my. _,

«‘x‘m‘

 

 

 

. . .
will.

.u

v
)

wry
,

I

1 .
Era»?

. 5
133

r. if

.. .
x munwiamm

.32 . A

L21...
Vl‘ .I .I

 

.

.
1'
1.3 1,} 5'

I

up
dﬂunlv‘hcrﬁkh
‘ 4f. #9.” ,
3. ..
hnumdmmﬁi .
, 3X! 4‘
an».
wig:

$4.1?

xtuwhwh
. ‘14.". r .1.» i
5.. . ‘9 7‘... “s
9?me 44,?
$3 a: “JV

s.

 

 

mm},

‘ m
l

\ngg‘

5739/va

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

THE PLACEMENT OF SOCIAL MESSAGES IN
ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA: A STUDY OF SOCIAL
EXCHANGE THEORY

presented by

MONICA LORENE BECKHAM

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for the

 

 

 

M.A. degree in PUBLIC RELATIONS
Major Professor's Signature

ﬁ'ﬂr/ 27‘ 796,61
r I

Date

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

_——v P'“— r

 

 

LIBRARY

Michigan State

University

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINE return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

U711 05
AUG 16 2005

 

MAR 01 3 @197

 

LIA c I
333102069

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 c:/CIRC/DateDue.p65-p.15

 

THE PLACEMENT OF SOCIAL MESSAGES IN ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA: A
STUDY OF SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORY

By

Monica Lorene Beckham

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial ﬁtlﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS
Department of Advertising

2004

ABSTRACT

THE PLACEMENT OF SOCIAL MESSAGES IN ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA: A
STUDY OF SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORY

By

Monica Lorene Beckham

The purpose of this thesis is to study the inter-organizational process through
which social messages become embedded in entertainment programming content. Social
Exchange Theory was used to create the conceptual framework for this study. In-depth
interviews were conducted with high-ranking executives ﬁ'om government agencies,
advocacy organizations, and the entertainment industry to study this process. Three
primary processes were identiﬁed to explain issue placement: (1) serendipitous
placements; (2) opportunistic placements; and (3) planned placements. The result of this
study is a practical and theoretical examination of the relationships between entities

rarely associated with one another, and a practice of which few are aware.

Cepyright by
MONICA LORENE BECKHAM
2004

To my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ...
whom I am humbly grateful for all of my blessings...

past, present, and future.

And to my father, William J. Beckham, Jr.
My guardian angel in heaven.

I love you and miss you always.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to acknowledge the many people who have supported me through the
process of creating this thesis. First, I thank Dr. Charles T. Salmon, my thesis
chairperson and advisor. Thank you for introducing me to Entertainment—Education.
You have constantly helped guide me through my academic trials, tribulations,
development, and successes. Thank you for everything.

Thank you to all of the people who have taken time to edit this paper for me (Dr.
Bonnie Reece, Dr. Teresa Mastin, Daria Burke, Susan Chang). Taking your time to assist
me was extremely kind, and I value and appreciate all of you. A special thank you to the
best editor I’ve even known, David Kirkland. Thank you so much for all the time, effort,
appreciation and love you have shown me. I will always remember you.

I would like to also thank, Dr. Nora Rifon, my academic advisor. Since my ﬁrst
day in the master's program, you have always exhibited your faith in me. Through many
conversations you put my worries and anxieties at ease through your advice and support.
You have been such an amazing source of encouragement for me, thank you and I love
you.

To my mother, and Jeff who have spent countless phone calls enduring my stress
induced attitude and complaining. . .thank you for all of your prayers, love and support. I
love you. Leslie, my best friend, thank you for being the sister I never had. All of your
“tough love” and support is appreciated more than you will ever know. I love you.

A special thank you to Bobby, whose love and support get me through the

toughest of days. I am blessed to have you. I love you.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................. vii

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1
Purpose of Study .................................................................................. 2
Deﬁnition of Terms ............................................................................... 3
Background ........................................................................................ 5
Freedom of Expression, Commercial, and Government Speech ........................... 7
Government in Health and Safety Communication ......................................... 11

CHAPTER 1

REVIEW OF LITERATURE ..................................................................... 14
Background ....................................................................................... 14
Theoretical Framework ......................................................................... 26
Research Questions .............................................................................. 37

CHAPTER 2

METHODOLOGY ................................................................................. 40
Participants ....................................................................................... 40
Procedures and Instrumentation ............................................................... 43
Data Collection and Treatment ................................................................ 44

CHAPTER 3

RESULTS ............................................................................................ 45
Heuristic Model for Issue Placement ......................................................... 45
Three Issue Placement Processes .............................................................. 46
The Value of Emotion and Interpersonal Relationships in Issue Placement ............ 57
Government and Issue Placement ............................................................. 58

CHAPTER 4

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION ................................................................ 62
Ethical Considerations .......................................................................... 64

CHAPTER 5

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH .................................................. 68

APPENDICES ....................................................................................... 69

REFERENCES ...................................................................................... 77

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1- Heuristic Model for Issue Placement ................................................. 73
Figure 2- Serendipitous Model for Issue Placement ............................................ 74
Figure 3- Opportunistic Model for Issue Placement ............................................. 75
Figure 4- Flamed Model for Issue Placement ................................................... 76

Vii

INTRODUCTION

Entertainment-education (E-E), is the practice of deliberately placing educational
content in entertainment programming (for the purpose of this study, entertainment
programming will include primetime/daytime television and movies). Organizations that
use E-E strategy do so to propagate ideas with the intent of bringing about social and
behavioral change (Singhal and Rogers, 2002). In keeping with its desired effects, E-E
has become more ﬁequently used over the years as a means to bring about change at
collective and individual levels (Sood, 2002). Slater and Rouner (2002) point out that E-
E practices are more effective than traditional media advertising. Thus, E-E strategy is a
quickly developing phenomenon amongst academics and practitioners.

E-E, in the context of health, is believed to be a strategy designed to inﬂuence
individuals’ attitudes and beliefs in unique ways depending upon the person’s willingness
to change the perceived harmful behavior (Slater and Rouner, 2002). E-E practitioners
believe that individuals will be more receptive to educational messages when they are
embedded in an entertaining context (Sood, 2002). It is also believed that audiences will
beneﬁt from issue placement because they, 1) learn a new idea, 2) behave differently as a
result of their exposure to a concept, or 3) think a different way about an idea,
particularly because the concept was placed in an entertainment medium (Greenberg,
Salmon, Patel, Beck, and Cole, 2004). Yet, ethical questions arise regarding who places
issues into popular media and what their motivations are for doing so.

Various government agencies use E-E to promote their communication objectives.
Recent uses of E-E include efforts by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to advise

Hollywood creatives on such topics as HIV/AIDS, the anticipated result being storyline

placement in daytime and primetime television. Similarly, the White House Office of
National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) hopes to inﬂuence audiences not to use drugs by
placing drug storylines in primetime television series. In 1998, the White House
launched a major anti-drug campaign using components of EB. Three years later
Congress approved funding for the CDC to create a media campaign designed to target
the nutrition and physical activity of adolescents. Over the following years, more
government agencies have been employing E-E strategies to achieve their
communication goals.

In addition to government agencies, non-proﬁt and health/service agencies
practice E-E to promote their respective organizations. Organizations such as Media
Scope, the Media Project, and the Kaiser Family Foundation frequently employ E-E
strategies for issue placement in media content. In addition to issue placement, the
Kaiser Family Foundation promotes and studies health messages depicted on popular
television shows by non-proﬁt and government agencies (Greenberg et al., 2004) and
tracks the placement and impact of message implementations. Issues undoubtedly arise,
however, when government organizations and other groups use entertainment media to
inﬂuence public thinking and behavior.

Purpose of Study

This study explores the relationship among the government, entertainment
industry, and nonproﬁt organizations. Although selected scholars have explored the
ethical issues of agenda setting through public affairs departments of government
agencies (Gostin and Javitt, 2001), no deeper examination has been given about the

relationships between these organizations. This paper examines the process by which the

government and nonproﬁt agencies develop and implement strategies to promote certain
issues and images within entertainment media content.

This paper will begin with a ﬁ'amework of law to describe the historical introduce
relationship between the government and the media. The boundaries set forth by the
Constitution in reference to the government’s ability to inﬂuence media content will be
discussed. Following this introduction, relationships among the government,
entertainment industry, and non-proﬁt agencies will be presented. After a thorough
understanding of the history between these agencies, Social Exchange Theory will be
presented as a framework of which to view these organizational and interpersonal
relationships. Upon the presentation of the results ﬁom this study, I will then discuss the
potential ethical implications of these relationships, and suggest recommendations for
future research.

The understanding of the relationships among the government, non-proﬁt, and
entertainment industries are important due to the potentially controversial nature of the
process and of these campaigns designed to inﬂuence media content and the public will.
This study is not being conducted with negative nor positive motives, but to present a full
layout of the issue placement process for one to formulate his/her own opinion. Some
will criticize while others will laud the practice of issue placement. To promote either
opinion is not the motive of this study.

Deﬁnition of Terms

Three key phrases will be used frequently to discuss the implementation and/or

presence of a speciﬁc issue within entertainment media. This section deﬁnes how these

phrases will be used for this study.

Issue Placement

Speciﬁc issues such as safe sex, substance abuse, and cancer education are
ﬁequently written into scripts for television programming. These storylines may be
created at the efforts of nonproﬁt organizations and government agencies seeking to
promote a message, or simply for entertainment value. Issue placement, as used in this
study, is deﬁned as the serendipitous or intentional inclusion in a storyline of any social
issue which may inﬂuence an audience member. This inclusion may or may not be on
the part of intermediary agencies, writers and/or producers seeking to incorporate these
topics into storylines. This study will explore the process of these implementations in

great detail.

Entertainment-Education

Entertainment-education is a speciﬁc term for issue placement used by many
public health organizations. Entertainment-education is deﬁned by scholars as the
deliberate placement of educational content in an entertainment format. Organizations
that use entertainment-education strategies do so to promulgate ideas with the intent of

bringing about social and/or behavioral change.

Public Affairs

In reference to government agencies in particular, public aﬂairs is the term used
to describe those departments who serve a classically public relations function. Due to
the 1913 Gillette Amendment, government agencies are not permitted to use appropriated

funds to pay a publicity expert unless speciﬁcally appropriated for that purpose. Thus,

government workers may not hold positions practicing public relations functions. As a
result, many government agencies have public affairs and/or communication ofﬁces.
Commercial Speech, Government Speech, and Issue Placement

The government has a signiﬁcant responsibility to protect the welfare of its
citizens, as health and safety are top priorities of government agencies. Federal and state
laws regulate the quality of the health care people receive, the food people eat, the air
people breathe, and the water people drink. However, many factors of disease and health
rest on individual human behavior. Unfortunately, many harmful social behaviors are
predicated on erroneous information or a lack of information altogether. Therefore, the
government’s effort to serve its citizenry involves a great degree of power over the
information public receives. The government controls content by delivering messages
directly to the public or through grants to intermediary, private organizations (Gostin and
Javitt, 2001). Depending upon speciﬁc issue involved, the behaviors adopted, and the
source employed, this practice may be deemed suspicious or deceptive, thus warranting
further investigation.

Even while bounded by the First Amendment’s guarantee of free expression, the
government holds the authority to require or restrict service or product-related
communications deemed hazardous to the public in the private sector. The US. Supreme
Court has developed a well-defmed method for the determination of the extent the
government may control commercial speech content consistent with the First
Amendment. The law seeks to mediate the government’s ability to protect its citizens

ﬁ'om media deception and the rights of commercial entities to communicate information

(Gostin and Javitt, 2001). These laws are very pertinent when discussing the
communication of health and safety information to the public.

Although laws exist to regulate commercial entities, no equally applicable law
exists for the government when it acts as the communicator. According to Gostin and
Javitt (2001), the First Amendment protects citizens from government interference in
freedom of expression; however, there is no precise protection when government is the
communicator. In reference to the Constitution, courts rarely restrict government speech
even when such speech could be controlled if made by commercial entities. Thus, while
a signiﬁcant amount of scholarly literature and jurisprudence exists relating to the
boundaries of commercial speech, there is very little literature pertaining to government
speech, and none speciﬁcally on matters of public safety and health issues (Gostin and
Javitt, 2001 ).

Despite being safeguarded from constitutional examination, government speech
on health and safety matters raises key social and ethical questions and involves
signiﬁcant societal tradeooffs. While such speech may produce public health beneﬁts,
reduce risky behavior, and increase public safety, it is also inherently politicized through
its framing of health problems and their remedies. Despite the fact that government
inﬂuence on commercial speech can be easily recognized due to its regulation through
laws, government speech is regularly disseminated without public scrutiny (Gostin and
Javitt, 2001). The government maintains exclusive discretion over the information it
propagates to the public with very few restrictions on its communication methods or

content.

Although the government may exhibit some control over commercial speech’s
physical attributes (e.g. posting of billboards), its ability to censor content is lessened by
the Constitution (Gostin and Javitt, 2001). The First Amendment declares that “Congress
shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” The First
Amendment also impedes the government’s suppression of speech by private
organizations or citizens even when the content may be deemed offensive. Grounded in
several fundamental values, freedom of expression is essential to the enhancement of
democracy by the permission of free exchange of ideas.

Freedom of expression is also considered a necessity for the discovery of truth.
Oliver Wendell Holmes put forth the metaphor “marketplace of ideas” to invoke the view
that in a competitive free market, expressions of truth will prevail.1 Public health
oﬂicials (government and non-govemment), in particular, are skeptical over the notion of
truth prevailing in a free market of communication. Many public health authorities
distrust commercial entities. They are skeptical to whether commercial entities can
genuinely inform the public of risky behavior and appropriate measures for healthy
lifestyles. This distrust manifests itself in the belief that commercial entities are a
dissension of explicit and tacit messages about health However, with the exception of
food and drug advertisements regulated by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA),
commercial messages are rarely based on science. Many commercial messages are more
frequently based upon opinions set forth by entities with proﬁt motivation rather than
interest in behavioral change (Bayer, Gostin, and McGraw, 1995).

