Cultural appropriation scandals in the fashion industry, to what extend and how existing crisis communication responses (based on SCCT) apply to this, and how the results are moderated
by issue importance and crisis history.
University of Amsterdam Graduate School of Communication Master’s Track: Corporate Communication
Master’s Thesis
Supervisor: Rens Vliegenthart
Submission Date: Friday, the 4th of February 2022 Word count: 5308
Thesis written by: Annelotte van Thull 11272775
Abstract
Cultural appropriation has gradually become one of the most contentious topics within the world of fashion. This creates crisis situations and consequently damage to the corporate reputation of the fashion brand that’s being accused from it. Crisis communication is often used to minimize this damage to keep a company stable, especially financially. As SCCT of Coombs stated, there are two strategies that can be applied in this type of situations, apology and compensation. These strategies are tested in terms of effectiveness on corporate
reputation, together with the moderating effect of issue importance and the role of a related crisis history.
To test this, an online survey experiment was conducted by using an inconvenience sample. The respondents were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental conditions or the control condition, where they were exposed to a case where Christian Dior got accused of cultural appropriation. In the conditions, the two different response strategies were applied and crisis history was added or left out. 141 participants were included in the analyses after filtering.
The results showed that there were no significant effects of the response strategies on corporate reputation, neither was there a significant effect present of issue importance or crisis history. Nevertheless, there were some differences between the groups that do show that there is some influence of crisis history on corporate reputation. Important is, the fact that the use of crisis response strategies has not appeared useful to improve the corporate reputation in comparison to not using any crisis response strategy, shows that there potentially is a difference in the way a moral crisis should be treated in comparison to a crisis related to products or services. Therefore, the results have important implications for PR practitioners and academic researchers to explore this field of crises more.
1. Introduction
Cultural appropriation has taken a very prominent stand in today’s societal issue arena. More and more companies, in this case within the fashion industry, are getting accused from it as a result of their advertising. In the fashion industry has always been common practice to use cultural symbolism to express creativity (Pozzo, 2020). Only recently, consumers started to pay more attention to designers and corporations using style elements from other cultures in their own financial advantage, and therefore put them under a big amount of pressure (Sádaba, LaFata & Torres, 2020). This type of ‘borrowing’ from other cultures is called
‘cultural appropriation’ (Maiorescu-Murphy, 2021). Simply put, cultural appropriation refers to the use of genres, rites and rituals, symbolism, traditional knowledge, artifacts, or
technologies pertaining to a community without its permission (Pozzo, 2020; Rogers, 2006;
Young & Brunk, 2012). The publics’ questions that usually arise have to do with the impact that cultural appropriation can have on a community whose culture designers or corporations draw on for product development or marketing purposes. Cultural appropriation has gradually become one of the most contentious topics, together with racism and body inclusivity, within the world of fashion.
As fashion is an expression of art, there is often a grey area on what is ethically approved and what not (Scafidi, 2005). What is art, and what crosses the line? Once a line is crossed, and the public starts to share their opinions on social media or in the press, the negative voices can spread really fast and the company it’s regarding can end up in a
communication crisis. In this situation, the corporate reputation is always on the line. This is where crisis communication comes into place (Coombs, 2007), and therefore, it is important to investigate how different forms of crisis response strategy can influence, and ideally improve, the corporate reputation of a brand once they got into a crisis regarding a cultural appropriation scandal.
This study builds upon several studies that suggest that scandals, in other words
“crises that spur moral outrage”, in this case regarding the sensitive topic of cultural
appropriation, might require a different approach than crises related to products, services or operations (Maiorescu-Murphy, 2021; Coombs & Tachkova, 2018). Researchers have mentioned that it is for example extra important for PR practitioners to understand the
sociology of online communication, particularly in the case of societal issues such as cultural appropriation, given that activism is an inherent feature of the Web 2.0 (Chon & Park, 2020).
Moreover, this study has shown that compensation turns out to be a much more important element in crisis communication when it comes to sensitive topics as using cultural
symbolism in advertising. Based on these couple of recent findings, and all that has not been researched and discovered in this field yet, it is relevant to conduct research on the existing and widely used crisis response strategies that are based on the Situational Crisis
Communication Theory (SCCT) by Coombs (2007). SCCT seeks to use research and theory to develop recommendations for the use of crisis response strategies. The crisis response strategies are matched to the nature of the crisis situation. The idea is that it is recommendable to match the level of responsibility and response towards victims in the crisis response
strategy that would be warranted by the crisis responsibility and reputational damage caused by the crisis situation.
As empirical research on the specific field of crises that spur moral outrage is lacking, it is of high academic relevance to add scientific knowledge to existing suggestions. Crises damage the reputation and this can negatively affect how stakeholders interact with the organization (Barton, 2001; Dowling, 2002). Postcrisis communication can be used to repair the reputation and/or prevent reputational damage (Coombs & Holladay, 2005). As these crisis response strategies in the first place are used and applied by managers or decision
makers within a company to maintain or to rebuild the corporate reputation, it is relevant to figure out to what extent these strategies actually help with reaching this goal.
