Journal Review

Journal Review

Rulan Suciyanti

135120207121010

This paper consist of review from two journals, first journal titled “Apologies and public relations crises at Chrysler, Thosiba and Volvo ” written by Keith Michael Hearit. Second journal titled “Attribution Theory As A Guide For Post-Crisis Communication Research” written by W. Timothy Coombs. t.

The first journal by Keith and Hearit, this journal analyzes the corporate apologetic discourses of three paradigmatic case.-at Chrysler, Toshiba, and Volvo-and examines the use of persuasive descriptions and strategic dissociation preferred by these corporate apologists.

Such is an example of the parodies that auto executive and cultural icon Lee Iacocca faced with the disclosure that Chrysler Corporation executives had driven over sixty thousand cars with unhooked odometers before selling them as new (Michael & Hearit, 1994). In one particular instance, an executive reportedly drove a new car home in a heavy rain storm, hit a large puddle and the car slid off the road on to its side. The car was fixed for $950, then sold presumably as “new.“ As a result of negative press, the Chrysler Corporation instituted a major public relations campaign to improve its damaged image. The style of the campaign was the “shoot from the hip” staccato of Chrysler Chairman Lee Tacocca. Given the inherent inadequacy of silence to resolve public relations crises, this analysis instead focuses on those times when an organization is charged with wrongdoing and uses communication to mitigate its perceived or actual guilt.

The year 1987 also was the year a whistle-blower disclosed that between 1981 and 1984, the Toshiba Corporation sold top-secret computer and milling equipment to the former Soviet Union. Soviet possession of the milling equipment significantly narrowed the technology gap between U.S. and Soviet submarines: it enabled the U.S.S.R to produce much quieter submarines that are better able to escape detection by American sonar. The illegal sale has had a direct impact on national security. Reagan Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger told Japanese officials that “the sale had damaged the national security of both nations.“21 The export-control chief of the Commerce Department, Paul Freedenberg called the illegal sale “the most damaging [technology transfer] of the postwar era.

Such a statement subtly assumes the appearance of responsibility while actually functioning to deny it. The company apologizes for its subsidiary’s actions, but also makes it very clear that those actions were done by its subsidiary without th knowledge of the parent company. Once Volvo learned on 30 October 1990 that the vehicles used in its advertisements had indeed been modified, the company responded with the following statement of regret in an effort to expunge its guilt.

Apologies are often used tratrgically in the crisis communication of individual or an organization.

Communicatively, this extends the dissociation. The companies now have two different names; only the non-offending parent corporation carries the Toshiba name. This asserts that it is wrong for Americans to blame Toshiba, the electronics maker, for the wrongdoing; instead, the American public is led to believe an altogether different organization authorized the illegal sale. This use of a scapegoat functions to distinguish one part of the company from another-though consubstantially they are the same. Traditionally, large multinational firms attempt to create one image for the entire organization; as illustrated in the Toshiba case, the distinctiveness of the identity is focused upon only when it serves the communicative purpose of the organization.

Corporations like Chrysler, Toshiba, and Volvo that take their case directly to the public find that they may still face legal sanctions for their wrongdoing. The presentation of an apologia is indeed a difficult communication maneuver This analysis illumines how corporations attempt to use this discourse of defense, known as apologia, to manage public relations crises for which they bear primary responsibility. Consequently, I have shown that, as it relates to the construction and delivery of apologia, organizations attempt to provide a competing interpretation of the act. In so doing, they label their wrongdoing in a way that displays sorrow but limits culpability, and use dissociations to distance themselves from the wrongdoing.

The second Jounsl sbout communication research named Attribution Theory as a guide for post-crisis with. Timothy Coombs The field of crisis communication is poised to take the next in its evolution. Now is the time to move beyond the limits of the case study methods that shape the field’s development and shift to empirical methods. As the field matures, crisis managers need recommendations that are based on scientifically tested evidence rather than speculation. The argument for scientifically tested evidence for action is based on the evidence-based in management and medicine. This article discusses the role Attribution Theory has played and can continue to play in building scientifically tested evidence for crisis managers as well as providing an integrative mechanism for the diverse crisis research that spans a variety of disciplines.abundance of rhetorical studies that attempt to use descriptive data to claim issues of causality and theory building. There are also problems in preoccupations with finding “genres” in crisis communication that contribute little to theory development and testing. Apologia was a gateway for many into crisis communication. It was useful to think of organizations using communication to protect their public personas/reputations and provided a wealth of resources for developing crisis response strategies SCCT posits that each crisis type generates specific and predictable levels of crisis responsibility—attributions of organizational responsibility for the crisis. 

Post-crisis communication research should continue along its newer, empirical track. Such research is providing tested results to crisis managers rather than speculation based on case studies. We move away from decisions based on unsystematic data toward evidence-based decisions. Attribution Theory is an historical and still viable theory for integrating crisis communication research. A common theoretical link allows for the integration of research from various researchers in diverse fields.We begin to build upon one another’swork and see howthe pieces can begin to be integrated into a larger whole. Moreover, there is a broad research agenda to pursue based upon Attribution Theory. A partial list would include application of fundamental attribution error to crises and implications for crisis communication, the ability of crisis response strategies to shape perceptions of the crisis frames, how crisis response strategies can trigger the discounting principle, and relationship of crisis frames to counter-factual thinking. With Attribution Theory as a connecting point, diverse streams of research can converge into to a river of post-crisis communication knowledge that provides a mechanism for evidence-based crisis communication.

References

Coombs, W. T. (2007). Attribution theory as a guide for post-crisis communication research. Public Relations Review, 33, 135-139.

Hearit, K. M. (1994).  Apologies and public relations crises at chrysler, thosiba and volvo. Public Relations Review, 20(2), 113-125.