合法性、问题管理和枪支辩论

IF 4.1 3区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS Public Relations Review Pub Date : 2024-03-08 DOI:10.1016/j.pubrev.2024.102450
Minhee Choi , Baobao Song , Won-Ki Moon
{"title":"合法性、问题管理和枪支辩论","authors":"Minhee Choi ,&nbsp;Baobao Song ,&nbsp;Won-Ki Moon","doi":"10.1016/j.pubrev.2024.102450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study examined how two opposing advocacy organizations, National Rifle Association and Moms Demand Action, legitimize issues related to gun violence. Through topic modeling and social network analysis of tweets from both organizations, this study analyzed how advocacy organizations dealing with controversial issues use communication to achieve certain types of legitimacy. With the consistent outbreak of school mass shootings, this study also explored the communication strategies employed by advocacy organizations to manage issues and enhance legitimacy to garner policy initiatives. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings were discussed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48263,"journal":{"name":"Public Relations Review","volume":"50 2","pages":"Article 102450"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legitimacy, issue management, and gun debate\",\"authors\":\"Minhee Choi ,&nbsp;Baobao Song ,&nbsp;Won-Ki Moon\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pubrev.2024.102450\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This study examined how two opposing advocacy organizations, National Rifle Association and Moms Demand Action, legitimize issues related to gun violence. Through topic modeling and social network analysis of tweets from both organizations, this study analyzed how advocacy organizations dealing with controversial issues use communication to achieve certain types of legitimacy. With the consistent outbreak of school mass shootings, this study also explored the communication strategies employed by advocacy organizations to manage issues and enhance legitimacy to garner policy initiatives. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings were discussed.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48263,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Relations Review\",\"volume\":\"50 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 102450\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Relations Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363811124000298\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Relations Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363811124000298","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究探讨了全国步枪协会(National Rifle Association)和妈妈要求行动(Moms Demand Action)这两个对立的倡导组织如何使枪支暴力相关问题合法化。通过对这两个组织的推文进行主题建模和社交网络分析,本研究分析了处理有争议问题的倡导组织如何利用传播实现某些类型的合法性。随着校园大规模枪击事件的持续爆发,本研究还探讨了宣传组织在管理问题和增强合法性以争取政策倡议时所采用的传播策略。本研究还讨论了研究结果的理论和实践意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Legitimacy, issue management, and gun debate

This study examined how two opposing advocacy organizations, National Rifle Association and Moms Demand Action, legitimize issues related to gun violence. Through topic modeling and social network analysis of tweets from both organizations, this study analyzed how advocacy organizations dealing with controversial issues use communication to achieve certain types of legitimacy. With the consistent outbreak of school mass shootings, this study also explored the communication strategies employed by advocacy organizations to manage issues and enhance legitimacy to garner policy initiatives. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings were discussed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
19.00%
发文量
90
期刊介绍: The Public Relations Review is the oldest journal devoted to articles that examine public relations in depth, and commentaries by specialists in the field. Most of the articles are based on empirical research undertaken by professionals and academics in the field. In addition to research articles and commentaries, The Review publishes invited research in brief, and book reviews in the fields of public relations, mass communications, organizational communications, public opinion formations, social science research and evaluation, marketing, management and public policy formation.
期刊最新文献
“Being a Burson Person is something special”: Burson-Marsteller’s influence in the Americanization of the public relations industry in Latin America (1980s – 2010s) The effects of crisis type and CSR fit on organizational outcomes: The moderating role of authentic leadership in shaping organizational reputation, word-of-mouth, and purchase intentions Artificial intelligence for internal communication: Strategies, challenges, and implications Communicating strategic CEO activism to promote employee prosocial behaviors: Understanding the mediating role of employee prosocial sensemaking Optimizing organizational corrective communication: The effects of correction placement timing, refutation detail level, and corrective narrative type on combating crisis misinformation narratives
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1