- Email: [email protected]
Krafting the obesity message: A case study in framing and issues management
Public Relations Review 34 (2008) 373–379
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Public Relations Review
Krafting the obesity message: A case study in framing and issues management Keren Darmon a , Kathy Fitzpatrick b,∗ , Carolyn Bronstein a a b
College of Communication, DePaul University, 2320 North Kenmore Ave., Chicago IL 60614, United States School of Communications, Quinnipiac University, 125 Mount Carmel Avenue, Hamden, CT 06518-1908, United States
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 15 October 2007 Received in revised form 13 April 2008 Accepted 28 July 2008 Keywords: Public relations Framing Issues management
a b s t r a c t This study examined the application of framing theory in issues management. Using case study methodology, the researchers analyzed message frames used by Kraft Foods in its public response to the obesity crisis, how the Kraft frames were reported by the media and whether Kraft’s approach might help define effective framing and issues management practices in public relations. The study suggested that framing was indeed useful in Kraft’s attempt to manage the issue of obesity. © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
The year 2001 provided a wake-up call for Americans regarding the problem of obesity. The United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) described obesity as a national epidemic for the first time, noting that 30% of American adults over the age of 20 were obese and another 34% were overweight. Children were faring badly too; 15% of youth aged 2–19 were overweight, up from just 6.5% some 20 years earlier (CDC, 2003a,b). That same year, journalist Eric Schlosser published Fast Food Nation, an exposé of the fast food industry that condemned both the nutritional value of the food served and the parent companies’ marketing practices. These developments signaled a deepening concern about the role of food manufacturers in promoting and sustaining obesity, and related health problems such as heart disease and diabetes. In the midst of this public awakening, Kraft Foods, the maker of such high-fat, high-calorie packaged foods as Oreos and Ritz crackers, spent nearly $465 million in 2001 advertising its products to American consumers (Linn, 2004). Over the next few years, worrisome headlines continued to emerge about obesity. In 2002, the parents of two New York City teenagers filed suit against McDonald’s, claiming that its restaurants failed to clearly and conspicuously disclose the nutritional content of its food, including high levels of fat, sugar, and sodium. As a result, the plaintiffs alleged, the teens’ weights had soared past 200 pounds, causing the onset of diabetes, high blood pressure and elevated cholesterol levels. And, in the wake of the McDonald’s uproar, the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a policy statement urging pediatricians to pressure local school districts to eliminate high calorie soft drinks from school vending machines. The Academy urged physicians to call superintendents and school board members, and “emphasize the notion that every school in every district shares a responsibility for the nutritional health of its students” (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2004, p. 153). Although television pundits debated the question of “personal responsibility,” questioning whether one could reasonably blame a third party for weight gain, these campaigns revealed that public opinion did support the idea that the packaged and fast food industries had an obligation to help combat the problem. In 2003, new statistics indicated that the obesity epidemic was “worsening rather than improving” (CDC, 2003c). The CDC warned that “halting and reversing the upward trend of the obesity epidemic” would require a coordinated, society-wide effort, including “collaboration among government, voluntary, and private sectors, as well as a commitment to action by
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 203 582 8974. E-mail address: [email protected] (K. Fitzpatrick). 0363-8111/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2008.07.002
374
K. Darmon et al. / Public Relations Review 34 (2008) 373–379
individuals and communities across the nation” (CDC, 2003a). In addition to the negative health consequences of obesity, the epidemic was taking a financial toll, costing the U.S. more than $117 billion in direct health care costs for obesity-related medical conditions (United States Department of Health and Human Services, 2001). For corporations in the packaged and fast food industries, which quickly emerged as major culprits, the potential consequences of inaction were dire. Onlookers predicted that the McDonald’s lawsuit would inaugurate a series of legal actions against food companies, similar to the onslaught that tobacco companies faced in the 1990s. The risk of such lawsuits, combined with the possibility of heightened government regulation of food content and product labeling, and possible consumer action (e.g. boycott) against food industry corporations, presented a growing threat to these companies’ financial health and autonomy. Kraft Foods offered its initial response to the obesity crisis in March 2003. In a speech delivered that month, Betsy Holden, then Kraft’s CEO, acknowledged that food companies could no longer afford to ignore the public dialogue about obesity nor hope to avoid blame for the problem. She characterized the situation as both a challenge and an opportunity: “If you operate fast food restaurants or market snack foods or soft drinks, you’re being asked to solve the serious and widespread problem of obesity. . . Companies that are seriously out of touch with societal expectations will find themselves under mounting economic, social and political pressure. Companies that are well aligned will enjoy growing support in these same three spheres” (Kraft, 2003a). Although Kraft laid claim to the obesity problem quite late from an issues management perspective, it was nonetheless first among the major packaged food corporations to step forward to provide solutions. Four months later, Kraft announced its issues management strategy in the form of “global initiatives to help address [the] rise in obesity” (Kraft, 2003a). In the time that elapsed between 2001, when the CDC first labeled obesity a national epidemic, and 2003, when Holden foreshadowed Kraft’s impending initiatives, food industry corporations realized that obesity had become an “issue.” Hainsworth (1990) defined an “issue” as “a point of conflict between an organization and one or more of its publics” that arises “as a consequence of some action taken, or proposed to be taken, by one or more of these parties” (p. 33). Food companies hoping to avoid blame would have to manage the issue effectively. The significance of proactive efforts aimed at issue resolution was described by Coombs (1999), who explained: “The idea is to have the issue resolved in a manner that is not a crisis” (p. 41). This study examined the public relations aspects of Kraft’s obesity initiatives, with a focus on message framing and issues management. Since Kraft was the first major packaged food corporation to launch an obesity-related program, the company had a significant advantage in shaping the way it presented its intervention to journalists and the public. Using qualitative content analysis methods, the researchers analyzed how Kraft framed its obesity initiatives and how those frames were subsequently reported by the news media. The purpose of the study was to examine the application of framing theory as a tool in issues management, using the Kraft case to discern whether framing might be used advantageously as an issues management practice. Although the relevance of framing theory for the practice of public relations has been well established, there is a recognized need for “additional theorizing and research that builds on and extends the typology of framing” (Hallahan, 1999, p. 229). Indeed, framing decisions may be the single most important strategic decision made in a public relations effort. In attempting to determine the usefulness of framing as a tool in issues management, the study also responded to Kosicki (1993), who contended: “We need to look more closely at the particular frames that are used and trace these through to their antecedents. . .. In this way, we can make the study of issues more vital and central” (p. 120). Bridges and Nelson (2000) noted the significance of media frames for issues management: “The concept of framing applied to issues management suggests that what is said, what is omitted, and the terminology related to media coverage define an issue” (p. 100). 1. Literature review 1.1. Framing and issues management According to Entman (1993), frames, of any kind, have four functions: defining problems, including costs and benefits; diagnosing causes of said problem; making moral judgments such as evaluating the problem’s effects; and suggesting remedies. Hallahan (1999) asserted that “a frame limits or defines a message’s meaning by shaping the inferences that individuals make about the message” (p. 207). Journalists use frames to put information into a usable context for readers, to make stories accessible and meaningful to their audiences, and to enable readers to act upon information when appropriate. Frames are often created with persuasive intent. Bennett (1993) explained that framers consciously select symbols and language that evoke emotional responses and commonsense interpretations, which can lead to readers’ willingness to accept seemingly “logical” solutions. Esrock, Hart, and D’Silva (2002) defined news framing as “the process by which the thematic or stylistic organization of news accounts emphasizes a particular story line” (p. 210). The power struggle between the media and outside forces over the framing of issues has been well-established, and a reciprocal relationship is known to exist between sources who rely on the news media to transmit their information to the public, and the news media who depend on sources for such information. But if, as Jones and Chase (1979) stated, the media have the ultimate power to decide what goes in and what stays out, it is not clear how outside forces can obtain favorable coverage. Shoemaker and Reese (1991) suggested that outsiders can use organizational mechanisms to their advantage, such as delivering information through official channels like corporate news releases.
