Branding national images: The 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics, 2010 Shanghai World Expo, and 2010 Guangzhou Asian Games

Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Public Relations Review

Branding national images: The 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics, 2010 Shanghai World Expo, and 2010 Guangzhou Asian Games Ni Chen ∗ Department of Media and Communication, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 6 December 2011 Received in revised form 30 March 2012 Accepted 1 April 2012 Keywords: National image building/branding Mega events Image trasferability Chinese government public relations 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics 2010 Shanghai World Expo 2010 Guangzhou Asian Games

a b s t r a c t International mega or hallmark events such as the Olympics and World Expo, are believed to help brand national and government images of the host country. Existing studies explain that mega-event images are transferrable to a host country and/or government. Yet, such an assumption has not been widely tested, or studied with country cases. Furthermore, while international mega events are assumed to target chiefly the international community for country branding purposes, there is reason to assert that they may just as much aim at domestic audiences for regime’s political legitimization. By focusing on China’s recently hosted three mega events – the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics, the 2010 Shanghai World Expo, and 2010 Guangzhou Asian Games, this study addresses these issues. The analyses reveal that people are likely to associate event images, especially positive ones, with those of China and Chinese government. A set of presumably influential factors, which may either strengthen or weaken that association, are examined, showing that “people’s involvement and participation in these events” are the most significant. The findings also verify that internationally oriented mega events can aim at the host country’s internal audience. Indeed, solidifying its domestic legitimacy always seems to be an integral part of the Chinese government’s strategy in pursuit of a favorable international image. Although exploratory, this study provides clues and fertile ground for further research on the relationship between international mega events and national and/or governmental image building, projection and branding. © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction National images abroad and at home are widely regarded as a state’s intangible soft-power resource (Nye, 2004). While externally becoming essential elements of a state’s strategic asset, they, internally, contribute to political capital for both democratic systems and authoritarian regimes. There is growing recognition that national images can be branded. The traditional concept of branding asserts that brands are created when there is a balance in perception and reality about a product, resulting in a favorable, or a balanced image. Consumer-behavior studies find that such an image can have an impact on everything from purchasing habits to perceptions of nationals from a specific country (Berkowitz, Gjermano, Gomez, & Schafer, 2007). Following the same logic, the concept of nation or place branding has recently come into play, evident, for example, in the increasing acceptance of the Anholt Nation Brands Index (ANBI). S. Anholt’s nation brand hexagon based on six categories (tourism, exports, governance, investment and immigration, culture and heritage, and people) offered an analytical framework for national brands of 50 countries,

∗ Correspondence address: M5040, Run Run Shaw Creative Media Centre, 18 Tat Hong Avenue, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong. Tel.: +852 3442 8655; fax: +852 3442 0228. E-mail address: [email protected] 0363-8111/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.04.003

732

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

developed and developing ones alike, in 2009 (GfK Group, 2009). To brand national images is believed to gain a favorable image of at least the three major stakeholders of a country: its people, society and certainly government (including its institutions). Here, it is implied that the branding of government image is an integral part of the branding of national image. International mega or hallmark events, either sports tournaments such as the Olympics, or cultural and trade shows like the World Expo, can facilitate country’s image branding. The term “mega-event” characterizes “large events of world importance and high profile which have a major impact” on the hosting country or place (Law, 1993). In explaining why a growing number of countries show interest in hosting such events despite the high costs and complexity of the bidding process and actual event hosting, several studies have identified economic growth, infrastructure upgrading, and image promotion as chief benefits to hosting countries (Kim, Kim, & Odio, 2010; Kim & Petrick, 2005; Matos, 2006). Such events are not only pleasurable in themselves but attractive to money-spending visitors who are likely to forge positive images about places rich in culture, spirit and value (Horne & Manzenreiter, 2006; Therkelsen, 2003). Recently, China hosted three such mega events: the Beijing Summer Olympics in August 2008, the Shanghai World Expo in May–October 2010, and the Guangzhou Asian Games in November 2010. Still an authoritarian system, the Chinese government fought vigorously in bidding for the permits to host these events and worked hard in organizing them. With enormous resources invested, the government believed that every penny spent was worthy, particularly as a necessary expenditure for public diplomacy. Along with new opportunities for urban development, Chinese officials have claimed that the images of China’s three largest cities are branded nationally and internationally, and so is the image of the Chinese government via hosting these three mega events (Hong, 2010; Zhang, 2010). While many try to characterize the actual impact of the mega events on the country’s image abroad (Berkowitz et al., 2007; Lamberti et al., 2011; Wang, 2010), some find that the branding of the Chinese government has achieved only limited results (Rabinovitch, 2008). Whether or not mega events help brand a nation and/or government image remains an interesting and important issue, both academically and policy-wise. Applying Gwinner’s model of image creation/transfer in event sponsorship as a frame of reference, and approaching the issue from a government public relations perspective, this investigation focuses on a substantial set of research questions and hypotheses.

2. Literature review, research questions and hypotheses Event sponsorship is believed to generate effects on image building. When striving to hold a mega event, the decision making of a sponsoring organization is often based on the assumption that sponsorship, like any promotional efforts, produces positive effects on the image that a target audience may have of the sponsors, hence, promoting the sponsoring organizations (Nelson, 1990). With this assumption in mind, Gwinner (1997) proposed a theoretical model to explain the mechanisms by which image branding may be impacted through activity sponsorship. The model simply suggests that the impact on image is transferrable: from that of the event to that of the sponsor. In identifying factors that may shape the event-image branding, he regards three – event type, event characteristics, and individual factors (e.g. number of meanings, as well as past history with the event) – as outstanding determinants in positioning a given event in a new light. In tracking how the event image may lead to impact on the sponsor image, he believes that such factors as degree of similarity, level of sponsorship, event frequency, and product involvement are among the most relevant. Together, these factors are likely to warrant the transferring of an event image to a sponsor image. This is largely driven by a belief, he argues, that organizations select to sponsor an event to brand organization image, aiming to influence consumers’ attitudes towards the organization brand. So far, the Gwinner model has yet to be validated so as to become normative. Moreover, even if the image transferring impact may occur with organizations, it remains unclear whether such an impact may take place when a country or a city sponsors an event – particularly an international mega event. Many of those who study the impacts of mega events – mainly sporting events – find positive effects associated with events sponsorships. Boosted local economy, improved infrastructure, and increased tourism are among those intended “hard” benefits (Crompton, 1999; Getz, 1998; Hall & Hodges, 1996; Kim & Morrison, 2005; Richie & Smith, 1991; Richie & Yangzhou, 1987; Smith, 2005). Others identify enhanced destination image (awareness and knowledge of the hosting country or place), with community pride as the “soft” benefits that mega events can bring to a hosting country or place (Allen et al., 2002; Chalip, 2006; Fredline & Faulkner, 1998; Lee et al., 2005). Although encouraging in finding a link between mega events and images of a hosting country or place, many of these studies remain descriptive, and are particularly short in pin-pointing how, for example, the “soft” benefits are pursued, managed, and achieved. Few empirical studies have been conducted to measure whether the intended image transfers actually happen in the branding process. In other words, there is little hard-data supported evidence that a mega-event image would automatically rub off onto that of the host country. Furthermore, few government PR scholars have investigated whether a mega event that a country – in fact, government – sponsors might lead to the assumed image transferring result. Thus,

Research question 1: Do audiences associate a mega-event image with that of sponsoring country or government? Research question 2: If there is an association between mega-event image and that of host country or government, what factors may moderate – strengthen or weaken – this connection?

