May may meijer

595 views

Published on

Konferenca Portorož 2006

Published in: Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
595
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Hoe pakken we dat aan? In drie stappen: 1 Wat is reactie kiezer op Kok/Bolk 2 Hoe worden K/B afgebeeld in media 3 Wat is effect nieuws over K/B op kiezer Daarmee illustratie werkwijze academici: onderzoek: beschrijven + verklaren soc wet.: veel factoren, complex, omgeving, tientallen media, politici, partijen en miljoenen kiezers. Hoe werkt dat? Lastig te onderzoeken Ingewikkelde genuanceerde antwoorden Dit zijn belangrijke vragen, want 42% kiezers zweeft nog. Dus is het interessant voor campagnemakers en media te weten waar de zwevende kiezer door wordt beinvloed.
  • The more the liberal political party ‘VVD’ was criticized in the news, the more public support it received from newspaper readers (Dutch election campaign 1994, Kleinnijenhuis & De Ridder 1997). The more Clinton was attacked by conservative elites, the higher his job approval ratings
  • May may meijer

    1. 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. 2. Outline <ul><li>Theory: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Hypotheses of the present study </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Research method: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>News in newspapers and on television: content analysis (Media profile or media reputation Deephouse, 1997) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Public opinion: panel survey (corporate reputation) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Results </li></ul><ul><li>Conclusions, discussion </li></ul>
    3. 3. Effects of the amount of media coverage on corporate reputation (1) <ul><li>Mere exposure effect </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Zajonc (1968) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inverted U-shape (Miller, 1976) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>RAS model (Receive Accept Sample) of Zaller, 1992 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The greater a person’s level of cognitive engagement (or political awareness) with an issue, the more likely that he/she will receive the message about that issue. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The greater a person’s level of “organizational awareness” the more likely that he/she will receive that message. </li></ul></ul>
    4. 4. Effects of the amount of media coverage on corporate reputation (2) <ul><li>Two stage “familiarity-then-something wrong” </li></ul><ul><li>It is assumed that tv-watchers possess lower level of organizational awareness than newspaper readers. </li></ul><ul><li>Hypothesis 1a: The amount of tv news about a certain organization is positively related to its reputation </li></ul><ul><li>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 </li></ul>
    5. 5. Three types of news <ul><li>Success & failure news (e.g. Shell took a beating) </li></ul><ul><li>Support & criticism news (e.g. BP and Amoco are joining forces) </li></ul><ul><li>Issue news (e.g. Shell invests in the environment) </li></ul><ul><li>Effects of each of these types of news can be discussed from different theoretical perspectives </li></ul>
    6. 6. Effects of success & failure news on reputation <ul><li>Bandwagon effect (“everybody loves the winner” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Patterson (1993) when a political candidate’s support in the poll increases sharply, the news of his candidacy becomes more favorable </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Underdog effect </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Marsh (1984), vote for a loosing party out of compassion. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Kleinnijenhuis et al. (1997, 1998, 2003) mainly found bandwagon effects. </li></ul><ul><li>H2a: The tone of success & failure news is positively related with reputation </li></ul><ul><li>H2b: The tone of success & failure news is positively related with the perception of the success of the policy </li></ul>
    7. 7. Effects of support & criticism news on reputation <ul><li>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. </li></ul><ul><li>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. </li></ul><ul><li>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. </li></ul>
    8. 8. Effects of issue news on reputation <ul><li>Three perspectives: agenda setting, priming and issue ownership </li></ul><ul><li>In the agenda setting hypothesis, relationship between the issue news and salience of an issue is studied </li></ul><ul><li>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. </li></ul><ul><li>Priming and issue ownership are consequences of agenda setting, focus on the overall evaluation of the organization </li></ul>
    9. 9. Research method <ul><li>Eight Dutch companies, two sectors: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Shell, BP (oil companies) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ABN AMRO, Rabobank (banks) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Schiphol airport (Dutch airport), NS (Dutch railway), </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>police, agricultural sector </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Content analysis </li></ul><ul><li>- Network analysis of Evaluative Texts (NET)-method </li></ul><ul><li>- Period July 24, 1997 till August 1, 2000. </li></ul><ul><li>Opinion polling </li></ul><ul><li>- NIPO Telepanel ( n = approx. 500, subsample) </li></ul><ul><li>- Summer 1998, 1999 and 2000 </li></ul>