Driven by economic incentive, the private sector seeks to inﬂuence consumer

behaviors and preferences for its own beneﬁt. The media struggles for advertising proﬁts

 

‘ Abrams v. United States, 250 US. 616, 630 (I919) (Holmes, 1., dissenting).

and the advertising industry seeks to create enthralling campaigns to serve as a catalyst
for consumer purchase. Thus, the majority of information received by citizens comes not
from the government but ﬁ'om entities guided by proﬁt maximization (Gostin and Javitt,
2001). This becomes a concern when health and safety issues are amidst the content.
The government’s power to form and restrict messages disseminated by the private sector
is arguably a critical strategy to protect consumers’ health and safety. Advertising assists
in the demand for harmful services and products (e.g. tobacco and alcohol). Many
campaigns target adolescents who by law are unable to purchase and/or consume these
products. These issues have caused government regulation of advertising format and
content for products with negative consumption consequences.

According to Valentine v. Chrestensen", commercial speech held a subordinate
position in the priorities of First Amendment values. However, the Supreme Court
became increasingly sensitive to advertising’s heightened potential for deception.3 This
awareness warranted more extensive consumer protection by the government in the
Court’s opinion. The Court created a paradox by establishing the mandate that
commercial speech is protected under the First Amendment yet government maintains
regulation power. This inconsistency created two signiﬁcant issues: (1) what constitutes
commercial speech; and (2) what criteria should be used to determine government
regulation of such speech and assess its appropriateness. The Court has deﬁned
commercial speech as “an expression related solely to the economic interests of the
speaker and its audience” that “does no more than propose a commercial transaction.”4 It

must identify a speciﬁc product or service, be a form of advertising, and/or confer

 

2 Valentine v. Chrestensen, 316 US. 52 (1942).
3 Bolger v. Youngs Drug Prods. Corp., 463 US. 60, 65 (I983).
’ Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. Public Serv. Comm ’n, 447 US. 557, 561 (I980).

economic beneﬁt. After deﬁning commercial speech, the Court then laid out criteria for
government intervention in commercial speech content.

Upon deﬁning commercial speech, the Court proceeded to create a method for
deciphering circumstances under which government interference is permitted. Thus, the
Court created a four-part test based on the Central Hudson cases for the governmental
regulation of commercial speech. To receive constitutional protection, the speech must
ﬁrst involve a legal activity and avoid ambiguity or deception. Second, the government’s
interest in asserting regulation must be considerable. Third, the interference must
advance directly the interest set forth by the government. And ﬁnally, the interference
must not exceed what is needed for the government to achieve its goal. Due to the nature
of public health and safety issues, content concerning such often satisﬁes the criteria of
the government’s interest being substantial. Under the guise of their policing powers,
states have a proclivity to protect the safety, health, and welfare of its citizens. In
addition, the Court has acknowledged the importance of government regulation in
helping to promote health and safety (Gostin and Javitt, 2001). However, careful
consideration and assessment must be taken when discussing the government as a
communicator to the public.

The Court is skeptical of government actions that keep the public ignorant. This
skepticism is due to the assumption that society lacks the ability to independently judge
the quality of advertisements. For example, the average adolescent lacks the ability to
decipher fantasy from reality when viewing an alcohol commercial. Thus, the Court
requires that speech be truthful for constitutional protection; however, the Court has

never deﬁned explicitly what constitutes deceptive speech. It must be considered as to

 

’ Ibid, I980.

whether or not ﬁctional television content is constitutionally protected or subject to
government interference.

The deﬁnition of deceptive and untruthﬁrl speech is very important when
discussing public health and safety information (Gostin and Javitt, 2001). The purpose of
advertising is to create an image associated with the product and/or service with which
consumers want to identify. For example, alcoholic products may generally be associated
with sophistication or sex, while ﬁrearm advertisements ﬁequently emphasize family
security achieved by owning a handgun. Similar to advertising, the purpose of
entertainment television is to create characters and storylines with which viewers can
relate. Popular characters may participate in sexually promiscuous behavior or indulge in
illegal or controlled substances. To the extent that advertising may fail to disclose health
hazards associated with speciﬁc products, it can be assumed that they are misleading and
cannot be protected under the First Amendment. A question arises as to whether or not
these same criteria can be extended to entertainment media.

There are several social harms which factor into the issue of commercial speech
regulation. The Supreme Court has stated that the government does not have broader
latitude to regulate speech advocating socially destructive activities. However, the
Central Hudson test is implicit in its conclusion that the government may interfere when
the speech promotes social harms the government is seeking to avoid. Step 2 of the
Central Hudson test requires that the government’s interest be substantial in order to
interfere. Generally, avoiding social harms such as smoking, drinking, and violence will
be regarded consistently as substantial.6 However, the other factors in the Central

Hudson test must also be satisﬁed for the government to regulate commercial speech

 

6 Greater New Orleans Broadcasting Ass ’n, Inc. v. US, 527 US. 173, I74 ( I999).

10

content. It is under these conditions that most government speech regulations generally

fail (Gostin and Javitt, 2001). To avoid potential pitfalls, the government uses resources

from various federal agencies, and through grants with private organizations.
Government in Health and Safety Communication

The government is a primary health educator through agencies such as the CDC
and National Institutes of Health (NIH). Health communication campaigns set forth by
these agencies are part of an overall public health strategy. National anti-drug and anti-
smoking campaigns have been initiated through these agencies. Advertising campaigns
and health education campaigns employ similar techniques. However, rather than
persuading consumers to purchase a commercial product, health communication
campaigns promote healthier behaviors. In addition, efforts imposed by public safety
agencies such as the Department of Defense may promote military recruitment. The
government has become highly sophisticated in disseminating its messages through
media (Gostin and Javitt, 2001). In addition to fundamental advertising and public
relations tactics such as paid advertising, public service announcements, Web sites, and
press releases, the government has also become savvy in implementing its messages
within entertainment media programming to tacitly inﬂuence citizens. In some instances,
the government may hire outside agencies to help implement its messages.

In many instances, the government’s health initiatives are brought about in
cooperation with private (generally non-proﬁt) organizations (Rice and Atkins, 1990).
The Bush Administration, for example, intends on expanding its cooperation with, and
funding of, religious organizations in matters of social health and welfare (Milbank,

200]). Nonproﬁt organizations depend greatly upon the ﬁnancial support of the

11

government to distribute health and safety messages. Even those who wish to promote
their messages autonomously often experience adversity achieving their objectives due to
the lack of ﬁnancial support (Gostin and Javitt, 2001). Thus, whether intentional or not,
many nonproﬁt organizations become dependent upon the government in some form or
fashion.

Once it selects the organizations it will fund, the government’s inﬂuence in the
organization’s messages is inevitable. For instance, the government issues contracts and
grants predicated on the condition that a given organization will express a particular
viewpoint consistent with that of the government. For example, government-sponsored
HIV prevention grants may promote condom use or abstinence; however, the government
may exclude any support of homosexuath in the media messages (Gostin and Javitt,
2001). Under the provisions of the First Amendment, the government may opt to
promote certain health messages over others. This selectivity permits the government to
impose its morals and values onto society, which some may deem as an overstepping of
bounds.

With these issues in mind, one must question the depth to which the relationships
between the government and media occur. A thorough understanding of the processes
and relationships between the government, entertainment industry, and private
organizations must be investigated and examined. To promote an understanding of the
issue placement process, I investigate two public health agencies (Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention and White House Ofﬁce of National Drug Control Policy), three

public service agencies (Department of Defense, CIA and FBI), and multiple nonproﬁt

12

and entertainment agencies. To assess the relationships between these agencies, I will

use Social Exchange Theory (SET) as a framework.

13

CHAPTER 1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Issue placement should not be examined without a full understanding of the
development of the relationships between government, entertainment, and intermediary
agencies, over the past few decades. Previous interactions between agencies have laid
the foundation for the processes which occur today. Before discussion of the theoretical
framework which will be used to examine issue placement, we will ﬁrst discuss the
history of the relationship between these agencies.

Background

During a thorough review of the literature pertaining to issue placement, three
primary institutions are identiﬁed as being involved in the issue placement process. For
the purposes of this study, these will be referred to as intermediaries, government
agencies, and entertainment industry. The intermediaries consist of advocacy
organizations, non-proﬁt organization, foundations, and public relations agencies.
Government agencies consist of any public safety or public health agency within the
government. Lastly, the entertainment industry consists of writers, producers, studio
executives and/or corporations. The history and development of the relationships
between these parties from the 19703 until today will be examined and discussed in this
section.

Intermediaries

Since the 19705, entertainment programming has become a medium for the
dissemination of pro-social messages. More than twenty advocacy groups, non-proﬁt
organizations, and foundations have migrated to Hollywood with the intention of

lobbying to implement, improve or alter the portrayals of speciﬁc issues in the television

14

and ﬁlm industry (Shavitz, 2002). As a result of the axiom that society learns ﬁom
popular culture, especially entertainment programming, these organizations vehemently
defend their necessity in the entertainment industry. Due to the numerous messages in
entertainment programming pertaining to medical issues, government and law,
organizations have been building relationships with the entertainment industry for
decades to create a more accurate and positive programming environment for its viewers
(Shavitz, 2002).

Due to the common set of tactics and strategies that advocacy groups use in
Hollywood as political lobbyists use with the government, the term “Hollywood
lobbyists” was created to label these efforts (Atkin and Wallack, 1990). These groups
situated themselves close to decision-making centers, and provided valuable expertise
and facts to support Hollywood, just as DC. lobbyists support Congress. They adopted
game rules, compromised when necessary, and used cooperative versus conﬁontational
negotiation tactics. To further make headway with Hollywood and push their agendas,
Hollywood lobbyists gave incentives (e.g., awards and public recognition), and did not
insist on programming content change. These strategies demonstrated an understanding
of Hollywood culture (Montgomery, 1989).

The development of relationships between media advocacy individuals and the
entertainment industry can be traced as early as 1970. A Methodist minister, David
Poindexter, moved to Hollywood to begin lobbying for the inclusion of social issues in
entertainment programming. His efforts led to the founding of Population
Communications International, which developed pro-social programming nationally and

internationally (Shavitz, 2002). Also in the 19703, television producer and writer

15

Norman Lear began pioneering the effort for media accuracy. He hired staff members to
ensure the appropriateness and accuracy of social messages depicted in his hit series, “All
in the Family.” One of the earliest controversial issue placements was a result of
collaboration between the Population Institute and Norman Lear. An initiative led by the
Population Institute led to CBS’s hit show, “Maude” including an abortion into its
storyline. In 1972, the 47-year old lead character became pregnant and had an abortion.
The show’s producer, Norman Lear, was attacked by the Catholic church, which accused
Lear of using primetime television for propaganda purposes. The church also targeted
the Population Institute for wielding its inﬂuences in Hollywood. The show led to anti-
abortion protesters staging sit-ins and threatening boycotts (Atkin and Wallack, 1990).
During the “Maude” controversy, Norman F leishmann began holding Hollywood soirees
as the director of Planned Parenthood. His ﬁrst party was held to garner support of
Norman Lear. F leishmann was keenly aware of entertainment television’s new trend
toward the inclusion of social and political issues. He became known as the “liberal pied
piper” because of his diligent efforts to persuade Hollywood to incorporate issues into
their programming. After leaving Planned Parenthood, Fleishmann became the TV
project director of the Population Institute. F leishmann was not alone in his career efforts
to change television programming. By the mid-1980’s Fleishmann was joined by
multiple other “Hollywood lobbyists” seeking to inﬂuence entertainment programming
(Montgomery, 1989).

Despite the potential negative effects of including controversial issues into
entertainment programming, advocacy groups did not delay their efforts due to the effects

these programming inclusions had on its audience members. Early indications of the

16

effect of entertainment programming on behavior change can be traced as early as the
19705. Following one episode of the hit sitcom, “Happy Days,” a depiction of the star
character receiving a library card resulted in libraries across the country reporting record
numbers of library card requests (Shavitz, 2002).

Due to the increasing research on the effect of entertainment programming on effects on
behavior change, the following 30 years created numerous efforts to increase the number
of pro—social issues in programming.

Since 1980, the Center for Population Institute continued its work in Hollywood
initiated by the Population Institute. The Center for Population Institute offered script
input and consultation as well as awards for TV programming depiction of sexual issues
in a responsible manner. In 1983, the Entertainment Industries Council (EIC) was create
to “deglamorize drug and alcohol abuse use” (Atkin and Wallack, 1990). EIC issued
periodic guidelines on issues relating to public safety and other alcohol and drug abuse
related topics. Funded by private philanthropy organizations and government grants and
contracts, EIC lobbies Hollywood on behalf of advocacy groups such as: Drug Strategies,
Center for Alcohol and Drug Research and Education, Society for Women’s Health
Research, AIDS Action, and National Institutes of Mental Health. In addition to non-
proﬁt organizations lobbying to include social messages into entertainment programming,
universities also participated in issue placement.

In April of 1989, ABC aired an episode of the sitcom, “Growing Pains.” In the
episode, a teen boy was seriously injured in a drunk driving accident after having only “a
few drinks.” After vowing to change his irresponsible ways, in a surprise ending, he dies.