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

733

Research question 3: In the related vein, exactly what may influence audiences’ perception toward the mega-events, which, in turn, may have an impact on their perception of, and attitude towards the host country or government? Furthermore, some indicate that a predominant objective of Beijing’s “charm offensives” abroad is for the creation of benign or peaceful images in the world public opinions (Wang, 2003; Kurlantzick, 2007). To brand such an image, China has made sponsoring mega events with international impact and global visibility a salient strategy. While a general assumption focuses on internationally oriented mega events as targeting chiefly, if not solely, at the international community for country branding purpose, it is reasonable to contend that they may be just as much aimed at internal audiences. As branding China’s image abroad may have serious consequence for its credibility and legitimacy at home, there is reason to claim that Chinese government’s intention to host these events may be based on domestic considerations, deriving from a need to target its own people. With both domestic and foreign publics, Beijing may intend to foster a more favorable image of not only the country but also the government (including its institutions) than what it was. Yet, only a few studies have analyzed the intended and actual impacts upon domestic audiences of Beijing’s strategy and efforts in image branding through the mega events. Among those, a recent study suggests that Chinese government used the Beijing Olympics “as a moment to stress the ‘civilizational’ value of Chinese culture to its people” (de Kloet, Chong, & Landsberger, 2011). Another posits that, with the specific theme of the Shanghai Expo, Beijing expected to “affirm the leadership of the city of Shanghai in the debate on sustainable development in urban areas” within China and saw positive effects (Lamberti et al., 2011, p. 4). These preliminary observations have corresponded with Chinese government’s claims. With the “Better City, Better Life” as the main theme of the Expo, Shanghai’s party boss, Yu Zhensheng, claimed at a press conference on 11 November 2010 that the government wished to convince the people that “the ultimate goal of our [party’s] work is to make their lives better” (Yu, 2010). One official of the Shanghai Expo Organizing Committee also suggested in an interview that, though openly promoting domestic tourism, the main message of “seeing the world without traveling abroad” was designed to help the people draw a “cost-effective” judgment about government expenditure on the event (Interview, 2011). Top Chinese leaders have consistently stated that the Beijing Olympics and Shanghai Expo generated positive impacts upon the Chinese peoples’ attitude toward, perception of, and belief in the government and leadership, enhancing the “solidarity” between the peoples and the government (Hu, 2010; Zhang, 2010). It is, then, important to examine exactly how the Chinese government mega-event communication impacted the domestic audience in order to verify whether or not there was an image transfer from the event to the country or the government. Hence, such a query leads to a specific research focus of this study. To measure the impacts of Beijing’s branding efforts on its own people, this study regards Chinese nationals including those residing in mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau as the target audiences. It also intends to explore possible factors that may be associated with the actual effects – positive, neutral, or negative. Hypothesis 1. Asserts that overall, people tend to associate a mega-event image with that of the host country and government. PR campaign strategists believe that if the sponsorship of an event is visible, it is bound to affect the image of the sponsoring organization as do the organization’s logo and delivery (McDonald, 1991). Well-directed sponsorship can do much to change and enhance the public’s perception of the organization and, possibly, its services and products. Conversely, ill-designed and poorly executed sponsorship may, at best, have no effect at all or, at worst, backfire. In terms of image transfer, sponsorship may alter how people “see” or perceive the sponsoring organization. Marketing research also shows that, through sponsorship, an event’s image may be linked with the brand image. For example, “this event involves conserving energy; energy is provided by China Power Ltd.; and China Power Ltd. is sponsoring it.” It is the synergy between the event and the organization’s values that makes it possible for people to connect the event to the image of the sponsoring organization. This may well be applicable to mega events and their image branding effects. Moreover, studies on international sporting events (Bieger et al., 2003; Getz, 1991; MacCartney, 2005; Moon et al., 2009; Richie & Smith, 1991; Ritchie, 1996) reveal that a tourist’s positive perception of an international sporting event helps to enhance the destination image. Hypothesis 2a. The more positively audiences feel about the mega events, the more likely the event images may affect their perception toward the host country in a positive way. Other studies show that event images are not always transferrable to brand images. Audiences may associate an event image only with a partial image of the sponsor, not all of it. This seems true with mutual perception and images of nationstates and their governments. Wang (2010) finds that American perception of China corresponds with some of the images projected by the Chinese government, but contradicts others. A study (Otker & Hayes, 1987) on the 1986 World Cup found little change in sponsors’ brand images compared with those of non-sponsors. Hypothesis 2b. There is no assured association between the mega-event images and that of the host country or government. Some event images are transferrable, while others are not. This is so largely because some images entail more or less objective attributes, leaving little room for interpretation. Others are full of subjective judgments and often controversies. A mega-event image that consists of both objective and

734

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

subjective components may not be entirely transferred to the image of a sponsoring country or government, depending in part on the “economic externalities” and “variations” to the community’s perception that the event suggests (Lamberti, 2010, p. 4). Mega sporting and cultural events are believed to be culture-bound, likely to mean different things to participants or visors of different cultural and personal experiences. Some may be shared by individual’s expectations through external involvement (Dozier & Ehling, 1992, p. 174); whereas others are related to certain cultural communities (Therkelsen, 2003). Image association between people and their country or government may hinge chiefly upon ethnic, cultural and personal identities. In today’s China, even among the Han Chinese, national identity is not assured. Hong Kong (a former British colony) and Macau (a former Portuguese colony) have only been recently handed over to mainland China (the former in 1997 and the latter in 1999). After centuries of separation while still adhering to “one country two systems” arrangements, people in Hong Kong and Macau have different senses of association with the country and/or the government (Chou, 2010). Hence, they may think of the events differently. Hypothesis 3. People from mainland China are more likely to think of the events positively as compared to those from Hong Kong and Macau; thus, in the following rank order: mainland Chinese > Macau > Hong Kong. In the related vein, Hypothesis 4. Those who feel emotionally associated with the host country (i.e. feeling proud of being Chinese) tend to think of the event positively, leading them to harbor more positive perceptions toward the host country or government. In addition to attributes such as geographic locations and one’s emotional attachment, the level of education may be a predictor of a person’s perception toward the mega-event. Studies on the impacts of mega events find that the distinctive traits of these events lie in their potential to enhance awareness, appeal and profitability of the hosting place in the short or long run (Lamberti, 2010, p. 4). Whether or not public support for staging a mega event can be galvanized is said to depend in part on the public perception of and attitude toward the event itself and the government institutions involved (Baum, Deery, Hanlon, Lockstone, & Smith, 2009). The level of education of the audiences that tends to structure their perceptive or cognitive processes may influence their perception and attitude: the higher level of education, the more independently such a perception of or attitude toward a mega event will become. Hypothesis 5a. The more educated the audiences are, the more likely they think of the events in a neutral or unemotional way; and the more likely they would de-associate event images from that of the host country/government. Hypothesis 5b. Conversely, those with relatively lower education degrees are more likely to associate the event images with those of the host country and government; consequently, the event images tend to influence their perceptions toward the host country in terms of both the extent (larger) and direction (more positive). The situational theory of publics (Grunig, 1966) has been enriched by invoking the concept of “level of involvement” in explaining the differences between active communication behavior (information seeking) and passive communication behavior (information processing). This theory assumes that audience information seeking is active under conditions of high problem recognition, low constraint recognition, and most importantly, high involvement. A person’s involvement in a situation is, thus, accounted for his/her information seeking and using behaviors. In general, people with high level of involvement would analyze issues more often, prefer messages that contain more and better arguments (Heath, Liao, & Douglas, 1995; Petty & Cacioppo, 1981; Petty, Cacioppo & Goldman, 1986), and attain greater knowledge levels (Chaffee & Roser, 1986; Engelberg, Flora, & Nass, 1995). They tend to seek for information more actively rather than process information passively. In addition, audience’s involvement induced by an organization or government can be an important motivational factor. Dozier and Ehling (1992, p. 172) believed that highly involved individuals tend to have high problem recognition and low constraint recognition. Johnson and Eagly (1989) verified that high-involved individuals were more persuaded than low-involved ones particularly by strong arguments. A recent study on the impact of media in a transitional society found that the information acquired through partisan-oriented media played a positive role in shaping the attitude formation toward the political institutions (Camaj, 2011). Derived from the above, one may regard the level of audience involvement in the events as an influential factor, which, to some extents, determines audience behaviors in seeking or processing events-related information. Moreover, mega events are designed largely to encourage wide participation. However, some may engage more participants than others, depending on the nature and scope of the event. While affecting information-seeking or processing, level of individual’s involvement and participation in or connection to an event plays a critical role in shaping the individual’s perception toward the events; hence, the event images (Dozier & Ehling, 1992, pp. 171–173; Yan et al., 2007). Those who exhibit higher level of involvement/participation in the events are assumed to think of the events more positively than others (Johnson & Eagly, 1989; Kim et al., 2010). Because of that, for all the three mega events, the Chinese government persistently mobilized domestic involvement/participation by encouraging people to be either visitors or volunteers (Lamberti, 2010). The attendance to the Shanghai Expo, for example, reached a record-high of 73.084 million with 94.2% domestic, of which 27.3% came from local communities, 25.4% from neighboring provinces of Jiangsu and Zhejiang, and 41.5% from the rest of the country (Expo.Net, 2010). Also, there were altogether 79,965 volunteers: except for 204 from abroad and 1266 from other parts of China, the vast majority was local residents and college students attending schools in Shanghai.

