Is Publicity Always Better than Advertising? The Role of Brand Reputation in Communicating Corporate Social Responsibility

89Citations
Citations of this article
267Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Previous studies on corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication suggest that firms’ social initiatives should be communicated through third-party, non-corporate sources because they are perceived as unbiased and therefore reduce consumer skepticism. In this article, we extend existing research by showing that source effects in the communication of social sponsorships are contingent on the brand’s pre-existing reputation. We argue that the congruence between the credibility and trustworthiness of the message source and the brand helps predict consumer responses to a social sponsorship. The results show that a non-corporate source (publicity) generates more positive brand evaluations than a corporate source (advertising) when the sponsor has a positive reputation. However, the converse effect occurs when brand reputation is low: when the sponsor has a poor reputation, a corporate source generates more positive brand evaluations than a non-corporate source. Mediation analyses show that the interaction effect between CSR information source and brand reputation can be explained by sponsorship attitude, persuasion knowledge, and perceived fit between the brand and the cause.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Skard, S., & Thorbjørnsen, H. (2014). Is Publicity Always Better than Advertising? The Role of Brand Reputation in Communicating Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 124(1), 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1863-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free