Advocacy Advertising Research Articles

Corporate Sponsorships of Philanthropic Activities: When Do They Impact Perception of Sponsor Brand?

We examined the benefits to a corporate sponsor of two types of philanthropic activities — cause promotions and advocacy advertising. Results from 4 laboratory studies indicate that perceptions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) are affected by consumers’ elaboration levels. Consumer perceptions of CSR are more favorable for cause promotions, which do not receive much elaboration, than they are for advocacy advertising, which prompts more elaboration. In addition, perceived congruence between the sponsor and the social issue is shown to moderate these effects: Higher congruence between the sponsor and social issue increases favorable ratings of CSR for cause promotions but only if elaboration on the sponsorship activity is facilitated. On the other hand, lower congruence increases favorable ratings of CSR for advocacy advertising as long as elaboration on the sponsorship is not constrained. We also found that higher congruence enhances CSR ratings if participants are primed to focus their attention on the sponsor brand, whereas lower congruence enhances CSR if participants are primed to focus their attention on the social issue.

The Kid in Upper 4

“The Kid in Upper 4” an advertisement created for the New Haven Railroad during the early part of World War II by copywriter Nelson C. Metcalf, Jr., has been called “the most famous single advertisement of the war and one of the most effective of all time” by historian Frank W. Fox, James Twitchell labeled it as the beginning of advocacy advertising and as one of twenty advertisements that “shook the world.” Drawing on interviews with Metacalf and other sources, the researchers detail the creation context, and impact of a unique example of public affairs advertising.

Albert Shanker's Advocacy Advertising

Albert Shanker's Advocacy Advertising

Albert Shanker’s Advocacy Advertising

Albert Shanker, president of the American Federation of Teachers until his death in February 1997, used advocacy advertising to increase public awareness of his views on how to improve the nation’s public schools and students’ learning. The “Where We Stand” advertisements, in effect, constitute a case study that highlights the importance of communicating research-based findings pertinent to specific educational policy issues to a general audience and not simply to professional educators. The need for broader communication continues to grow, pushing educational policy researchers to test new approaches and techniques for the dissemination of research findings.

Exploring the Construct of Organization as Source: Consumers' Understandings of Organizational Sponsorship of Advocacy Advertising

Abstract Advocacy advertising is now a mainstay of corporate advertising strategy. Though much research has been done on source credibility in general and single persona sponsor credibility, little attention has been given to what makes an organization a credible sponsor for issues/advocacy advertising. On the basis of 97 qualitative interviews with consumers, the article profiles how consumers make sense of organizational sponsorship of advocacy messages. In the analysis, the criteria consumers use to evaluate organizational sponsors are identified, and how consumers use those criteria to describe effective/ineffective advocacy messages is discussed. The article concludes with a comparison of the study results with those reported in the credibility and advocacy advertising literature, highlighting points of commonality and divergence. Suggestions for future research are offered.

An Inoculation Theory Explanation for the Effects of Corporate Issue/Advocacy Advertising Campaigns

Despite the popularity of issue / advocacy advertising campaigns, there has been limited empirical study of their overall impact. This investigation posits that issue / advocacy advertising should be viewed as a vehicle for inoculating against attitude slippage and for enhancing the sponsor's credibility among people who already favor a corporation's position, rather than as a tool to change attitudes. An experimental test of attitudinal and image effects of issue / advocacy advertising confirmed this theoretical view. The results indicated that issue / advocacy advertising inoculates against attitude change, while simultaneously protecting sponsors against slippage in ratings of source credibility, after exposure to a persuasive attack on behalf of an opposing position. These results are discussed in terms of their theoretical and policy implications.

Newspaper Advocacy Advertising

This article examines the magnitude and diversity of advocacy advertising in The New York Times and Washington Post for 1989. It is based on an analysis of the 661 advertisements which appeared in the two papers in 1989. The analysis shows: A small number of organizations regularly used advocacy ad- vertising as a communication tool. Profit corporations utilized advocacy advertising most fre- quently. However, nonprofit social service groups seem to be using advocacy advertising more frequently in the last several years. Three organizations were responsible for one-quarter of all ad- vocacy advertisements. Economic and social welfare issues were topics most often dis- cussed in the advertisements. The primary objective of the majority of ads was to mobilize public action rather than to provide education or improve pub- lic image.