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

735

Hypothesis 6. The individual or collective participation in the events tend to have a positive impact on the audience’s perceptions toward the events. Those who served as volunteers or participated in the events (visitors) may have a more positive view on the events as compared to those who did not. Theories such as agenda-setting, media dependency, framing, and cultivation, as well as research on mass media effects, suggest that mass media play a critical role in shaping the public opinion and perception on issues, events, subjects and so on (Ball-Rokeach & DeFleur, 1976; Chomsky & Herman, 2002; Gauntlett, 2005; Gerbner & Gross, 1976; Goffman, 1974; McCombs & Shaw, 1993; Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007; Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007). Mass media are often employed as instruments of social control, functioning as a social institution (Steinberg, 1972, p. 563). They are also used to educate the public on certain issues so as to form a favorable opinion (Harris, 1982). In China, mass media remain highly controlled by the Chinese government, which continue to serve as the ruling regime’s mouthpiece. They are used to disseminate information in favor of the government to achieve desirable effects. However, social media, such as blogs, MSN, Facebook, Twitter among others, have been developing at an amazing speed in recent years in China. They are more difficult for the government to control, enjoying a relatively higher-degree of freedom, and consequently, cast less socially controlled influence on the Chinese people, particularly college students (Bhattacharji, Zissis, & Baldwin 2010; Hazleton, Harrison-Rexrode, & Kennan, 2007). In contrast to mainland China, the government control over media is far less pervasive in Hong Kong or Macau. With the freedom of press protected by the Bill of Rights, for example, Hong Kong has been home to many international media and publications; some even having anti-Beijing backgrounds such as The Epoch Times which is funded by Falun Gong. Macau, too, enjoys the freedom of the press that is guaranteed in the Press Law of Macau. Due to these differences in media systems and functions that media serve, the influence of Hong Kong and Macau media on their audiences is less socially or politically controlled than in mainland China (BDHL, 2011). From the assumptions that people’s media consumption behaviors and sources of information may play significant roles in influencing and shaping their perception/thinking of the events and the host country, two related hypotheses are developed. Hypothesis 7. Those who consume the government-controlled mass media are more likely to think of the events positively, compared to those using social media as the main sources for events information. Conversely, those who mainly consume social media may have a less positive or rather a neutral view on the events. By the same token, Hypothesis 8. Those who depend on Chinese official media for event information tend to think of the events more positively than those relying largely on commercial media. In a related vein, those who receive the events information from Hong Kong and/or Macau media/foreign media outlets, tend to think of the events in a less positive, but rather a neutral or even a negative way. Mega events are normally world-famous. The differences in their appeal, objectives, history, profitability, and people’s awareness of them, tend to make a difference on the local community’s attitude toward hosting them (Baum et al., 2009). Hypothesis 9. Taking into account the appeal (world-wide vs. regional), the goal (sport vs. cultural), and host cities’ history (ancient vs. recent) of the three events, the audience’s perceptions toward each may differ in terms of positivity and shall follow the following rank order: Olympics > Shanghai Expo > Guangzhou Asian Games; so are the audience’s emotional attachment to the events. 3. Research methods This study employed both qualitative and quantitative analyses. They included examination of the information retrieved from the government websites of the State Council Information Office (SCIO) and the hosting cities, in-depth interviews of Chinese government officials, and a questionnaire survey. To provide a context, this work treated official information with care. Keenly aware of the power of the Internet, the Chinese government created official websites for the Beijing Olympics, the Shanghai Expo and the Guangzhou Asian Games respectively, at both central (SCIO) and local levels (hosting municipalities). Managed with vigor before, during and after the events, these websites contained official reports, news releases, backgrounders, statistics, photos, videos, and print media coverage including selected items by the media outlets outside China, in both Chinese and English. Analyses of these materials led to the development of a list of wordings/phrases/statements that were frequently used in describing and reporting the respective events. This list, in turn, guided the survey questionnaire construction. Such a list was particularly helpful in measuring the respondents’ philosophical impressions of the events, or event images. The website information also provided clues for several open-ended interviews with government officials at both central and local levels. Conveniently arranged, one of the four SCIO officials who had been contacted agreed to a roughly 45-min interview early in November 2010. Three from the event organizing committees (out of a total of 11 approached) at the city level – respectively for the Olympics, Expo and the Asian Games – were interviewed. Each interview lasted about an hour. They dealt with a wide range of issues relating to the events, from the interviewees’ anecdotal reflections about their roles in the committee to their perceptive analyses of the particular event. The focus, however, stayed on the policy initiation and action execution of communications with Chinese people about these events. Conducted in Chinese, all of the interviews