K. Darmon et al. / Public Relations Review 34 (2008) 373–379
375
Given this relationship, public relations professionals often look for opportunities to shape news frames. Esrock et al. (2002) explained: “The frame for news stories can be impacted by how practitioners write about the topic, the locations they choose, the visuals and spokespeople that are provided to the media and so forth” (p. 219). Public relations professionals thus operate as “frame strategists” (Hallahan, 1999, p. 224) who try to position news to result in good outcomes for clients. Vasquez (1996) argued that an issue development perspective recasts public relations practice as a “communication and negotiation process” in which practitioners construct frames that will help them negotiate the evolving organization–public relationship (p. 72). Despite the apparent tie between framing and issues management, the literature does not specify how framing theory might be applied to the practice of issues management. This study addressed that gap and asked the following questions: RQ1: What were the major frames advanced by Kraft in corporate initiatives in its attempt to manage the issue of obesity? RQ2: Were the major frames advanced by Kraft present in the resulting media coverage? RQ3: How do the findings contribute to our understanding of effective framing and issues management practices? 2. Method and data The researchers conducted a case study involving a qualitative content analysis of print and broadcast media coverage surrounding Kraft’s obesity initiatives. They sought to ascertain whether major frames identified in Kraft’s corporate documents were present in related media coverage, and if so, how each frame was portrayed. The close analysis of documents emerging from Kraft and those produced subsequently by journalists enabled the researchers to track the evolution of Kraft’s preferred frames. Two types of documents were included in the analysis. First, news releases and fact sheets pertaining to obesity initiatives that Kraft posted on its corporate website were analyzed to identify the organization’s preferred frames. Second, media reports (articles and broadcast transcripts) dealing with the initiatives were reviewed to establish whether Kraft’s preferred frames were reproduced in resulting news coverage. Print media reports were drawn from four leading national newspapers: The New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today. Broadcast transcripts came from four major national sources: National Public Radio (NPR), American Broadcasting Companies Inc (ABC), Fox News Network Inc (Fox News), and Cable News Network (CNN). In total, 24 media reports were identified through the LexisNexis database, using the search terms ‘Kraft’ and ‘obesity’ combined. The reports included both news stories and editorials, all of which appeared during the 2-month period following Kraft’s program announcement on July 1, 2003. The New York Times ran seven related articles, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times each ran four, and USA Today ran two. In the broadcast media, NPR aired two items, ABC and Fox News each broadcast one story, and CNN broadcast three. In order to cross-reference the frames and subframes in Kraft’s material with those that appeared in media coverage, a protocol table was designed. This approach was endorsed by Altheide (1996), who described a protocol as “a list of questions, items, categories, or variables that guide data collection from documents” (p. 26). The frames identified within Kraft’s corporate materials served as the “categories” in this study, defining the boundaries for the discussion of the obesity issue. Within each category, subframes were developed to identify recurring points associated with a particular frame. Next, the researchers sought to discern whether Kraft’s preferred frames and subframes were picked up by the media. They calculated how often Kraft’s frames were used, whether the news report included a direct quote from a Kraft spokesperson, and whether Kraft’s announcement was the “peg” for the article or simply incorporated in a related news story. Attention was also paid to the context in which the subframes and frames were reported; when present, did Kraft’s apparent framing and issues management efforts appear in a positive, negative or balanced context? A positive context meant that the majority of content supported Kraft’s initiatives, whereas negative context meant that the majority of content did not support Kraft’s initiatives, and balanced context meant that the content was equally divided between positive and negative comments. Some articles were labeled as neutral, as the media report carried no value judgment. 3. Results The analysis revealed five major frames, each with underlying subframes, used by Kraft to manage the issue of obesity: Frame I: Global initiatives to help address rise in obesity Subframe I.1: Kraft will take steps to help battle obesity Subframe I.2: Kraft is committed to encouraging healthy lifestyles and making it easier to eat and live better Frame II: Product nutrition Subframe II.1: A cap on the portion size of single-serve packages Subframe II.2: Guidelines for the nutritional characteristics of all products Subframe II.3: A planned effort to improve existing products and add healthy options Frame III: Marketing practices Subframe III.1: The elimination of all in-school marketing
376
K. Darmon et al. / Public Relations Review 34 (2008) 373–379
Table 1 Frequency of frame appearance Print
Frame I (global initiatives) Frame II (product nutrition) Frame III (marketing practices) Frame IV (consumer information) Frame V (advocacy and dialogue)
Broadcast
Yes
No
Yes
No
16 14 14 2 7
1 3 3 15 10
2 7 5 0 0
5 0 2 7 7