Previous research has also pointed out that crisis history is an important factor when it comes to damage of the corporate reputation of a company (Coombs, 2004; Coombs &
Holladay, 2001), because it adds to the perceived social responsibility of the company and can therefore be blamed easier and quicker by the public for making mistakes. Another important factor that can play a role in how the public perceives an organization and its crisis, is how much the issue the crisis is regarding, matters to them. The more important an issue is, the stronger the preexisting ideas about the issue might be and this indicates that people can be affected differently by information based on how much they care about an issue (Lecheler, de Vreese & Slothuus, 2009). In this paper, we will therefore also include the factors crisis history and issue importance as independent variables to investigate the effect of crisis response strategy on corporate reputation.
In this research paper, we focus on a specific cultural appropriation case based on a true story in the fashion industry. This is the case of Christian Dior, that was put under big public pressure in 2019 for launching a teaser of a campaign of their perfume Sauvage, where they ‘borrowed’ cultural style elements of native American Culture.
To investigate the effects of SCCT’s rebuild crisis response strategies on corporate reputation, moderated by issue importance, an online experiment has been conducted.
Consequently, the principal research question in this study is as follows: How do different forms of crisis communication response (based on SCCT) as reaction to cultural
appropriation scandals affect the corporate reputation of luxury fashion brands, what is the role of crisis history, and how does the effect depend on issue importance?
2. Theoretical framework Cultural appropriation and the fashion industry
As mentioned in the introduction, cultural appropriation stands for the idea of using genres, rites and rituals, symbolism, traditional knowledge, artifacts, or technologies pertaining to a community without its permission (Pozzo, 2020; Rogers, 2006; Young & Brunk, 2012).
Cultural appropriation in the fashion industry can be about a lot of different topics from various kind of natures. Sometimes, the use of textiles, patterns or images from other cultures can be a form of appreciation of cultural diversity, but in other situations the use of cultural or religious symbols in fashion designs it’s considered inappropriate (Sharoni, 2016). This consequently can lead to insult and harm towards the community where the appropriated items or elements find their origin. This especially counts for situations in which the cultural symbols are borrowed for commercial purposes, and disregarding the values they actually express. On top of that, sometimes the use of style or religious elements of other cultures can create a stereotypical representation of the original culture, and can even lead to negative economic consequences for that community (Pozzo, 2020). Usually, the main critique in these cases is that there is often a lack of compensation towards the people that their culture is being borrowed from.
Corporate Reputation
The dependent variable that is central to this study is Corporate Reputation. This concept has been widely used in communication science already, and has gotten many different
definitions throughout the time by different researchers. In this paper, it’s been decided to use the following definition to describe the concept best in its context:
“Observers’ collective judgments of a corporation based on assessments of the financial, social, and environmental impacts attributed to the corporation over time”
(Barnett, Jermier & Lafferty, 2006).
In this paper, we focus on the public’s perception of the fashion house Christian Dior, the organization in question.
One of the crucial direct consequences of a good corporate reputation is financial performance, and therefore this factor is crucial in corporate communication research (Gatzert, 2015). The effect of several independent variables will be tested in relation to Corporate Reputation.
Situational Crisis Communication Theory – In relationship to cultural appropriation SCCT provides a mechanism for anticipating how stakeholders will react to a crisis in terms of the reputational threat posed by the crisis. Moreover, SCCT projects how people will react to the crisis response strategies used to manage the crisis. It provides a widely used evidence- based framework for understanding how to maximize the reputational protection afforded by postcrisis communication. It is key to understand the crisis situation and the amount of reputational threat that is caused by the crisis. Reputational threat is defined as “how much damage a crisis could inflict on an organization if no action is taken to respond to it”, anc is influenced by the following elements: (1) initial crisis responsibility, (2) crisis history and (3) prior relational reputation. In assessing the level of reputational threat facing an organization, crisis managers must first determine the type of crisis facing the organization.
Coombs has identified three “crisis clusters” in his SCCT research: the victim cluster, the accidental cluster, and the intentional cluster. In the victim cluster, the organization is not attributed as the cause of the crisis; rather, the organization is viewed as a victim. In the accidental cluster, the organization has been attributed as the cause of the crisis, but the
situation is generally viewed by stakeholders as being unintentional or just accidental. In the intentional cluster, the organization is given all or most of the attributions for the crisis and carries all the responsibility. By identifying the crisis type, the crisis manager or PR
professional can anticipate how much crisis responsibility stakeholders will attribute to the organization, and determine the initial crisis responsibility level. When we look at scandals in the fashion industry that are caused by cultural appropriation, we would put the crisis in the
“intentional cluster”, as the perception of the stakeholders is that the company could have definitely prevented the situation when handling more consciously and aware. However, this type of crisis has not been named in the original SCCT, and therefore this choice has been considered and made by the researcher when writing this paper.
Crisis Response Strategy (based on SCCT)
Previous research found that the primary SCCT crisis response strategies form three groups based upon perceptions of accepting responsibility for a crisis: (1) denial, (2) diminish and (3) rebuild (Coombs, 2006). The denial strategy includes attacking the accuser, full denial of responsibility and scapegoating (Coombs, 2015). In this case, the organization usually claims there was no crisis or blames the crisis as a third party (Coombs & Holladay, 1996). The diminish strategy focuses on reducing attributions of organizational control or negative effects of the crisis. The diminishing posture contains two strategies; excusing, which reinforces minimal responsibility of the crisis; and justification, which reinforces minimal damage from the crisis. Lastly, there is the rebuilding posture, that focuses on rebuilding and improving the organization’s reputation.