736

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

were tape-recorded and transcribed. To enhance reliability, data from the interviews were checked against the information acquired from the websites to avoid misinterpretation based on events after the facts. A quantitative analysis of the data from the survey constituted a core of the research. In May and June 2011, the surveys were conducted in four selected locations: Shanghai and Guangzhou as the hosting cities of the two mega events (the Expo and Asian Games of 2010), and Hong Kong and Macau as China’s two former western colonies. It was of particular interest to identify how the residents from Hong Kong and Macau viewed and perceived the mega events held in mainland China and the Chinese government that acted as the sole sponsor of these events. Such a design warranted much-needed comparison of residents in the mainland China with those from Hong Kong and Macau in regard to their perceptions toward the events and sponsors. 3.1. Sampling Targeting college students, the sample was rather homogenous: more or less in the same age range and educational backgrounds. Such a focus was based on the assumption that young and educated people are likely to be interested, thus, participating in the highly profiled international mega events either as volunteers or visitors. Hence, the variables of age and gender are not considered, as they may not have much impact on the dependent variables this study intends to measure. Surveys were conducted in four universities in Shanghai, Guangzhou, Hong Kong and Macau (Shanghai International Studies University, Dr. Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou, City University of Hong Kong and Macau University of Science and technology). Since the students attending these universities were from all over the country, the representativeness of the sample – young and educated – was insured. Due largely to the need to circumvent the tightening government restrictions on surveys about social and political issues, and also as a supplement to the surveys conducted in the above four universities, the same questionnaire was posted online during the same period. As many as 56 people completed the survey posed online. Judging by their locations and educational backgrounds, 18 responses suggested that they were college students from parts of mainland China other than Shanghai, Guangzhou, Hong Kong or Macau. They were thus, included into and combined with the sample categorized as people from “mainland China”. Out of a total of 370 questionnaires distributed in four universities, 305 were completed and collected, yielding a response rate at 82.5%. Adding 18 people who participated in the online survey, the number of valid responses totaled up to 323. Among them, 221 (68.4%) were from mainland China, 52 (16.1%) from Hong Kong, and 50 (15.5%) from Macau. Given roughly 25 million college students enrolled in mainland China, 120,000 in Hong Kong and 45,000 in Macau, this sampling ratio stood as an appropriate representation of the groups in each different location. 3.2. Operational definitions 3.2.1. Event images When gauging the event images, two measures were taken. First, an analysis of the content posed on the official events websites as well as the media reporting over the events was carried out to locate often-used wordings/phrases/statements in describing and portraying the events. Altogether 21 such items were identified. Second, respondents were asked to choose all that applied that best describe their philosophical impressions of the events, reflecting event images in their minds. 3.2.2. Audience general perception toward the events – positive, neutral, or negative In gauging respondents’ general perception toward the events, a supplementary survey was conducted, asking respondents to indicate (on a 5-point scale with 1 = very negative to 5 = very positive) which wordings/phrases/statements they considered as “positive,” “neutral,” or “negative.” Eight of the items were rated as “positive”, nine “neutral”, and four “negative.” And the other two were too “vague” to be counted. Three rounds of factor analysis of these 21 items yielded three clear-cut summed indices: positive, neutral, and negative (m = 4.07, 3.13, and 1.3 respectively), explaining 80.8% variance in total. Thus, the internal-consistency reliability was quite high. Coefficient alphas were .82 for “positive,” .83 for “neutral,” and .87 for “negative” index. Finally, in computing the respondents’ general perceptions toward the mega events, the perception scores were calculated based on the respondents’ answers to multiple-choice questions. It entailed three steps in transferring the answers into calculable scores: first, the frequencies on positive/neutral/negative statements were counted; second, each frequency was weighted by 0.5 and −1.75 separately to eliminate the bias caused by the different total numbers of positive/neutral/negative statements; finally, a 3.5 was added to the weighted scale to create a 0–7 scale. The following formula was derived, undertaking the three steps: General perception

=

(Np ∗ 0.5 + Nn ∗ (−1.75)) + 3.5

In this formula, Np referred to the number of positive statements that the respondents chosen. Since eight statements in all were rated as positive ones, Np ranged from 0 to 8, with 0 means choosing none of such statements, and “8” for choosing all of them. Nn referred to the number of negative statements (altogether two). Nn thus, ranged from 0 to 2. This author then weighted Np and Nn by 0.5 and (−1.75) separately. With that, a −3.5 score reflected an extremely negative perception, and

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

737

a 3.5 score represented an extremely positive perception. Following that, a constant 3.5 was added into the formula to get a 7-point scale ranging from 0 to 7. By doing so, this author was able to measure the central tendency of respondents’ general perceptions towards the event, taking into account the mean and standard deviation on this variable. Also, in this formula, “*” denoted multiplying what came before it with what came after it. 3.2.3. Likelihood of association Respondents were asked to rate their likelihood of associating event images with that of hosting country and government on a 5-point scale from 5 (very likely) to 1 (not likely at all). 3.2.4. The extent to which events influence audience’s perception/opinion/attitude A 5-point scale was used to tap how large an influence that the events may have on audience’s perception toward the host country. Scale value ranged from 5 (very large) to 1 (very small). 3.2.5. The directions to which events influence audience’s perception/opinion/attitude Likewise, a 5-point scale was adopted to assess in which way that the events may impact audience’s perception toward the host country, ranging from 5 (very positive) to 1 (very negative). 3.3. Statistical analyses Both the data processing and the statistical analysis were done via SPSS-PC+. T tests, university analyses of variance, Pearson product-moment correlations, and Sheffe’s tests of selected comparison were used along with stepwise multiple regressions. Factor analysis, with principal-axis solutions followed by varimax rotation, yielded three summed indices of event images, which were then used to measure respondents’ general perceptions (positive, neutral, negative) toward the events. 4. Findings and discussions 4.1. Descriptive findings Among the 323 respondents, 28.2% were males (n = 91), and 71.8% females (n = 232). This heavily female composition somewhat matched the reported gender ratio in comprehensive research universities in China and, to less degree, the ones in Hong Kong and Macau. Most are well-educated: 77.7% (n = 251) with BA/BSC degrees, 18% (n = 58) with MA/MS degrees, 1.9% (n = 6) with a doctoral degree, and only 2.5% (n = 8) having high-school diplomas. All had heard of 2008 Olympics and 2010 Shanghai Expo. Only a few (n = 22, 6.8%) had never heard of 2010 Guangzhou Asian Games. Most (85%, n = 275) believed that these events helped enhance understanding of China including its people, culture, and society. However, only 15.2% (n = 48) participated in the Beijing Olympics and Guangzhou Asian Games (15.9%, n = 51) either as volunteers or visitors. That number went up to 45.2% (n = 146) for the Shanghai Expo. Asked what medium/media they tended to consume for events information, the respondents provided intriguing answers. Surprisingly, television took the lead (94.1%, n = 304), followed by newspapers (72.8%, n = 235), and the Internet (70%, n = 226). In a related vein, more than half of the respondents (57.2%, n = 185) admitted that the Chinese official media served as their main source of events information. A large number (55.5%, n = 179) named the Chinese commercial media as a primary source. Regarding their overall impressions on these events, the three most often checked words/phrases/statements reflecting their views on the Beijing Olympics and Shanghai Expo were in the following rank order: mega publicity campaigns used by the Chinese government for image and reputation enhancement (Olympics: 61.4%, n = 198; Expo: 53.4%, n = 172); mega promotion campaigns to “brand” the country (Olympics: 55.9%, n = 181; Expo: 47.9%, n = 155); and events showing China as a “rising power” (Olympics: 51.7%, n = 167; Expo: 41.7%, n = 135). The respondents’ impression of the Guangzhou Asian Games seemed slightly different, with the most-often checked statement (37.9%, n = 122) being “it is a mega event to promote the understanding and friendship between and among peoples of different nations;” followed by “it is a mega publicity campaign used by the Chinese government for image and reputation enhancement” (35.9%, n = 116); and “it is a successful mega event” (34.8%, n = 112). Still, the descriptive statements of “an event to ‘brand’ the country” and “an event showing China as a ‘rising power”’ were among the top five. The data indicated that about half of the respondents held a rather “neutral” perception toward these mega events. Interestingly, only a few (Olympics: 9.7%, n = 31; Expo: 7.9%, n = 26, Asian Games: 6.9%, n = 22) claimed that these events made them proud of being Chinese. 4.2. Hypotheses testing results Hypothesis 1, which asserts that people tend to associate mega-event images with those of the host country and government, was clearly supported by the following measures.