Subframe III.2: Locally appropriate criteria to use with the international vending industry to determine which Kraft products might be sold in in-school vending machines Subframe III.3: Guidelines for all advertising and marketing practices to encourage healthy eating behaviors and active lifestyles Frame IV: Consumer information Subframe IV.1: Nutrition labeling in all markets worldwide Subframe IV.2: Added nutrition and/or activity-related information on product labels to assist consumer choices Subframe IV.3: Guidelines for the use of health-related claims in all global markets Frame V: Advocacy and dialogue Subframe V.1: Advocacy for public policies to help schools and communities improve fitness and nutrition Subframe V.2: Increased dialogue with key stakeholders regarding the obesity issue Of the 24 total media reports, five focused on Kraft’s initiatives, while 19 emphasized related issues, such as commercialism in schools, obesity and public health, and the debate over trans fats. Each media report mentioned at least one of Kraft’s announcement frames. Kraft’s five frames appeared with varying frequency. Table 1 demonstrates that frame I (global initiatives) was covered most frequently by print media, whereas frame II (product nutrition) was most frequent in broadcast media. Frame IV (consumer information) was the least covered frame in print media, and frames IV and V (advocacy and dialogue) were least covered by broadcast media. Media use of direct quotes varied (see Table 2). The most frequent quote came from a Kraft news release and was attributed to CEO Holden: The rise in obesity is a complex public health challenge of global proportions. Just as obesity has many causes, it can be solved only if all sectors of society do their part to help. Kraft is committed to product choices and marketing practices that will help encourage healthy lifestyles and make it easier to eat and live better (Kraft, 2003b). The New York Times and The Washington Post incorporated the subframe of fighting obesity using material taken directly from a Kraft news release, whereas The Washington Post included quotes from Michael Mudd, Kraft’s Director of Communications. In each case, the quotes reproduced Kraft’s preferred frames. Consumer information received one direct quote, in the Los Angeles Times: “We certainly agree with and support the fact that trans fats should appear [on product labels].” This is a quote from Mudd’s deputy, Kris Charles, who used the underlying themes of this frame, product labeling, when talking to the reporter. Advocacy and dialogue did not appear in any direct quotes. In the broadcast media, NPR aired a sound-bite from Mudd, pertaining to the overall frame of fighting obesity, in which he reiterated Kraft’s commitment to help tackle obesity: “We’re making these commitments, first and foremost, because we do think it’s the right thing to do for the people who use our products and for our business.” With respect to the value judgment context in which the frames and subframes appeared, seven of the reports were positive, two were negative, six were balanced, and in nine cases the context was neutral with no value judgment (see Table 3). The New York Times carried two positive comments from an academic expert lauding Kraft’s efforts: Table 2 Use of direct quote Print
Frame I Frame II Frame III Frame IV Frame V
Broadcast
Yes
No
Yes
No
3 1 1 1 0
14 16 16 16 17
1 0 0 0 0
6 7 7 7 7
K. Darmon et al. / Public Relations Review 34 (2008) 373–379
377
Table 3 Value judgment context Print
Positive Negative Balanced
Broadcast
Yes
No
Yes
No
5 2 4
12 15 13
2 0 2
5 7 5
‘The Kraft announcement is a landmark,’ said Kelly D. Brownell, a professor at Yale University and head of the school’s Center for Eating and Weight Disorders. ‘It’s the first of its kind from a major food company. And because Kraft is the largest food company in the world, other food companies will have to take notice.’ The same article in the New York Times also carried a negative comment attributed to unnamed sources: Some health and food industry experts, however, said that Kraft and other food companies were promising new health initiatives to deflect criticism of their role in a wide range of health and obesity problems, and also because the big food companies hope to avoid the fate of the big tobacco companies, which were sued for marketing highly addictive cigarettes without properly disclosing their health risks. In the tally, the New York Times article was deemed positive because there were two positive comments versus one negative one. An example of negative coverage was found in a different New York Times piece, which once again cast Kraft’s initiatives in a self-serving light, linking them with lawsuits filed against the tobacco industry: The move was presented as a statesmanlike effort to help combat the obesity epidemic, but analysts suggested that the company was scrambling to take the high road in advance of a potential litigation explosion like the one that staggered the tobacco industry. Kraft is a sister company of Philip Morris and is thus well positioned to understand the legal risks of selling unhealthy products. The second negative reference in that piece cast doubt on Kraft’s commitment to deliver on its promises: Skeptics worry, with good reason, about the depth and sincerity of the food industry’s late-inning conversion to healthy eating. An industry that has prospered by selling high-fat, high-calorie or sugary foods in ever larger quantities will probably be loath to deviate too much from a proven path to profits. Balanced reports were also found. A Los Angeles Times editorial praised Kraft’s initiatives: I was even more pleased to see Kraft Foods – the $30-billion giant whose products include cream cheese, peanut butter, Velveeta, Oreo cookies and Oscar Mayer hot dogs – announce plans to reduce fats, sugar and calories across its product line. Kraft also said it would cease its marketing efforts in schools and reexamine its portion sizes. However, the writer then proceeded to question Kraft’s motives: Were I a betting man, I’d wager that concerns about possible lawsuits, not a suddenly awakened social conscience, dictated these moves by Kraft – which is, after all, owned by Philip Morris, a company that knows all too well the power of the class action suit. Given the even-handed tone overall, this editorial was deemed balanced. When cross-referencing value judgment context with frequency of frame appearance, the study found that only one story (USA Today) incorporated all five of Kraft’s frames, and it was positive. Six reports carried references to four Kraft frames; two were judged positive, two were negative, one was balanced, and one was neutral. Eight stories carried references to three frames; two were positive, one was balanced, and five were neutral. Five stories carried two reference frames; two were positive, two were balanced, and one was neutral. Four stories carried only one frame; two were balanced and two were neutral. When cross-referencing value judgment context with use of direct quote, the study found that five stories used direct quotes from Kraft. Of these stories, three were positive and two were neutral. The negative and balanced articles did not include Kraft quotes. And when cross-referencing value judgment context with main focus of article, five articles used Kraft’s obesity-tackling initiatives as their main focus. Of these, three were positive and two were negative. All used four or more of Kraft’s frames, and the three positive articles also carried quotes from Kraft.
