This paper uses a frame analysis method to highlight the ways in which the quick-service restaurant (QSR) industry -or fast food restaurant industry -uses official websites to communicate messages about nutrition and health to consumers and other relevant publics, especially using the language of corporate social responsibility. In the context of the increasing association of QSR industry food to the obesity epidemic in the U.S.A., several large fast-food chains have developed elaborate communication strategies to address the health concerns among the general public of their foods. Using a frame analysis method, I demonstrate that the industry consistently draws on metaphors of 'individual responsibility' and 'personal choice' in choosing healthy food, while establishing the primary role of moderation and exercise in preventing obesity. As a contribution to the field of PR, this emic frame analysis features an integrative approach that combines both message features in context with message intention. I also discuss practical applications of the study findings. ARTICLE HISTORYThe primary scholarly objective of this article is to respond to questions raised by consumers, consumer-rights groups, and food activist organizations: Can we view the health campaigns initiated by fast food industry as a genuine sign of improvement? Are fast food websites a value-neutral, trustworthy source of health information? Have fast food restaurants turned into the healthy meal options as their corporate social responsibility (CSR) messages suggest?Fast food chains such as McDonald's, Arby's and KFC have long been criticized for providing foods associated with energy overconsumption

On November 18, 2018, the Italian fashion house Dolce & Gabbana (D&G) released a controversial video on all their social media channels. The video triggered an instant outcry from the general Chinese public, who called the video a racist caricature of Chinese culture. D&G responded to the crisis with several image repair strategies. This study examines D&G’s crisis communication efforts in the wake of this incident. Departing from corporate-oriented perspectives prevalent in the field of public relations, this study employs a dynamic, public-oriented view of crisis communication, which focuses on the dynamic, interactive process of crisis development from the standpoint of the publics. By analyzing communicative behavior on Twitter (an increasingly influential alternative public sphere in China) and in particular, comments and responses toward the crisis communication strategies employed by D&G, we have identified four prominent themes, or ways that publics framed their key messages against the corporation: “Apology not enough”; “Apology done badly”; “Call to unite against D&G”; and “Sarcasm, mockery, and abuse.” And they can be interpreted as a number of crisis communication strategies of the global, online publics. Based on our analysis of the D&G case, we discuss the theoretical implications of a dynamic, public-oriented perspective (DPOP) on crisis communication, highlighting its key areas of difference from the corporate-oriented perspective (COP).

No abstract

In recent years, China has emerged as a major economic and trade partner of the USA. In the light of the increasing ‘neoliberalization’ of the Chinese economy – as exemplified by privatization, deregulation and globalization, China has come to be situated in the economic and political imagination within mainstream managerial US discourses of commerce and trade. As a strategic economic partner for US-based businesses, much academic, policy-based, and commercial literature has focused on ‘relationship management’ issues to guide US-based business management practices directed toward China. In this article, we focus on the discourses of ‘relationship management’ in the 2009 through 2011 versions of one such document: Doing Business in China: Country Commercial Guide for US Companies, a publication of the US and Foreign Commercial Service and the US Department of State. Using an entry point for putting the postcolonial and ‘political economy’ theoretical frameworks in conversation, as exemplified by the works of Edward Said, Arif Dirlik, and David Harvey, this document was analyzed for congruent themes and the ways in which these themes depicted the relationships of power and control within contemporary configurations of neocolonialism. Three themes were reflected in the discourse: (1) China as a juvenile business field; (2) primitive business culture of the Orient; and (3) globalization as improvement and development. These themes were examined in detail and explicated in relation to postcolonial and neoliberal political economic theories, elucidating the relationship among neoliberalization, the nation state and neocolonial framing of the Orient.