The tragic twist was an effort of the producers to break the typical sense of denial and

17

immortality teenagers possess. This episode was a part of one of the most noteworthy
cases of issue placement. This case is a result of a massive effort on behalf of Harvard
University’s School of Public Health. Known as the Harvard Alcohol Project (HAP), the
program was directed by Jay Weinstein from the Center for Health Communication. The
center receives ﬁrnding from corporations such as Max Factor Family Foundation, Exxon
Corporation, Helena Rubenstein Foundation and the Alfred P. Sloan Corporation. Over a
15-month period beginning in November of 1988, HAP sought to use entertainment
television raise awareness of the dangers of drunk driving and to promote the “designated
driver.” HAP’s efforts resulted in drunk driving prevention appearing in 62 television
episodes by encouraging dozens of Hollywood writers and producers to add dialogue in
some episodes or create a “dedicated episode” to the issue. Drunk driving prevention
appeared in shows such as: All My Children, Baywatch, Charles in Charge, Cheers,
Coach, Cosby Show, Dallas, Designing Women, Doogie Howser, Growing Pains, Family
Ties, Head of the Class, Knots Landing, Murphy Brown, My Two Dads, Who’s the Boss,
and Young and the Restless (Montgomery, 1993). Over the next 15 years, advocacy
groups and agencies continued their effort to encourage the entertainment industry to use
their powerful medium for pro-social causes.
Government

Department of Defense.

Along with the addition of pro-social messages, many non-advocacy agencies
have also sought to use entertainment programming as a means to promote their
communication message and/or simply ensure the accurate representation of their

organization. The military is a primary example of this type of use of entertainment

18

programming. The relationship between the government and Hollywood can be traced
back as far as the early 19005. For example, in 1914, the Navy provided instructions
outlining the criteria for which ﬁlming of any ships, equipment, etc. could occur.
Filmmakers who used naval equipment or facilities were mandated to submit scripts of
their movies for censorship before they were permitted to release the ﬁlm. The armed
forces realized the impact of movies on its image and recruitment early on (Suid, 2002) .

Speciﬁc criteria must be fulﬁlled in order for the Department of Defense (DoD) to
support requests of the entertainment industry. First and foremost, the production must
beneﬁt the DoD or be in national interest. This condition is based upon the subjective
opinion of the DoD. The entertainment project must increase public understanding of
the Armed Forces and the DoD, and should help the Armed Forces recruitment and
retention programs. The DoD also requires that the entertainment request must be an
authentic portrayal of persons, places, actual military operations and/or historical events.
Even ﬁctional depictions must be a feasible representation of military policies, operations
and life. In addition to these requirements, the production must not appear to condone or
endorse activities by private citizens that are in contradiction to United States government
policy. These conditions must be agreed upon by the producer represented by a signed
production agreement (Making Movies Guide, 2003).

Along with the signed agreement from the producer, the completed production
must be submitted for screening in Washington, DC, prior to ﬁnal print (all television
episodes must be approved as well). Although most issue placement does not contain
any monetary exchange, DoD issue placement is an exception. The entertainment

production must pay the project ofﬁcer and/or technical advisor’s housing and travel

19

expenses and per diem. Reimbursement for any costs incurred by the government agency
for use of facilities must also occur (Making Movies Guide, 2003). These costs,
however, may only be incurred by the government when materials may only be obtained
by the government as not to compete with commercial enterprises (DoD Instruction,
2003). This reimbursement is a result from the requirement that taxpayers may in no way
ﬁnance entertainment projects (Making Movies Guide, 2003).

Despite these requirements for the government to participate in entertainment
projects, the DoD, as well as any other advocacy agencies participating in issue
placement, understands the powerful effect the entertainment industry has over its
audience members. Many Americans gain their images of the military from movies and
television. Military ﬁhn historian, Lawrence Suid, states that “without it [entertainment],
I don’t think most Americans would have thought we could win the Gulf” (The Song
Machine, 2003). After release of Top Gun, the navy enjoyed recruitment ﬁgures up to
500% above usual (The Song Machine, 2003). The hit movie produced such dramatic
results, that it has been deemed the “I" op Gun effect.” These types of results create a
need for the government to participate in entertainment content when able. It must be
noted that the DoD is not generally a proactive party in the issue placement process. The
DoD has the ability to aid in entertainment content when approached for assistance by the
entertainment industry.

Proactive efforts to inﬂuence entertainment content by the government have not
been well received by the public in the past. The White House Office of National Drug

Control Policy attempted issue placement in a more intermediary capacity in 2000.

20

Poorly received by press and society when discovered, the ONDCP suffered a barrage of
poor publicity ﬁom their self-professed philanthropic efforts.

White House Oﬂice of National Drug Control Policy.

The ONDCP collaborated with six major broadcast networks to help convey anti-
drug messages. The White House office reviewed the scripts of many popular television
shows and made suggestions on at least two dozen programs. In exchange for production
cooperation, White House ofﬁcials conﬁrmed that the networks were ﬁeed ﬁ'om $22
million dollars in obligations for public-service advertising for two years. The freedom
of this airtime would allow the networks to sell this lucrative time to corporate
advertisers. The director of ONDCP, Alan Levitt, said the ofﬁce reviewed scripts to
ensure the programs were “on strategy or not” by portraying youth drug use negatively.
If this was accomplished, the networks were given credits enabling them to sell ad time
versus donating the time for public-service messages (Kurtz and Waxman, 2000).

Popular shows such as “ER,” “Chicago Hope,” “Beverly Hills 90210,” “7‘h
Heaven,” “Cosby,” and “General Hospital,” were given script assistance. A spokesman
for the drug control office, Robert Weiner, states that the advertising credits given for
primetime programming is “a very positive statement and has the proper message on
drugs and is accurate. There’s nothing wrong with that. They’ve given us positive
programs. If you’ve got a good, ‘ER,’ that’s certainly as important as an ad.” Many
outside of the government share the sentiments of nonproﬁt Media Access Project
president, Andrew Jay Schwartzrnann. He states, “the idea of the government attempting
to inﬂuence public opinion covertly is reprehensible beyond words. It’s one thing to

appropriate money to buy ads, another thing to spend the money to inﬂuence the public

21

subliminally” (Kurtz and Waxman, 2000). Government participation in the issue
placement process is a sensitive and complex topic.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Other government agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), however, have had extreme success with little to no controversy with
issue placement. The CDC has maintained a continued interest in promoting the accurate
depiction of health content in entertainment programming (Beck and Cody, 2003). The
CDC is a federal agency with the mission of prevention and control of disease within the
United States. With disease prevention and health promotion goals, their experts seek to
ensure accurate portrayal of health information in storylines for viewers. The CDC
works with Hollywood producers and writers to encourage these accurate depictions.
Their efforts are similar to those of advocacy organizations in Hollywood (Beck, 2004).

Although the term entertainment-education had yet been coined, its practices and
beneﬁts were quickly dispersing through academic and professional communities.
During 1993, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) established a task
force to explore the use of the entertainment industry to combat HIV/AIDS. The task
force was comprised of representatives from various CDC ofﬁces, public policy officials,
communication researchers, media industries, and “Hollywood lobbyists.” Led by a
visiting scientist at the CDC, Dr. Charles T. Salmon, the ﬁrst conference on
entertainment-education was convened in Atlanta, Ga. in February of 1994. The task
force established three primary topics for the conference agenda: 1) the review of
scientiﬁc evidence of media effects to establish the validity of entertainment-education,

2) public policy questions and concerns with regards to government inﬂuence in media

22

content, and 3) what type and level of involvement would be most effective and
acceptable, if the government were to get involved with the entertainment industry in the
manner.

The conference concluded that due to the imminent threat of HIV/AIDS to
society, there was not only a strong need, but a necessary mandate for the government to
use entertainment-education strategies to aid in awareness and prevention. In addition,
the conference was used as a springboard to establish a cooperative agreement with
University of Southern California’s (USC) Annenberg School of Communication,
Norman Lear Center. The agreement led to the creation of a program titled Hollywood,
Health, & Society, which seeks to assist Hollywood with information, storylines, etc. to
promote accurate health messages in entertainment content (Salmon, 1994).

In 1998, the CDC Directors Office of Communication established a pilot project
for health communication campaigns. The project’s mission was to educate Hollywood
producers and writers about public health topics. The mission was achieved by the CDC
by employing the same methods used by “Hollywood lobbyists:” providing materials to
the industry, tailoring their efforts to the entertainment industry’s needs, providing
technical assistance, convening conferences with public health experts and entertainment
industry writers and producers, creating online tip sheets for Hollywood access, and
creating entertaining and creative storylines. Because many non-medical and medical
daytime and primetime shows in the US. consistently produce public health storylines in
their programming, the CDC have health communication specialists to employ their

expertise with the writers/producers.

23

A" .SZI'TX-L'- u r...

 

The CDC has succeeded in implementing and assisting with health storylines over
the past decade including: Thirtysomething (cancer), mental health issues (LA Law), teen
alcohol and drug abuse (7th Heaven), diabetes (Y&R), safe sex (Dawson, Felicity),
violence against women (90210), skin cancer and sexually transmitted diseases (90210),
Chlamydia (Sex & the City), Hepatitis C (ER), HIV/AIDS (B&B, Chicago Hope), and
more (Beck, 2004). The CDC’s continued dedication to issue placement has resulted in a
cooperative agreement between the CDC and the USC Annenberg School for
Communication’s Norman Lear Center. The agreement created the Hollywood, Health &
Society program which increases the accuracy of health content in entertainment
programming storylines, in addition to the encouragement of health storylines in future
content (Summary Report, 2003). HH&S provides research and issue placement
expertise, maintains a Web site to promote services, hosts panel discussions on health
topics, and has formed an alliance with the Writers Guild of America (Beck, 2004). In
collaboration with the Soap Summit, HH&S established the Sentinel for Health Award
for Daytime Drarm in 2000 to recognize “exemplary accomplishments of daytime
dramas that inform, educate, and motivate viewers to live safer and healthier lives”
(Beck, 2004), for soap operas (www.entertainment.usc.edu/hhs.htm).

In addition to the CDC’s cooperative agreement with USC, they have also used
their ofﬁce of Smoking and Prevention to work with Hollywood. The CDC has sent a
representative of their OSP ofﬁce to Hollywood as an entertainment initiative. Working
in the advocacy organization, Media Scopes, Los Angeles ofﬁce, the CDC staffer often
partners with Hollywood executives, producers and writers to discuss tobacco depiction

in programming. The goal is to promote accurate depiction of tobacco use and health in

24

television and movies (Havard, 2003). It is evident that the CDC and other government
agencies share the sentiments of intermediary organizations; the entertainment industry is
an extremely powerful medium for inﬂuence and persuasion of society.
Entertainment Industry

Entertainment industry writers and producers, however, share mixed feelings on
their level of responsibility to use their power for good. Some scholars, such as Todd
Gitlin, have found that quality and ideology account for very little in the television
industry, in that the primary goal of television executives is to keep viewers coming back
(Gitlin, 2000). However, in a study conducted by Shields, Carol, Balbach, and McGee
(1999), some interviewees saw themselves as extremely responsible for trends in society,
including that toward smoking amongst teenagers. Many entertainment industry
interviewees took their responsibility seriously and wanted to improve the situation.
According to one industry employee, “we have to take matters into our own hands, as the
architects and custodians of pop culture, to really police ourselves” (Shields et al., 1999).

Throughout the development of issue placement as a common occurrence in
Hollywood, the television industry has been required to walk a tightrope between
advocacy groups with opposing views on representation on issues in programming (Atkin
and Wallack, 1990). Despite this conﬂict, the industry has developed the understanding
of entertainment programming’s agenda-setting capacity, and it’s ability to make the
public aware of important health issues. Although some health messages appear due to
the diligent efforts of advocacy organizations, many appear due writers and producers
looking for topic material. Television is inspired by news media, drawing program ideas

ﬁ'om news headlines. Blending fact and ﬁction, writers and producers ﬁ'equently seek

25

ideas and expertise on health storylines from outside sources, e.g., the CDC or EIC
(Atkin and Wallack, 1990).

Regardless of the source of topic inspiration, there appears to be a genuine desire
amongst producers and writers to depict accurate health information in its programming.
For decades, television and ﬁlm writers and producers have solicited aid ﬁom the CDC
and other government agencies to assist with storylines. Hollywood writers visit
agencies, interview researchers, and gain new show concepts ﬁ'om communicating with
experts (Beck, 2004). Although the inclusion of prosocial messages in entertainment
programming is not a typical American capitalist tradition, many inﬂuential media
corporations have begun taking their role seriously and using their persuasion power to
help society.

Although documentation of the development of issue placement relationships
exists, a theoretical framework of which to examine these relationships does not. Social
Exchange Theory (SET) can be used as a lens through which to study issue placement.
However, to critically examine issue placement using SET, an addendum must be
applied. Due to the business-to-business nature of SET, the interpersonal roots are rarely
recognized. Thus, the emotional undertones of the relationships are ﬁequently ignored.
As a result, when analyzing the exchanges between the parties in issue placement, the
emotional component in SET will be highlighted. The following section will discuss the
roots and development of SET.

Theoretical Framework
The roots of Social Exchange Theory (SET) lie in interpersonal communication.

SET theorists view interpersonal relationships as an economic exchange of resources

26

(Thibaut and Kelley, 1959). These resources range from friendship to trust. While there
are a variety of theories rooted in social psychology to explain these exchanges, most
SET theorists share several common principles (Thibaut and Kelley, 1959): the
continuity of relationships are seen as mutually proﬁtable; parties are compelled to
reciprocate rewards; exchanges are not limited to economic resources; and social
exchange is inherently subjective. Over time, scholars discovered that the principles of
SET could be used not only in explaining interpersonal relationships, but also to explicate
business-to-business relationships.

Social exchange theory has been a central theoretical ﬁamework in the
explanation of business-to-business marketing (Lambe, Wittman and Spekman, 2001).
With regard to the entertainment industry in particular, many scholars have become
intrigued with the exchange theory as a means of explanation for product placement.
With the exception of product placement, however, few scholars have investigated
exchange theory in respect to the relationships between the entertainment industry and
government and non-proﬁt agencies. Similar to the result of product placements, the
negotiated exchanges between these agencies produce issue placements and other non-
tangible rewards. This paper will examine the exchange processes between the
entertainment industry, government, and non-proﬁt agencies.