4. Discussion and implications This study demonstrated that framing is an integral part of issues management (Heath, 1990; Vasquez, 1996; Kuhn, 1997; Bridges & Nelson, 2000). Kraft’s framing attempts fit well with recognized objectives of issues management:
378
K. Darmon et al. / Public Relations Review 34 (2008) 373–379
(1) Profitability (Camillus & Datta, 1991; Renfro, 1993): Kraft’s over-arching frame of tackling obesity was interpreted as an attempt to not only prevent negative repercussions, but also to protect Kraft’s position as an industry leader; (2) Public policy (Jones & Chase, 1979; Heath, 1990; Kuhn, 1997; Bridges & Nelson, 2000): Kraft’s consumer information frame was interpreted as an attempt to curb additional government restrictions; (3) Organizational policy (Coombs, 1999): Kraft’s product nutrition and marketing practices frames were interpreted as the organization’s attempt to respond to market forces via internal adjustments; (4) Stakeholder relations (Heath, 1990; Heath & Cousino, 1990): Kraft’s advocacy and dialogue frame was viewed as socially responsible public outreach. Confronted with the issue of obesity, Kraft attempted not only to avoid a crisis but also to find a way to turn the situation to its advantage by becoming the first major player in the packaged food industry to address the issue of obesity. Given that only two of the 24 news items analyzed in this study were negative, it seems that Kraft was successful in its framing and management attempts. By taking a proactive approach, Kraft did seem to manage the issue on its own terms. The timeliness of the obesity issue likely contributed to the broad coverage of Kraft’s initiatives. However, it also appears that Kraft’s framing efforts had an impact on the way in which its initiatives were presented by the media, supporting previous findings that framing plays a pivotal role in the process of agenda-setting (Hallahan, 1999). By using an over-arching message about global initiatives to fight obesity along with more specific frames and subframes, Kraft made its program relevant to numerous audiences. The finding that the over-arching frame was most frequently covered by print media might be attributed to a number of factors: (1) this frame appeared as the title of Kraft’s news release, (2) this frame was the lead frame in the quotes within the news release, and (3) this frame captured the perceived social significance of the issue. The study also suggested that the nature of the frame and its degree of social relevance to news audiences was a factor in influencing media reports. Journalists are drawn to frames that they perceive to be salient, controversial and timely. Obesity is relevant to media audiences who regard it as both a social and individual level issue. The finding that “product nutrition” was the most covered frame in the broadcast media, followed by “marketing practices,” and that these frames were also prominent in print media reports, could be attributed to several factors: (1) Kraft positioned these frames directly after the overarching global initiatives frame in its news release; (2) these frames were emotionally charged (portion control and marketing to children); and (3) these frames were easier for reporters to work into stories being prepared on related issues, not necessarily those focused on Kraft’s efforts. The two frames of “consumer information” and “advocacy and dialogue” received the least media attention. These items may have been of less interest to journalists because they were third and fourth in a sequence of four frames set out by Kraft in its news release and/or because these frames were perceived to be less relevant to readers. This exploration of framing as a tool of issues management yields several strategic insights for practitioners. First, there may be a limit to the number of frames that can be influential within any given communication. The average of just over three frames per print article and just under three per broadcast item indicates that perhaps three is the optimal number of useful frames that a public relations practitioner ought to include within a single communication. Second, the physical placement of frames within a published document, such as a news release, may have an impact on whether the frame appears in subsequent media coverage. The more prominent the position in initial documents or interviews, the more likely the frame is to appear in coverage and to appear often. Third, the most prominent frame in any given communication, such as “global initiatives to fight obesity” in the Kraft case, may generate frame-specific articles. Finally, the use of quotes in published documents, such as news releases, may increase the chance that a company’s frames will be conveyed intact by the media. The study suggests that a quote that meets the publication’s requirements (e.g. from an official source) is more likely to be incorporated in an unaltered fashion. The inclusion of direct quotes in media coverage is important for issues management because it allows an organization to speak directly to its publics. Future research on issues management would extend our knowledge of framing effects by moving beyond the analysis of media texts to examine audience reaction to practitioner-influenced news reports. It would be valuable to investigate the degree to which audiences draw different conclusions from materials created by public relations practitioners, such as the fact sheets available on the Kraft web site, and news stories produced by journalists, and the extent to which members of the public are willing to accept the frames advanced by each. References Altheide, D. L. (1996). Qualitative media analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. American Academy of Pediatrics (2004, January). Policy statement: Soft drinks in schools. Pediatrics, 113, 1, 152–154. Bennett, W. L. (1993). Constructing publics and their opinions. Political Communications, 10, 101–120. Bridges, J. A., & Nelson, R. A. (2000). Issues management: A relational approach. In J. A. Ledingham & S. D. Bruning (Eds.), Public relations as relationship management: A relational approach to the study and practice of public relations (pp. 95–115). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Camillus, J. C., & Datta, D. K. (1991). Managing strategic issues in a turbulent environment. Long Range Planning, 24, 67–74. Center for Disease Control (2003a). http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/trend/prev reg.htm accessed 11.12.03. Center for Disease Control (2003b). http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/faq.htm accessed 11.12.03. Center for Disease Control (2003c). http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/index.htm accessed 11.12.03. Coombs, T. (1999). Ongoing crisis communication: Planning, managing, and responding. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51–58. Esrock, S. L., Hart, J. L., & D’Silva, M. U. (2002). The saga of the Crown Pilot: Framing, reframing, and reconsideration. Public Relations Review, 28, 209–227. Hainsworth, B. E. (1990). The distribution of advantages and disadvantages. Public Relations Review, 16, 33–39.
