Activists playing a dual role:

identities, organizational goals,

and public relations practices
Hua Jiang
1
*
and Lan Ni
2
1
Department of Mass Communication and Communication Studies, 8000 York Road, Towson
University, Towson, Maryland, USA
2
Jack J. Valenti School of Communication, University of Houston, Houston, Texas, USA
This study explores the relationship among identities, goals, and public relations
practices of an activist organization through in-depth interviews and document
analysis. Findings suggest different levels of the participant organizations identity
in communication with its different audiences. In playing its dual role (as a public
to its target organizations and a public communicator to its own publics), the
organization acts as an honest representative voice and a credible source of
information to both parties, a process that requires a balance position compatible
with its mission. Its public relations practices were found to be consistent with the
identities it appropriates and the values it respects.
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Introduction
Scholars argued that the dominant public
relations theory, i.e. the Excellence study
(Grunig, 1992; Dozier, et al., 1995; Grunig,
et al., 2002) has prioritized the communication
knowledge and skills that resource-rich organ-
izations need. Researchers should pay more
attention to the communicative needs, con-
straints or practices of citizen groups them-
selves (Karlberg, 1996, p. 271). More studies
are called for theorising public relations from
the perspective of activists, particularly exam-
ining their self-perceived identities (Curtin and
Gaither, 2006).
Activist organizations manifest different
aspects of their identities (Smith and Ferguson,
2001). Aldoory and Sha (2007) explicated this
process as activist groups playing a dual role
as publics to inuence target organizations
(the role of public[s]) and as organizations to
build relationships with their own publics (the
role of public communicator[s]) (p. 352). In
Roman mythology, Janus, as the god in charge
of doors, halls, beginnings and endings, has
been portrayed as having two heads facing in
opposite directions (Figure 1). The two heads
of Janus may be a good metaphor illustrating
the dual role concept herethe internal and
external roles an activist organization plays are
actually coexistent and united
1
. Nevertheless,
Journal of Public Affairs
J. Public Affairs 9: 288300 (2009)
Published online 29 July 2009 in Wiley InterScience
(www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/pa.330
*Correspondence to: Hua Jiang, Department of Mass
Communication and Communication Studies, 8000 York
Road, Towson University, Towson, MD 21252-0001 USA.
E-mail: hyjiang@gmail.com
1
The authors would like to give credit to one of our
reviewers for her/his suggestion regarding the similarity
between the dual role and the two faces of Janus.
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Public Affairs, (2009)
DOI: 10.1002/pa
few scholars have examined how an activist
organization actually plays such a dual role and
how it feels about this experience.
Two competing theories have explained
activist public relations: two-way symmetrical
communication (Grunig and Grunig, 1997)
and confrontational communication tactics
(Rodino and DeLuca, 1999). However, little
research has explored how the identities of
activist organizations interplay with their
organizational goals to inuence the way
activists practice public relations. To ll the
aforementioned gaps in past research, this case
study attempts to investigate the relationship
among the multiple identities, goals and public
relations practices of an activist organization.
Organization to be studied
The organization in this case study is an activist
group founded in the 1940s to protect and
extend the rights of GIs
2
and conscientious
objectors (COs)
3
. It is governed by a Board of
Directors made up of representatives from
citizen groups working closely with it as a
coalition, and afliated with an advisory
council consisting of diverse religious bodies,
ethical groups and communities. According to
its Web site, this organization supports all who
question any means of participation in wars,
including US citizens, permanent residents,
documented or undocumented immigrants
and citizens of other countries in the world.
The programme of the activist group divides
into the following areas: (1) Advocacy focusing
on lobbying for changes in national and
international law to protect individual COs,
for example, opposing and working towards
eliminating the draft registration requirements
and state penalties applied on those who
refuse to register; (2) Counseling centred on
advising individual COs and members of the
military who are confronted with the penalties
for non-registration, difcult or unsuccessful
discharges from the US Armed Forces, natural-
isations as US citizens traded on military
services and persecutions due to their anti-
war and anti-draft beliefs; (3) Outreach
emphasizing providing draft and counsellor
trainings, educating individuals how to docu-
ment their convictions as COs and keeping
COs updated with relevant changes in laws and
legislatures and (4) Grassroots Support prac-
ticed via its Web site, action alerts, hotline,
newsletters and other print and non-print
materials.
Conceptualizations
The concept of activist publics
Research has typically examined activist pub-
lics from the perspective of organizations that
they target for change, i.e. as a group of publics
who organize to inuence or change those
target organizations through various actions
(Grunig, 1992; Curtin and Gaither, 2005).