Exchange theory scholars have also become increasingly interested in the non-
contractual procedures that govern exchange processes between ﬁrms (Lambe et. a1,
2001; Dwyer, 1987). Due to the complexities of comprehensive contracts, non-
contractual methods of “governance” are critical to success of exchange (Goetz and

Scott, 1981). Early research utilized power and dependence concepts, emphasizing the

27

control one ﬁrm has over another, for explaining non-contractual governance in
Business-to-Business (BTB) exchange (Hunt, Ray and Wood, 1985). However,
limitations have been found with regards to the use of power to explain successﬁrl
exchanges due to conﬂict potential.

In time, transaction cost analysis (TCA) was used to explain BTB exchange
(Coase, 193 7). Based on research ﬁ'om institutional economics, TCA suggests that
exchange governance is motivated by frrms’ desires to manage opportunity costs of
exchange (Rindﬂeish and Heide, 1997). In TCA literature, these costs are referred to as
“transaction costs” (Williamson, 1975). Researchers have used TCA to assist in the
explanation of why ﬁrms select speciﬁc exchange relationships mechanisms based upon
the problems they face (Rindﬂeish and Heide, 1997). A primary premise of TCA asserts
that the risk of opportunistic partners limits the efﬁcacy of relational governance in
relationship exchange. However, some researchers have revealed that relational control
in the form of personal relationships and norms is frequently a successful way to govern
(Anderson and Narus, 1984). However, doubt has been cast on TCA relational exchange
due to its limited capacity to explain relationships in which partners develop relationship-
based governance over a period of time. Thus, many BTB research have become
increasingly drawn to SET.

The core mechanism of SET is the relationship contract, or relational
interdependence. For those who seek to use SET in the explication of BTB relational
exchange, three challenges are present. First, SET is not clearly articulated in BTB
marketing literature (Lambe et al., 2001). An inclusive examination of SET and its

components is lacking, although one may gain an overall sense of SET. Second, no

28

methodical assessment of limitations exists to explain SET in BTB exchange. Finally, no
signiﬁcant amount of current literature exists which organizes SET research to serve as
guidebook for those who desire to use SET to clarify BTB exchange governance (Lambe
et al., 2001).
Social Exchange Theory

Social Exchange Theory (SET) is perhaps one of the original theories of social
behavior (Homans, 195 8). SET has been deﬁned as any relations between individuals
resulting in an exchange of resources: tangible and intangible (Homans, 1958). The
primary foundation of SET revolves around the assumption that parties enter and sustain
relationships with the belief that rewards will be positive (Blau, 1968, Hormns, 1958).
Blau (1964) was one of the ﬁrst to use term “theory of social exchange” to conceptualize
“social interaction as an exchange process.” Often cited as noteworthy contributors to
SET, Thibaut and Kelley (1959) employed their theories to explain how parties in
exchange relationships weigh the beneﬁts of the relationships to determine their
commitment level. Emerson’s (1962) research on effects of dependence and power on
exchange relationships was his primary contribution to SET. He posits that power
disparities create relationship instability and, thus, interdependence is vital to continuity
of social exchange relationships.

SET scholars collectively proclaim a shared interest in the interdependence of
relationships between parties and the process of social behavior. The social
psychological theory suggests that exchange interactions involve social and/or economic
outcomes (Lambe et al., 2001). Each party will eventually evaluate and compare social

and economic beneﬁts ﬁ'om these interactions with those accessible from alternatives. As

29

a result of these comparisons, determination of relationship dependence is established.
Positive social and economic outcomes increase the trust and commitment of relationship
over time; thus, the relationship is maintained. In addition, positive exchanges over time
produce relational exchange norms that govern future interactions.

Three forms of social exchanges can occur, according to SET. These forms are
labeled as: direct, indirect, and productive (Molrn, 1995). Direct exchanges are deﬁned
as relationships in which parties are directly dependent upon one another. On the other
hand, indirect exchanges are categorized as those in which two parties may beneﬁt from
one another through a mutual third party. Productive exchanges are deﬁned as those in
which equally beneﬁcial results are created by contributions from both parties involved.
In this type of exchange, both parties can only beneﬁt if both cooperate. Thibaut and
Kelly (1978) used direct and indirect exchanges to understand reciprocity and cyclical
relationship in terms of both economical and interpersonal relationships.

The primary assertion of SET is that parties enter and maintain relationships with
the anticipation that the relationships will provide positive rewards (Lambe et al., 2001).

Lambe et a1. propose that there are four premises to understanding SET:

(1) Exchange interactions result in economic and social outcomes. Under this
premise, it is expected that ﬁrms will enter into new associations because of the
potential positive outcome. Although economic gain is frequently viewed as most
important, social rewards i.e., emotional satisfaction, spiritual values, pursuit of
personal advantage, and sharing humanitarian ideals are also valued, and in some
instances, more valued. Blau (1968) posits that the most signiﬁcant advantage

involved in social exchange does not have any material value on which an exact

30

price can be put, as exempliﬁed by social approval and deference. This assertion
in particular will prove very relevant to understanding negotiation tactics and
exchange between the entertainment, government and non-proﬁt industries
examined in this study. Social rewards are a ﬁequent result of many issue

placement exchanges.

(2) Social and economic outcomes are compared to alternatives. SET assumes
that parties will remain in their current relationships as long as satisfactory
rewards remain evident (Lambe et al., 2001). It is assumed that parties must use
valuable social and economic resources for the exchange; thus, these costs reduce
the beneﬁt of relationship as a whole. Although “satisfaction” will be relative to
each party, the satisfaction level must outweigh the reward potential from
alternative relationships in order for the current partnership to be maintained. As
long as outcomes exceed alternatives, each party will gain relationship
dependence due to greater rewards achieved in current versus alternative
situations. As a result of this dependence, maintenance of relationship will be
sought. With this in mind, the initial interaction between parties is essential in
determining future partnership trust and commitment. Furthermore, parties will
remain in relationships as long as positive rewards continue. As mentioned
earlier, these rewards may not necessarily be economic. In most issue placement
instances, no monetary beneﬁt will result. Thus, primary emphasis is placed on

emotional satisfaction, social responsibility, humanitarian ideals, etc.

31

(3 ) Positive outcomes over time increase trust and commitment. Trust is an
essential component of social exchange due to the non-contractual nature of the
agreement. The mutual reciprocation of positive rewards over time through
multiple exchanges creates trust. Trust, as a result, contributes extensively to the
commitment level of partners in the relationship (Blau, 1964). SET asserts that
trust building may begin with small transactions, and as rewards increase, more
valuable rewards must be given in return. Mutual commitment is essential
because it ensures effort by each party, and investments are made to ensure

production of equally advantageous outcomes.

(4 ) Positive outcomes over time produce relational exchange norms. Deﬁned as
unambiguous and/or tacit jointly established rules for behavior developed over
time, norms are signiﬁcant in SET because social exchange is extensively
governed by rules (Thibaut and Kelley, 1959; Homans, 1958). Norms are
mutually agreed upon means of exchange behavior without the complexities
created by use of power. Norms increase the eﬂicacy of relationships because
uncertainty is reduced by previously established agreements. With regards to
issue placement, norms are ever present. Common methods for relationships
between parties have been established and used continuously.

As indicated previously, SET was developed as an interpersonal communication theory.

Currently used to explain BTB exchange, emotion is not frequently acknowledged in the

SET model. Due to the nature of issue placement exchanges, emotion is an essential

aspect of SET. Concentrating on emotion when using SET as a lens to examine issue

32

placement, is critical. Thus, emotion will be discussed as a variable within SET for the
remainder of this paper.

It is often presumed that those self-interested parties involved in SET are
unemotional entities using only cognitive reasoning to make decisions concerning their
exchanges (Lawler and Thye, 1999). Lawler and Thye (1999), however, discuss how
emotion, in fact, is a relevant component of SET. Classic exchange theory literature
refers to various types of emotions (Thibaut & Kelly, 1959, Homans, 1961, Blau, 1964).
Examination of many exchange relations will demonstrate emotions pervading the social
exchange process (Lawler and Thye, 1999). Economic partnerships may thrive because
of the pleasure they produce, just as interpersonal relationships are often motivated by
strong affection. Exchange relationships may maintain a particular emotional
component, and generate certain measures and/or results when these emotions surface
(Hotschild, 1979). Exchange relations can cause involved parties to feel good, proud,
satisﬁed, etc. (Lawler and Yoon, 1996). Assessing emotions in relation to SET will
prove essential in evaluating the relationships between parties involved in issue
placement due to the non-monetary satisfaction derived from these exchanges.

Social Exchange Theory, Emotion, and Issue Placement

Lambe, Wittman, and Spekman (2001) suggest several factors to be considered
while examining social exchange relationships, including: (1) dependence; (2) trust; (3)
levels of commitment; (4) cooperation; (5) norms; (6) satisfaction, and (7) emotion.
Though not speciﬁcally listed as a factor in SET, emotion is a component already
contained within SET and will be focused on for the purpose of this study. All of these

factors are pertinent to issue placement:

33

(1) Dependence: Interdependence is perhaps the most common explanation for why
organizations enter ties with other organizations. Research suggests that
organizations enter relationships with other organizations as a means to alleviate
challenges posed by their environment (Gulati,l999). From the perspective of
issue placement, the entertainment industry may seek consultation, script
assistance, and/or resources from government or advocacy agencies. At the same
time, government or advocacy agencies may be seeking to have their
organizations’ agenda included in an entertainment program. These groups may
form an alliance as a means to serve their individual needs collectively.

(2) Trust: Trust has been deﬁned as the belief in the integrity and reliability of an
exchange partner (Morgan and Hunt, 1994), and the belief that a party’s word is
honorable (Blau, 1964). It has assumed that as positive outcomes between
exchanges increase, trust will increase. Due to the non-contractual and non-
monetary nature of issue placement, trust becomes an essential component in
these relationships. It must be assumed that with no contract, agreements between
parties will be upheld on good faith. Thus, relationships may initially begin
amongst parties who have previous interaction and/or third party references,
making interpersonal relationships a potentially vital component of exchange
relationships of this type.

(3) Commitment: Commitment level is generally inﬂuenced by the level of social
and/or economic reward received by the exchange relationship (Lambe et al.,
2001). Thus, higher levels of reward perceived by each party will predict the

level of commitment. In regards to issue placement, it is not easy to determine

34

commitment levels due to the level of autonomy available to the entertainment
industry when dealing with advocacy groups and some government agencies.
With the exception of instances where the entertainment entity approaches other
organizations for speciﬁc needs outside of reference material and consultations,
no guarantee of commitment must be made by the entertainment entity.

(4) Cooperation: Cooperative behaviors amongst the parties engaged in social
exchange will promote greater beneﬁts for the exchange partners. This
cooperation allows the development of synergistic rewards (Anderson and Narus,
1990), which will promote success of the exchange relationship (Morgan and
Hunt, 1994). Thus, as agencies seek to build relationships with the entertainment
industry, cooperation from both parties will yield future exchanges and
relationship development.

(5) Norms: Norms have become a critical component for continuity of exchange
relations between parties (Lambe et al., 2001). Many researchers have deﬁned
relational norms in BTB literature, however, a common theme remains constant
through all defmitions- norms are guidelines for interaction between the parties
which are generally accepted by all involved (Gundlach, Achrol and Mentzer,
1995; Heide and Jonn, 1992; Lusch and Brown, 1996; Macneil, 1980; Nevin,
1995). These norms serve as mechanisms for governing exchange relationships
(Blau, 1964). With regard to issue placement, norms may be formal (contracts
outlining the exchange agreements) or informal (good faith, verbal agreements)
ﬁom the development of the relationships to the outcome of the exchange

depending upon the agencies involved and type of exchange in question.

35

(6) Satisfaction: Although similar to cooperation, satisfaction is an essential
component to exchange relationships. Gaski and Nevin (1985) deﬁne satisfaction
as the overall level of approval of the arrangement. Satisfaction can also be
deﬁned as the level in which the exchange results meet the expectations of the
parties involved. Parties who believe that exchanges have met or exceeded their
expectation will be most likely to maintain and expand that relationship (Thibaut
and Kelly, 1959). As a result, satisfaction level is an important indicator in
determining the a) presence of issues, and b) technical assistance sought and used
in entertainment programming.

(7) Emotion: Under the Social Exchange Theory premise that exchange interactions
result in social outcomes, rewards such as emotional satisfaction may perhaps be
the most signiﬁcant advantage involved in exchanges (Blau, 1968). These
rewards, in many instances are valued more than economic gain. Kemper (1978)
deﬁnes these emotional rewards as positive or negative states that involve
neurophysio logical and cognitive elements. Lawler and Yoon (1993) consider
positive emotions in two facets: pleasure/satisfaction and interest/excitement.
Pleasure/satisfaction is deﬁned as “feeling gratiﬁed,” while interest/excitement is
deﬁned as “feeling energized” (Izard, 1977; Watson and Tellegren, 1985). In
exchange relations, pleasure/satisfaction is most important. Because SET has
established social reward as a signiﬁcant advantage in exchange relationships, it is
perhaps the feeling of gratiﬁcation which leads to this advantage. Assuming such

is an essential factor in understanding the motivations behind why entertainment

36

is an essential factor in understanding the motivations behind why entertainment
entities may enter into relationships with other agencies when no monetary value

is achieved.

Gulati and Gargiulo (1999) suggest that strategic alliances are a result of organizations
voluntarily cooperating to combine resources for mutual beneﬁt. The alliances are
created through a variety of arrangements. Social Exchange Theory with emotion as an
addendum was used as the theoretical framework to understand the various arrangements
created through the process of issue placement. By using the dimensions deﬁned in SET,
as well as those recognized during the interview process, a series of models were
developed based upon those created by Chang, et. al (2204) to demonstrate a thorough
examination of issue placement.
Research Questions

Through the combination of premises and theories such as interpersonal
relationships, appealing to emotion, and reciprocal exchanges, the following primary and
secondary research questions were asked:

RQI : What are the organizational processes and relationships which can lead

to issues being integrated into television programming and ﬁlms? How does

Social Exchange Theory explain these processes and relationships?