Based on the fact that we can put moral crises related to cultural appropriation in the
“intentional cluster”, there are two different types of responses that should fit the crisis best according to SCCT, both focusing on rebuilding the corporate reputation rather than denial or
diminish. Rebuild crisis response strategies should be used for crises with strong attributions of crisis responsibility (preventable crises) regardless of crisis history or prior relationship reputation. The two forms of rebuild response strategies are:
Compensation: Crisis manager offers money or other gifts to victims.
Apology: Crisis manager indicates the organization takes full responsibility for the crisis and asks stakeholders for forgiveness.
Rebuild strategies are the main strategies for generating new reputational assets, and attempt to improve the organization’s reputation by offering material and/or symbolic forms of aid to victims (Coombs, 2007). The crisis managers or PR professionals say and do things to benefit stakeholders and thereby try to right their wrongs. The strategies apology and compensation will be used as independent variables in the experiment and the effects on corporate
reputation will be tested.
Based on the theoretical background information stated above, the first hypothesis that will be tested in this paper, is as following:
H1: The use of a rebuild crisis response strategy, either compensation or apology, will yield a better corporate reputation than when no crisis response strategy is applied by the brand.
Issue Importance
Issue importance terminates how important a certain issue is for an individual. The more important the issue for the person, the more responsibility they will give the organization for handling correctly and the more a suitable response will be valued (Lecheler et. al, 2009).
Issue importance is one of the key dimensions of public opinion and attitude formation, and a crucial ingredient of strong and resistant attitudes (Boninger, Krosnick, Berent & Fabrigar, 1995; Krosnick, 1989). The stronger the attitude, the more necessary it seems to be for a company to give a correct answer to the public’s questions in a crisis situation.
Assumed in this paper, is that the perceived Issue Importance of a person regarding the topic of cultural appropriation will moderate the effect of Crisis Response Strategy on
Corporate Reputation. From this idea, the second hypothesis follows:
H2: The more importance individuals assign to moral scandals as cultural
appropriation, the larger the effect of the crisis response strategy on corporate reputation.
Crisis History
Previous experimental studies have demonstrated that the history of past crises definitely hurt an organization by increasing attributions of crisis responsibility and the reputational threat (Coombs, 2004; Coombs & Holladay, 2001). Especially when that crisis results from
intentional acts by the organization, which is the case in this experimental research. SCCT of Coombs argues that information about past crises is a significant factor that can affect
perceptions of a more recent crisis, and therefore severely harm the corporate reputation.
Based on the given information, the third and last hypotheses of this paper follows:
H3: The presence of a past of a crisis history related to cultural appropriation, will lead to more negative outcomes on corporate reputation than in the case where no past of a related crisis history is present.
Research Questions
Since new questions rise from these three main hypotheses, the following two RQs will be answered after the results section as well:
RQ1: To what extent do the existing crisis response strategies stated in SCCT have the same positive outcomes on corporate reputation for this type of moral scandals in comparison to crisis related to products or services?
RQ2: To what extent differ the rebuild strategies apology and compensation in terms of positive effects on corporate reputation?
3. Method Design and procedure
To test the stated hypotheses, a 2 (apology versus compensation) x 2 (crisis history versus no crisis history) factorial between-subjects experimental design was conducted. The experiment was conducted through an online survey via Qualtrics.com. The distribution of the online survey link took place via WhatsApp, and was shared on Instagram. After clicking on the link, the participants could fill in the questionnaire in English. They were firstly asked to read the informed consent and asked whether they agreed on it or not. Once accepted to
participate, respondents were asked a couple of demographic background questions, such as age, gender and education. Respondents with an age younger than 18 were left out the data analysis, as no parental consent was given. Then, the case of Christian Dior got introduced by the means of an explanatory text, and the campaign in questions was shown as well. After the
case introduction, participants were randomly assigned to one of the five conditions where they got to view a crisis response of Christian Dior that was manipulated differently in all five conditions. Then, respondents were asked two questions that were meant to check whether the manipulation was successful. The next question they were asked to answer was about how important the issue of cultural appropriation is currently to them. The last questions were meant to measure the corporate reputation of Christian Dior, based on this story and the crisis response the participant was exposed to. At the end of the survey, respondents were given a description of the study, they were thanked for participation and explained that the story was partly fictive.
Sample and sampling technique
The data was collected with a convenient sampling technique. In addition, a snowballing technique was used, since participants were asked to share the invitation link sent by WhatsApp, or the social media post, with their own network. The data collection lasted 1,5 weeks. A total number of 141 responses were collected. Partial responses were excluded from the final data set, as well as participants under 18, and participants that did not agree on the informed consent. After cleaning the data, 113 responses remained. 67.3% of the participants are female, against 32.7% of them being male. 63.7% of the sample are between 18 and 29 years old, and 37.2% of the sample has graduated with a Bachelor’s Degree. The sample was predominantly composed of higher educated young woman.