Marketing corporate image: the company as your number one product

Image: Leading Edge of Corporate Strategy * Establishing Favorable Market Position: Building Public Awareness and Acceptance * Redefining the Corporation: Merger, Takeover, and Other Reasons for Name Change. * Preselling Target Markets: Image and Brand--the Inseparable Duo * Impacting the Financial Community: Changing Investor Expectations * Advocacy Advertising: Presenting the Company's Position on Key Issues * Managing a Crisis: Frontline Defense When the World Falls Apart * Retaining Quality Employees: Using Image to Recruit and Keep the Best * Our Important Reminder: We Are Not Alone

Another Look at Advocacy Advertising and the Boundaries of Commercial Speech

Journal ofAdvertising, Volume XX, Number 4 December 1991 We are pleased that our article entitled Advocacy Advertising and Boundaries of Commercial Speech (Cutler and Muehling 1989) has generated additional discussion and commentary on topic of advocacy advertising. As we pointed out in our original piece, the distinction between commercial and political speech, especially as it pertains to advocacy advertising, often is not clear (p. 40). Therefore, any attempt to further clarify matter should be welcomed, both from an academic as well as managerial/public policy perspective. As previously noted, advocacy advertising is a special form of advertising in which organizations express their opinions on (often controversial) issues in an attempt to sway public sentiment. Since a dominant element of such advertisements is a statement of opinion on an issue, advocacy ads have often been viewed as fully protected political speech and not subject to government (Federal Trade Commission) regulation and control. However, because advocacy ads also often contain some commercial element (e.g., paid sponsorship or reference to a product and its attributes), there is possibility that ads of this nature may be treated as commercial speech, and therefore subject to regulatory scrutiny. In our original paper, we provided a brief background and history of advocacy advertising and offered a number of reasons corporations may elect to use or eschew this ad form. In addition, we attempted to review significant legal cases and classification schemes that have been used to distinguish between commercial and political/editorial advocacy advertising. We also proposed some additional we felt may be helpful in making this distinction. Our proposal included consideration of a continuum that viewed likelihood of regulatory control in terms of ad's impact on ad sponsor, industry, business community, and society in general. As part of our discussion of continuum we noted that factors such as nature of ad's contents and context in which ad is placed, as well as other competitive/environmental factors, may be considered when making decisions regarding placement of advocacy ads along continuum. Also offered in article was a list of relevant questions/research topics others may wish to pursue in future. Middleton (1991) recently authored a comment on our 1989 article, suggesting that continuum we proposed helps little to distinguish between political and commercial advocacy advertising. At issue are two related points: 1) our article did not adopt, reject, nor suggest modifications to Supreme Court criteria (p. 78) and therefore is vague in its presentation of issues dealing with regulatory boundaries of advocacy advertising, and 2) our proposal would permit unconstitutional regulation of corporate political speech, thereby misclassifying political speech as commercial in nature. In this paper, we intend to address Middleton's comments and criticisms and place in perspective what we feel to be contribution of original article.

Advocacy Advertising, the First Amendment, and Competitive Advantage: A Comment on Cutler & Muehling

Abstract A continuing difficulty in regulating corporate advocacy advertising is distinguishing between political and commercial speech. An article by Cutler and Muehling argues that the competitive impact of an advertisement should be a factor in determining whether a corporate advocacy advertisement is commercial or political speech. If a corporate ad primarily benefits the ad sponsor, the ad is likely to be considered commercial speech, Cutler and Muehling say. If the ad benefits a larger industry or society, Cutler and Muehling would call the ad political speech. This comment argues that the Cutler and Muehling proposal helps little to illuminate or modify controlling Supreme Court criteria for distinguishing political and commercial speech. The comment also argues that the vagueness of the Cutler and Muehling proposal would permit the unconstitutional regulation of corporate political speech by misclassifying it as commercial speech.

Advocacy Advertising and the Boundaries of Commercial Speech

Abstract Advocacy advertising has become an often-used means for corporations to express their viewpoints on a variety of controversial issues. Recent events make it unclear whether advocacy advertising may be viewed as political (editorial) speech and, therefore, outside the regulatory controls of the Federal Trade Commission. This article discusses the current state of advocacy advertising by reviewing the criteria proposed (and/or used) by the courts, regulatory agencies, and advertising/marketing scholars in determining the regulatory boundaries of this form of advertising. In addition, the article proposes additional criteria that may be helpful in making such a determination.