S1: What norms have developed though the exchange of services through the
agencies? The overall purpose of this research is to explore and evaluate the process of
issue placement in entertainment media. In order to accomplish this, the researcher must

be able to establish certain relational norms which have been created by these agencies.

37

SZ: How do agencies negotiate the exchange between themselves to achieve
mutual goals? By exploring the negotiation tactics used to create exchanges between
agencies, the level of commitment by each party may be assessed.

S3: How and why do agencies build and maintain relationships with other
agencies? The SET factor of dependence is addressed by answering this question.

RQZ: Does the element of emotion have an inﬂuence on the exchange between

agencies where no monetary exchange is involved?

S4: What motivations exist in the exchange between agencies? When discussing
social exchange relationships, especially when no monetary exchange exists, emotion
must be considered as a factor and a motivation. The personal relationships between
parties and altruistic acts of issue placement in many instances must be included and

seriously examined when examining social exchange relationships.

38

CHAPTER 2
METHODOLOGY

Participants

The goal of this exploratory study was to obtain a sample of those parties directly
involved in the process of issue placement in entertainment programming. A total of 20
executives or public affairs representatives ﬁom government, non-proﬁt, foundation,
public relations, or entertainment organizations were used as the sample for this
investigation. Agencies were purposefully targeted by dividing government agencies into
public health and public safety. Two agencies per division were identiﬁed; CDC and
ONDCP (public health), and FBI and DoD (public safety). Intermediary and
entertainment agencies were identiﬁed through the review of literature on issue
placement. Focal participants were selected through an on-line investigation of top
communication ofﬁcers within the targeted agencies. General contact numbers were
obtained and used to locate the appropriate individuals to request an interview. Several
participants were located from this method. During a conference on entertainment-
education in Santa Monica, CA in May of 2003, additional participants were approached
for a future interview date. Contacts maintained from this conference yielded additional
contact information for participants. Through email and phone communication,
interviews were scheduled in Los Angeles, CA and Washington, DC. during the summer
of 2003. During many interviews with focal participants, indigenous contacts were then
obtained. Lastly, following interviews, participants frequently referred other

colleagues for potential interviews. Through this selection process, the sample was

created.

39

Full cooperation and assistance was provided ﬁom the government and
intermediary representatives. Difficulty arose it attempts to locate and contact
entertainment industry representatives. This difficulty resulted in a lower number of
interviewees from entertainment organizations in comparison to government and
intermediary organizations. One participant, however, could account for representation
of two entertainment programs due to his extensive experience as a writer/producer on
two major prime-time television programs (Dr. Neal Baer, Law & Order SVU and
formerly, ER). Thus, the sample created is a microcosm of the agencies involved in the
issue placement process. Despite the vast amount of intermediary organizations involved
in issue placement, and additional amount of entertainment organizations which could
have been used in the sample, the representatives used are rmjor participants in the
process. Due to this fact, the results from this sample will serve as a representation of the
issue placement process.

The sample resulted as such: eight participants represented government agencies,
eight represented intermediary organizations (non-proﬁt/foundation/public relations),
three represented entertainment organizations, and one participant doubled as a
government and intermediary representative (CDC and Norman Lear Center). The
participant list contained the following representatives:

Government:
1) US. Department of Defense, Special Assistant for Entertainment Media
2) Federal Bureau of Investigations, Public Affairs Director

3) Central Intelligence Agency, Entertainment Industry Liaison

4O

4) White House Ofﬁce of National Drug Control Policy, former
Communications Director

5) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Director Hollywood, Health &
Society

6) United States Marine Corps, Motion Picture and T.V. Liaison

7) United States Air Force, Motion Picture and T.V. Liaison

8) Lieutenant Commander United States Navy, Navy Ofﬁce of Information,
West

9) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Ofﬁce of Smoking Prevention,
Entertainment Industry Liaison

Entertainment Industry:

10) MTV, Manager of Research and Planning

11) Law Order SVU, Executive Producer (former ER writer/producer)

12) Paramount Pictures Studios, Director of Publicity

Intermediaries:

13) Entertainment Industries Council, Snr. Vice President Program Services and
Government Relations

14) F leishman-Hillard, Managing Supervisor

15) Human Interaction Research Institute, Director

16) USC Annenberg School of Communication Norman Lear Center, Director
Hollywood, Health and Society

17) Media Sc0pe, President

18) The Media Project, Director

41

19) Kaiser Family Foundation, Entertainment Media Partnerships

20) Rogers & Associates

21) Michigan State University, Acting Dean of Communication Arts & Sciences
Procedures and Instrumentation

During the summer and fall of 2003, an open-ended interview protocol was
implemented to conduct face-to-face or phone interviews of the sample. F ace-to-face
interviews were conducted in Washington, DC. in July and October of 2003, and in Los
Angeles, CA in September of 2003. All face-to-face interviews took place in the ofﬁce
of the interviewee. Phone interviews were conducted in various locations at the
convenience of the interviewer. All interviews in-person or phone, were digitally tape
recorded for the use of the researcher, with consent of all interviewees. Consent forms
were signed and given to the interviewer or faxed to the university (APPENDIX A).

All interviews were conducted by myself, the primary researcher, following a 14-
question questionnaire (APPENDIX B-C) used as a guideline for the interview. Two
variations of the questionnaire were created to accurately address the differences in the
process for those in the entertainment industry versus those at govemment/intermediary
agencies. The questionnaire was created to ensure all research questions would be
addressed during the interview. The questions were created within the ﬁamework of
social exchange theory and emotion.

Central to RQl and S] is the notion of relational norms which was measured
through analyzing the cumulative responses to: who is contacted within the exchange
organization to implement messages (IQ4); what type of relationship has been established

with this agency (IQ8); and where the agency is established geographically (IQ9),

42

relational norms can be assessed and summarized. The focus of 82 and S3 are the SET
factors of commitment and dependence. These factors were measured through multiple
items. In order to identify the negotiation tactics and relationships between parties, the
following questions are addressed: (IQ6) how the agency approaches the entertainment
industry (or if they are approached, when interviewing a representative ﬁom the
entertainment industry), (IQ8) what type of relationship has been established with the
exchange party, e. g. asymmetrical/symmetrical, compensation, and (IQl 1) what has been
found to be the most effective negotiation tactic. By asking if agencies use entertainment
programming to communication their messages (IQ4), if they have established
representatives in close proximity to the entertainment industry (IQ9), and if they feel
issue placement is a beneﬁcial way to implement their messages (IQ12), it may seek to
explicate the level of dependence one party may have with another. This level of
dependence may deem relevant in analyzing the norms created in the exchange
relationships of the involved parties.

Central to RQ2 and S4 is the element of emotion. In order to assess the factor of
emotion in the process of issue placement, the following questions are asked: what have
you found to be the most effective methods in achieving you placement goals or why
have you used issue placement in your programming (IQl l), and do you feel issue
placement is a beneﬁcial way to implement your messages or do you feel issue placement
enhances your programming (IQ12).

In many instances, after the researcher explained the purpose of the interview,
many interviewees responded to the majority of the questions without much guidance

from the interviewer. Interviews lasted anywhere from 15-120 minutes, with the average

43

being 45 minutes. Additional follow-up questions were been asked via email during the
analysis process.
Data Collection and Treatment

Each tape-recorded interview was downloaded onto a laptop computer and stored
on a hard drive, ﬂoppy disk and compact disc. Upon completion of all interviews, two
undergraduate students transcribed the data. A speciﬁc protocol was given to the
transcribers. To account for non-verbals, transcribers were instructed to include all
pauses and noises. After transcription, the primary researcher retained all typed data and
compact discs. No research remained in possession of the transcribers. Because no
qualitative data analysis software was available, data was analyzed for themes manually
by the researcher.

I interpreted the data in two phases. I ﬁrst coded the data thematically based on
patterns that emerged from the interviews. After establishing my initial codes, I then
engaged in more focused coding to identify speciﬁcs in each of the identiﬁed processes.
The data was cataloged by color-coding the transcriptions where discussion of the various
processes occurred. 1 developed themes based upon these identiﬁed processes. After
arranging my data by subcodes, I then created titles for the processes identiﬁed.

The answers to each research question were identiﬁed in each interview and
logged for easier accessibility for the researcher. Major relationships between each
agency were identiﬁed in order to create charts (see ﬁgures) depicting the types of

relationships norms in the issue placement process.

CHAPTER 3
RESULTS

The method in which prosocial messages become included in entertainment
programming varies. However, the following research study resulted in the detection of
three primary processes. The following section will provide charts, explanations, and
examples of the issue placement process.
Heuristic Model for Issue Placement

An analysis of 19 interviews conducted amongst representatives ﬁom the
entertainment industry, government and non-proﬁt agencies, revealed individuals
between four major industries/organizations being responsible for issue placement in
entertainment programming: (1) intermediary agencies such as F leishmann—Hillard
Public Relations ﬁrm contracted for hire by government agencies to implement their
media campaigns; (2) advocacy groups such as Media Scope and Entertainment
Industries Council who continuously work with Hollywood to increase the
implementation and accurate portrayal of prosocial messages in programming, these
agencies are also frequently given government grants; (3) government agencies such as
the Department of Defense and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention work with
Hollywood directly or through intermediary agencies to communicate message; (4) and
entertainment firms and producers/writers such as Paramount Studios and Law & Order
SVU, who are frequently approached by intermediary agencies and/or seek assistance
from agencies to augment storylines to increase accuracy . Based upon the models
created by Chang et. al (2004), four models were developed to illustrate the issue

placement process.

45

FIGURE 1 ABOUT HERE

As Figure 1 displays, these four industries/organizations are not linked to one
another in a speciﬁc manner or process. Because issue placement occurs in various
manners, different parties play a role in some situations as opposed to others. Thus, in
terms of the heuristic model for issue placement, no directional lines are given to
explicate the relationships between the players. RQl asked what organizational
processes and relationships can create issue integration into television programming and
ﬁlms. The second part of R01 asks how Social Exchange Theory explains these
processes and relationships. 81 asks what norms have developed though the exchange of
services through the agencies. The answers to these questions are explained in detail in
the following sections.

Three Issue Placement Processes

Several variables and premises ﬁom Social Exchange Theory emerged ﬁom the
interviews conducted for this study. Regardless of the industry, many participants
relayed similar information with respect to the issue placement process. The three
processes in which prosocial messages may become embedded in entertainment
programming are acknowledged in this study as: (1) serendipitous; (2) opportunistic; and
(3) planned (Chang et. al, 2004). Each process is described and explained in the
following sections.

Serendipitous Issue Placement.

FIGURE 2 ABOUT HERE
Illustrated in Figure 2, serendipitous placements are those that occur by chance,

without prior effort of an agency, or those that occur without prior knowledge of the

46

agency whose message was conveyed. For example, if an episode of ER airs containing
a storyline about the sexually transmitted disease, syphilis, and no assistant or
consultation from any intermediary or government agency was given or sought, then
serendipitous placement as occurred by chance.

Opportunistic Issue Placement (OIP).

Opportunistic issue placements can be organized into two types. They answer 82
by addressing how agencies negotiate the exchange between their ﬁrms to achieve mutual
goals. Type I OIP ’s can be deﬁned as those placements which occur after initiation from
an intermediary or government agency. An example of a Type 1 OIP occurring without
prior knowledge would be when, for example, the Media Project holds roundtables for
writers and producers from the network WB and UPN, suggesting possible storylines and
expertise on teenage pregnancy. A few months after this roundtable, a Gilmore Girls
episode airs including a storyline with a teen girl dealing with pregnancy. In this
instance, it may be assumed that the roundtable held may have inspired the storyline.

S3 asks how and why agencies build and maintain relationships with other
agencies. Opportunistic issue placements create initial interactions which may produce
socially beneﬁcial outcomes leading to future partnerships. These issue placements
satisfy the ﬁrst premise SET by emphasizing the element stating that exchanges are not
necessarily for economic beneﬁt, but for social and professional relationships. When
intermediary and/or government agencies hold roundtables or conferences for
entertainment industry writers/producers, there is no contract binding the
writers/producers to any agreement to use the information or storylines suggested. These

events are held strictly to, a) provide valuable information for the writers/producers in the

47

instance they choose to include prosocial topics in their storylines and, b) build
potentially lasting relationships with key industry people in case they may be needed for
assistance in the future.

When discussing variables, SET posits that, because needs may be met ﬁom
opportunistic issue placement regardless of how it came about, dependence may
materialize. For example, despite the fact that the Media Project may not have been
alerted that their roundtable caused the writer to use a storyline suggested, the mission of
the Media Project was still met. If the show met no objections, the satisfaction achieved
ﬁom both parties may manifest itself into a relationship leading to future reciprocal
beneﬁts. The writer/producer may view the Media Project as a source for information
and consultation on future episodes, thus, creating a sense of dependence.

FIGURE 3 ABOUT HERE

Figure 3 illustrates the non-directional nature of Type 1 OIP’s. Because these
placements occur without prior knowledge or strictly by chance, there is no evidence of
direct or indirect exchange. Thus, the process is neither cyclical nor repetitive based on
this initial placement. These relationships will only continue in the event conditions were
satisfactory for both parties, according to SET. For example, it would be assumed that if
the Media Project and the writers/producers of Gilmore Girls both experienced positive
emotions from the episode on teen pregnancy, an interpersonal relationship will develop
in time.