738

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

Table 1 Correlations between event images and their impacts on the audience’s perception toward the host country. Likelihood of associating event images with that of host country No. of positive descriptions Beijing Olympics World Expo Asian Games No. of neutral descriptions Beijing Olympics World Expo Asian Games No. of negative descriptions Beijing Olympics World Expo Asian Games * ** ***

Extent to which audience are influenced by the events in perceiving the host country

Directions of audience’s perception toward the host country

.361*** .313*** .280***

.314*** .297*** .277***

.356*** .343*** .279***

.315*** .328*** .187**

.292*** .243*** .230***

.233*** .203*** .190**

−.178** −.174** −.124*

−.143* .000 −.072

−.308*** −.190** −.098

p < .05. p < .01. p < .001.

Table 2 Correlations between event images and that of the host country and government. Likelihood of associating event images with that of host country General perception Olympics World Expo Asian Games No. of positive descriptions Beijing Olympics World Expo Asian Games No. of neutral descriptions Beijing Olympics World Expo Asian Games No. of negative descriptions Beijing Olympics World Expo Asian Games * ** ***

Likelihood of associating event images with that of host government

.355*** .323*** .275***

.181** .154** .207***

.361*** .313*** .280***

.202** .197** .281***

.315*** .328*** .187**

.175** .153** .225***

−.178** −.174** −.124*

−.077 −.046 −.045

p < .05. p < .01. p < .001.

First, respondents’ likelihood in linking the event images with that of the host country (m = 3.78, SD = 1.02), as well as that of the government (m = 3.42, SD = 1.12) on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = “not likely at all” to 5 = “very likely”). Second, the large percentage among the respondents (n = 75, 23.2% checked on “very likely”; and n = 152, 47.1% checked on “fairly likely) or “very likely” scoring high on the 5-point scale, claiming their likelihood to relate the two sets of concepts to each other. Hypothesis 2a received partial support, predicting that the more positively a person feels about the mega events, the more the event images may affect his/her perception toward the host country AND in a positive way. The data showed that those who thought of the events positively or neutrally were inclined to claim that the event could impact their perceptions toward the host country in a positive way; whereas, those who considered the event negatively tended to hold a negative perception toward the country, though with little statistical significance (see Table 1). The data, in general, confirmed Hypothesis 2b that there is no assurance that all event images would be rubbed on to that of the host country or government – some event images are transferrable, but others not (see Table 2). By examining the association between respondents’ general perception toward the events and that of the host country and government, it was found that the more positive one’s perception of the events, the more one leaned toward relating the event images to those of the host country and government. Moreover, in testing the relationship between different event images with views of the host country and government, the number of positive/neutral/negative image descriptions that the respondents selected and attached to the events in the assessment of how likely these different event images might transfer (or NOT) to the host country and government was counted. The data revealed a statistically significant likelihood that the positive and neutral event images seemed convertible while the negative ones did NOT.

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0

3.85

739

3.79

2.34

Macau

Mainland(elsewhere included)

HK

Fig. 1. General perception toward Beijing Olympics by locations, p < .001.

4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5

3.83

3.59

2.36

2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Macau

Mainland(elsewhere included)

HK

Fig. 2. General perception toward Shanghai expo by locations, p < .001.

Interestingly, the negative perceptions appeared to be more associated with the host government than the host country, though statistically not significant. There nevertheless appeared a different branding effect between the image of the country and the image of the government. The data supported Hypothesis 3, which asserts that people from mainland China are more likely to think of the events positively as compared to those from Hong Kong and Macau. In measuring how locations of residency may affect audiences’ perception toward the events, ANOVA tests proved that this variable made a difference, but not in the exact rank order hypothesized. Regarding the respondents’ perception toward the event of Beijing Olympics, the data showed the differences among the people from different locations (F = 7.246, p < .001), following the order of Macau (m = 3.85, SD = 1.23) > mainland China (m = 3.79, SD = 1.42) > Hong Kong (m = 2.34, SD = 1.85) (see Fig. 1). Moreover, the difference between Macau and mainland China was not significant; whereas the differences between Hong Kong and the other two locations proved statistically significant. As for the event of Shanghai Expo, perception differences also existed (F = 5.384, p < .01); and moreover, the same pattern or rank order held true (see Fig. 2): Macau (m = 3.83, SD = 1.18) > mainland China (m = 3.59, SD = 1.54) > Hong Kong (m = 2.36, SD = 1.64). Again, the differences between Hong Kong and mainland China as well as that of Hong Kong and Macau were statistically significant. In terms of the respondents’ perception toward the Guangzhou Asian Games, the differences remained (F = 15.857, p < .001), but in a slightly different order (see Fig. 3): mainland China (m = 3.64, SD = 0.83) > Macau (m = 3.40, SD = 1.21) > Hong Kong (m = 1.84, SD = 1.61). Again, the difference between mainland China and Macau were not significant; whereas the differences between Hong Kong and other two locations proved statistically significant. On each of the three events, the general perception means for people from Hong Kong are lower than those for the people from mainland China and Macau respectively; and the later two, did not differ from each other that much with, surprisingly, Macau people exceeding mainland Chinese by a slight margin on two accounts. Independent T-tests clearly confirmed Hypothesis 4 that presumes that those who feel emotionally attached to the host country tend to think of the events positively, leading them to harboring more positive perceptions toward the host country and government. The T-test results demonstrated that the respondents who felt proud of being Chinese were inclined to uphold a more positive perception toward all three events respectively: (Olympics: mean = 4.50, SD = 1.26; Expo: m = 4.29, SD = 1.28; Asian Games: m = 4.01, SD = 1.37) than those who did not (Olympics: mean = 3.24, SD = 1.43; Expo: m = 3.23, SD = 1.40; Asian Games: m = 3.47, SD = 1.26). The differences were statistically significant (Olympics: mean difference = 1.25; Expo: mean difference = 1.06; Asian Games: mean difference = 0.54; p < .001).

740

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

4

3.64

3.5

3.4

3 2.5 1.84

2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Mainland(elsewhere included)

Macau

HK

Fig. 3. General perception toward Guangzhou Asian games by locations, p < .001.