Stimuli
To manipulate the crisis response (apology versus compensation) and the crisis history (crisis history versus no crisis history), participants were assigned randomly to one of four
experimental conditions, or the control condition. The first condition, after the first couple of
introduction questions and information fields, showed the participants a message where apology was used as crisis response strategy, and a crisis history related to the topic of cultural appropriation was present. The apology strategy was applied by clearly emphasizing that Christian Dior felt really sorry about the offense they caused with their campaign, and they would immediately remove the campaign from all channels. Crisis history was added by a message that implied that Dior is known for having a past of similar crises related to cultural appropriation, with a specific example highlighted. The second condition also showed the same message with apology as response strategy, but it emphasized that there was no crisis history present related to this topic. The message made clear that it was the very first time Dior got accused from cultural appropriation and that it was an unforeseen crisis. The third condition showed a message where compensation was used as crisis response strategy, and a crisis history related to the topic of cultural appropriation was present. The compensation strategy was applied by a statement that Dior would like to show their appreciation and donate 250.000 dollars to the Americans for Indian Opportunity, an indigenous advocacy group. The same message as before was used for crisis history. The fourth and last
experimental condition also showed a message with compensation as crisis response strategy, but without crisis history present. The fifth condition was the control condition, where the only message that showed expressed that the brand has not been available for any
communication yet.
Measures Issue importance
Respondents rated the importance of the issue on a seven-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree) as a response to a question stating how important the respondent considers the issue of cultural appropriation.
Corporate reputation
The dependent variable corporate reputation was measured with a scale from a previous study by Newburry (2010). The participants had to indicate on a seven-points Likert scale (ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree) the extent to which they agreed with
different statements. There were four statements in total. A principal axis factor analysis was conducted on these items. All items had factor loadings above .3 and loaded on one factor. All four items were retained. Together, the four items form a reliable scale (α =.94). A scale variable for Corporate Reputation was created by taking the mean of all four belonging items.
Pre-test
Before data collection started, a pre-test was conducted amongst 6 participants, in order to see whether the survey was clear enough and worked as expected. These participants were asked to complete the survey and to send their feedback to the researcher. The feedback led to small changes in term of words, and flow. The manipulation was checked, and all the participants responded correctly.
Manipulation check
In order to make sure that participants understood what they were shown and that the manipulation worked, a manipulation check was conducted. The participants were firstly asked whether Dior apologized for their mistake, or compensated for it by offering of money to an advocacy group. Secondly, they were asked whether the organization is known for having a past with related crisis history. Two chi-square tests confirmed that the manipulation of the variables crisis response (χ2(3) = 11.56, p = .009), and crisis history (χ2(3) = 8.12, p = .044) were successful.
Randomization check
To check if the randomization of participants between the five different conditions was successful, several randomization checks were run before analyzing the date. The demographic variables that participants were asked about were their age, gender, and
education. For gender and education, two one-way Anova tests were conducted. Between the different conditions, there were no significant differences in age (F(4, 108) = .30, p = 0.879), and education (F(4, 108) = 1.90, p = 0.116). The randomization of gender was checked with a chi-square in crosstabs. Gender also did not appear significantly different in the five
conditions (p = .079).
4. Results
Effect of Crisis Response Strategy on Corporate Reputation
For this analysis, a new variable was created to distinct the four conditions with rebuild crisis responses from the control condition where no rebuild crisis response was applied. With the new variable and the dependent variable, Corporate Reputation, a one-way Anova was conducted. From the results of the test we can conclude that there was no significant
difference in Corporate Reputation between the group where the rebuild strategy was applied (M = 5.01, SD = 1.07) and the group that was in the control condition (M = 4.91, SD = 0.90), F(1, 48.45) = 0.17, p = 0.652.
As there was a difference in the means of the 2 groups but not significant, we can conclude that the first hypothesis “the use of a rebuild crisis response strategy, either compensation or apology, will yield a better corporate reputation than when no crisis response strategy is applied by the brand”, is not assumed.
Moderating effect of Issue Importance
For this analysis, two new variables were created to distinct the four experimental conditions into one variable where compensation was used as crisis response and another variable where apology was used as crisis response. Subsequently, a first regression analysis was conducted with these two variables and Issue Importance as independent variables with Corporate Reputation as the dependent variable. After that, a second regression analysis was run with interaction-terms added from both conditions multiplied by issue importance. The effect of both rebuild response strategies did not appear to be significantly dependent on the variable Issue Importance, F(5, 107) = .82, p = .537. However, for the apology group, the effect did appear to be slightly bigger than for the compensation group (p = .111), but still not
significant. The results of this analysis are therefore in line with the second hypothesis “the more importance individuals assign to moral scandals as cultural appropriation, the larger the effect of the crisis response strategy on corporate reputation”, but cannot be scientifically confirmed.
Effect of Crisis History on Corporate Reputation
To test the effect of Crisis History on Corporate Reputation, another one-way Anova was conducted. The means of the conditions where a related crisis history was present were compared with the means of the conditions where no crisis history was present. There was no significant effect of Crisis History on Corporate Reputation, F(3, 83) = .68, p = 0.567.