I can see the process of opportunistic issue placement beginning through many
intermediary agencies such as Media Scope who states that,

Any new issue that we take up under a new grant or a new contract we reach out
to the entertainment industries through roundtables and small gatherings. . .small

48

gatherings of entertainment industry people through which we actively invite and
encourage them to participate. . .and whenever possible we go directly to them to
do a brieﬁng directly at a production site (Media Scope Interview, 2003).

We see similar responses from the Lear Center,

What we did initially was just get meetings with different shows and just go in
and talk about what the CDC was offering. Show them some of the tip sheets,
which suggested storyline topics. But we had a case example so that the writer
has a bit of an idea of how people are affected, who’s affected, what happens
when they are affected by a health issue and what can be done to treat it, or to
prevent it. . .met with ER I believe 3 times, met with West Wing once, met with
representatives ﬁom Guild and from some of the major studios once, and then we
started taking in other experts because the shows seemed to like the experts and
now that the program is based here, that’s really a strong effort we mostly take in
experts. Because the shows are willing to sit down and talk to us, but they’re
much happier to talk to somebody who knows the topic and can tell them stories.
They’re looking for stories (Lear Center Interview, 2003).

The methods depicted in these examples are found throughout all of the intermediary
agency interviews. They show a clear indication of the efforts to provide the
entertainment industry with facts, storylines, etc. to encourage them to include their
messages into programming. Another concrete example of how the intermediaries seek
to gain issues placed into entertainment content is evident ﬁom the Media Project,

We also couple times a year do larger scale writers brieﬁng. The last one was in
the spring at the Writer’s Guild. And then we will have a hundred and some odd
writers come and we will have a panel of teams and experts and we talk about
different issues that we hope will be of interest to writers the last one was on
growing up gay in America. We did one on being a boy, the pressures and
struggles of growing up a teen boy, we did one on sex ed. These are all an
opportunity for writers to hear ﬁom teens and talk to teens about the realities of
their lives (Media Project Interview, 2003).

The results of these efforts, however, are rarely told to the agencies prior to use, however,
they still maintain the requirements for opportunistic issue placements.

The general consensus from the interviews showed that Type 2 OIP ’s generally

originate on behalf of entertainment ﬁrms and/or writers/producers. Type 2 OIP’s are

49

those initiated by one party to another solely for their own beneﬁt, which may or may not
result in a mutually beneﬁcial exchange. For example, it is common practice for a movie
producer to approach the Department of Defense for script review and or technical
assistance. The producer may want anything from the use of a base to full script review,
an on—site consultant, and use of off-duty ofﬁcers as extras in the ﬁlm. The following
quote expresses the sentiments of the DoD in reference to what Hollywood needs ﬁom
the government:

What it is that Hollywood wants from us? Of course equipment technical

advice. . .access to installations and by installations that includes ships real

estate and if not for backgrounds like Pearl Harbor the ﬁlm would have not have
been made if they had not ﬁlmed at Ford Island the budget would have

gone so high they could not have rmde the picture... (Department of Defense

Interview, 2003).
The government will read the script and decide whether or not they are willing to assist.
In some instances they are willing to provide some assistance to ﬁll] assistance depending
upon how much the writer/producer is willing to amend their script for the appeasement
of the DoD. If the writer/producer is unwilling to sacriﬁce entertainment value for
accuracy, the DoD may generally opt out of any assistance. Depending upon how salient
it is to the writer/producer to gain DoD assistance, an agreement may or may not be met.
If the producer agrees to make script changes to ensure DoD cooperation, this type of
issue placement is deemed opportunistic.

FIGURE 4 ABOUT HERE
As demonstrated by ﬁgure 4, these types of issue placements are generally

initiated from the entertainment industry. In most instances regarding issue placement

with the Department of Defense, CIA or FBI, assistance is sought for a movie. An

50

interview with a representative from Paramount Studios explains why the entertainment
industry would be interested in approaching agencies for consultation:

[. . .]in the past I think 15 years audiences have become increasingly
sophisticated, and you can’t fool them...one of the elements that makes the movie
successful is its realism and its authenticity, so its important to get the facts right,
its important to present something in an accurate light. . .when we were working
on The Sum of All Fears Trace, we wanted the character Jack Ryan to be as real
as possible talked to a lot of CIA to make sure that his characters were
.. .(Paramount Studios Interview, 2003).

The following interview excerpts illustrate why the government desires cooperation with
the entertainment industry in regards to issue placement, and the limitations they place on
their cooperation:

[. . .]ﬁom them we want the opportunity to tell the public something about the
military that they may not know, or maybe they know and we want to reinforce,
or just keep our good will going by imagery that we think makes us look
realistic. ..if a picture comes along and its unrelentingly negative, I’m going to say
that’s not realistic its not my experience with the US military... now are there any
conditions or limitations, yes. . .(Department of Defense, 2003).

A similar, but varying opinion can be found when assessing the opinion of the CIA,
[. . .]the criteria for cooperating with a dramatic ﬁctional program is absolutely
subjective, and it is absolutely simple and straight foreword. It has to do with
whether or not they’re going to give us a fair and balanced portrayal. That
doesn’t mean that they can’t talk about Alder James or traitors like him. that
was the whole point of the Recruit ...well I didn’t say I’m not going to cooperate
with you because you’re sort of picking a scab off an old wound, its history that
happened we’re not trying to white wash but the rest of the movie was realistic
enough and showing the purposeﬁrl, patriotic meaningful mission in the agency
(CIA Interview, 2003).

It is evident that a realistic, yet patriotic portrayal of the government is generally an

essential element that must be depicted in a production to garner support from a

government agency. This support is essential for opportunistic issue placement to occur.

It is also evident from this research that in regards to public safety agencies, the primary

exchanges exist between agencies and ﬁlmmakers. In these relationships, the ﬁlm studio

51

initiates the exchange in order to solicit assistance. Contrarily, in the instances regarding
opportunistic issue placement with public health agencies (CDC) or intermediary
agencies, the assistance sought from the entertainment industry is generally for television
shows versus ﬁlm. These relationships are more clearly illustrated when analyzing the
comments from the executive producer of Law & Order (formerly from ER),

I found them [intermediary agency] and said here’s what I need. Kaiser started to
ﬂy in experts on PHV or needle exchange or whatever topics we were interested in
and they paid for it. And we would have a seminar and we would talk to different
experts. So that really started from ER, because there was a need. We burned
through so many stories, we wanted experts and we would have lunches where we
would have seminars and talk to these people (Law & Order Interview, 2003).

Similar sentiments can be seen with the Lear Center,

A typical call would be, Crossing Jordan might call up and say, we want the
character to be in a situation where A, B, and C will happen so we were thinking
about these diseases, and we want to speak to an expert to help us ﬁgure out how
that would all take place and if this is feasible. That’s a typical call (Lear Center
Interview, 2003).

Through these examples we see that it is common for a television producer to contact an
intermediary agency for consultation about a particular script concept, or for new script
ideas.

In more instances than not, opportunistic placements generally occur through
previously successﬁrl exchanges. Using SET as the foundation, opportunistic placements
have surpassed the initial introduction of the relationship (ﬁrst premise), both parties
have examined and compared successful alternatives (second premise), and these positive
exchanges have resulted in ﬁrture exchanges between the parties. The following example

from the DoD illustrates a positive outcome ﬁ'om an issue placement exchange

relationship:

52

Black Hawk Down has been fairly and widely appreciated as being a not only an
accurate picture, but one that thematically is very appropriate to the times. I’ve
also had a lot of positive feedback about We Were Soldiers; how it was a long
over due portrayal of the military during the Vietnam War (Department of
Defense Interview, 2003).
This example of a satisfactory, positive outcome whether ﬁom media content or other
intangible rewards, have given each party the opportunity to demonstrate each other’s
willingness to cooperate, ability to commit, and level of trustworthiness. The existence
and demonstration of these three essential SET variables, lead to the assumption that trust
and commitment will increase from each positive exchange. This development of trust
and commitment will lead to further cooperation ﬁom both parties. In the instance of the
entertainment industry and the DoD, this may prove invaluable. As relationships develop
between particular writers/producers and the DoD, more cooperative agreements on
script changes and assistance given may occur with time. Both parties may be willing to
sacriﬁce more in order to reach a compromise due to the interpersonal relationships that
have developed over the exchanges. Thus, the frequency of opportunistic issue
placements may allow for the DoD to garner more script assistance resulting in a more
positive depiction of the military in society, while the writer/producer will perhaps gain
more access to DoD facilities and a more accurate ﬁlm.

Figure 4 clearly demonstrates the direct exchange relationship between the
entertainment industry and the government agency. This direct relationship is most
evident in the exchanges between the entertainment industry and the DoD. In no other
relationships does this level of exclusive dependence exist. If the writer/producer does

not agree to the script amendments required by the DoD, no assistance is given The

writer/producer may still go on with his production, but without the assistance sought. In

53

other relationships, the writer/producer may approach, for example, the CDC for access
to health experts for a storyline on Hepatitis C. The CDC will be more than obliged to
provide the assistance due to the beneﬁt of its mission. The writer/producer will accept
the assistance in order to produce a more accurate script. The writer/producer may use
part, all, or none of the advice/consultation given by the CDC expert. Because the same
level of dependence on behalf of the writer/producer does not exist, the level of direct
exchange is not equivalent. Regardless, all opportunistic issue placements are to some
degree, direct exchange relationships. Opportunistic issue placements are becoming the
most frequent type of issue placement process, perhaps because of the longstanding
relationships between agencies.

Planned Issue Placement.

Planned issue placements are said to have occurred when previous agreement
exists between an entertainment ﬁrm/writer/producer and internmdiary or government
agency. For example, if a studio or show has an exclusive agreement with a particular
agency to include their prosocial message or agenda in their programming. These
agreements are rare in the instance of issue placement due to the nature of the
relationships. Rarely can a television series agree to such a type of agreement
continuously as a condition of the amount of shows produced. In reference to movies,
scripts are generally written before production assistance is ever sought. However,
planned issue placements have occurred recently in entertainment media. Based on
successful ﬁrst, second, and third SET premises, issue placements are identiﬁed as
planned when the fourth premise of SET is achieved. The fourth SET premise asserts

that norms result from a series of positive exchanges which govern the relationship.

54

Thus, the process of planned placements is indicative of the norms that have been built

based upon positive outcomes from previous exchanges between the parties.

FIGURE 5 ABOUT HERE

Planned issue placements are formal, contractual agreements very rare to issue
placement. They are representative of an official relationship between an agency and an
entertainment ﬁrm. The most recent example of a planned issue placement is that which
occurred in early 2003. During that time, Viacom, one of the largest media
conglomerates in the world, joined forces with the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation to
launch a global media campaign to combat HIV/AIDS. The Kaiser Family Foundation is
a leader in health research and information. The collaboration resulted in HIV/AIDS
themes in all of Viacom’s broadcast and cable networks (CBS, UPN, Showtime, MTV,
and others). Shows that included HIV/ AIDS awareness storylines were: Becker, The
District, Enterprise, Girlfriends, Half & Half, One on One, The Parkers, Presidio Med,
and Queer as Folk. MTV, BET, Showtime and Nickelodeon aired special IHV/AIDS
prevention programming throughout the year.

Contracts resulting from planned issue placements are negotiated by both parties
generally allowing for creative freedom on behalf of the writers/producers. These
negotiated acts of cooperation may produce higher levels trust and commitment to the
agreement than those of more formal binding business contracts (Molm, Takahashi and
Peterson, 2000). Because both parties involved in the agreement beneﬁt, higher levels of

trust and stronger feelings of commitment and attachment are produced (Molrn et al.,

55

2000). These types of exchanges will almost certainly promote future planned issue
placements between these parties.

When we examine SET variables present in planned placements, we must
distinguish dependence differently than in serendipitous issue placements. In
serendipitous placements, the entertainment representative is not currently dependent
upon the intermediary agency for anything. The dependency may or may not occur
unless a positive outcome is derived from the exchange. However, in planned
placements, the dependency is established prior to any outcome. In the example above,
the writers/producers of the Viacom shows and Kaiser Family Foundation are both
dependent upon one another for the success of the exchange contract. The
writers/producers will use Kaiser’s resources for any HIV/AIDS expertise needed for
script authenticity, while Kaiser is dependent upon the writers/producers to include the
storylines accurately in their programs. If this level of dependence is not present, there
remains no necessity for a planned placement.

When examining the process of SET, planned placements appear to be a natural
progression. After satisfying the ﬁrst three premises of SET, norms such as planned
placements will become established between the parties. Exchange relationships in
planned placements may be deﬁned as direct, indirect, and productive. An indirect
relationship may be identiﬁed if an intermediary agency were to be involved. For
example, in the instance where the agreement with Viacom were with the White House
Ofﬁce of National Drug Control Policy and Rogers & Associates PR ﬁrm was contracted

to facilitate the mission of ONDCP, this would be an indirect relationship.

56

The results of planned placements are not generally known until particular
episodes of shows air due to the creative control maintained by the entertainment entity.
However, at this stage of the exchange relationship, it is assumed that enough trust and
commitment has been established between the parties to predict a favorable outcome for
both.

The Value of Emotion and Interpersonal Relationships in Issue Placement

RQ2 addresses how the element of emotion has an inﬂuence on the exchange
between agencies where no monetary exchange is involved, while S4 asks what
motivations exist in the exchange between agencies. To answer these questions, we
must go back to the roots of SET. SET was founded in interpersonal theory.
Interpersonal relationships rarely develop without emotional attachment. Thus, these two
elements are essential to consider when examining issue placement processes.
Throughout many interviews these two themes reoccurred, especially when discussing
how agencies build relationships with Hollywood, and tactics used to implement
prosocial messages in their programming. Evidence of the need for interpersonal
relationships and emotional appeal (e.g., drama, sympathy, ego) to achieve their goals is
indicative throughout the majority of the interviews with intermediary agencies. Rogers
& Associates illustrates an example of the use of emotional appeal,

So what seems to be what people ﬁnd the most compelling, and what makes them
keep coming back are the real stories that they hear. . .what really gets their
attention is the stories because they are after all writing dramas, so we try to make
sure that we always have some. . .(Rogers & Associates Interview, 2003).