Table 3 Correlations between event images and that of the host country and government as well as the impacts on the audience’s perception toward the host country by education levels. Groups

Mean (SD)

Mean difference

p

Likelihood to associate the event images with that of the country

BA or lower MA or higher

3.81 (1.05) 3.66 (.84)

.15

.371

Likelihood to associate the event images with that of the government

BA or lower MA or higher

3.51 (1.09) 2.94 (1.17)

.57

.001

Extent to which respondents’ perception are influenced by the event images

BA or lower MA or higher

3.76 (.92) 3.40 (.95)

.36

.015

Directions in which respondents’ perceptions toward the country are influenced

BA or lower MA or higher

3.74 (.80) 3.47 (.83)

.27

.038

In testing Hypothesis 5a, this study aimed to determine whether different educational levels might lead to different perceptions toward the events that, in turn, might impact the likelihood of associating event images with those of the host country and government. The data suggested that the more educated the respondents were, the more likely they thought of the events in a neutral or unemotional way; and the more likely they de-associated the event images with those of the host country/government. In data analysis, the respondents were divided into two groups: one with bachelors or lower degrees, and the other with masters or higher degrees. Correlation analyses revealed no significant relationship between education levels or the ways the respondents thought of the events (p > .1). T-tests also showed that the respondents with masters and higher degrees were only slightly more likely to think of the events in a neutral way (mean difference = .49, p > .01). The first part of this hypothesis was thus rejected. The data, however, did confirm that the respondents with masters and higher degrees tended to de-associate the event images with that of the government (Spearman’s rho = −.150, p < .05). Along the same line, their perception toward the host country appeared less influenced by the event images (Spearman rho = −.112, p < .1). Hence, the second part of this hypothesis received partial support. The data strongly supported Hypothesis 5b that posits that the respondents with relatively lower education degrees are more likely to associate the event images with that of the host country and government. As Table 3 shows, the event images are more likely to influence their perception toward the host country in a positive way, with only one item (the tendency to associate the event images with that of the country) proven not statistically significant. Hypothesis 6, assuming that the individual or collective involvement and/or participation in the mega events may affect how the respondents perceive the events, received a clear confirmation. Independent T-tests showed that participants (Olympics: m = 3.44, SD = 1.44; Expo: m = 3.93, SD = 1.31; Asian Games: m = 3.90, SD = 1.12) and non-participants (Olympics: m = 2.52, SD = 2.51; Expo: m = 3.29, SD = 1.49; Asian Games: m = 3.53, SD = 1.33) differed significantly in terms of how they perceived the events. Those who participated in the events either as volunteers or as visitors were evidently more positive in thinking of the events (Olympics: mean difference = −0.92, t = −3.42; Expo: mean difference = 0.64, t = 3.91; Asian Games: mean difference = 0.37, t = 3.91; p < .01). In addition, the proportion of the samples who claimed to have had some degree of involvement and/or participation in the events was also relatively high (n = 245, 76%). The data failed to either confirm or reject Hypothesis 7 that proposes that the different media consumption behaviors may lead to different perceptions toward the events. This result appeared to suggest that none of the respondents considered himself/herself as either a “mass media consumer” or a “social/online media user” only. They tended to access both types of media for events information. Still, at least two observations were interesting. First, the surveyed college students in mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau consumed mass media more often than social and online media for the events information (see Table 4). The heavily government controlled television and

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

741

Table 4 Media consumption behaviors. Media consumption behaviors Mass media TV Newspaper Magazine Posters/brochures Radio Online media SNS Interpersonal Word of mouth Others

Frequency (total = 323)

Percentage (%)

304 235 145 145 115

94.1 72.8 44.8 44.8 35.5

199

61.7

199 21

61.7 6.6

Table 5 Media consumption behaviors and respondents’ general perceptions toward the events and event images. Media consumption behaviors

Beijing Olympics Mass media Online media Word of mouth Shanghai Expo Mass media Online media Word of mouth Asian games Mass media Online media Word of mouth

No. of respondents

Mean (SD) of general perception toward the events

293 270 211

3.59 (1.31) 3.88 (1.47) 3.97 (1.45)

293 270 211

3.80 (1.50) 3.57 (1.42) 3.51 (1.44)

293 270 211

3.59 (1.44) 3.62 (1.29) 3.67 (1.31)

Table 6 Sources of the event information and perception/opinions/attitudes toward the event.

Chinese official media Chinese commercial media Media in Hong Kong, Macau, or other areas

No. of respondents

Mean (SD) of general perception toward W.E.

166 161 162

3.59 (1.44) 3.52 (1.53) 3.60 (1.47)

newspapers were the most popularly used media, followed by online media and interpersonal channels. This suggested somewhat the degree of dependence on the government controlled media for events information. Whether or not this tendency reflects their approval of the government-controlled media or of the government is beyond the scope of this study. Second, though statistically not meaningful, Table 5 indicates that whichever media the respondents used to access the events information, their media consumption behaviors did not seem to have any impact on their general perceptions toward the events, as no significant difference was identified among subgroups relying primarily on the different media. Much as with Hypothesis 7, the data failed to either confirm or reject Hypothesis 8, which assumes that the sources of information may play an influential role in shaping the audience’s perception toward the events and the host country. The data showed that none of the respondents, whether from mainland China or from Hong Kong or Macau, claimed to have relied solely on one type of media – official or commercial – as their sources of events information. Much as expected, however, those who depended more on official Chinese media tended to perceive the events more positively (see Table 6). Even though the difference is not statistically significant, the impact deserves attention. Considering the size and the nature of the three events in terms of their appeals (world-wide vs. regional), the types (sport vs. cultural), the host cities’ history (ancient vs. modern), as well as the amount of resources put in, Hypothesis 9 states that the audience’s perceptions toward each of the three events may differ in terms of positivity and shall follow the following rank order: Olympics > Shanghai Expo > Guangzhou Asian Games; so are the audience’s emotional attachment to the events. This hypothesis received partial confirmation. The data confirmed the existence of different perceptions by the respondents toward the three different events, but in a slightly different order than expected: Beijing Olympics (M = 3.80, SD = 1.49) > Guangzhou Asian Games (M = 3.59, SD = 1.30) > Shanghai Expo (M = 3.58, SD = 1.45). Interestingly, the rank orders for the audience’s emotional attachment

742

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

Table 7 Hierarchical regression of perception toward the three events on education level, location, emotional attachment and involvement/participation. Models

Beijing Olympics B (SE)

Shanghai W.E. Beta

Model 1 3.221 (.844) Constant .018 (.204) .006 Education level Location (reference = mainland China) −1.094 (.358) −.182** Hong Kong Macau .119 (.215) .030 Emotional attachment (reference = not feeling proud of being Chinese) 1.200 (.167) .401*** Feeling proud of being Chinese R2 .213 .162 15.399*** 10.941*** F Model 2 3.201 (.845) Constant .029 (.205) .009 Education level Location (reference = mainland China) −1.072 (.360) −.178** HK Macau .105 (.217) .027 Emotional attachment (reference = not feeling proud of being Chinese) .144 (.228) .035 Feeling proud of being Chinese Involvement (reference = not involved) 1.191 (.168) .398*** Involved R2 .214 12.872*** F a * ** ***

Guangzhou A.G.

B (SE)

Beta

B (SE)

Beta

4.072 .842) −.195 .204)

−.064

4.827 (.758) −.273 (.183)

−.323

−.943 (.352) .177 (.213)

−.162** .046

−1.694 (.317) −.393 (.194)

−.323*** −.114*

1.010 (.169) .162 11.008***

.329***

.365 (.175)

.116*

3.558 (.858) −.125 (.204)

−.041

4.731 (.766) −.259 (.184)

−.094

−.796 (.353) .367 (.224)

−.137 .096

−1.678 (.317) −.366 (.196)

−.320*** −.106a

.452 (.176)

.156*

.177 (.197)

.050

.913 (.171) .181 10.396***

.298***

.364 (.176) .165 9.302***

.116*

*

p < .1. p < .05. p < .01. p < .001.

to the three events were in a reversed mode: Guangzhou Asian Games (M = 1.77, SD = 0.44) > Shanghai Expo (M = 1.67, SD = 0.47) > Beijing Olympics (M = 1.55, SD = 0.50). The differences were not statistically significant, though.

