Читать книгу Theorizing Crisis Communication - Timothy L. Sellnow - Страница 28

One framework that has sought to describe the warning process within a very specific risk context is the integrated model of food recall (Seeger & Novak, 2010). Recalls are warning messages sometimes associated with distribution and supply chain systems for informing distributors, retailers, and the public that a product is somehow deficient or defective. Recalls are a way of reducing the potential harm of a defective or contaminated product by removing that product from the public.

Seeger and Novak (2010) have developed a model of the food recall process involving four stages or phases (see Figure 3.4). Stage I in this model is a recognition stage where cues accumulate regarding some harm and are made available to decision makers, usually at regulatory agencies, such as the Food and Drug Administration. Cues may be generated in a number of ways, but this stage is primarily institutional or organizationally grounded. For a recall to be recommended and/or initiated, there must be a general recognition of and consensus about a harm or potential harm. In addition, there must be an identification of a specific commodity or product. In a case involving a serious outbreak of E. coli bacteria in Europe in 2011, the specific commodity could not be identified, thus making a specific recall or warning impossible. Initially, cucumbers grown in Spain were suspected, but eventually the outbreak was traced to sprouts produced on a German farm. This identification may be slower when medical authorities are confronted with novel contaminations that do not fit into expected or historical patterns. Regulatory agencies and producers may also weigh the cost of the recall against the seriousness of the potential harm. A recall has the potential to damage a company’s reputation and may be very costly in terms of effort and lost product. In some cases, companies are forced into bankruptcy and markets for specific agricultural products can collapse. Without specific identification of a product and expectation of a relatively serious harm, recalls generally do not happen. Time is a particularly critical variable in the recognition stage, with more extended time limiting recall effectiveness (Teratanavat et al., 2002).

Figure 3.4 Integrated Model of Food Recall.

Source: Seeger and Novak (2010).

Stage II involves messaging where recall notices are distributed by regulatory agencies, producers, and distributors. For recovery of stock from distribution channels, food producers directly communicate with notices to distributors, warehouses, retail outlets, and, in some cases, other secondary food distributors. In addition, food companies and producers attempt to announce recalls to consumers by posting press releases on company and governmental websites. These often involve specific information such as lot number, production date, and location where the item was produced so consumers can make specific choices about how to respond. Gibson (1997) also describes the use of direct mail, display ads, and point-of-sales messages when consumers are the intended message recipients. Message characteristics interact with demographic elements of the audience (age, gender, and ethnic background) and channel distribution elements (width and speed of distribution), which therefore affect the reception and interpretation of a message. Tailoring and targeting messages improve effectiveness. For example, some retail stores are using the information given by customers enrolled in their customer loyalty and rewards programs to contact customers if a recall has been issued for an item in their store.

Stage III is the point where reception and interpretation of the message by the intended audience occurs. During this stage, the audience must receive and interpret the messages. The audience may also seek to confirm the information received in the recall. This may involve collecting additional, confirmatory information before the recall warning can be personalized and thereby lead to action. Consumers may need to hear the message from multiple sources, repeated several times; to confirm the consistency of messages; to assess if they own the product and check lot numbers; and to personalize the projected harm by assessing their own risk.

Stage IV is the response stage, when the intended audience takes some action as a response to the recall message. These actions vary depending on the nature of the event, the interpretation of the message, and the recommendations. Possible actions include disposing of or returning the unsafe product, seeking medical attention, or simply avoiding the unsafe item. One important factor for consumer compliance may be the ease of the recommended action and the ability to do what is suggested. Some consumers may find it easy to dispose of the product, while others may see disposal as a significant economic burden. For example, some consumers may be able to readily purchase alternative food items. Others may not have the ability simply to dispose of a food item.