Some scholars explained how target organiz-
ations identify and segment activist publics
(Hamilton, 1992; Grunig, 1997; Major, 1998;
Hallahan, 2000, 2001). This segmentation
perspective studies activists based on their
own shared perceptions of problems, pro-
blems arising either from the experience of
organizational consequences or from their
own life situations. Nevertheless, the focus
on activist publics by this stream of research
has been overlooked and scholars have
criticized its prioritizing the interests of
Figure 1. Two faces of Janus. Source: http://ccrg.cs.
memphis.edu/tutorial/introduction.html
2
People who are currently enlisted or veterans of the US
Armed Forces; paraphrased based on the groups Web
site.
3
Individuals whose moral, religious or ethical dictates of
conscience prohibit any involvement in wars and other
military services; paraphrased based on its Web site.
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Public Affairs, November 2009
DOI: 10.1002/pa
Activists playing a dual role 289
resource-rich organizations (Karlberg, 1996;
Dozier and Lauzen, 2000; Leitch and Neilson,
2001). In order to further develop the
construct of activist publics from activists
own perspective, a study placing an emphasis
on identity as a central construct (Curtin and
Gaither, 2006, p. 67) is paramount.
The issue of identity has been covered in
public relations literature (Leitch and Neilson,
2001; Choi and Cameron, 2005; Henderson,
2005). The social psychological and multi-
dimensional model of identity formation (Cote
and Levine, 2002) can be applied to examining
the activist identity formation. This model
incorporated three levels. The rst level, i.e.
ego identity, describes an individuals sub-
jective sense of continuously being the same
person across time and situations. In this
conception, the ego identity of an activist
group can be viewed as its fundamental
subjective experience of maintaining itself as
the same organization over time and in
different situations.
Sha (2006) differentiated two important
cultural identities, avowed and ascribed
(p. 52). Applied to an activist organization,
the avowed identity may refer to the basic
values or position on a public policy issue that
the organization identies with. In this sense,
the avowed identity is conceptually synon-
ymous to the ego identity. However, the
ascribed identity of an activist organization is
assigned by other individuals or groups of
individuals and may not be the same as its ego
identity arising from its organizational values
and mission. The concept of ego identity or
avowed identity has been examined, though
not widely, in public relations scholarship. For
instance, Leitch and Davenport (2006) argued
that it is critical to incorporate the self-
perceived identities of activist organizations
in understanding how and why activists
engage in public policy issues.
Based on the aforementioned literature, the
rst research question this study addresses is as
follows:
RQ1: How does an activist group dene
itself as an organization?
The dual role of an activist
organization: public and public
communicator
Activist organizations need to manifest differ-
ent aspects of their identities when dealing
with their target organizations so as to rectify
the economic, social and political problems
these organizations have created and when
communicating with their own publics in
response to changing external environments
(Smith and Ferguson, 2001). Aldoory and Sha
(2007) have addressed this character of activist
organizations as negotiating their dual role as
public and public communicator (p. 352), i.e.
as public in communicating with its target
organizations and as public communicator
when interacting with its own publics to
maintain itself as an organization.
One way to connect the dual role to identity
management is to examine identity as serving
different purposes: as belonging, as repres-
entation, or as a way of organizing (Hender-
son, 2005, p. 124). The internal role, or an
activist group as a public communicator,
seems to be more closely related to the identity
as belonging; whereas the external role, or an
activist group as a public, seems to be more
closely associated with the identity as repres-
entation.
Previous studies have provided three lines of
thoughts as the theoretical underpinnings of
the dual role. First, the dual role of activist
organizations suggests that they may actively
appropriate and negotiate multiple identities
(Curtin and Gaither, 2005, p. 102) in com-
munication with diverse publics; and, the
identities activist organizations choose to
exhibit should be compatible with their
organizational missions and values (Hender-
son, 2005; Roper, 2005). In playing its dual
role, an activist organization negotiates two
identities, public and public communicator, in
response to target organizations and its own
publics respectively.
Second, an activist organization enacts the
dual role through its interaction with other
organizations and publics. The second level in
Cote and Levines (2002) model, i.e. personal
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Public Affairs, November 2009
DOI: 10.1002/pa
290 Hua Jiang and Lan Ni
identity, and the concept of identity salience
(Sha, 2006) can be used to support this
statement. Adapting the denition from
Cote and Levine (2002), the personal identity
of an activist organization can be conceptual-
ized as its stabilized behaviour or character
in interaction with different audiences. The
interactional behaviours may manifest differ-
ent aspects of its ego identity in different
contexts. Sha (2006) described such manifes-
tation as identity salience, or the relative
importance of a particular aspect of identity in
a specic situation, relative to the other
aspects of ones total identity (Cupach
and Imahori, 1993, p. 114, as cited in Sha,
2006, p. 53). The identity of an activist group
constantly evolves: it is produced and repro-
duced through interactions with its publics
(Motion and Leitch, 2002) and dependent on
situational contingences (Curtin and Gaither,
2006).