However, the groups where crisis history was present did score lower on CR (M = 4.81 & M
= 4.91) than the groups without crisis history (M = 5.10 & M = 5.25). This means that the results are in line with the third hypothesis “the presence of a past of a crisis history related to cultural appropriation, will lead to more negative outcomes on corporate reputation than in the case where no past of a related crisis history is present”, but not significantly.
RQ1: To what extent do the existing crisis response strategies stated in SCCT have the
same positive outcomes on corporate reputation for this type of moral scandals in comparison to crisis related to products or services?
Judging from Coombs’ SCCT, it became clear that his crisis response strategies, among others the rebuild strategies that we discuss in this research paper, when used correctly in the context of the situation, have beneficial effects on an organization’s overall CR. However, the theories he put together are mainly focused on crises that are related to products and services, which (as discussed above) are of a different nature than crises related to moral scandals, where a lot of emotion and moral outrage is involved.
From the results of the analyses above, we can conclude that both compensation and apology did not have positive significant effects on Corporate Reputation. This implies that in our case of a moral crisis, the SCCT crisis response strategies are not effective for rebuilding a beneficial CR. So, to answer RQ1 as completely as possible, we can conclude that the existing crisis response strategies stated in SCCT do not have the same positive outcomes on CR for moral crises, in comparison to crisis related to products or services.
RQ2: To what extent differ the rebuild strategies apology and compensation in terms of
positive effects on corporate reputation?
To test the difference in effectiveness of rebuild strategies apology and compensation, a one- way Anova was conducted. The means of the two conditions were compared. Firstly, a new variable was created by dividing the conditions just in two groups, the apology group and the compensation group. This variable was included in the analysis together with the dependent variable Corporate Reputation.
There was no significant effect of the rebuild strategy on Corporate Reputation, F(1, 85) = .23, p = 0.632. The apology group scored a little bit lower on Corporate Reputation (M
= 4.96) than the compensation group (M = 5.01). Based on this result we can conclude that these two rebuild strategies are not significantly different when it comes to effectiveness on Corporate Reputation.
5. Conclusion & Discussion
The main purpose of this study was to find out whether different forms of crisis
communication response (based on SCCT) as reaction to cultural appropriation scandals affect the corporate reputation of luxury fashion brands. Moreover, the role of crisis history and the dependence on issue importance in this matter was taken into account as an important element in the research. As additional scientific knowledge, two research questions were added to 1) investigate what the actual effectiveness of the well-known and commonly used SCCT strategies is in two types of crises, product-related crisis and crises based on scandals that evoke moral outrage, and 2) to investigate the difference in the effectiveness of both rebuild strategies, apology and compensation on Corporate Reputation.
Firstly, the results of the survey experiment that was conducted with a final number of 141 included participants after selection, pointed out that there was no significant positive effect of a rebuild crisis response strategy on the corporate reputation of the brand, Christian Dior, in comparison to the use of no crisis response strategy.
The results of the research were in line with the second hypotheses, which means that issue importance did have an effect on the effect of the crisis response strategy, however, this result was not significant. We can say that there was the idea that the more people care about the topic of cultural appropriation, the larger the effect of the crisis response strategy is so the
more it worked for a better corporate reputation, but we cannot scientifically confirm this statement based on the findings of this paper.
There was no significant negative effect of the presence of a past crisis history on the corporate reputation of Christian Dior, contradicting the theoretical background of this paper. However, there was a small insignificant difference between the groups with and without crisis history present in the exposed experimental material.
These results taken together, also imply that the existing crisis response strategies, based in Coombs’ SCCT, do not certainly have the same positive, scientifically proven, positive outcomes on corporate reputation of a company for the two different types of crises, product-related and crisis based on moral scandals. The rebuild strategies in general did not significantly work on the participants of the conducted experiment, in order to repair or improve the corporate reputation of the brand in question. In addition, we can conclude that the existing rebuild crisis response strategies, apology and compensation, stated in SCCT do not have the same positive outcomes on corporate reputation for moral crises, in comparison to crisis related to products or services that they were widely tested on in the past. As in line with researchers Chon & Park (2020), it did appear that compensation turned out to be slightly more effective than apology when it comes to the topic of cultural appropriation.
Finally, the results of the experiment showed that the effectiveness between apology and compensation on the corporate reputation of a brand dealing with a cultural appropriation scandal, did not significantly differ. Therefore, we can say that in this case, it would not really have mattered whether the rebuild strategy apology or compensation was used, as they had almost the same outcome on corporate reputation.
Even though some of the results are in line with the hypotheses based on scientific theory, no result appeared to be significant. There are a couple of limitations to the research that may have caused this fact. Firstly, the sample of 141 was relatively small for an
experimental research method. This can be harmful to the validity of the research, as the groups that were compared did not always reach the amount to show significant results. The second important limitation is, despite the fact that the manipulation check was successful, still not all the participants were manipulated correctly, which in result may have caused harm to the reliability to the results. To give an example, if a participant did not recognize whether Christian Dior apologized or compensated for their fault, the results are not reliable anymore.