K. Darmon et al. / Public Relations Review 34 (2008) 373–379
379
Hallahan, K. (1999). Seven models of framing: Implications for public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 11, 205–242. Heath, R. L. (1990). Corporate issues management: Theoretical underpinnings and research foundations. Public Relations Research Annual, 2, 29–65. Heath, R. L., & Cousino, K. R. (1990). Issues management: End of first decade progress report. Public Relations Review, 16, 6–18. Jones, B. L., & Chase, W. H. (1979). Managing public policy issues. Public Relations Review, 5, 3–23. Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Problems and opportunities in agenda-setting research. Journal of Communication, 43, 100–127. Kraft Foods (2003a). Staying connected with public expectations. http://www.kraft.com/pdfs/kft 032103.pdf accessed 08.12.03. Kraft Foods (2003b). Kraft Foods announces global initiatives to help address rise in obesity. http://www.kraft.com/newsroom/07012003.html accessed 08.08.03. Kuhn, T. (1997). The discourse of issues management: A genre of organizational communication. Communication Quarterly, 45, 188–210. Linn, S. (2004). Consuming kids: The hostile takeover of childhood. New York: The New Press. Renfro, W. L. (1993). Issues management in strategic planning. Westport, CT: Quorum. Shoemaker, P. J., & Reese, S. D. (1991). Mediating the message: Theories of influence on mass media content. White Plains, NY: Longman. United States Department of Health and Human Services (2001). Call to action. http://www.sugeongeneral.gov/topics/obesity/calltoaction/1 3.htm accessed 25.09.03. Vasquez, G. M. (1996). Public relations as negotiation: An issue development perspective. Journal of Public Relations Research, 8, 57–77.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Public Relations Review
Krafting the obesity message: A case study in framing and issues management Keren Darmon a , Kathy Fitzpatrick b,∗ , Carolyn Bronstein a a b
College of Communication, DePaul University, 2320 North Kenmore Ave., Chicago IL 60614, United States School of Communications, Quinnipiac University, 125 Mount Carmel Avenue, Hamden, CT 06518-1908, United States
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 15 October 2007 Received in revised form 13 April 2008 Accepted 28 July 2008 Keywords: Public relations Framing Issues management
a b s t r a c t This study examined the application of framing theory in issues management. Using case study methodology, the researchers analyzed message frames used by Kraft Foods in its public response to the obesity crisis, how the Kraft frames were reported by the media and whether Kraft’s approach might help define effective framing and issues management practices in public relations. The study suggested that framing was indeed useful in Kraft’s attempt to manage the issue of obesity. © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
The year 2001 provided a wake-up call for Americans regarding the problem of obesity. The United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) described obesity as a national epidemic for the first time, noting that 30% of American adults over the age of 20 were obese and another 34% were overweight. Children were faring badly too; 15% of youth aged 2–19 were overweight, up from just 6.5% some 20 years earlier (CDC, 2003a,b). That same year, journalist Eric Schlosser published Fast Food Nation, an exposé of the fast food industry that condemned both the nutritional value of the food served and the parent companies’ marketing practices. These developments signaled a deepening concern about the role of food manufacturers in promoting and sustaining obesity, and related health problems such as heart disease and diabetes. In the midst of this public awakening, Kraft Foods, the maker of such high-fat, high-calorie packaged foods as Oreos and Ritz crackers, spent nearly $465 million in 2001 advertising its products to American consumers (Linn, 2004). Over the next few years, worrisome headlines continued to emerge about obesity. In 2002, the parents of two New York City teenagers filed suit against McDonald’s, claiming that its restaurants failed to clearly and conspicuously disclose the nutritional content of its food, including high levels of fat, sugar, and sodium. As a result, the plaintiffs alleged, the teens’ weights had soared past 200 pounds, causing the onset of diabetes, high blood pressure and elevated cholesterol levels. And, in the wake of the McDonald’s uproar, the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a policy statement urging pediatricians to pressure local school districts to eliminate high calorie soft drinks from school vending machines. The Academy urged physicians to call superintendents and school board members, and “emphasize the notion that every school in every district shares a responsibility for the nutritional health of its students” (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2004, p. 153). Although television pundits debated the question of “personal responsibility,” questioning whether one could reasonably blame a third party for weight gain, these campaigns revealed that public opinion did support the idea that the packaged and fast food industries had an obligation to help combat the problem. In 2003, new statistics indicated that the obesity epidemic was “worsening rather than improving” (CDC, 2003c). The CDC warned that “halting and reversing the upward trend of the obesity epidemic” would require a coordinated, society-wide effort, including “collaboration among government, voluntary, and private sectors, as well as a commitment to action by
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 203 582 8974. E-mail address: [email protected] (K. Fitzpatrick). 0363-8111/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2008.07.002
374
K. Darmon et al. / Public Relations Review 34 (2008) 373–379
individuals and communities across the nation” (CDC, 2003a). In addition to the negative health consequences of obesity, the epidemic was taking a financial toll, costing the U.S. more than $117 billion in direct health care costs for obesity-related medical conditions (United States Department of Health and Human Services, 2001). For corporations in the packaged and fast food industries, which quickly emerged as major culprits, the potential consequences of inaction were dire. Onlookers predicted that the McDonald’s lawsuit would inaugurate a series of legal actions against food companies, similar to the onslaught that tobacco companies faced in the 1990s. The risk of such lawsuits, combined with the possibility of heightened government regulation of food content and product labeling, and possible consumer action (e.g. boycott) against food industry corporations, presented a growing threat to these companies’ financial health and autonomy. Kraft Foods offered its initial response to the obesity crisis in March 2003. In a speech delivered that month, Betsy Holden, then Kraft’s CEO, acknowledged that food companies could no longer afford to ignore the public dialogue about obesity nor hope to avoid blame for the problem. She characterized the situation as both a challenge and an opportunity: “If you operate fast food restaurants or market snack foods or soft drinks, you’re being asked to solve the serious and widespread problem of obesity. . . Companies that are seriously out of touch with societal expectations will find themselves under mounting economic, social and political pressure. Companies that are well aligned will enjoy growing support in these same three spheres” (Kraft, 2003a). Although Kraft laid claim to the obesity problem quite late from an issues management perspective, it was nonetheless first among the major packaged food corporations to step forward to provide solutions. Four months later, Kraft announced its issues management strategy in the form of “global initiatives to help address [the] rise in obesity” (Kraft, 2003a). In the time that elapsed between 2001, when the CDC first labeled obesity a national epidemic, and 2003, when Holden foreshadowed Kraft’s impending initiatives, food industry corporations realized that obesity had become an “issue.” Hainsworth (1990) defined an “issue” as “a point of conflict between an organization and one or more of its publics” that arises “as a consequence of some action taken, or proposed to be taken, by one or more of these parties” (p. 33). Food companies hoping to avoid blame would have to manage the issue effectively. The significance of proactive efforts aimed at issue resolution was described by Coombs (1999), who explained: “The idea is to have the issue resolved in a manner that is not a crisis” (p. 41). This study examined the public relations aspects of Kraft’s obesity initiatives, with a focus on message framing and issues management. Since Kraft was the first major packaged food corporation to launch an obesity-related program, the company had a significant advantage in shaping the way it presented its intervention to journalists and the public. Using qualitative content analysis methods, the researchers analyzed how Kraft framed its obesity initiatives and how those frames were subsequently reported by the news media. The purpose of the study was to examine the application of framing theory as a tool in issues management, using the Kraft case to discern whether framing might be used advantageously as an issues management practice. Although the relevance of framing theory for the practice of public relations has been well established, there is a recognized need for “additional theorizing and research that builds on and extends the typology of framing” (Hallahan, 1999, p. 229). Indeed, framing decisions may be the single most important strategic decision made in a public relations effort. In attempting to determine the usefulness of framing as a tool in issues management, the study also responded to Kosicki (1993), who contended: “We need to look more closely at the particular frames that are used and trace these through to their antecedents. . .. In this way, we can make the study of issues more vital and central” (p. 120). Bridges and Nelson (2000) noted the significance of media frames for issues management: “The concept of framing applied to issues management suggests that what is said, what is omitted, and the terminology related to media coverage define an issue” (p. 100). 1. Literature review 1.1. Framing and issues management According to Entman (1993), frames, of any kind, have four functions: defining problems, including costs and benefits; diagnosing causes of said problem; making moral judgments such as evaluating the problem’s effects; and suggesting remedies. Hallahan (1999) asserted that “a frame limits or defines a message’s meaning by shaping the inferences that individuals make about the message” (p. 207). Journalists use frames to put information into a usable context for readers, to make stories accessible and meaningful to their audiences, and to enable readers to act upon information when appropriate. Frames are often created with persuasive intent. Bennett (1993) explained that framers consciously select symbols and language that evoke emotional responses and commonsense interpretations, which can lead to readers’ willingness to accept seemingly “logical” solutions. Esrock, Hart, and D’Silva (2002) defined news framing as “the process by which the thematic or stylistic organization of news accounts emphasizes a particular story line” (p. 210). The power struggle between the media and outside forces over the framing of issues has been well-established, and a reciprocal relationship is known to exist between sources who rely on the news media to transmit their information to the public, and the news media who depend on sources for such information. But if, as Jones and Chase (1979) stated, the media have the ultimate power to decide what goes in and what stays out, it is not clear how outside forces can obtain favorable coverage. Shoemaker and Reese (1991) suggested that outsiders can use organizational mechanisms to their advantage, such as delivering information through official channels like corporate news releases.