The importance of interpersonal relationships is demonstrated ﬁom the Media Project,

A lot of it has to do with personal relationships... a lot of the shows that we work
with have writers and producers that we have worked with before so that’s very

57

easy. And we work with them in a variety of ways from, a lot of individual show
meetings. . .(Media Project, 2003).

Similar responses were seen from the CDC’s Ofﬁce of Smoking and Prevention
entertainment representative,

[. . .]he’s the producer, my friend. . .And he’s very good about introducing me to,
and helping me build those relationships that are key. Because the other thing
that I will have to say is that if you want to work with Hollywood, it’s really
important to be here physically. You have to be able to mingle, you have to be
able to network, you have to be able to be ﬂexible. . .it’s all about relationship
building and trust. . .they want to feel like you know you get what they’re doing
and respect what they’re doing, but at the same time, more often than not, they do
care about your issue. It’s just in how it’s presented to them (CDC-OSP
Interview, 2003).
As identiﬁed in these interviews, appeal to emotion and interpersonal relationships are
key elements in addition to the fundamental premises and variables of SET. The results
of this research suggest that many relationships and exchanges would not occur unless
personal relationships were developed and utilized. The emotions and trust created from
personal relationships are essential when dealing with Hollywood. In addition, it
suggests that appeal to emotion is a critical component initiating the ﬁrst premise of SET.
Due to the lack of economic beneﬁt the entertainment industry will receive ﬁom many
issue placements, emotional appeal becomes a necessary strategy to gain any initial
exchange. Positive outcomes yielded from these initial exchanges will then, hopefully,
prompt relationships.
Government and Issue Placement

During the interview process, regardless of whether or not the interviewee was a

government representative, the government was ﬁequently mentioned as a source of

funding and/or partnership for the organization. Examples of intermediary agencies

58

relationships with the government, and/or government agencies relationships with other
agencies or media are evident through Media Scope,

Funding is from the two usual channels, and that is ﬁom foundations and
government contracts. . .with government agencies, it has been primarily the
Ofﬁce of National Drug Control Policy which has a major national campaign, and
then we also have relationships with the Administration for Children and Families
which is under Health and Human Services (Media Scope Interview, 2003).

In addition to Media Scope, the Media Project and EIC are also funded by government
agencies. The Media Project is primarily funded by Advocates for Youth, which is a
nonproﬁt organization who receives government grants. EIC is partially funded by
NIDA, which is an institute of the National Institutes of Health.

After this pattern of government ﬁrnding was identiﬁed during the interviews,
particular government representatives were asked to comment on the criticism the
government receives concerning their involvement in entertainment programming. Most
respondents stated that they felt there was a ﬁne line that must be acknowledged between
public affairs and propaganda. The Air Force and Rogers & Associates have explicit
comments on this issue,

Coca Cola wouldn’t drum up their own stories on how the company is. . .having
problems, they’d want to show more of a positive on how the company is trying
to ﬁx some of these problems and that’s the same thing that we would do. ..(Air
Force Interview, 2003).

One of the challenges of being the federal government is sort of going and
knocking on producers and writers doors and saying, ‘hey you should be writing
more about drugs,’ ...irnagine you’re a TV writer or a producer and the drug
czar’s ofﬁce knocks on your door and says, ‘hey I think you should be writing
more scripts about drugs and here’s the information,’ you’re just not going to
react well, it could come across as the government trying to strong arm you

putting messaging in your shows for their purposes that you may not agree
...(Rogers & Associates Interview, 2003).

59

Through these and other examples, evidence was shown that the government has a heavy
inﬂuence in the process of issue placement. Whether disseminating its messages directly
to the entertainment industry (e.g., the CDC), contracting the work to intermediary
agencies (e. g., the ONDCP contracting to Fleishmann-Hillard), or funding (grants)
advocacy groups (e.g., Entertainment Industries Council, Media Scope, the Media
Project), the government plays a role in the inclusion of prosocial messages in
entertainment content.

As stated above in the Rogers & Associates excerpt, many government agencies
are aware of their intimidating presence, which is continuously subject to scrutiny. No
government agencies employ the strategy of “strong arming” their way into Hollywood.
Thus, the “Hollywood lobbyists” tactics of cooperation versus conﬁontation are
frequently used. In addition, the use of intermediary agencies becomes a vital strategy
for message dissemination to avoid federal investigation/regulation, and public scrutiny.
Due to constitutional ambiguity concerning the commercial speech regulation and
whether or not issue placement is protected, it is more strategically sound for the
government to work as indirectly as possible to communicate its messages.

It must be noted that during the interview process, no interviewees, regardless of
industry, expressed any negative feelings toward government involvement in issue
placement. This is perhaps due to the prosocial nature of many of the messages issue
placement advocates seek to implement in programming. This opinion may also manifest
itself from the knowledge that non-governmental agencies rely on grants for their
existence. Thus, to question the motives of ﬁmding sources may be deemed detrimental

to the existence of the organization. However, throughout years much public criticism

60

and concern has been published over the issue of govermnent interference in the
depiction of the military in the media. Public safety representatives in this study
combated these criticisms by defending their right to promote a positive image of their
work just as a corporation would have the ability to promote and market itself or its

product in a positive light as well.

61

CHAPTER 4
SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

Three primary groups are responsible for social messages becoming embedded in
entertainment programming: government agencies, intermediary agencies, and
entertainment agencies. This study examined the relationships between these groups
through interviews with representatives from various agencies. The research resulted in
the development of three processes based upon those created by Chang et. a1 (2004) for
which to explain issue placement: serendipitous, opportunistic, and planned.
Serendipitous issue placement is deﬁned as those placements that occur by chance,
without any prior knowledge of the agency whose message was implemented in to
programming. Opportunistic issue placements, contrarily, are those that are initiated by
one party for self-beneﬁt. These efforts may or may not result in a mutually beneﬁcial
exchange. Lastly, planned issue placements are those which occur as a result of a
solidiﬁed agreement between an entertainment ﬁrm and an intermediary or government
agency.

Through the examination of the interview comments collected for this study, it
becomes evident that there is a critical need for interpersonal relationships to be
developed following post-serendipitous issue placements. Due to the non-monetary
nature of issue placements, excluding the defense department, there is no economically
motivating factor for the entertainment industry to participate. Appealing to the altruistic
nature of writers/producers through personal relationships appears to be the most
successful means of gaining issue placements by “Hollywood lobbyists” and public

health organizations.

62

It has become apparent, through the successful efforts of these organizations, that
the entertainment industry is not the strictly capitalistic, “entertain at any cost,” entity that
many assume it to be. The successful inclusions of hundreds of prosocial messages in
entertainment content prove these previous assumptions to be untrue. One may assert
that the apparent philanthropic actions of writers/producers have been mistaken for the
simple use of a dramatic storyline. However, opportunistic and planned placements
would prove otherwise. The desire to provide accurate information assumes a level of
accountability and responsibility not indicative of egocentric motives. Though true
motives may not be evident ﬁom this study, one may question whether or not motive is
relevant. If positive outcomes are achieved through the exchanges for both parties,
Social Exchange Theory deems the exchange successful, thus, prompting future
interaction. Therefore, the exchanges resulting in issue placements, not motives, are
signiﬁcant to the agencies seeking inclusions in programming.

With regard to opportunistic issue placements between the entertainment industry
and public safety agencies, it may be concluded that more self-interested motives are
present on behalf of both parties. Though still maintaining the premises and variables of
SET, these types of exchanges differ from those of advocacy and public health agencies
with regard to dependence and cooperation. It is imperative that both parties must
cooperate with one another in order to reach a positive outcome from the exchange.
Although the entertainment industry does not need government approval to proceed with
production, if the government representative opts out of participation due to negative
portrayal, the entertainment industry will not gain the technical and/or any other

assistance initially sought. Thus, neither party will gain satisfaction; the entertainment

63

industry does not receive assistance, and the government will endure a negative portrayal
in entertainment media. It serves both parties to reach a satisfactory level of compromise.
This level of dependence is not evident in other issue placement processes. It must be
noted that this is one of the few issue placement processes in which the government
directly barters with the entertainment industry.
Ethical Considerations

Although it does not raise constitutional issues, government ﬁmding issue
placement poses certain ethical and social questions. Government constructed health and
safety messages reinforce selective social norms and communicate the government’s
stance on what is “right” for society (Gostin and Javitt, 2001). Thus, government
intervention in health and safety education does more than communicate information; it
attempts to modify and inﬂuence social behavior. A particularly disconcerting ethical
question arises when addressing the issue of the government constructing social norms
without disclosing to the public its efforts to do so. A prime example is the previously
mentioned January 2000 scandal. The principal communication effort on behalf of the
Clinton Administration was the “War on Drugs.” The government’s drug czar, General
Barry McCaffrey, presented television networks substantial ﬁnancial inducements to
incorporate anti-drug messages in their programming. Networks were required to submit
scripts to the White House’s Office of National Drug Policy before airing each show.
Television viewers, however, were never informed that scripts had been screened by
federal ofﬁcials or that content had been altered (Kettle and Campbell, 2000). Not all
government agencies, however, need go to such potentially damaging extremes to

achieve their communication goals.

64

For example, the CDC and ONDCP both were government agencies establishing
a relationship with Hollywood, the dissimilar approaches led to very different results. The
CDC has ﬂourished in its efforts to build a meaningful relationship with Hollywood to
disseminate its health messages into entertainment programming. The development of
programs such as those at USC is evidence of such. However, the ONDCP greatly
changed its methods due to the negative backlash of its tactics. Those who agreed with
the motive behind the ONDCP’s health objectives opposed the use of ﬁnancial incentives
and secrecy of involvement. One editorial declared, “In allowing government to shape or
even to be consulted on content. . .the networks are crossing a dangerous line they should
not cross. On the far side of that line lies the possibility of censorship and state-
sponsored propagan ” (New York Times, 2000). These sentiments were shared by
many, spawning a media ﬁenzy concerning the acts of the ONDCP.

Another potentially negative effect of government inﬂuence may arise when
discussing social norm construction. In an effort to portray certain behaviors as superior,
other behaviors and lifestyles must be portrayed as atypical or inappropriate. Most
effective health campaigns often succeed by associating “bad” behaviors with
unappealing characteristics (e.g., smokers develop wrinkles, indulgence in high-fat foods
leads to obesity). These messages can lead to psychological harm and concrete
disadvantages (e.g. social ostracism, employment discrimination) in addition to
promoting social discrimination and denunciation (Salmon, 2001).

Government communication has the ability to advance knowledge and truth by
informing the public and reversing incorrect assumptions about health and safety issues.

However, when the communication intentions are to control ideas and behaviors, one

65

must worry when the government conceals its efforts to abuse this position. If the
government hides its intentions so that the public is unaware of its actions, this act of
hiding poses serious concerns. Academics and skeptics such as Jonathan Turley, a law
professor, assert that the Pentagon has an extended and sordid past for propaganda
efforts. It has been previously thought that the Pentagon has been consistently hard at
work participating in a number of movies that will disseminate its messages on the
legitimacy of war. Turley states that major feature ﬁlms have been rewritten to remove
negative yet “historically accurate” facts in order to portray a positive military image to
society. Turley further alleges that the military and other intelligence sources ﬁamed an
account of Pfc. Jessica Lynch to manufacture public appeal (Turley, 2003).

Failure to disclose information concerning its intentions and methodologies
breaches the fundamental agreement of honesty between the government and its citizens.
When unperceived information is revealed, society may cast doubt on the messages
communicated and on future government communication (Gostin and Javitt, 2001). The
government should be held to equal ethical standards that are parallel with commercial
sectors.

Regardless of the type of issue placement process in discussion, there are many
potential implications of these relationships. Those critical of the process may not feel as
though the government should maintain any involvement in entertainment media content.
The concept of the government funding many organizations as a means to facilitate its
communication messages may not be deemed ethical. On the contrary, some may feel as
though issue placement is a necessary practice in order to ensure responsibility of the

entertainment industry. Many view the entertainment industry as a purveyor of socially

66

immoral messages. The idea of the government and/or intermediary organizations
lobbying to the entertainment industry to include prosocial messages in programming
may be viewed as critical versus controversial. Despite the positive or negative

implications of issue placement, this study seeks only to present the processes.

67

CHAPTER 5
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
One primary limitation was present in the study. The limitation pertains to the

entertainment industry sample. Only three people were located and willing to participate
in this study. This number does not provide the same representation as those in
government and intermediary agencies. In addition, due to the breadth of the
entertainment industry, a more expansive list of representatives must be obtained for a
more thorough sample. The entertainment industry is divided between writers,
producers, executives, etc. Each of these positions represent a different aspect of the
issue placement process. Differing motivations may exist between the positions with
regard to what type of relationships may exist with government and intermediary
agencies. With this in mind, a more expansive sample would provide more depth and
breadth in understanding the entertainment industries role in issue placement. However,
this study may be used to aid in future research concerning this topic.

Future research should be conducted with regard to public opinion and issue
placement. Due to the potentially controversial nature of government involvement in
media content, public attitudes on issue placement should be assessed. In addition, a
study should be conducted investigating whether or not messages government agencies
seek to have implemented in entertainment content frequently make their way into
programming. It should then be studied whether or not these messages in entertainment
programming are then seen in Congress as new policy issues. This research should be

used as a foundation for which to build upon for continued research of any manner.

