Political Science Research on Crises and Crisis Communications

Schneider, Saundra K.; Jordan, Marty P.

doi:10.1002/9781118516812.ch2

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The constitutive and contested nature of crises makes framing decisions particularly important during such times. Political crises have extensive communicative power and often turn the critical attention of the media and public toward the deficiencies in existing socio-political structures (Schneider & Jordan, 2016). Labels that are applied in such moments-especially early on-can have particular force and ultimately shape the broader information environment in enduring ways (Entman, 2004).…”

Section: Framing In Times Of Political Crisismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This study analyzes news coverage of the January 6 attacks to better understand the use of labels during this period of potential definitional uncertainty. 1 Recognizing political crises as constructed events (e.g., Schneider & Jordan, 2016; Zulli & Coe, 2021) and situating our interest in word choice within the literature on emphasis framing in news coverage (e.g., Bennett et al, 2008; D’Angelo, 2018), we ask which labels predominated in news coverage of the attacks and how different labels were explained/justified. We answer these questions by examining national news during the week following the attacks, first through the tracing of broad quantitative trends in the usage of specific labels and then via qualitative textual analysis to identify more nuanced discursive patterns.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

News Framing in the Aftermath of the January 6 Attacks on the U.S. Capitol: An Analysis of Labels, Definitional Uncertainty, and Contextualization

Zulli

Coe

Isaacs

2022

American Behavioral Scientist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the aftermath of a violent attack, questions of definition arise. News framing research has shown that the words chosen to define a given event can affect attitudes and decision-making, even when only a single word is varied. This study analyzes public discourse in the aftermath of the January 6 U.S. Capitol attacks to better understand which labels predominated and how different labels were explained/justified. We pair computer-assisted content analysis with qualitative textual analysis to identify patterns in public commentary during the week following the attacks. Results indicate that initial news coverage favored “protest(s)” as a descriptor, but “riot,” “attack(s),” and “insurrection” gained traction as the week unfolded. Many labels were also definitively applied and deployed to contextualize the attacks, providing a degree of contrast to framing norms. The results are considered in relation to ongoing debates over definitions of domestic terrorism and related crises, as well as normative considerations central to the maintenance of U.S. democracy.

show abstract

Section: Framing In Times Of Political Crisismentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

News Framing in the Aftermath of the January 6 Attacks on the U.S. Capitol: An Analysis of Labels, Definitional Uncertainty, and Contextualization

Zulli

Coe

Isaacs

2022

American Behavioral Scientist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The prevailing disciplinary orientations are public relations, communications, and psychology. Only a few communication scholars have employed frameworks based on economics, sociology, or political science (Ha & Boynton, 2014), even though some of these disciplines have produced a rich body of knowledge which is relevant for crisis communication such as disaster sociology (Vollmer, 2013), crisis management (Hart, Heyes, & Boin, 2001), or political crisis communication (Schneider & Jordan, 2016). In the field of communication studies, we have suggested to categorize research into the three perspectives of institutional, technical-instrumental, and symbolic-relational crisis communication research (Löffelholz & Schwarz, 2008; with each asking the following main questions: communication is "to provide people with all insights they need in order to make decisions or judgments that reflect the best available knowledge and their own preferences" (Renn, 2009, p. 80) in order to better protect them against risks.…”

Section: Three Perspectives Of Strategic Organizational Crisis Communmentioning

confidence: 99%

The state of strategic organizational crisis communication research in the context of global and digital communication

Schwarz

2019

RAEIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

publication of specialized journals such as the Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication indicate the ongoing institutionalization of the field (Schwarz, Seeger, & Auer, 2016a). Moreover, an increasing number of academic and public research centers, primarily at American and European universities, point to the rapid growth and societal relevance of the field (Palenchar, 2010). Within the field of public relations and strategic communication research the management of crisis communication already counts as a vital sub-discipline (Coombs, 2012b). This gain in importance can also be explained by the numerous devastating crisis events which do not only have tremendous social, political, ecological, and economic impact, but also reveal in many cases the complexity and limitations of managing crisis communication as practiced by organizations in various fields of society. This complexity and scope of crises go along with the interdisciplinarity and multiperspectivity of the research field, which in most cases lacks reciprocal reference (Coombs, 2012a; Löffelholz & Schwarz, 2008). However, the key role of communication in the context of crisis situations and especially the role of strategically planned and research-based communication by organizations before, during and after crisis situations have been recognized in practice as well as in academia. This has stimulated further efforts of developing a stronger conceptual and theoretical basis of crisis communication research. Compared to past ontological descriptions of crises, scholars now emphasize the social construction of crises as well as the role of individual and organizational observers and their perceptions. Pearson and Clair (1998, p. 66) defined organizational crisis as "low-probability, high-impact situation that is perceived by critical stakeholders to threaten the viability of the organization and that is subjectively experienced by these individuals as personally and socially threatening." Hearit and Courtright (2004) argued that communication is a constitutive element of the construction of social reality in crisis contexts. Applying this to organizational crises, the authors concluded that "[c]rises are terminological creations conceived by human agents, and consequently, are managed and resolved terminologically. As such, instead of being one component, communication constitutes the quintessence of crisis management" (p. 205). Hence, crises and their interpretations

show abstract

“…Policy crises can range from 'acts of war, threats of force, and terrorist attacks to environmental calamities, industrial accidents, health epidemics, and natural disasters' (Schneider and Jordan, 2016). Many of these are exogenous (such as disasters) or man-made (such as industrial accidents) and are usually not related to the strategic agency of political actors.…”

Section: Endogenous Policy Crisesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Politics of Manufactured Crisis

Sebők

2019

Intersections

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is a widely used assumption in the literature on political decision-making that leaders ‘choose their battles’ according to their interests. This strategic approach often results in seemingly ‘fake crises’; crises which are – as opposed to natural disasters – not exogenous in nature. These crises are exceptional in that they are avoidable and are the product of political entrepreneurs following deliberate agendas. In this paper, the logic of crisis manufacturing is illustrated by a case study of the ‘fiscal wars’ of 2011–2013. The case study shows how, given the right institutional environment, political entrepreneurs, even those outside the political mainstream, can use crisis manufacturing to their advantage. In order to exploit the institutional veto points related to fiscal policy in the U.S. constitutional system, various actors associated with the Republican Party and the Tea Party movement used a networked, coalition-based approach to reach these goals. Although their quest to instill a regime of fiscal conservatism was eventually unsuccessful, they did manage to raise their national profile and set the policy agenda for an extended period.

show abstract

Political Science Research on Crises and Crisis Communications

Cited by 6 publications

References 31 publications

News Framing in the Aftermath of the January 6 Attacks on the U.S. Capitol: An Analysis of Labels, Definitional Uncertainty, and Contextualization

News Framing in the Aftermath of the January 6 Attacks on the U.S. Capitol: An Analysis of Labels, Definitional Uncertainty, and Contextualization

The state of strategic organizational crisis communication research in the context of global and digital communication

The Politics of Manufactured Crisis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About