K. Darmon et al. / Public Relations Review 34 (2008) 373–379
375
Given this relationship, public relations professionals often look for opportunities to shape news frames. Esrock et al. (2002) explained: “The frame for news stories can be impacted by how practitioners write about the topic, the locations they choose, the visuals and spokespeople that are provided to the media and so forth” (p. 219). Public relations professionals thus operate as “frame strategists” (Hallahan, 1999, p. 224) who try to position news to result in good outcomes for clients. Vasquez (1996) argued that an issue development perspective recasts public relations practice as a “communication and negotiation process” in which practitioners construct frames that will help them negotiate the evolving organization–public relationship (p. 72). Despite the apparent tie between framing and issues management, the literature does not specify how framing theory might be applied to the practice of issues management. This study addressed that gap and asked the following questions: RQ1: What were the major frames advanced by Kraft in corporate initiatives in its attempt to manage the issue of obesity? RQ2: Were the major frames advanced by Kraft present in the resulting media coverage? RQ3: How do the findings contribute to our understanding of effective framing and issues management practices? 2. Method and data The researchers conducted a case study involving a qualitative content analysis of print and broadcast media coverage surrounding Kraft’s obesity initiatives. They sought to ascertain whether major frames identified in Kraft’s corporate documents were present in related media coverage, and if so, how each frame was portrayed. The close analysis of documents emerging from Kraft and those produced subsequently by journalists enabled the researchers to track the evolution of Kraft’s preferred frames. Two types of documents were included in the analysis. First, news releases and fact sheets pertaining to obesity initiatives that Kraft posted on its corporate website were analyzed to identify the organization’s preferred frames. Second, media reports (articles and broadcast transcripts) dealing with the initiatives were reviewed to establish whether Kraft’s preferred frames were reproduced in resulting news coverage. Print media reports were drawn from four leading national newspapers: The New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today. Broadcast transcripts came from four major national sources: National Public Radio (NPR), American Broadcasting Companies Inc (ABC), Fox News Network Inc (Fox News), and Cable News Network (CNN). In total, 24 media reports were identified through the LexisNexis database, using the search terms ‘Kraft’ and ‘obesity’ combined. The reports included both news stories and editorials, all of which appeared during the 2-month period following Kraft’s program announcement on July 1, 2003. The New York Times ran seven related articles, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times each ran four, and USA Today ran two. In the broadcast media, NPR aired two items, ABC and Fox News each broadcast one story, and CNN broadcast three. In order to cross-reference the frames and subframes in Kraft’s material with those that appeared in media coverage, a protocol table was designed. This approach was endorsed by Altheide (1996), who described a protocol as “a list of questions, items, categories, or variables that guide data collection from documents” (p. 26). The frames identified within Kraft’s corporate materials served as the “categories” in this study, defining the boundaries for the discussion of the obesity issue. Within each category, subframes were developed to identify recurring points associated with a particular frame. Next, the researchers sought to discern whether Kraft’s preferred frames and subframes were picked up by the media. They calculated how often Kraft’s frames were used, whether the news report included a direct quote from a Kraft spokesperson, and whether Kraft’s announcement was the “peg” for the article or simply incorporated in a related news story. Attention was also paid to the context in which the subframes and frames were reported; when present, did Kraft’s apparent framing and issues management efforts appear in a positive, negative or balanced context? A positive context meant that the majority of content supported Kraft’s initiatives, whereas negative context meant that the majority of content did not support Kraft’s initiatives, and balanced context meant that the content was equally divided between positive and negative comments. Some articles were labeled as neutral, as the media report carried no value judgment. 3. Results The analysis revealed five major frames, each with underlying subframes, used by Kraft to manage the issue of obesity: Frame I: Global initiatives to help address rise in obesity Subframe I.1: Kraft will take steps to help battle obesity Subframe I.2: Kraft is committed to encouraging healthy lifestyles and making it easier to eat and live better Frame II: Product nutrition Subframe II.1: A cap on the portion size of single-serve packages Subframe II.2: Guidelines for the nutritional characteristics of all products Subframe II.3: A planned effort to improve existing products and add healthy options Frame III: Marketing practices Subframe III.1: The elimination of all in-school marketing
376
K. Darmon et al. / Public Relations Review 34 (2008) 373–379
Table 1 Frequency of frame appearance Print
Frame I (global initiatives) Frame II (product nutrition) Frame III (marketing practices) Frame IV (consumer information) Frame V (advocacy and dialogue)
Broadcast
Yes
No
Yes
No
16 14 14 2 7
1 3 3 15 10
2 7 5 0 0
5 0 2 7 7
