21 pages, via online journal, How an agricultural organization handles the way the media reports a crisis can have an impact on the public’s perceptions of the organization, and sometimes the industry as a whole. The popularity of social media outlets as a venue for disseminating and gathering information and news makes the use of social media surrounding agricultural crises an important topic to investigate (Glynn, Huge, & Hoffman 2012; Hermida, 2010). A qualitative case study was conducted to investigate the use of social media tools during an agricultural crisis. The participants – communications directors, social media managers, and individuals with a close connection to the crisis under study – reported that social media was a major component of their communication efforts surrounding each crisis. Participants felt social media was very effective in these situations and had a major impact on their communication efforts. Although no participants reported using a structured social media strategy or crisis communication plan, they stated a need for such guidelines in the agricultural industry. From the data analyzed in this study, a model for using social media during a crisis situation, aimed specifically for use by those in the agricultural industry, was developed. This project was funded through the USDA's Beginning Farmers & Ranchers Project.
18 pages., via online journal, As the public has expressed increasing concerns regarding the humane raising and handling of farm animals, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and industry organizations have developed a series of standards enforcing animal welfare in the poultry industry. Labels and value-added claims were created and defined to differentiate products and to inform consumers’ purchasing decisions. This study identified five labels related to animal welfare that are frequently found on food packages in the U.S. grocery stores, including both the mandatory labels and third-party, voluntary labels. Using a controlled online experiment (N=249), we examined the labels’ effects on consumers’ perception of humane treatment and purchasing tendencies toward egg products. Results showed that while most consumers lack knowledge regarding the labels’ meaning and certification standards, they rely on the labels with simplistic terms (e.g., "certified humane," "cage free") as heuristic cues to judge the ethical treatment of hens on the farm. However, the selected labels did not lead consumers to pay a higher premium for the labeled products. We discussed the implications for regulators, food marketers, and agricultural communicators.
16 pages, via online journal, One of the nation’s most important industries, agriculture, has adopted social media to communicate with consumers and the public. At the same time, traditional news media remains important to the agriculture industry because many consumers still receive information about agriculture from sources such as newspapers and television. Little literature at the time of this study explored how social media is used specifically as a media relations tool. The purpose of this study is to examine how agricultural organizations in Ohio communicate via social media and how the messages could impact central Ohio traditional media outlets’ coverage of agricultural issues. The study is grounded in uses and gratifications theory, and previous social media studies. Data were collected from seven Ohio agricultural organizations’ Facebook pages and four central Ohio news outlets. Researchers found that Ohio agricultural commodity organizations use social media, but not necessarily to communicate with the news media. The industry received limited news coverage during the time studied, and we were unable to discern a relationship between social media and news media coverage beyond a commonality of stories. By communicating the results of this study with agricultural organizations and researchers, effective social media strategies can be developed to guide the future of social media as a media relations tool.
15 pages., via online journal., Since the first Earth Day in the 1970s, corporate environmental performance has increased dramatically, and cases of greenwashing have increased sharply. The term greenwash refers to a variety of different misleading communications that aim to form overly positive beliefs among stakeholders about a company's environmental practices. The growing number of corporate social responsibility claims, whether founded or not, creates difficulties for stakeholders in distinguishing between truly positive business performance and companies that only appear to embrace a model of sustainable development. In this context, through the lens of legitimacy and signalling theory, we intend to understand and assess the different influences that various types of misleading communications about environmental issues have on stakeholders' perceptions of corporate environmental responsibility and greenwashing. Stakeholder responses to an environmental scandal will also be assessed. The hypotheses tested through a four‐for‐two design experiment reveal that different levels of greenwashing have a significantly different influence on stakeholders' perceptions of corporate environmental responsibility and stakeholders' reactions to environmental scandals.