Book Reviews : Strategic Issues Management: How Organizations Influence and Respond to Public Interests and Policies. Robert L. Heath and Associates. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1988. 415 pages. Handbook of Advocacy Advertising: Concepts, Strategies, and Applications. S. Prakash Sethi. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1987. 577 pages

Book Reviews : Strategic Issues Management: How Organizations Influence and Respond to Public Interests and Policies. Robert L. Heath and Associates. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1988. 415 pages. Handbook of Advocacy Advertising: Concepts, Strategies, and Applications. S. Prakash Sethi. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1987. 577 pages

BOOK REVIEWS

Book reviewed in this articleWills, Robert L., Julie A. Caswell, and John D. Culbertson, (editors), Issues After A Century of Competition PolicySethi, S. Prakash, Handbook of Advocacy Advertising: Concepts, Strategies, and ApplicationsSamli, A. Coskun (editor), Marketing And The Quality of Life InterfaceRauniker, R. and C.‐L. Huang, eds., Food Demand Analysis: Problems, Issues, and Empirical EvidenceForbes, J.D., The Consumer Interest: Dimensions and Policy ImplicationsPosner, Richard A. Economic Analysis of Law

Corporate advocacy advertising and political influence

Corporate advocacy advertising and political influence

Advocacy Advertising: A Novel Communications Approach to Building Effective Relations with External Constituencies

Since the oil crisis of 1972–73 when the oil companies in America and the UK first introduced sustained advocacy advertising campaigns to explain to a hostile public the simultaneous rise in oil prices and company profits, advocacy advertising has come of age, used not only by large corporations but by trade unions, interest groups, religious organizations, government agencies and political candidates. Advocacy advertising enables the sponsor to put forward his point of view, in a controlled context, targeted at key audiences. However, without sufficient philosophical underpinning and commitment, such partisan, single-issue-orientated campaigns are all too often confined to what the sponsor wants the world to hear, rather than what the world wants the sponsor to talk about. On these grounds, such campaigns may ultimately prove counterproductive.

The Fitful Career of Advocacy Advertising: Political Protection, Client Cultivation, and Corporate Morale

Advocacy advertising—as well as corporate image advertising in general—has recently been on the upswing. Some trace its origins as far back as the oil crises of the 1970s, but a historical amnesia has largely obscured the extensive earlier history of this so-called modern phenomenon. In fact advocacy advertising emerged early in the twentieth century. In some of the dramatic early campaigns, practitioners of this strategy—often among the giants of the corporate world—confronted many of the same challenges that modern public relations and corporate positioning strategists face. This article provides a historical survey of these advocacy campaigns which reveals both the variety of experiments within this advertising mode and the ways in which earlier practitioners tried to deal with the problems that still beset the genre.

Corporate Political Strategy and Legislative Decision Making: A Review and Contingency Approach

This paper attempts to provide a theoretical basis for determining effective corporate political strategies. The strategies considered are the five most commonly used by politically active firms: constituency building, political action committee contributions, advocacy advertising, lobbying, and coalition building. Relevant literature is reviewed and an exchange model of legislative decision making is developed. A contingency approach to the selection of appropriate strategies is derived from the model and a typology of legislative decision situations.

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ADVOCACY ADVERTISING RELATIVE TO NEWS COVERAGE

The use of advocacy advertising by corporations and special interest groups attempting to influence social policy has increased dramatically in the past decade. Yet little research has been conducted to gauge the effectiveness of advocacy advertising relative to other forms of mass communication. Conventional wisdom suggests that because advocacy material presented in the form of an advertisement is inherently paid-for communication, it will be less effective than the same information appearing in news columns as a published news release. This study uses a factorial design to examine the impact of format (advertisement versus news article) and source (commercial versus noncommercial) manipulations on the effectiveness of advocacy messages.

Corporate public relations and new media technology

Restrictions on advocacy advertising by corporations on commercial television have led to the innovative use of alternative channels for reaching targeted publics with business-oriented information. Concerns over one-sided propaganda from business' use of television have been raised by public-interest groups and others alarmed, by what they perceive as business's attempt to manipulate public opinion through “deep-pocket” spending. On the other hand, business communicators assert that they are making a vital contribution by providing information needed to better understand corporate operations and social contributions. In response to network policy, corporate communicators are utilizing new options to direct messages both at internal employee and external public audiences. These authors review these developments and conclude that corporate involvement in issue communication (particularly in cablecasts where the Fairness Doctrine is held to be inapplicable by the industry) may lead to increases in advocacy advertising, as well as broader discussion of business/investor news and regulatory options.

Advocacy Advertising: Propaganda or Democratic Right?

Advocacy Advertising: Propaganda or Democratic Right?