4.3. Addressing the research questions The research questions for this study are addressed in a systematical way. The data yields a positive answer to the question of whether audiences associate a mega-event image with that of sponsoring country. Then, the questions of what may shape this connection and influence their perception toward the mega-events and subsequently their perception of, and attitude towards the host country are tackled in two ways: first, through two-variable analysis and multiple regression; second by examining relationships among as many variables as possible. The bivariate analysis focused on several variables proven to be influential in shaping audiences’ perceptions/attitudes toward the events held in a country in transition, including: education level, residential location, emotional attachment to the host country, the individual or collective involvement in the events, media consumption behaviors, and sources of information. To identify which may be the determinant one, a multiple regressions analysis was conducted, which allowed examining several independent variables at one time so as to see which ones predicted scares on a dependent variable most strongly with the other independent variables controlled or held constant. This analysis targeted four independent variables (education level, residential location, emotional attachment, and involvement/participation in the events) that in the earlier analysis correlated with the selected dependent measure. A two-step hierarchical regression analysis showed that, when demographics of education level and residential location (reference = mainland China) as well psychological variable of emotional attachment (reference = not feeling proud of being a Chinese) were entered as independent variables, a significant difference was shown (see Table 7) on two accounts. First, there was a statistically significant difference between Hong Kong and mainland Chinese/Macau people in terms of their perceptions toward the events (see Table 7, Model 1). This demographic variable (residential location) accounted for substantial amount of variance in dependent measure. Second, emotional attachment played an influential role in shaping the way audience members perceived the events. Education level, however, did not have any effect on the perception when location was controlled. When involvement/participation variable was added to the regression equation, there appeared some enhancement in variance accounted for in the dependent measure, showing it as a significant predictor of the event evaluation (see Table 7, Model 2). This variable, thus, did stand as the leading predictor of the respondents’ evaluation of the events; hence, the host country.

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

743

5. Implications and conclusions This study explored China’s image-building efforts through hosting such mega events as the 2008 Beijing Olympics, 2010 Shanghai Expo, and 2010 Guangzhou Asian Games. It has particularly addressed the questions of whether the event images could be transferred to that of the host country and government – a belief that many countries and governments seem to have harbored when bidding for and executing international mega events with huge public expenditures. While it is generally assumed that internationally oriented mega events target chiefly the international community for country’s branding purpose, this study attempted to argue that they may also aim at the internal audience in order to legitimize the ruling regime and leadership, which is particularly so with authoritarian regimes such as the one in China. Therefore, the study was focused on measuring the image-building effects on China’s domestic audiences. Though taking only on college students as the targets, this study has generated several academic and practical implications that may inspire future research in this area. First, mega and hallmark events images seem to transfer to that of the host country and government. This study has discovered that Chinese college students, including those from former western colonies, Hong Kong and Macau, expressed a strong inclination to link positive images of the mega events with that of the host country and, to less degree, government. This finding has somewhat supported Gwinner’s assumption of image transfer between a mega event and the hosting country. Still, more research is needed to validate this analytical model and, particularly, to explain the existence of a different branding effect between the image of host country and the image of host government. Second, world-famous mega events are utilized not only to brand the host country’s image abroad but also to promote the host government’s image at home. This study demonstrated that the Beijing government, still an authoritarian regime, aimed its efforts at the Chinese people for the political objective of legitimizing the ruling regime and leadership. It has, however, suggested that the correlation between event image and likelihood of associating event image with host-country image was greater than with government image. Such a finding implies that when people experience the mega event, they really experience the host country more than the host government. Third, such inforgraphic variables as media consumption behaviors and sources of information prove significant in forging the positive association between mega-event images and that of the sponsoring country and government. They stand as influencing factors, proving useful in predicting audiences’ perceptions toward the events; hence the host country. This finding suggests that in transitional China, the government-controlled media continue to mobilize public support for the government-sponsored mega events. Also, the fact that Hong Kong people do not identify with the government-sponsored mega events as closely as mainland and Macau people shows that Hong Kong residents are the least receptive to the strong arguments featured in the government-controlled media. It should, however, be stressed that there exist difficulties to achieve a clear-cut distinction between government and social media and between government and commercial media in China, as social media may draw on and post articles from government media; and to be “commercial” does not free a given medium from government control. Fourth, individual’s involvement in and participation at mega events stand out as the leading predicator of audiences’ positive evaluation on the events and the host country and government. The indication of high-involvement in the three mega events leading to the high-positivity in viewing the events in reference to the host country and government has somewhat supported the argument on public relations program planning – high involvement shall be one of the key goals. Fifth, it is also interesting to note that individual’s emotional attachment to the host country, though not the leading predictor, proves to be an important one. This finding has further validated the marketing research assumption on the utility of persuasions in event/sponsor promotions. Finally, this study has expected limitations. Being a study of only three events in one country, the results cannot be generalized before being compared with other cases in other countries. Indeed, there is a need for multiple replications. In addition, convenience sampling was done in this study partly in light of growing difficulty in conducting surveys on politically sensitive issues in China. This study may stand only as a first step toward further research with wider representative samples (i.e. extending to Beijing, the capital and political center of the country) from more diverse audiences (i.e. going beyond college students). Moreover, the idea that the Chinese government intends to target the domestic audiences with mega events needs to be further substantiated. It would also be interesting to examine other factors that may shape the government rationale for sponsoring the mega events, including the power of domestic lobby and the fear of international communities about ramifications to contain a growing China from bidding to host the events.

References Allen, J., O’Toole, W., McDonnell, I., & Harris, R. (2002). Festival and special event management. London: Wiley. Ball-Rokeach, S. J., & DeFleur, M. L. (1976). A dependency model of mass media effects. Communication Research, 3, 3–21. Baum, T., Deery, T., Hanlon, C., Lockstone, L., & Smith, K. (2009). People and work in events and conventions: A research perspective. Oxfordshire, UK: CABI. Berkowitz, P., Gjermano, G., Gomez, L., & Schafer, G. (2007). Brand China: Using the 2008 Olympic Games to enhance China’s image. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 3, 164–178. www.palgrave-jounals.com/pb Bhattacharji, P., Zissis, C., & Baldwin, C. (2010). Media censorship in China. Backgrounder, Council on Foreign Relations, http://www.cfr.org/publication/11515/media censorship in china.html Bureau of Democracy, Human rights and Labor (BDHL), Department of State, USA. (2011). 2010 human rights report: China (includes Tibet, Hong Kong and Macau). 8 April, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/eap/154382.htm

