Elsevier

Public Relations Review

Volume 27, Issue 3, Autumn 2001, Pages 263-284
Public Relations Review

How activist organizations are using the Internet to build relationships

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0363-8111(01)00086-8Get rights and content

Abstract

This study examines the mediated communication of activist organizations to understand how these groups use their Web sites to build relationships with publics. A study of one hundred environmental organization Web sites identified common features and examined the incorporation of dialogic communication into this new medium. The data suggest that while most activist organizations meet the technical and design aspects required for dialogic relationship building on the Web, they are not yet fully engaging their publics in two-way communication. Moreover, it appears that the activist organizations are better prepared to address the needs of member publics rather than media needs.

Introduction

Although all types of organizations may benefit from communicating with publics through the WWW, activist groups may benefit most from the Web’s dialogic potential. An activist public has been defined as “a group of two or more individuals who organize in order to influence another public or publics through action that may include education, compromise, persuasion, pressure tactics or force” [1]. In the past, active publics have been considered threats that require a public relations response. But Dozier and Lauzen have critiqued the “modern positivist” “threat” approach that causes scholars to “overlook the heuristic merits of the ways in which activist publics are different from rather than similar to, other constituents and stakeholders that are players in the game of public relations” [2].

Activist organizations are important to study in public relations because they have unique communication and relationship-building needs. They “must maintain membership, thrive in what might be described as a competitive marketplace of ideas and issues, and adjust to changes in their environment” [3]. Many activist organizations, operating on minimal budgets, have traditionally relied on public relations as a cost-effective way to reach publics. Maintaining an activist organization is difficult because there are many different activist groups—large and small—working on similar issues and courting the same active publics. For instance, thousands of organizations advocate on behalf of endangered species, clean water, and better land use. One way that activist organizations can better serve their publics, extend their reach, and coordinate efforts with other like-minded groups, is through the Internet.

Coombs identified the Internet as a potential equalizer for activist organizations because it offers a “low cost, direct, controllable communication channel” that can magnify their efforts and create linkages with other like-minded stakeholders [4]. Similarly, Mitra has suggested that the Internet can be used effectively to bring members of diasporic groups together [5]. Leveraging the communication potential of the Internet is important because noncorporate organizations often lack expertise and sophistication in their public relations efforts [6]. The Internet may be one of the best channels for activist organizations to communicate their messages and build public support for issues [7]. One way that activist organizations can use the Internet to build relationships with publics is by fostering dialogic communication.

In 1998, Kent and Taylor proposed five dialogic principles that would guide organizations interested in creating mediated, two-way, dialogic relationships with publics [8]. The purpose of this article is to examine activist Web sites to determine the extent to which they use dialogue effectively to build organization–public relationships. Activist organizations are studied to determine if, and how, these groups are using their Web sites to engage their publics, encourage feedback, and meet the informational needs of their publics. To provide context to the concept of dialogue, the first section of the article reviews the relevant literature in public relations that addresses the development of dialogue as a framework for understanding ethical public relations practice. Dialogue is emerging as an important framework as public relations moves toward a relational approach. Dialogue, however, is more than a relational strategy for interpersonal communication; dialogue can also guide mediated relationships. Thus, the second section of the article examines the status of relationship building on the Internet and explores how organizations can actually build dialogic relationships through their sites on the WWW. To test for relationship building, the third section of the article reports the results of a study that examines the incorporation of dialogic features in activist organizations’ Web sites.

Section snippets

The emergence of dialogue in public relations theory

For the last 20 years, a prominent theme in public relations research and commentary has focused on either supporting or challenging James Grunig’s symmetrical model of public relations as the most ethical way to conduct public relations. Alternative frameworks have slowly emerged, however, that are pushing the field in a new direction and raising critical questions about past assumptions [9]. Of particular interest are the relational and accommodation approaches to public relations that

Mediated dialogue and the WWW

In the last 4 years, there have been a number of articles and research studies published about mediated public relations. Johnson explored practitioner perceptions of the Internet and WWW and found that there were mixed attitudes about conducting mediated public relations through the Web [24]. Johnson found that while many practitioners enjoyed the ease of communication afforded through electronic mail and Web sites, some felt that it “depersonalized” public relations [25].

In a special issue of

Method

This study is based on a random sample of 100 activist organization Web sites. The data for this project were collected during spring 2000. The study operationalized five principles of dialogic relationship building deductively from Kent and Taylor’s principles [46] into a 32-item questionnaire. Esrock and Leichty’s article on corporate Web sites also provided insight into two of the features of usefulness of information and ease of use [47].

