Mass Media Orientation and External Communication Strategies: Exploring Organisational Differences

Abstract

This study assesses relationships between mass media orientations of communication professionals in organisations and their external communication strategies. We assume that mass media orientations within an organisation may affect an organisation's external communication strategies of bridging and buffering. A survey among 150 Dutch communication professionals working for both for-profit and public organisations as well as NPOs was conducted. Our study shows that preferences for specific communication strategies are related to different forms of media orientation. Having media attention as an organisational goal is more strongly associated with buffering, that is, one-way and symmetric communication, yet a more negative attitude toward the media also hinders an organisation from bridging activities. Overall, few differences between the three types of organisations regarding communication strategies and media orientations were found.

Unpacking Public Sentiment Toward the Government: How Citizens’ Perceptions of Government Communication Strategies Impact Public Engagement, Cynicism, and Communication Behaviors in South Korea

“…Although a government may adopt a wide range of communication strategies, in this study, we draw upon S. Kim's (2014) conceptualization of bridging and buffering strategies based on the underlying goals of communication. S. Kim's (2014) conceptualization emerged from Grunig's (2009) discussion of paradigms of public relations practice based on the underlying goal, either to bridge the gap between an organization and its stakeholders, or to buffer an organization from its stakeholders (Grunig, 2006;Wonneberger & Jacobs, 2016). Grunig (2006; referred to the most commonly practiced, message-oriented approach to persuading individuals about an organization's point of view brand of public relations as the symbolic, interpretive paradigm of public relations.…”

“…It is important to note here that the UNPACKING PUBLIC SENTIMENT TOWARD THE GOVERNMENT 13 bridging and buffering strategies are not mutually exclusive; indeed most organizations, including governments, tend to apply both strategies in tandem as the need may arise, but one strategy is often emphasized over the other in most cases (S. Kim, 2016). Wonneberger and Jacobs (2016) interpreted the two strategies as being on a continuum, where bridging is an open and active approach toward the organizational environment while buffering is an imbalanced, one-way approach which reflects an "organizational unwillingness to change" (Sha, 2009, p. 300) and an organization's interest in "accomplishing its own agenda" by "changing the publics" (Wonneberger & Jacobs, 2016, p. 373). In other words, buffering shapes publics' perceptions about the organization's behavior instead of changing an organization's behavior itself.…”

Did we make it to the news? Effects of actual and perceived media coverage on media orientations of communication professionals

“…Examples of PR-driven media effects include studies on media framing (e.g., Schultz, Kleinnijenhuis, Oegema, Utz, & van Atteveldt, 2012) or agenda setting (e.g., Carroll & McCombs, 2003). Very little, in contrast, has been said so far about how mass media influence the work of communication professionals (Thorbjørnsrud et al, 2014;Wonneberger & Jacobs, 2016). The concept of mediatization offers a valuable perspective that can help to approach this understudied part of public relations research.…”

Who Takes the Lead? Investigating the Reciprocal Relationship Between Organizational and News Agendas

“…In that sense, the legitimacy of nonprofit organizations depends on their ability to attract media attention for their cause (Wonneberger & Jacobs, 2016). Previous research has shown that nonprofit organizations are successful agenda builders, providing journalists with newsworthy information subsidies (Len-Rios et al, 2009;Van Leuven & Joye, 2014).…”

“…Our choice for these organizational types is guided by previous research, which argues that these organizational types differ significantly on key variables relevant to media orientations (e.g., Liu, Horsley, & Levenshus, 2010;Wonneberger & Jacobs, 2016). Among other factors, differences in internal structures (e.g., budgets, objectives) and the organizational environments (e.g., legal constraints, political influence, public scrutiny) have been argued to profoundly impact organizations' communication strategies (Liu et al, 2010).…”