On top of that, the sample was an inconvenience sample. This means that only the people in direct and indirect network of the researcher were reached, which can cause bias in the sample. The descriptives showed that the participants mainly existed of young, well-educated women, which is not exactly a representation of a very wide public. This is also a factor that influences the external validity, which means we cannot responsively generalize the results much wider than this research paper. Furthermore, the survey was written in an advanced level of English, which sometimes made it hard for Dutch speaking participants to understand everything as it was meant. This is also a threat to the reliability. Lastly, the research was held in The Netherlands, where the topic of cultural appropriation is on the rise, but not as
sensitive or relevant in today’s society as in for example in the United States of America.
Therefore, we cannot generalize the results over different countries with different beliefs and cultures.
Nevertheless, this research paper brings a few useful implications for the practice and academical field. For PR practitioners in the fashion industry, these findings show that it is important to pay attention to what type of crisis you are dealing with, to see whether, why, and which response strategy is useful in the crisis in question. Thorough scientific information is lacking on crisis communication in moral crises, having to do with cultural appropriation, which is a topic that is exponentially relevant in today’s societal issues. Therefore, the
findings in this paper can be well used for future research. As certain results were in line with
the theoretical hypotheses, it would be useful to investigate these hypotheses more thorough, with more extensive research and a bigger sample.
Literature
Barnett, L. M., Jermier, J. M., & Lafferty, B. A. (2006). Corporate reputation: The definitional landscape. Corporate Reputation Review, 9, 26-38.
doi:10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550012
Boninger, D. S., Krosnick, J. A., Berent, M. K., & Fabrigar, L. R. (1995). The causes and consequences of attitude importance. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 159-190). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Brown, M. F. (2003). Who Owns Native Culture? (Eds.) Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Chon, M.G. & Park, H. (2020). Social media activism in the digital age: Testing an integrative model of activism on contentious issues. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 97 (1), 72-97. doi:10.1177/1077699019835896
Coombs, W. T. & Holladay, S. (2001). An Extended Examination of the Crisis Situations: A fusion of the relational management and symbolic approaches. Journal of Public Relations Research, 13(4), 321-430. doi:10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1304_03
Coombs, W. T. (2004). Impact of past crises on current crisis communication: Insights from Situational Crisis Communication Theory. International Journal of Business
Communication, 10(3), 163-176. doi:10.1177/0021943604265607
Coombs, W.T. (2006). The protective powers of crisis response strategies: Managing reputational assets during a crisis. Journal of Promotion Management, 12(3/4), 241–
259. doi:10.1300/J057v12n03_13
Coombs, W. T. (2007). Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and application of Situational Crisis Communication Theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 10, 163–176. doi:10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550049
Coombs, W. T. (2015). Situational Theory of Crisis Communication. In Craig E. Carroll (Red.), The Handbook of Communication and Corporate Reputation, 262-278. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Coombs, W. T. & Tachkova, E. R. (2019). Scansis as a unique crisis type: theoretical and practical implications. Journal of Communication Management, 23(1), pp. 72- 88. doi:10.1108/JCOM-08-2018-0078
Gatzert, N. (2015). The impact of corporate reputation and reputation damaging events on financial performance: Empirical evidence from the literature. European Management Journal, 33(6), 485-499. doi:10.1111/rmir.12028
Krosnick, J. A. (1989). Attitude importance and attitude accessibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15, 297-308.
Lecheler, S., de Vreese, C., & Slothuus, R. (2009). Issue importance as a moderator of framing effects. Communication Research, 36(3), 400-425.
doi:10.1177/0093650209333028
Maiorescu-Murphy, R. D. (2021). “We are the land:” An analysis of cultural appropriation and moral outrage in response to Christian Dior’s Sauvage scandal. Public Relations Review, 47(4), 1-8. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2021.102058
Sádaba, T., LaFata, V., & Torres, A. (2020). Cultural Appropriation in the digital context: A comparative study between two fashion cases. HCI in Business, Governments &
Organizations, 504-520. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-50341-3_38
Scafidi, S. (2005). Who Owns Culture? Appropriation and Authenticity in American Law (Eds.). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Sharoni, S. (2016). The Mark of a Culture: The Efficacy and Propriety of Using Trademark Law to Deter Cultural Appropriation. Retrieved from
https://law.stanford.edu/publications/the-mark-of-a-culture-the-efficiency-and- propriety-of-using-trademark-law-to-deter-cultural-appropriatio/
Pozzo, B. (2020). Fashion between inspiration and appropriation. Laws, 9(1), 1-26.
doi:10.3390/laws9010005
Newburry, W. (2010). Reputation and supportive behavior: moderating impacts of
foreignness, industry and local exposure. Corporate Reputation Review, 12, 388-407.
Young, J. O., & Brunk, C. G. (2012). The Ethics of Cultural Appropriation (Eds.). Oxford:
Wiley-Blackwell.
Appendix 1. Questionnaire
Informed consent Dear participant,
I would like to invite you to participate in a research study to be conducted under the auspices of the Graduate School of Communication, a part of the University of Amsterdam. The survey will take about 5-10 minutes. An explanation about the aim of the study will be given at the end of the survey. As this research is being carried out under the responsibility of the ASCoR, University of Amsterdam, I can guarantee that:
1) Your anonymity will be safeguarded, and that your personal information will not be passed on to third parties under any conditions.
