This research examined the impact of negative publicity associated with a firm or an industry on consumer`s attitude toward the firm and its competition. This research also evaluated the effectiveness of alternative coping advertising strategies again...
This research examined the impact of negative publicity associated with a firm or an industry on consumer`s attitude toward the firm and its competition. This research also evaluated the effectiveness of alternative coping advertising strategies against such negative publicity. Most previous research investigating the effects of negative publicity has been concerned about the negative publicity associated with a certain firm`s products/services. In this research, however, we also investigated the effects of negative publicity associated with an industry or the target firm`s competition. Three experiments were conducted: In Experiment 1, we demonstrated that consumers` attitudes toward the target firm were more unfavorable when they were exposed to the negative publicity related to the firm’s social responsibility (corporate social responsibility; CSR) than when they were exposed to the one related to the firm`s ability(corporate ability; CA). We also found that highly typical firm within the industry is more heavily damaged than an atypical firm by the same kind of negative publicity. In the second experiment, the effects of negative publicity associated with an industry in general were examined. The results of Experiment 2 revealed that a typical firm within the industry was more heavily damaged by strongly negative publicity than an atypical firm whereas there was no significant difference between a typical firm and an atypical firm when the negative publicity was weak in intensity. In Experiment 3, we demonstrated the moderating effects of the target firm`s typicality and the type of the coping advertising strategy when the negative publicity associated with the competition affected consumer`s attitudes toward the target firm. When there was a negative publicity associated with a highly typical competition, the atypical target frim benefited from the negative publicity associated with the competition. However, the highly typical target from was not able to benefited from the negative publicity associated with the atypical competition due to its association with the atypical firm. It was also demonstrated that CA related advertising was more effective than CSR related advertising when there was a CA related negative publicity. However, there was no difference in effectiveness between CA related advertising and CSR related advertising when the negative publicity was CSR related.