Descriptives

The Web sites visited loaded quickly, with 87% loading in less than four seconds on a networked computer. Seventy-three percent (73%) of the sites included links to other activist Web sites. The Web sites were linked most often to other local environmental organizations (M = 8.9 links per site). Additionally, the sites were also linked to national environmental organizations (M = 8.3 links per site) and international environmental organizations (M = 8.2 links per site). The links to other Web

Discussion

The data suggest that activist organization Web sites are not fully employing the dialogic capacity of the Internet as expected. The Web sites do meet some of the prerequisites of dialogue in that they are easy to use, contain useful information, and provide reasons for visitors to remain on the site. However, the relationship-building capacity of encouraging visitors to return and allowing for visitor interaction are both lacking. Two clusters emerged from the data analysis: a technical and

Conclusion

Dialogue has increasingly been described as one of the most useful frameworks for conceptualizing the organization–public relationship [56]; and the Web has increasingly been described as one of the essential tools for activist and nonprofit organizations [57]. In merging both of these areas this study has provided insight into the use of the Web for dialogic purposes. However, this study also highlights certain deficiencies inherent in “measuring” Webbed dialogue. That is, measurements of

Maureen Taylor is an assistant professor at Rutgers University in New Brunswick New Jersey. Taylor can be reached by telephone at (732) 932-1721, or by e-mail at 〈[email protected]〉.

References (59)

  • R.L Heath

    New communication technologies: an issues management point of view, Public Relations Review

    (1998)
  • M.L Kent et al.

    Building dialogic relationships through the World Wide Web, Public Relations Review

    (1998)
  • S.L Esrock et al.

    Social responsibility and corporate Web pagesself-presentation or agenda-setting?

    Public Relations Review

    (1998)
  • L.A. Grunig, Activism: how it limits the effectiveness of organizations and how excellent public relations departments...
  • D.M. Dozier, M.M. Lauzen, Liberating the intellectual domain from the practice: public relations, activism, and the...
  • M.F. Smith, D.P. Ferguson, Activism, in: R.L. Heath (Ed.), Handbook of Public Relations, Sage Publications, Thousand...
  • W.T. Coombs, The Internet as potential equalizer: new leverage for confronting social irresponsibility, Public...
  • A Mitra

    Diasporic Web sites: ingroup and outgroup discourse,Critical Studies in Mass Communication

    (1997)
  • D Rouner et al.

    Not-for-profits appear to lack PR sophistication, Public Relations Review

    (1988)
  • Cf., A.E. Cancel, G.T. Cameron, L.M. Sallot, M. Mitrook, It depends: a contingency theory of accommodation in public...
  • G.M. Broom, S. Casey, J. Ritchey, Toward a concept and theory of organization–public relationships, Journal of Public...
  • Ibid., E.L....
  • J.A. Ledingham, S.D. Bruning, 2000, op....
  • Ibid., p....
  • A.E. Cancel, G.T. Cameron, L.M. Sallot, M. Mitrook, 1997, op. cit.; A.E. Cancel, M. Mitrook, G.T. Cameron, 1999, op....
  • Ibid., A.E. Cancel, et al.,...
  • Cancel, et al., 1997, 1999, op....
  • J.E. Grunig, Two way symmetrical public relations: past, present and future, in: R.L. Heath (Ed.), Handbook of Public...
  • Ibid., p. 29, emphasis...
  • A.J. Sullivan, Values of public relations, in: O. Lerbinger, A. Sullivan (Eds.), Information, Influence and...
  • R. Pearson, A Theory of Public Relations Ethics, unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Ohio University, 1989a; R. Pearson,...
  • J.E Grunig

    Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management

    (1992)
  • K.D. Day, Q. Dong, C. Robins, Public relations ethics: an overview and discussion of issues for the 21st century, in:...
  • Ibid., J.E. Grunig, 2001, p....
  • M.A Johnson

    Public relations and technology: practitioner perspectives, Journal of Public Relations Research

    (1997)
  • Ibid., p....
  • W.T. Coombs, 1998, op....
  • R.L. Heath, 1998, op....
  • M.L. Kent, M. Taylor, 1998, op....
  • Cited by (330)

    • Self-promotion and online shaming during COVID-19: A toxic combination

      2022, International Journal of Information Management Data Insights
    • Nonprofit Organizations’ Dialogic Use of Social Media: Principles and Practice

      2024, Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Maureen Taylor is an assistant professor at Rutgers University in New Brunswick New Jersey. Taylor can be reached by telephone at (732) 932-1721, or by e-mail at 〈[email protected]〉.

    Michael L. Kent is an assistant professor and the Director of Graduate Studies at Montclair State University in Upper Montclair New Jersey. Kent conducts research on public relations and the Web, and international public relations. Kent can be reached by telephone at (973) 655-7471, or by e-mail at 〈[email protected]〉.

    William J. White received his Ph.D. from the School of Communication, Information, and Library Studies (SCILS) at Rutgers University in May, 2001. Dr. White conducts research on organizational and scientific communication, particularly the processes of knowledge creation, dissemination, and management. White can be reached by e-mail at 〈[email protected]〉.

    View full text