    10. 10. NET-method (content analysis) <ul><li>Network analysis of Evaluative Texts (NET)-method (De Ridder 1994a, 1994b) </li></ul><ul><li>Assertion: subject, predicate, object </li></ul><ul><li>different types of news: news about issues, support & criticism, success & failure </li></ul>
    11. 11. Oilcompany endangers environment environment oilcompany Positive, association negative, dissociation
    12. 12. Oilcompany endangers environment environment oilcompany endangers Positive, association negative, dissociation
    13. 13. Oilcompany endangers environment (issue news) Clinton criticizes oilcompany (support & criticism) environment oilcompany endangers Clinton Positive, association negative, dissociation
    14. 14. Oilcompany endangers environment (issue news) Clinton criticizes oilcompany (support & criticism) environment oilcompany endangers Clinton Positive, association negative, dissociation
    15. 15. Oilcompany endangers environment (issue news) Clinton criticizes oilcompany (support & criticism) Oilcompany makes big profit (success & failure) environment oilcompany endangers Clinton Reality Positive, association negative, dissociation
    16. 16. Oilcompany endangers environment (issue news) Clinton criticizes oilcompany (support & criticism) Oilcompany makes big profit (success & failure) environment oilcompany endangers Clinton Reality Positive, association negative, dissociation
    17. 17. Measures of the media variables (1) The summed direction of success & failure news with the focal organization in object position <ul><ul><li>Favorability of s&f news </li></ul></ul>The average direction of success & failure news with the focal organization in object position <ul><ul><li>Direction of s&f news </li></ul></ul>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. 18. Measures of the media variables (2) The summed direction of support & criticism news with the focal organization in object position <ul><ul><li>Favorability of s&c news </li></ul></ul>The cumulated advertising expenditures by the focal organization Advertising intensity The average direction of support & criticism news with the focal organization in object position <ul><ul><li>Direction of s&c news </li></ul></ul>Measures Variable name
    19. 19. Opinion polling <ul><li>Reputation: Attitude towards an organization </li></ul><ul><li>Measures </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Salience: what do you think of first when you think off organization X? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reputation: can you give a report mark from 1 to 10 to the focall organization? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Limited number of salient beliefs (Fishbein and Azjen, 1975; Wolsink, 1991; Eysenck en Van der Pligt, 1988) </li></ul>
    20. 20. Results, H1a, H1b, H2a, and H7 (1) <ul><li>Pooled Crossectional model </li></ul>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. 21. Results, H1a, H1b, H3a, and H7 (1) <ul><li>Reputation i,t,o = b 0 + b1 (Amount of TV news o ) + b2 (Amount of print news o ) + b3 (Direction support & criticism TV 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 </li></ul>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. 22. Results, H1a, H1b, H3a, and H7 (2) <ul><li>Continued, Crossectional models </li></ul>.18*** -.07* Amount of TV news Amount of print news Police .11** .07* .10** Favorability of s&c news Advertising intensity TV Advertising intensity newspapers Agricultural sector .08* Advertising intensity newspapers Rabobank -.08* Direction of s&c print news Schiphol .07* Amount of TV news NS
    23. 23. Results, H4 (1) <ul><li>Salience i,t,o = b 0 + b1 (Frequency of issues TV news o ) + b2 (Frequency of issue print news o ) + e i </li></ul>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. 24. Results, H4 (2) <ul><li>Salience i,t,o = b 0 + b1 (Frequency of issues TV news o ) + b2 (Frequency of issue print news o ) + e i </li></ul>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. 25. Conclusions <ul><li>The more tv news about an organization, the better its reputation </li></ul><ul><li>At a certain point, more print news worsens reputation </li></ul><ul><li>The effects of success & failure news: TV viewers jump on the bandwagon </li></ul><ul><li>The effects of support & criticism news: criticism by competitors improves reputation </li></ul><ul><li>News about a certain issue in relation to the organization stimulated the salience of that issue </li></ul><ul><li>The higher the advertising intensity of a company, the better its reputation </li></ul>
    26. 26. Conclusions about a media monitor <ul><li>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. </li></ul><ul><li>It cannot always prevent bad news, like a financial annual report can not always prevent losses. </li></ul>
    27. 27. May-May Meijer Assistant professor E-mail : mm.meijer@fsw.vu.nl Book: [email_address]

    ×