IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v19y2016i1p119-133.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk communication and social media during food safety crises: a study of stakeholders' opinions in Ireland

Author

Listed:
  • Áine Regan
  • Monique Raats
  • Liran Christine Shan
  • Patrick G. Wall
  • Áine McConnon

Abstract

Social media is a particular communication platform which has witnessed an exponential growth in use and influence in recent years, democratising the communication process, and offering risk communicators a way of putting into practice those principles which are advocated to be at the core of risk management and communication. However, little is known about stakeholders' willingness to embrace this new form of communication in a food crisis. The current study presented an exploratory investigation of the opinions of Irish stakeholders on the position of risk communication in a crisis, with a particular focus on understanding what application social media may have. In-depth one-to-one interviews were carried out with key stakeholders holding frontline positions in managing and communicating about risk in the food sector in Ireland. The stakeholders identified risk communication as a central activity in a food safety crisis, driven by an obligation to protect both consumer health and the reputation of the Irish food sector. Stakeholders relied primarily on risk communication to disseminate information in a crisis so to educate and inform the public on a risk and to prevent confusion and alarmism; most did not explicitly value two-way risk communication in a crisis. The ability to effectively manage future crises may depend on stakeholders' willingness to adapt to the changing communication landscape, namely - their willingness to adopt social media and use it effectively. The findings indicate that the stakeholders interviewed are appreciative of the need to engage with social media in times of a food safety crisis. However, most valued social media as a one-way channel to help spread a message and there was little reference to the interactive nature of this medium. Implications for integrating social media into crisis risk communication strategies are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Áine Regan & Monique Raats & Liran Christine Shan & Patrick G. Wall & Áine McConnon, 2016. "Risk communication and social media during food safety crises: a study of stakeholders' opinions in Ireland," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 119-133, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:19:y:2016:i:1:p:119-133
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2014.961517
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2014.961517
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2014.961517?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kaplan, Andreas M. & Haenlein, Michael, 2010. "Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 59-68, January.
    2. Ortwin Renn, 1998. "Three decades of risk research: accomplishments and new challenges," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(1), pages 49-71, January.
    3. Houghton, J.R. & Rowe, G. & Frewer, L.J. & Van Kleef, E. & Chryssochoidis, G. & Kehagia, O. & Korzen-Bohr, S. & Lassen, J. & Pfenning, U. & Strada, A., 2008. "The quality of food risk management in Europe: Perspectives and priorities," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 13-26, February.
    4. Jean Kennedy & Liam Delaney & Eibhlin M. Hudson & Aileen McGloin & Patrick G. Wall, 2010. "Public perceptions of the dioxin incident in Irish pork," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(7), pages 937-949, October.
    5. Gabe Mythen, 2010. "Reframing risk? Citizen journalism and the transformation of news," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 45-58, January.
    6. Rutsaert, Pieter & Pieniak, Zuzanna & Regan, Áine & McConnon, Áine & Kuttschreuter, Margôt & Lores, Mònica & Lozano, Natàlia & Guzzon, Antonella & Santare, Dace & Verbeke, Wim, 2014. "Social media as a useful tool in food risk and benefit communication? A strategic orientation approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 84-93.
    7. Ragnar Lofstedt & Frederic Bouder & Jamie Wardman & Sweta Chakraborty, 2011. "The changing nature of communication and regulation of risk in Europe," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 409-429, April.
    8. Bev J. Holmes & Natalie Henrich & Sara Hancock & Valia Lestou, 2009. "Communicating with the public during health crises: experts' experiences and opinions," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(6), pages 793-807, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ying Zhu & Xiaowei Wen & May Chu & Gongliang Zhang & Xuefan Liu, 2021. "Consumers’ Food Safety Risk Communication on Social Media Following the Suan Tang Zi Accident: An Extended Protection Motivation Theory Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-19, July.
    2. Pérez-Mesa, Juan Carlos & García Barranco, Mª Carmen & Serrano-Arcos, Mª Mar, 2023. "The agri-food crisis in the post-truth age: an application to the Spanish greenhouse sector," MPRA Paper 119882, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Comrie, E.L. & Burns, C. & Coulson, A.B. & Quigley, J. & Quigley, K.F., 2019. "Rationalising the use of Twitter by official organisations during risk events: Operationalising the Social Amplification of Risk Framework through causal loop diagrams," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(2), pages 792-801.
    4. Meyerding, Stephan G.H. & Spiwoks, Elisabeth & Rombach, Meike & Lehberger, Mira, 2019. "Not only speed matters – Crisis response in the hypothetical case of a transport accident involving genetically modified crops," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 55-63.