2) You can refuse to participate in the research or cut short your participation without having to give a reason for doing so. You also have up to 24 hours after participating to withdraw your permission to allow your answers or data to be used in the research.
3) Participating in the research will not entail you're being subjected to any appreciable risk or discomfort, the researchers will not deliberately mislead you, and you will not be exposed to any explicitly offensive material.
4) For more information about the research and the invitation to participate, you are welcome to contact me by e-mail at any time: annelotte.vanthull@student.uva.nl
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you in advance for your assistance with this research, which I greatly appreciate.
• I hereby declare that I have been informed in a clear manner about the nature and method of the research, as described in the invitation for this study. I agree, fully and voluntarily, to participate in this research study.
• With this, I retain the right to withdraw my consent, without having to give a reason for doing so.
• I am aware that I may halt my participation in the experiment at any time.
• If my research results are used in scientific publications or are made public in another way, this will be done such a way that my anonymity is completely safeguarded.
• My personal data will not be passed on to third parties without my express permission.
• If I wish to receive more information about the research, either now or in future, I can contact the researcher via annelotte.vanthull@student.uva.nl.
Should I have any complaints about this research, I can contact the designated member of the Ethics Committee representing the ASCoR, at the following address: ASCoR secretariat, Ethics Committee, University of Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020‐ 525 3680; ascor‐secr‐fmg@uva.nl.
Kind regards, Annelotte van Thull
Q1:
• Yes, I understand the presented text above, and I agree to participate in this research study.
• No, I disagree, and I will not participate in this research study.
Demographics
Firstly, you will be asked a couple of demographic questions. Please answer these questions truthfully.
Q2: What is your gender?
• Female
• Male
• Other
• Rather not say
Q3: To what age group do you belong?
• 17 or younger
• 18-29
• 30-39
• 40-49
• 50-59
• 60-69
• 70-79
• 80 or more
Q4: Please indicate the highest level of education you completed.
• Less than high-school diploma
• High school diploma
• Post-secondary degree
• Bachelor’s degree
• Master’s degree
• Doctorate
• Other
Case introduction
Now you will be introduced to a communication crisis case on the topic of cultural appropriation.
Cultural appropriation (in Dutch: culturele toe-eigening) refers to the use of objects or
elements of a non-dominant culture in a way that doesn't respect their original meaning, gives credit to their source, or reinforces stereotypes or contributes to oppression. Please read the following text carefully before continuing the experiment.
Fall 2019: The fashion brand Christian Dior released a video advertisement for its cologne,
Sauvage, featuring a Native American dancer in ceremonial garb, including a feathered headdress. The combination of the imagery and the name of the cologne, got perceived by many as racist and a matter of cultural appropriation. Dior's tweet about the cologne stated the campaign is "An authentic journey deep into the Native American soul in a sacred, founding and secular territory."
Americans for Indian Opportunity, a 50-year-old nonprofit organization that advocates for the rights of Indigenous peoples, said it collaborated with Dior on the new ad campaign
titled “We are the Land" which was filmed near Arches National Monument in Utah. The nonprofit organization said in a statement that it worked with music video director Jean- Baptiste Mondino and actor Johnny Depp to "provide advice on authentic inclusion of Native American images in the film promoting Depp’s signature parfum."
Depp, who played Tonto, a Native American character, in the 2013 Disney film “The Lone Ranger," faced backlash on social media for participating in the Dior campaign. Just as the name of the cologne did. As Wesley Morris wrote in a New York Times article from 2018, the word ‘savage’ is often tinged with racism, particularly in reference to those belonging to Native American and African-American communities. "In its expanded usage, 'savage' glorifies the imagined wildness that the word once sought to quarantine," Morris wrote.
“The ‘Sauvage’ campaign released by Dior today is offensive, racist and cultural
appropriation at its worst by a corporation that is exploiting Native peoples and culture for profit,” - Crystal Echohawk, Executive Director of IllumiNative, a Native American
advocacy group “This is a company that is looking to profit from advancing a harmful stereotype about Native people.”
The responses to the video by the public and critics were generally negative and the public felt offended, it felt like the campaign was misplaced. Instead of cultural appreciation, the campaign of the luxury fashion brand got accused for cultural appropriation. The campaign trailer created a lot of backlash on social media, and the brand ended up in a moral crisis situation.
Below you find the campaign it's regarding. Please watch the video carefully before you proceed the survey.
Condition 1 – Apology & crisis history
Dior is known for having a past of similar crises related to cultural appropriation and got critiques on a campaign for the Cruise 2019 collection, featuring garments influenced by Mexican culture, was criticized for starring Jennifer Lawrence, who is not Mexican.
Apology
The brand responded in the following way to the negative reactions to the campaign:
“The House of Dior has long been committed to promoting diversity and has no tolerance for discrimination in any form. Recently, a film trailer for the Sauvage fragrance was posted on social media and immediately withdrawn. We are deeply sorry for any offense caused by this new advertising campaign, which was meant to be a celebration of the beauty, dignity, and grace of the contemporary Native American culture, but was not perceived as such. As a consequence, we have decided not to release this version of the campaign.”
Dior has decided to cancel the film campaign and use only print stills that feature Johnny Depp, the face of the fragrance. The Native American contribution has essentially been erased, along with its presence — though it will live on, as most such things do, in bootleg copies online.
