radio programs like The Rush Limbaugh Show. Sivek, however, notes Buckley’s criticism of some Bush policies that have departed from the National Review’s conservative principles.

Sivek’s research was completed before knowing John McCain would be the Republican nominee for President. So she didn’t indicate where he would fit in the spectrum of conservatives that were taken under the National Review umbrella.

But Stephen Perry, Editor of Mass Communication and Society, said, “Perhaps the conservatives that were recruited to ‘take over the Republican Party’ through National Review are no longer in control based on McCain’s nomination. Still, the selection of Sarah Palin for his Vice Presidential running mate clearly indicates the conservatives still pull a lot of weight at the Republican table.”

In the article, Sivek detailed how one magazine shaped and developed the political opinions of millions through applying various frames to political philosophy. Sivek also demonstrates how framing and editing of political movements can increase political engagement throughout the nation. To read more about how National Review framed issues that created the Conservative movement, read “Editing Conservatism: How National Review Magazine Framed and Mobilized a Political Movement” in Mass Communication and Society, Volume 11, Issue 3.

CONTACT: Susan Currie Sivek, California State University, Fresno, ssivek@csufresno, (559) 278-4597.

<<RYCU

[February 2, 2010]

Within the past four years, Hispanics have become the largest minority in the United States, but their roles in both American and international politics remains limited.

According to the Pew Hispanic Center, in the 2006 U.S. midterm elections, Latinos only comprised 8.6% of all votes cast. Two studies published in the journal Mass Communication and Society indicate that political participation among Hispanics is not proportional to their ever growing population. The findings for these studies were based on research and statistics from the 2004 Presidential election, since research from the recent 2008 election is yet to be examined and analyzed.

Spanish language media is culturally more important and relevant to Latinos in the United States, and they have the ability to shape the audience’s attitudes and political opinions.  Results from the article A Matter of Language or Culture: Coverage of the 2004 U.S. Elections on Spanish and English Language Television, written by Matthew Hale from Seton Hall University, Tricia Olsen from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Erika Fowler from the University of Michigan, show that Spanish language media is doing very little to close the gap between Latino political participation and Latino population growth.

The study emphasized that Spanish language media are keeping their distance from the traditional political sphere. This apparent avoidance of politics may be the key reason why a lack of participation exists among the Latino population, the researchers suggest. While Latino news coverage is more likely to depict Latino issues or concerns than English stations, political candidates are not shown speaking as often and much of the news coverage entails the election horse race without relating where candidates stand on policies.

Since many Latinos are still citizens of their home country and ineligible to vote in America, the study Mexican Expatriates Vote? Framing and Agenda Setting in U.S. News Coverage about Mexico explored how Hispanic media provided information about politics for those able to vote by absentee ballot in the 2006 Mexican Presidential election.

Researchers Melissa Johnson, John Davis, and Sean Cronin from North Carolina State University found that big-circulation newspapers in cities with large Latino populations most often featured Mexican pre-election news. This shows the media recognized the importance of this Hispanic minority. They also pointed out that U.S. newspapers covering Mexican political candidates again focused mainly on the horse race along with political candidate attributes as opposed to policy. Other factors that this article suggests contributed to poor political participation from Mexicans included news coverage that depicted Mexicans as: corrupt, irrelevant to the absentee ballot process, and passive about key policy issues.

Overall, both of these studies describe how the media has a way of broadening the gap among Hispanics in politics. Although, Hispanics prefer media that caters to their needs, the research indicates that different measures need to be taken in order to increase Hispanic engagement in the political process.

CONTACT: Matthew Hale, Seton Hall University, halematt@shu.edu, (973) 275-2013; Melissa Johnson, Department of Communication, NC State University, melissa_johnson@ncsu.edu, (919) 515-9757.

<<RYCU