Online corporate social responsibility communication strategies and stakeholder engagements: A comparison of controversial versus noncontroversial industries

Abstract

This study attempts to reveal the corporate social responsibility (CSR) programming and communication strategies of companies from controversial versus noncontroversial industry sectors and stakeholders' responses to these online CSR communications. A content analysis of CSR videos from 58 companies among the Fortune 500 and user comments on YouTube found that controversial and noncontroversial industries tended to use different strategies in their online CSR communications. Videos that (a) used information strategies, (b) took a company‐dominant perspective, and (c) described high fit CSR programs received more negative and skeptical comments; CSR videos that (a) emphasized the companies' commitment to the programs, (b) demonstrated the impact of CSR programs with anecdotal evidences, and (c) balanced their stated CSR motives between social benefits and business interests received less negative and skeptical comments. Most importantly, stakeholders' responses towards these communication strategies differed by industry sectors.

Using big data to evaluate corporate social responsibility and sustainable development practices

“…It will allow: On the one hand, companies can obtain information about what their stakeholders say, think and do; and, therefore, by using these stakeholder insights from online social networks, companies can make better strategic CSR decisions, increase the speed of analysis, provide a more adapted and focused response to a target audience or problem and, ultimately, create more value for the community (Crawford et al, 2013; Farache et al, 2018). To monitor online opinions about the company should be a priority for companies because the attitudes of the stakeholders towards the company may be affected by being exposed to these opinions (Song & Jing, 2019). Stakeholders that use online social networks can become active subjects who take part in the companies' CSR‐image formation process through the content they generate on online social media (Acuti, Grazzini, Mazzoli, & Aiello, 2019).…”

“…Although there is no consistency in the CSR concept (Huang, Do, & Kumar, 2019), CSR can be defined as the responsibility of enterprises for their impacts on society (The European Union Commission, 2011). In other words, to meet this responsibility, corporates need to involve their stakeholders to integrate economic, social, environmental, ethical human rights, and consumer concerns into their business operations and core strategy (Song & Jing, 2019).…”

Environmental disclosure and stakeholder engagement via social media: State of the art and potential in public utilities

“…In addition, social media usage is growing in the public sector, with the result of increasing the level of accountability (Bonsón, Royo, & Ratkai, ; Gesuele, ; Giacomini, ). Despite these premises, many studies focus on the private sector in order to assess the quality of disclosure (Song & Wen, ), whereas only a few studies examine other sectors, such as NGOs, the public sector, LGOs, SOEs and PUs (Mia, Hazelton, & Guthrie, ).…”

Understanding the Impact of Sustainability and CSR Information in D2C Online Shops on Consumer Attitudes and Behavior – A Literature Review

“…With this conceptual model of the communication process in mind, we can turn to other communication theories that link characteristics of the various model elements to communication effectiveness. For example, several papers refer to congruency theory, which posits that a high degree of fit between characteristics of the sender and the message facilitates easier processing of the message and reduces cognitive elaboration [4,40,41,42,43]. A S/CSR message that has a logical connection to the company's core business will be perceived as more congruent.…”

“…that have been used in our literature sample to explain the role of S/CSR information in forming consumer behavior include contingency theory [48], legitimacy theory [41,49,50], focus theory [51], framing theory [50], the SOR model [52], stakeholder theory [53], the theory of conspicuous consumption [54] and the theory of ethical egoism [53]. Unfortunately, discussing all of them in detail is beyond the scope of this review.…”