OR Condition 2 – Apology & no crisis history
It is the very first time this type of crisis occurred for Christian Dior. The crisis was a completely unprecedented case, and the backlash of the campaign trailer really shocked the luxury warehouse.
Apology
The brand responded in the following way to the negative reactions on the campaign:
"The House of Dior has long been committed to promoting diversity and has no tolerance for discrimination in any form. Recently, a film trailer for the Sauvage fragrance was posted on social media and immediately withdrawn. We are deeply sorry for any offense caused by this new advertising campaign, which was meant to be a celebration of the beauty, dignity, and grace of the contemporary Native American culture, but was not perceived as such. As a consequence, we have decided not to release this version of the campaign.”
Dior has decided to cancel the film campaign and use only print stills that feature Johnny Depp, the face of the fragrance. The Native American contribution has essentially been erased, along with its presence — though it will live on, as most such things do, in bootleg copies online.
OR Condition 3 – Compensation & crisis history
Dior is known for having a past of similar crises related to cultural appropriation and got critiques on a campaign for the Cruise 2019 collection, featuring garments influenced by Mexican culture, was criticized for starring Jennifer Lawrence, who is not Mexican.
Donation
The brand responded in the following way to the negative reactions on the campaign:
"The House of Dior has long been committed to promoting diversity and has no tolerance for discrimination in any form. Recently, a film trailer for the Sauvage fragrance was posted on social media and immediately withdrawn. The campaign was meant to be a celebration of the beauty, dignity, and grace of the contemporary Native American culture, but was not
perceived as such. Therefore, we would like to show our appreciation and donate 250.000 dollars to the Americans For Indian Opportunity, an indigenous advocacy group. This way we hope to compensate for the fact that we insulted a group of people that we did not intend to.”
Dior has decided to cancel the film campaign and use only print stills that feature Johnny Depp, the face of the fragrance. The Native American contribution has essentially been erased, along with its presence — though it will live on, as most such things do, in bootleg copies online.
OR Condition 4 – Compensation & no crisis history
It is the very first time this type of crisis occurred for Christian Dior. The crisis was an unprecedented case, and the backlash of the campaign trailer really shocked the luxury warehouse.
Donation
The brand responded in the following way to the negative reactions on the campaign:
“The House of Dior has long been committed to promoting diversity and has no tolerance for discrimination in any form. Recently, a film trailer for the Sauvage fragrance was posted on social media and immediately withdrawn. The campaign was meant to be a celebration of the beauty, dignity, and grace of the contemporary Native American culture, but was not
perceived as such. Therefore, we would like to show our appreciation and donate 250.000 dollars to the Americans For Indian Opportunity, an indigenous advocacy group. This way we hope to compensate for the fact that we insulted a group of people that we did not intend to.”
Dior has decided to cancel the film campaign and use only print stills that feature Johnny Depp, the face of the fragrance. The Native American contribution has essentially been erased, along with its presence — though it will live on, as most such things do, in bootleg copies online.
OR Condition 5 – Control group
Since the backlash occurred, Dior has not been available for any press communication yet.
Manipulation check
Next up you will be asked a couple of questions regarding the story you just read. Please answer these questions truthfully.
Q5: The brand Christian Dior...
• …apologized for its mistake.
• …compensated by offering an amount of money to the advocacy group.
Q6: The brand Christian Dior...
• …has no crisis history related to the topic of cultural appropriation.
• …has a crisis history related to the topic of cultural appropriation.
Issue importance
Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statement about the story you just read about. Keep in mind that it only concerns your own perception.
Q7: I currently find the issue of cultural appropriation (in Dutch: culturele toe-eigening) in society an important topic, that needs to be paid attention to.
• Strongly disagree
• Disagree
• Somewhat disagree
• Neither agree nor disagree
• Somewhat agree
• Agree
• Strongly agree
Corporate reputation
Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the following
statements about the company you read about. Keep in mind that it only concerns your own perception.
Q8: I have good feelings about this company.
• Strongly disagree
• Disagree
• Somewhat disagree
• Neither agree nor disagree
• Somewhat agree
• Agree
• Strongly agree
Q9: I admire and respect this company.
• Strongly disagree
• Disagree
• Somewhat disagree
• Neither agree nor disagree
• Somewhat agree
• Agree
Q10: I trust this company.
• Strongly disagree
• Disagree
• Somewhat disagree
• Neither agree nor disagree
• Somewhat agree
• Agree
• Strongly agree
Q11: This company has a good overall reputation.
• Strongly disagree
• Disagree
• Somewhat disagree
• Neither agree nor disagree
• Somewhat agree
• Agree
• Strongly agree
Conclusion
I would like to thank you very much for your participation in this research study, my appreciation is endless.
Disclaimer: The aim of the study is to examine whether the use of certain crisis response strategies have an influence on the corporate reputation of a company, in times of a moral
when analyzing this effect. You were shown a true story about Christian Dior's cultural appropriation scandal, however, their response strategies and the fact whether they have a related crisis history were manipulated by me. You were assigned to one of the five
experimental conditions, that I will compare the different results of to be able to answer my research questions.
THE END.