68

APPENDICES

69

 

APPENDIX A- “Consent Form”

Evaluating Relationships Between the Entertainment Industry
and Government and Non-Proﬁt Agencies

You are being interviewed for the purpose of analyzing the portrayals of social issues in
popular media and how these portrayals come about. The interview should take about
30-45 minutes and will be tape recorded. This interview is intended to help me better
understand the relationships between government agencies, non-proﬁt agencies, and the
entertainment industry. The information collected from the interview will be used in a
master’s thesis and submitted for publication. The research conducted for this study is
strictly exploratory, to be used in an effort to gain a more thorough understanding of the
practice of entertainment-education.

This is a voluntary interview; you may choose to not participate or to discontinue your
participation at any time. You may also choose to not respond to speciﬁc questions.

In indicating your permission to participate in this interview, you indicate your
acceptance of all recorded information to be used in the ﬁnal report.

If you have questions or comments regarding this study, please contact Monica Beckham,
master’s degree student in public relations at Michigan State University at 517-381-5179
(beckhamm@msu.edu) or Dr. Charles Salmon, Senior Associate Dean, Department of
Advertising at Michigan State University at salmon@msu.edu .

 

If you have any questions or concerns regarding your rights as a study participant, or are
dissatisﬁed at any time with any aspect of this study, you may contact- anonymously, if
you wish-- Ashir Kumar, M.D., Chair of the University Committee on Research
Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS) by phone at 517-355-2180, fax at 432-4503, email
at ucrihs@msu.edu or regular mail at 202 Olds Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824.

 

Your signature below indicates your voluntary permission to participate in this study.

 

Printed Name

 

Signature

70

APPENDIX B- “Questionnaire for Entertainment Industry”
1. Name, job title, and job description
2. Brief summary of company/organization mission/purpose
3. What is your role in your organization/company?

4. What are your communication objectives/mission?

5. In your organization, do you implement or assist in the implementation of social
messages into entertainment programming content?
6. Are you approached by agencies to implement these messages, do you seek counsel
from outside sources, or do you seek placement of messages?
a. What outside sources do you contact for information?
7. How do you select which messages you seek to place into programming?

8. What type of relationship do you have with agencies seeking placement of social
issues in your programming? Or, what type of relationship do they have with
you?

a Reciprocal?
b. What is the trade-off? Compensation?

9. How do you feel these relationships beneﬁt your organization and/or programming?

10. Do you feel entertainment-education/issue placement is a beneﬁcial way to educate
audiences? Why?

1 1. What type of issues have been placed in your programming? And where?
a. TV? Movies?

12. Have you seen results ﬁom message implementation?

a. What type of results?
b. How are results tracked?

71

APPENDIX C- “Questionnaire for Government and Non-Proﬁt Agencies”

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

Name, job title, job description
What is the mission/goal of your organization?
What are your communication objectives?

Other than advertising, do you use popular media to implement your
communication objectives?

How do you select which media you will use to convey your messages?

Do you approach the entertainment industry, or are you approached to
implement/consult your messages into the media?
a. Proactive/reactive relationship?

Who do you contact within the industry?
a. Agencies, producers, writers, corporations, directors, etc?

What type of relationship do you have with the entertainment industry?
a. Reciprocal? What is the trade-off/compensation?
b. Asymmetrical/symmetrical, 2-way, l—way?
How have you set up your communication department in relation to the
entertainment industry?
a. LA. ofﬁce?
b. One representative, multiple representatives?

How do you feel these relationships beneﬁt your communication objectives?

Do you feel issue placement/product placement is a beneﬁcial way to implement
your messages? Why?

What type of media have you used to place your messages?
a. TV shows? Films?
b. Most/least successﬁrl?
c. Track success?

Have you seen results from your message implementation?

Problems? Issues?

72

FIGURE 1 — “Heuristic Model for Issue Placement”

 

 

[menalnrnern Industry

 

 

 

 

Government Agencies

 

 

ISSUE
PLACEMENT

 

 

Advocacy Groups

 

 

 

Independerl Agencies

 

 

73

 

FIGURE 2- “Serendipitous Model for Issue Placement”

 

Erlertainrneu Industry l

 

 

 

ISSUE
Government Agencies PLACEMENT Advocacy Grows

 

 

 

Independerl Agencies

 

74

 

FIGURE 3- “Opportunistic Model for Issue Placement”
Type]

.1 tantalum Industry .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

# I ...é .
Government Agencies ISSUE Advoca Groups
’ PLACEMENT 0'
Independent Agencies
Type 2
.- Entertainmem Industry ‘.
...... I \
AL... ’ .....
l
Govenunent Agencies : 1,42%?! IENT Advocacy Groups
* I ‘
\ \ ‘
\ \ \
x
\
Independerl Agencies

 

 

75

FIGURE 4- “Planned Model for Issue Placement”

 

Advocacy Groups

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Independem Agencies

 

 

 

76

REFERENCES

77

REFERENCES

Anderson, J .C. & Narus, J.A. (1990). A Model of Distributor Firm and Manufacturer
Firm Working Partnerships. Journal of Marketing, 54(January), 42-58.

Atkin, C. & Wallack, L. (Eds). (1990). Mass Communication and Public Health.
Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Bayer, R., Gostin, L.O., & McGraw, DC. (1995). Trades, AIDS, and the Public’s Health:
The Limits of Economic Analysis. Georgetown Law Journal, 83, 79-107.

Beck, V. (2004). Working With Daytime and Prime-Time Television Shows in the
United States to Promote Health. In A. Singhal, M.J. Cody, E.M. Rogers, & M.
Sabido (Eds), Entertainment-Education and Social Change (pp. 207-222).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Beck, V., Cody, M. (2003, May). Developing a Research Agenda for Entertainment
Education and Multicultural Audiences. Summary Report from conference by The
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hollywood Health & Society, and
USC Annenberg Norman Lear Center. Santa Monica, California: USC.

Blau, P.M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.

Blau, P.M. (1968). Interaction: Social Exchange. International Encyclopedia of the
Social Sciences, 7, 452-458.

Chang, 8., Salmon, C.T., & Newell, J. (2004). Product Placement in Entertainment
Media: Proposing Business Process Models. International Communication
Association. May 27-31. New Orleans, LA.

Coase, RH. (1937). The Nature of the Firm. Economica, 41(6), 386-405.

US. Department of Defense. (1988, January 26). DoD Assistant to Non-Govemment,
Entertainment-Oriented Motion Picture, Television, and Video Production.

(Department of Defense INSTRUCTION No. 5410.16).

Down, J. (2003). The Song Machine. Retrieved June, 11, 2003, ﬁom
http://wwwopendemocracL net/ debates/article- l-67-3 69 4°ng

Dwyer, R.F., Schurr, P.H., Sejo, O. (1987). Developing Buyer-Seller Relationships.
Journal of Marketing, 51(April), 11-27.

Emerson, RM. (1962). Power-Dependence Relations. American Sociological Review,
27(February), 31-41.

78

Gaski, J.F. & Nevin, JR. (1985). The Differential Effects of Exercised and Unexercised
Power Sources in a Marketing Channel. Journal of Marketing Research, 22(May),
130-142.

Gitlin, T. (2000). Inside Prime Time. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.

Goetz, C.J., & Scott, RE. (1981). Principles of Relational Contract. Virginia Law
Review, 67(September), 1089-1 150.

Gostin, L.O. & Javitt, G.H. (2001). Health Promotion and the First Amendment:
Government Control of the Informational Environment. The Milbank Quarterly,
79(4), 547-576.

Greenberg, B., Salmon, C., Patel, D., Beck, V., & Cole, G. (2004). In M. Cody, M.
Sabido, A. Singhal & E. Rogers (Eds). Entertainment-Education and Social
Change (pp. 192-204). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Gulati, R. (1999). Network Location and Learning: The Inﬂuence of Network Resources
and Firm Capabilities on Alliance Formation. Strategic Management Journal.

Gulati, R. & Gargiulo, M. (1999). Where Do Interorganizational Networks Come From?
American Journal of Sociology, 104(5), 1439-1493.

Gundlach, G.T., Ravi, S.A., & Mentzer, IT (1995). The Structure of Commitment in
Exchange. Journal of Marketing, 59(January), 78-92.

Havard, M. (2003, October). Progress Report: Entertainment Initiative. For The Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention: Ofﬁce of Smoking and Health.

Heide, J .B. & John, G. (1992). Do Norms Matter in Marketing Relationships? Journal of
Marketing, 56(April), 32-44.

Hochschild, AR. (1979). Emotion Work, Feeling Rules, and Social Structure. American
Journal of Sociology, 85(3), 551-575.

Homans, G.C. (1958). Social Behavior as Exchange. American Journal of Sociology,
63(May)e 597-606.

Homans, G.C. (1961). Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),
Advancements in Experimental Social Psychology (203-253). New York:
Academic.

Hunt, S.D., Ray, N.M., & Wood, V.R (1985). Behavioral Dimensions of Channels of

Distributions: Review and Synthesis. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
13(2), 1-24.

79

Izard, CE. (1977). Human Emotions. New York: Plenum Press.

Kelley, H.H. & Thibaut, J .W. (1978). Interpersonal Relations: A Theory of
Interdependence. New York: Wiley.

Kemper, TD. (1978). A Social Interactional Theory of Emotions. New York: Wiley.

Kettle, M., & Campbell, D. (2000). Hollywood, the New Front in Drugs War: White
House Gives Movie Industry Lead Role in Fight against Teenage Abuse. The
Guardian (London) (July 12).

Kurtz, H. & Waxman, S. (2000, January 14). White House Cut Anti-Drug Deal with TV
Ad Credits Given for ‘Proper Message.’ The Washington Post, pp. A01.

Lambe, C.J., Wittman, C.M., & Spekman, RE. (2001). Social Exchange Theory and
Research on Business-to-Business Relatiorml Exchange. Journal of Business-to-
Business Marketing, 8(3), 1-35.

Lawler, E.J. & Yoon, J. (1993). Power and the Emergence of Commitment Behavior in
Negotiated Exchange. American Sociological Review, 58(4), 465-481.

Lawler, E.J. & Yoon, J. (1996). Commitment in Exchange Relations: Test of a Theory of
Relational Cohesion. American Sociological Review, 61, 89-108.

Lawler, E.J. & Thye, SR (1999). Bringing Emotions into Social Exchange Theory.
Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 217-244.

Lusch, R.F. & Brown, IR (1996). Interdependency, Contraction, and Relational
Behavior in Marketing Channels. Journal of Marketing, 60(October), 19-38.

MacNeil, LR. (1980). The New Social Contract, an Inquiry into Modern Contractual
Relations. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

US. Department of Defense. Making Movies Guide. Retrieved June 9, 2003, from
http://wwwdtic.mil/armylink/movie/

 

Milbank, D. (2001). Bush Unveils “Faith-Based” Initiatives; Effort Will Team Agencies,
Nonproﬁts on Social Issues. Washington Post (January 30).

Molrn, L.D. & Cook, KS. (1995). Social Exchange and Exchange Networks. In K.S.
Cook, G.A. Fine, & J .S. House (Eds), Sociological Perspectives on Social
Psychology (pp. 209-235). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Molrn, L.D., Takahashi, N., & Peterson, G. (2000). Risk and Trust in Social Exchange:

An Experimental Test of a Classical Proposition. American Journal of Psychology,
105(5), 1396-1427.

80

 

Montgomery, K.C. (1989). Target: Prime Time. New York: Oxford University Press.

Montgomery, K (1993). The Harvard Alcohol Project: Promoting the Designated Driver

on Television. In Backer, T.E. & Rogers, E.M. (Eds). Organizational Aspects of
Health Communication Campaigns: What Works? (pp. 178-202). Newbury Park,
CA: SAGE Publications.

Morgan, RM. & Hunt, SD. (1994). The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship
Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(July), 20-38.

Nevin, IR (1995). Relationship Marketing and Distribution Channels: Exploring
Fundamental Issues. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(4), 327-334.

New York Times. (2000). Television’s Risky Relationship (editorial). New York Times
(January 18).

Rice, R.E., & Atkin, CK. (1990). Public Communication Campaigns, 2d ed. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Rindﬂeisch, A. & Heide, J.B. (1997). Transaction Cost Analysis: Past, Present, and
Future Applications. Journal of Marketing, 61(October), 30-54.

Salmon, C.T., & Murray-Johnson, L. (2001). Communication Campaign Effectiveness:
Some Critical Distinctions. In Rice, K & Atkin, C.K. (Eds) Public
Communication Campaigns, 3'“ ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Salmon, CT. (1994, February). CDC Conference Summary Report: Using
entertainment-education to reach a generation at risk. Atlanta, Georgia: CDC.

Shaivitz, M. (2002). How Pro-Social Messages Make Their Way into Entertainment
Programming. In a Report to the Carnegie Foundation.

Shields, D.L.L., Carol, J., Balbach E.D., & McGee, S. (1999). Hollywood on tobacco:
how the entertainment industry understands tobacco portrayal. Tobacco Control, 8,
378-386.

Singhal, A. & Rogers, EM. (2002). A theoretical agenda for entertainment-education.
Communication Theory, 12(2) 117-135.

Slater, M.D. & Rouner, D. (2002). Entertainment-Education and Elaboration Likelihood:

Understanding the Processing of Narrative Persuasion. Communication Theory,
12(2) 173-191.

81

Sood, S. (2002). Audience Involvement and Entertainment-Education. Communication
Theory, 12(2) 153-172.

Suid, L. (2002). Guts & Glory: The Making of the American Military Image in Film.
Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky.

Thibaut, J .W. & Kelley, H.H. (1959). The Social Psychology of Groups. New York: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Turley, J. (2003, August 19). Hollywood Isn’t Holding Its Lines Against the Pentagon.
Los Angeles Times. Retrieved September 9, 2003, from
http://www.commondreams.org/viewsO3/O819-05.htm

Watson, D. & Tellegren, A (1985). Toward a Consensual Structure of Mood.
Psychological Bulletin, 98, 219-235.

Williamson, CE. (1975). Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications.
New York: Free Press.

82

   

IILIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIJIIIII11111111111