Subframe III.2: Locally appropriate criteria to use with the international vending industry to determine which Kraft products might be sold in in-school vending machines Subframe III.3: Guidelines for all advertising and marketing practices to encourage healthy eating behaviors and active lifestyles Frame IV: Consumer information Subframe IV.1: Nutrition labeling in all markets worldwide Subframe IV.2: Added nutrition and/or activity-related information on product labels to assist consumer choices Subframe IV.3: Guidelines for the use of health-related claims in all global markets Frame V: Advocacy and dialogue Subframe V.1: Advocacy for public policies to help schools and communities improve fitness and nutrition Subframe V.2: Increased dialogue with key stakeholders regarding the obesity issue Of the 24 total media reports, five focused on Kraft’s initiatives, while 19 emphasized related issues, such as commercialism in schools, obesity and public health, and the debate over trans fats. Each media report mentioned at least one of Kraft’s announcement frames. Kraft’s five frames appeared with varying frequency. Table 1 demonstrates that frame I (global initiatives) was covered most frequently by print media, whereas frame II (product nutrition) was most frequent in broadcast media. Frame IV (consumer information) was the least covered frame in print media, and frames IV and V (advocacy and dialogue) were least covered by broadcast media. Media use of direct quotes varied (see Table 2). The most frequent quote came from a Kraft news release and was attributed to CEO Holden: The rise in obesity is a complex public health challenge of global proportions. Just as obesity has many causes, it can be solved only if all sectors of society do their part to help. Kraft is committed to product choices and marketing practices that will help encourage healthy lifestyles and make it easier to eat and live better (Kraft, 2003b). The New York Times and The Washington Post incorporated the subframe of fighting obesity using material taken directly from a Kraft news release, whereas The Washington Post included quotes from Michael Mudd, Kraft’s Director of Communications. In each case, the quotes reproduced Kraft’s preferred frames. Consumer information received one direct quote, in the Los Angeles Times: “We certainly agree with and support the fact that trans fats should appear [on product labels].” This is a quote from Mudd’s deputy, Kris Charles, who used the underlying themes of this frame, product labeling, when talking to the reporter. Advocacy and dialogue did not appear in any direct quotes. In the broadcast media, NPR aired a sound-bite from Mudd, pertaining to the overall frame of fighting obesity, in which he reiterated Kraft’s commitment to help tackle obesity: “We’re making these commitments, first and foremost, because we do think it’s the right thing to do for the people who use our products and for our business.” With respect to the value judgment context in which the frames and subframes appeared, seven of the reports were positive, two were negative, six were balanced, and in nine cases the context was neutral with no value judgment (see Table 3). The New York Times carried two positive comments from an academic expert lauding Kraft’s efforts: Table 2 Use of direct quote Print
Frame I Frame II Frame III Frame IV Frame V
Broadcast
Yes
No
Yes
No
3 1 1 1 0
14 16 16 16 17
1 0 0 0 0
6 7 7 7 7
K. Darmon et al. / Public Relations Review 34 (2008) 373–379
377
Table 3 Value judgment context Print
Positive Negative Balanced
Broadcast
Yes
No
Yes
No
5 2 4
12 15 13
2 0 2
5 7 5
‘The Kraft announcement is a landmark,’ said Kelly D. Brownell, a professor at Yale University and head of the school’s Center for Eating and Weight Disorders. ‘It’s the first of its kind from a major food company. And because Kraft is the largest food company in the world, other food companies will have to take notice.’ The same article in the New York Times also carried a negative comment attributed to unnamed sources: Some health and food industry experts, however, said that Kraft and other food companies were promising new health initiatives to deflect criticism of their role in a wide range of health and obesity problems, and also because the big food companies hope to avoid the fate of the big tobacco companies, which were sued for marketing highly addictive cigarettes without properly disclosing their health risks. In the tally, the New York Times article was deemed positive because there were two positive comments versus one negative one. An example of negative coverage was found in a different New York Times piece, which once again cast Kraft’s initiatives in a self-serving light, linking them with lawsuits filed against the tobacco industry: The move was presented as a statesmanlike effort to help combat the obesity epidemic, but analysts suggested that the company was scrambling to take the high road in advance of a potential litigation explosion like the one that staggered the tobacco industry. Kraft is a sister company of Philip Morris and is thus well positioned to understand the legal risks of selling unhealthy products. The second negative reference in that piece cast doubt on Kraft’s commitment to deliver on its promises: Skeptics worry, with good reason, about the depth and sincerity of the food industry’s late-inning conversion to healthy eating. An industry that has prospered by selling high-fat, high-calorie or sugary foods in ever larger quantities will probably be loath to deviate too much from a proven path to profits. Balanced reports were also found. A Los Angeles Times editorial praised Kraft’s initiatives: I was even more pleased to see Kraft Foods – the $30-billion giant whose products include cream cheese, peanut butter, Velveeta, Oreo cookies and Oscar Mayer hot dogs – announce plans to reduce fats, sugar and calories across its product line. Kraft also said it would cease its marketing efforts in schools and reexamine its portion sizes. However, the writer then proceeded to question Kraft’s motives: Were I a betting man, I’d wager that concerns about possible lawsuits, not a suddenly awakened social conscience, dictated these moves by Kraft – which is, after all, owned by Philip Morris, a company that knows all too well the power of the class action suit. Given the even-handed tone overall, this editorial was deemed balanced. When cross-referencing value judgment context with frequency of frame appearance, the study found that only one story (USA Today) incorporated all five of Kraft’s frames, and it was positive. Six reports carried references to four Kraft frames; two were judged positive, two were negative, one was balanced, and one was neutral. Eight stories carried references to three frames; two were positive, one was balanced, and five were neutral. Five stories carried two reference frames; two were positive, two were balanced, and one was neutral. Four stories carried only one frame; two were balanced and two were neutral. When cross-referencing value judgment context with use of direct quote, the study found that five stories used direct quotes from Kraft. Of these stories, three were positive and two were neutral. The negative and balanced articles did not include Kraft quotes. And when cross-referencing value judgment context with main focus of article, five articles used Kraft’s obesity-tackling initiatives as their main focus. Of these, three were positive and two were negative. All used four or more of Kraft’s frames, and the three positive articles also carried quotes from Kraft.