    5. Jinghao Chen & Qianxi Liu & Xiaoyan Liu & Youfeng Wang & Huizi Nie & Xiankun Xie, 2023. "Exploring the Functioning of Online Self-Organizations during Public Health Emergencies: Patterns and Mechanism," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-22, February.
    6. Y. Kozenko & Z. Kozenko & A. Bobicheva & K. Kozenko & M. Filin, 2016. "Perspectives of Development of Agriculture in Crisis by the Example of Present-Day Russia," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(2), pages 171-178.
    7. Dominic Balog‐Way & Katherine McComas & John Besley, 2020. "The Evolving Field of Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2240-2262, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrea Cerase & Lorenzo Cugliari, 2023. "Something Still Remains: Factors Affecting Tsunami Risk Perception on the Coasts Hit by the Reggio Calabria-Messina 1908 Event (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-26, February.
    2. Pratiwi, Santi & Juerges, Nataly, 2022. "Digital advocacy at the science-policy interface: Resolving land-use conflicts in conservation forests," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    3. Xinran Dai & Jing Wang, 2023. "Effect of online video infotainment on audience attention," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Charry, Karine & Tessitore, Tina, 2021. "I tweet, they follow, you eat: Number of followers as nudge on social media to eat more healthily," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 269(C).
    5. Mustafa Emre Civelek & Murat Cemberci & Necati Erdem Eralp, 2016. "The Role of Social Media in Crisis Communication and Crisis Management," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 5(3), pages 111-120, April.
    6. Jamie K. Wardman & Gabe Mythen, 2016. "Risk communication: against the Gods or against all odds? Problems and prospects of accounting for Black Swans," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(10), pages 1220-1230, November.
    7. Rutsaert, Pieter & Pieniak, Zuzanna & Regan, Áine & McConnon, Áine & Kuttschreuter, Margôt & Lores, Mònica & Lozano, Natàlia & Guzzon, Antonella & Santare, Dace & Verbeke, Wim, 2014. "Social media as a useful tool in food risk and benefit communication? A strategic orientation approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 84-93.
    8. Fan, Rui & Xu, Ke & Zhao, Jichang, 2018. "An agent-based model for emotion contagion and competition in online social media," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 495(C), pages 245-259.
    9. Nour El Houda Ben Amor & Mohamed Nabil Mzoughi, 2023. "Do Millennials’ Motives for Using Snapchat Influence the Effectiveness of Snap Ads?," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, July.
    10. Gundula Glowka & Andreas Kallmünzer & Anita Zehrer, 2021. "Enterprise risk management in small and medium family enterprises: the role of family involvement and CEO tenure," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 1213-1231, September.
    11. Schmidt, Christoph G. & Wuttke, David A. & Heese, H. Sebastian & Wagner, Stephan M., 2023. "Antecedents of public reactions to supply chain glitches," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    12. Mahan, Joseph E. & Seo, Won Jae & Jordan, Jeremy S. & Funk, Daniel, 2015. "Exploring the impact of social networking sites on running involvement, running behavior, and social life satisfaction," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 182-192.
    13. Molina, Arturo & Fernández, Alejandra C. & Gómez, Mar & Aranda, Evangelina, 2017. "Differences in the city branding of European capitals based on online vs. offline sources of information," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 28-39.
    14. Carmela Milano, 2015. "Democratization or else vulgarization of cultural capital? The role of social networks in theater’s audience behavior," Working Papers CEB 15-004, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    15. Yucheng Zhang & Zhiling Wang & Lin Xiao & Lijun Wang & Pei Huang, 2023. "Discovering the evolution of online reviews: A bibliometric review," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-22, December.
    16. Hassan Danaeefard & Ali Farazmand & Akram Dastyari, 2023. "The Iranian Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-9) Crisismanship: Understanding the Contributions of National Culture, Media, Technology and Economic System," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 1661-1682, December.
    17. Richey, Michelle & Ravishankar, M.N., 2019. "The role of frames and cultural toolkits in establishing new connections for social media innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 325-333.
    18. Jamal El-Den & Pratap Adikhari & Pratap Adikhari, 2017. "Social media in the service of social entrepreneurship: Identifying factors for better services," Journal of Advances in Humanities and Social Sciences, Dr. Yi-Hsing Hsieh, vol. 3(2), pages 105-114.
    19. Smith, Andrew N. & Fischer, Eileen & Yongjian, Chen, 2012. "How Does Brand-related User-generated Content Differ across YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter?," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 102-113.
    20. Bo Yang & Chao Liu & Xusen Cheng & Xi Ma, 2022. "Understanding Users' Group Behavioral Decisions About Sharing Articles in Social Media: An Elaboration Likelihood Model Perspective," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 819-842, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:19:y:2016:i:1:p:119-133. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.