744

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

Bieger, T., Laesser, C., Scherer, R. J., Johnson, J., & Bischof, L. (2003). The impact of mega events on destination images: the case of annual meeting of the WEF in Davos. In Paper presented at the TTRA European Chapter Gasgow. Camaj, L. (2011). Mass media and political culture: Examining the impact of media use on political trust and participation in Kosovo. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, http://search.proquest.com/docview/872543792?accountid=10134 Chalip, L. (2006). Towards social leverage of sport events. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 11(2), 109–127. Chaffee, S. H., & Roser, C. (1986). Involvement and the consistency of knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. Communication Research, 13, 373–399. Chomsky, N., & Herman, E. (2002). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media. New York: Pantheon. Chapter 1. Chou, B. K. P. (2010). Building national identity in Hong Kong and Macao. East Asian Policy, 2, 73–80. Crompton, J. I. (1999). The economic impact of sports tournaments and events. Parks and Recreation, 3(9), 142–150. Dozier, D. M., & Ehling, W. P. (1992). Evaluation of public relations programs: What the literature tells us about their effects. In J. E. Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management (pp. 159–184). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum. Engelberg, M., Flora, J. A., & Nassau, C. I. (1995). AIDS knowledge: Effects of channel involvement and interpersonal-communication. Health Communication, 7, 73–91. Expo.Net. (2010). An unprecedented gathering of 186 days with numerous new records of the World Expo. 1 November, http://big5.expo2010.cn/a/20101101/000033.htm Fredline, E., & Faulkner, B. (1998). Resident reactions to a major tourist event: The Glod Coast Indy car race. Festival Management and Event Tourism, 5(4), 185–205. Gauntlett, D. (2005). Moving experiences: Media effects and beyond. London: John Libbey. Gerbner, G., & Gross, L. (1976). Living with television: The violence profile. Journal of Communication, 26, 76. Getz, D. (1991). Festivals, special events and tourism. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Getz, D. (1998). Trend strategies and issues in sport event tourism. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 7(2), 8–13. GfK Group Press Release. (2009). America is now the most admired country globally, http://www.gfk.com/group/press information/press releases/004734 Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An easy on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Chapter 2. Grunig, J. E. (1966). The role of information in economic decision making. Journalism Monographs, 3, 51. Gwinner, K. (1997). A model of image creation and image transfer in event sponsorship. International Marketing Review, 14(3), 145–158. Hazleton, V., Harrison-Rexrode, J., & Kennan, W. R. (2007). New technologies in the formation of personal and public relations: Social capital and social media. In S. C. Duhe (Ed.), New Media and Public Relations (pp. 97–106). New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc. Harris, P. (1982). Pressure groups and protest. Politics, 17, 111–120. Hall, C. M., & Hodges, J. (1996). The party’s great but what about the hangover? The housing and social impacts of mega-events with special reference to the 200 Sydney Olympics. Festival Management and Event Tourism: An International Journal, 4, 13–20. Heath, R. L., Liao, S., & Douglas, W. (1995). Effects of perceived economic harms and benefits on issue involvement, use of information sources, and action: A study in risk communication. Journal of Public Relations Research, 7, 89–109. Hong, H. (2010). What wealth has Expo produced in the eyes of the organizers. Interview, 30 October, http://big5.gov.cn/gate/big5/www.gov.cn/jrzg/201010/30/content 1734063.htm Horne, J., & Manzenreiter, W. (2006). An introduction to the sociology of sports mega-events. The Sociological Review, 54(2), 1–24. Hu, J. (2010). Speech at the meeting to celebrate the closing of the 2010 Shanghai World Expo. 27 December, http://www.expo2010.cn/a/20101228/000002.htm Interview with an official of the Shanghai Expo Organizing Committee. Shanghai, China, June 2011. Johnson, B. T., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Effects of involvement on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 290–314. Kim, M., Kim, M. K., & Odio, M. A. (2010). Are your proud? The influence of sport and community identity and job satisfaction on pride of mega-event volunteers. Event Management, 14, 127–136. Kim, S. S., & Petrick, J. F. (2005). Residents’ perceptions on the impacts of the FIFA 2002 World Cup: The case of Seoul as a host city. Tourism Management, 26, 25–38. Kim, S., & Morrison, A. M. (2005). Change of images of South Korea among foreign tourists after the 2002 FIFA Would Cup. Tourism Management, 26, 233–247. de Kloet, J., Chong, G. O. L., & Landsberger, S. (2011). National image management begins at home: Imagining the new Olympic citizen. In J. Wang (Ed.), Soft Power in China: Public Diplomacy Through Communication (pp. 117–134). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Kurlantzick, J. (2007). Charm offensive: How China’s soft power is transforming the world. New Haven: Yale University Press. (Chapter 1). Lee, Ch., Lee, Y., & Lee, B. (2005). Korea’s destination image formed by the 2002 World Cup. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(4), 839–858. Lamberti, L. (2010). Mega-events as drivers of community participation in developing countries: the case of Shanghai World Expo. Tourism Management, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.12008 Lamberti, L. . (2011). Mega-events as drivers of community participation in developing countries: The case of Shanghai World Expo. Tourism Management, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.12.008 Law, C. M. (1993). Urban tourism, attracting visitors to large cities. London: Mansell Manzenreiter. Matos, P. (2006). Hosting mega sports events – a brief assessment of their multidimensional impacts. Paper presented at the Copenhagen conference on the economic and social impact of hosting mega sport events, 9 January. MacCartney, G. J. (2005). Hosting a recurring mega event: visitor raison d’etre. Journal of Sport Tourism, 10(2), 113–128. McCombs, M. F., & Shaw, D. L. (1993). The evaluation of agenda-setting research: Twenty-five years in the marketplace of ideas. Journal of Communication, 43, 58–67. McDonald, C. (1991). Sponsorship and the image of the sponsor. European Journal of Marketing, 25, 31–38. Moon, K. S., Lee, J. H., & Ko, Y. J. (2009). The effect of event quality on residents’ perception of local impacts: a case of Tour de Korea International Cycle Competition. Korean Journal of Sport Science, 20(1), 81–89. Nelson, E. H. (1990). The evaluation of sponsorship. Paper presented at an association of market survey organizations seminar on sponsorship. Nye, J. S., Jr. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. New York: Public Affairs. (pp. 107–129). Otker, T., & Hayes, P. (1987). Judging the efficiency of sponsorship—Experiences from the 1986 soccer world cup. Paper presented at ESOMAR Conference. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Issue involvement as a moderator of the effects on attitude of advertising content and context. Advances in Consumer Research, 8, 20–24. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1986). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 847–855. Rabinovitch, S. (2008). The rise of an image-conscious China. China Security: A Journal of China’s Strategic Development,. http://www.chinasecurity.us/index.php?option=com content&view=article&id=59 Richie, B., & Smith, B. (1991). The impact of a mega event on host region awareness – a longitudinal study. Journal of Travel Research, 30(1), 3–10. Ritchie, J. R. B. (1996). How special is the event? The economic and strategic development of the New Zealand Masters Games. Festival Management & Event Tourism, 4, 17–26. Richie, J. R. B., & Yangzhou, J. (1987). The role and impact of mega-events and attractions on national and regional tourism: a conceptual and methodological review. In Paper presented at the 37th Annual Congress of the International Association of Scientific Experts in Tourism Calgary. Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57, 9–20. Smith, A. (2005). Reimaging the city – the value of sport initiatives. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(1), 217–236. Steinberg, C. S. (1972). Mass media and communication. New York: Hastings House. (pp. 562–563).

N. Chen / Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 731–745

745

Therkelsen, A. (2003). Imagining places: Image formation of tourists and its consequences for destination promotion. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 3, 134–150. Wang, H. (2003). National image building and Chinese foreign policy. China: An International Journal, 1, 46–72. Wang, H. (2010). China’s image projection and its impact. In J. Wang (Ed.), Soft power in China: Public diplomacy through communication (pp. 37–56). Palgrave Macmillan. Yan, L., et al. (2007). Personal involvement and perception of press credibility. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the international communication association, San Francisco, CA, 23 May, http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p169089 index.html Yu, Z. (2010). Work wholeheartedly for the better life of the people. Press conference for the Shanghai media, 11 November, http://www.expo2010.cn/a/20101111/000004.htm Zhang, F. (2010). Expo legacy will live on. 1 November, http://en.expo2010.cn/a/20101101/000004.htm