Untitled

Severe Allergies, Price Increases, and Supply Shortages

“…Studying how it is framed can shed light on an issue often kept out of the public domain. Public interest communications is, simply put, communication on behalf of the public (Fessmann, 2017). Keeping an issue such as medication prices out of the public domain serves the public relations efforts of pharmaceutical companies.…”

“…Due to the nature of news acting as a fourth estate (Hirst, 2013), news outlets should not be participating in the public relations efforts of pharmaceutical companies. Instead, news coverage of an issue such as medication price increases should act in the interest of the public and aim to create change regarding the issue at hand (Fessmann, 2017). Framing research indicates that news frames suggest to audiences ways to interpret an issue or event (Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007).…”

“…The study deploys a framing analysis of television news stories from the major national news networks that covered the Mylan EpiPen price hike and shortage. Medication prices impact drug access and availability, among other considerations, which have major impacts on the health of individuals and communities, keeping medication prices in line with the aim of public interest communications (Fessmann, 2017). Understanding the frames that enter public discourse is essential to crafting public interest communications campaigns that can then create change in the organizational structures that dictate who can and cannot have access to lifesaving medications (Fessmann, 2017).…”

“…Although these efforts seem to do good, Dutta (2019) argued that they do not actually create lasting change, stating, "Development and public good are often paradoxically co-opted within efforts of community relations and CSR to strategically achieve goals of privatized organizational effectiveness" (p. 53). Although pharmaceutical companies participate in CSR abroad, the topic of prescription medications and pricing is often treated in a traditional public relations style as opposed to public interest communications as a way to build trust in the community (Fessmann, 2017). In this way, according to Fessmann's (2017) delineation of the differences between public relations and public interest communications, focusing on public relations with U.S. audiences allows Big Pharma to continue its business practices-including raising medication prices-while participating in public interest communications would force them to potentially change their structures.…”

Raining on SeaWorld’s Parade: PETA’s Direct Action and Public Interest Communication

“…Due to the continuing reliance on excellence theory and other functionalist approaches (Grunig & Grunig, 1992), some public relations scholarship still views activists as antagonistic groups corporations need to manage through public relations techniques (Benecke & Oksiutycz, 2015;Smith & Ferguson, 2010;Stokes & Rubin, 2010). Traditional activism scholarship argues that opposing parties in a conflict begin by trying to find common ground; but, once one party does not reciprocate, media advocacy may begin, providing the pivot to PIC (Fessmann, 2017;Hon, 2017). As Stokes and Rubin (2010) point out, this pivot away from accommodation becomes necessary because corporations and public interest communicators often have conflicting goals, meaning that "the compromise metaphor implicit in the two-way symmetrical model is not always accurate in describing the relationships between corporations and activists" (p. 42).…”