4. Discussion and implications This study demonstrated that framing is an integral part of issues management (Heath, 1990; Vasquez, 1996; Kuhn, 1997; Bridges & Nelson, 2000). Kraft’s framing attempts fit well with recognized objectives of issues management:
378
K. Darmon et al. / Public Relations Review 34 (2008) 373–379
(1) Profitability (Camillus & Datta, 1991; Renfro, 1993): Kraft’s over-arching frame of tackling obesity was interpreted as an attempt to not only prevent negative repercussions, but also to protect Kraft’s position as an industry leader; (2) Public policy (Jones & Chase, 1979; Heath, 1990; Kuhn, 1997; Bridges & Nelson, 2000): Kraft’s consumer information frame was interpreted as an attempt to curb additional government restrictions; (3) Organizational policy (Coombs, 1999): Kraft’s product nutrition and marketing practices frames were interpreted as the organization’s attempt to respond to market forces via internal adjustments; (4) Stakeholder relations (Heath, 1990; Heath & Cousino, 1990): Kraft’s advocacy and dialogue frame was viewed as socially responsible public outreach. Confronted with the issue of obesity, Kraft attempted not only to avoid a crisis but also to find a way to turn the situation to its advantage by becoming the first major player in the packaged food industry to address the issue of obesity. Given that only two of the 24 news items analyzed in this study were negative, it seems that Kraft was successful in its framing and management attempts. By taking a proactive approach, Kraft did seem to manage the issue on its own terms. The timeliness of the obesity issue likely contributed to the broad coverage of Kraft’s initiatives. However, it also appears that Kraft’s framing efforts had an impact on the way in which its initiatives were presented by the media, supporting previous findings that framing plays a pivotal role in the process of agenda-setting (Hallahan, 1999). By using an over-arching message about global initiatives to fight obesity along with more specific frames and subframes, Kraft made its program relevant to numerous audiences. The finding that the over-arching frame was most frequently covered by print media might be attributed to a number of factors: (1) this frame appeared as the title of Kraft’s news release, (2) this frame was the lead frame in the quotes within the news release, and (3) this frame captured the perceived social significance of the issue. The study also suggested that the nature of the frame and its degree of social relevance to news audiences was a factor in influencing media reports. Journalists are drawn to frames that they perceive to be salient, controversial and timely. Obesity is relevant to media audiences who regard it as both a social and individual level issue. The finding that “product nutrition” was the most covered frame in the broadcast media, followed by “marketing practices,” and that these frames were also prominent in print media reports, could be attributed to several factors: (1) Kraft positioned these frames directly after the overarching global initiatives frame in its news release; (2) these frames were emotionally charged (portion control and marketing to children); and (3) these frames were easier for reporters to work into stories being prepared on related issues, not necessarily those focused on Kraft’s efforts. The two frames of “consumer information” and “advocacy and dialogue” received the least media attention. These items may have been of less interest to journalists because they were third and fourth in a sequence of four frames set out by Kraft in its news release and/or because these frames were perceived to be less relevant to readers. This exploration of framing as a tool of issues management yields several strategic insights for practitioners. First, there may be a limit to the number of frames that can be influential within any given communication. The average of just over three frames per print article and just under three per broadcast item indicates that perhaps three is the optimal number of useful frames that a public relations practitioner ought to include within a single communication. Second, the physical placement of frames within a published document, such as a news release, may have an impact on whether the frame appears in subsequent media coverage. The more prominent the position in initial documents or interviews, the more likely the frame is to appear in coverage and to appear often. Third, the most prominent frame in any given communication, such as “global initiatives to fight obesity” in the Kraft case, may generate frame-specific articles. Finally, the use of quotes in published documents, such as news releases, may increase the chance that a company’s frames will be conveyed intact by the media. The study suggests that a quote that meets the publication’s requirements (e.g. from an official source) is more likely to be incorporated in an unaltered fashion. The inclusion of direct quotes in media coverage is important for issues management because it allows an organization to speak directly to its publics. Future research on issues management would extend our knowledge of framing effects by moving beyond the analysis of media texts to examine audience reaction to practitioner-influenced news reports. It would be valuable to investigate the degree to which audiences draw different conclusions from materials created by public relations practitioners, such as the fact sheets available on the Kraft web site, and news stories produced by journalists, and the extent to which members of the public are willing to accept the frames advanced by each. References Altheide, D. L. (1996). Qualitative media analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. American Academy of Pediatrics (2004, January). Policy statement: Soft drinks in schools. Pediatrics, 113, 1, 152–154. Bennett, W. L. (1993). Constructing publics and their opinions. Political Communications, 10, 101–120. Bridges, J. A., & Nelson, R. A. (2000). Issues management: A relational approach. In J. A. Ledingham & S. D. Bruning (Eds.), Public relations as relationship management: A relational approach to the study and practice of public relations (pp. 95–115). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Camillus, J. C., & Datta, D. K. (1991). Managing strategic issues in a turbulent environment. Long Range Planning, 24, 67–74. Center for Disease Control (2003a). http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/trend/prev reg.htm accessed 11.12.03. Center for Disease Control (2003b). http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/faq.htm accessed 11.12.03. Center for Disease Control (2003c). http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/index.htm accessed 11.12.03. Coombs, T. (1999). Ongoing crisis communication: Planning, managing, and responding. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51–58. Esrock, S. L., Hart, J. L., & D’Silva, M. U. (2002). The saga of the Crown Pilot: Framing, reframing, and reconsideration. Public Relations Review, 28, 209–227. Hainsworth, B. E. (1990). The distribution of advantages and disadvantages. Public Relations Review, 16, 33–39.
K. Darmon et al. / Public Relations Review 34 (2008) 373–379
379
Hallahan, K. (1999). Seven models of framing: Implications for public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 11, 205–242. Heath, R. L. (1990). Corporate issues management: Theoretical underpinnings and research foundations. Public Relations Research Annual, 2, 29–65. Heath, R. L., & Cousino, K. R. (1990). Issues management: End of first decade progress report. Public Relations Review, 16, 6–18. Jones, B. L., & Chase, W. H. (1979). Managing public policy issues. Public Relations Review, 5, 3–23. Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Problems and opportunities in agenda-setting research. Journal of Communication, 43, 100–127. Kraft Foods (2003a). Staying connected with public expectations. http://www.kraft.com/pdfs/kft 032103.pdf accessed 08.12.03. Kraft Foods (2003b). Kraft Foods announces global initiatives to help address rise in obesity. http://www.kraft.com/newsroom/07012003.html accessed 08.08.03. Kuhn, T. (1997). The discourse of issues management: A genre of organizational communication. Communication Quarterly, 45, 188–210. Linn, S. (2004). Consuming kids: The hostile takeover of childhood. New York: The New Press. Renfro, W. L. (1993). Issues management in strategic planning. Westport, CT: Quorum. Shoemaker, P. J., & Reese, S. D. (1991). Mediating the message: Theories of influence on mass media content. White Plains, NY: Longman. United States Department of Health and Human Services (2001). Call to action. http://www.sugeongeneral.gov/topics/obesity/calltoaction/1 3.htm accessed 25.09.03. Vasquez, G. M. (1996). Public relations as negotiation: An issue development perspective. Journal of Public Relations Research, 8, 57–77.