Third, to manage its dual role or identities, an
activist organization needs to create overlap-
ping zones of meaning for its target organiz-
ations and its multiple publics (Henderson,
2005, p. 133). Such zone is constituted when
peoplesharethesameknowledgeabout certain
events and interpret them in the same manner
(Heath and Palenchar, 2000). The zones of
meaning can be constructed between target
organizations and publics if an activist organ-
ization acts as the communication facilitator.
This dimension of the dual role can also be
extended by the third level inthe model of Cote
and Levine (2002), i.e. social identity. For an
activist organization, thesocial identityinvolves
its recognized roles within a community. Social
identity inuences personal identity through a
process of identity negotiation, i.e. the vali-
dation by others. As such, while engaging in
day-to-day interactions with other groups, an
activist organization needs to conform to
institutionalized rules or norms in communities
where all parties are involved, thereby giving its
behaviours meanings and justications before
zones of meaning can be established among all
affected parties.
The conceptualization of an activist groups
dual role and theoretical underpinnings of the
unique role for activists justify the proposition
of the second research question:
RQ2: How does an activist group accom-
modate its dual role as a public to target
organizations it attempts to change and as
an organization itself communicating
with its own publics?
Activist public relations: identities,
goals and public relations practices
There have been two competing views on how
activists should practice public relations. Some
scholars (e.g. Grunig and Grunig, 1997)
suggested that the two-way symmetrical model
is applicable to both corporations and activist
organizations. Other scholars (e.g. Rodino and
DeLuca, 1999) proposed activist public
relations models characterized by confronta-
tional communication tactics such as sit-ins,
boycotts, protests, blockades and the like.
Neither of the two dominant theories has
explicitly addressed the issue of identity in
activist public relations.
Heath (1997) proposed a model delinea-
ting the developmental stages of activism:
(1) strain (i.e. a stage when publics identify
issues and seek to legitimize them), (2)
mobilization (i.e. a stage when activists get
into organizations or groups, build up and use
their own communication networks, and
utilise available resources to accomplish their
objectives), (3) confrontation (i.e. a stage
when activist groups push their target organ-
izations to resolve issues), (4) negotiation (i.e.
a stage when parties involved in disputes or
conicts negotiate to arrive at compromise)
and (5) resolution (i.e. a stage when disputes
or conicts are nally resolved). In each stage
activists encounter challenges that demand
diverse communication tactics (Smith and
Ferguson, 2001). Heaths model implies that
the developmental stage an activist organiz-
ation lies in may inuence its public relations
practices. Moreover, an activist organization
may not experience all ve stages of this
model; and its mission may determine which
stage it chooses to end up with.
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Public Affairs, November 2009
DOI: 10.1002/pa
Activists playing a dual role 291
Activist organizations have two major goals
to accomplish: to correct the problems they
identify with target organizations and to
maintain themselves as organizations (Smith
and Ferguson, 2001). To achieve the rst goal,
organizations need to attract attention to the
issues, legitimatize themselves as advocates for
the issues, seek support for resolutions and
engage target organizations in collective pro-
blem solving. For the second goal, an activist
organization ought to compete for limited
resources, adjust to changing environments,
maintain organizationship and appeal to new
publics. To deal with these challenges, activist
organizations must adopt appropriate public
relations tactics. In addition to the relationship
between organizational goals and public
relations tactics, the identities of an activist
organization should be compatible with its
goals (Curtin and Gaither, 2005; Roper, 2005).
Henderson (2005) further advocated for a link
between the internal and external communi-
cation of an activist group and suggested that a
shared understanding must be created between
all stakeholders (p. 124).
Based on the reviewed literature, the
authors suggest a proposition that examines
the relationship between public relations
practices and organizational identities and
goals to better explain why activist groups
practice public relations the way they dothe
identities of an activist organization in com-
munication with target organizations and its
own publics should be consistent with its
organizational goals; and such self-perceived
identities inuence public relations practices.
In order to further examine the proposition,
the authors propose the third research ques-
tion as follows:
RQ3: Howdo the self-perceived identities of
an activist organization interplay with its
organizational goals to inuence the way
public relations is practiced?
Method
Case studies are the preferred strategy when
how or why questions are being posed and
when the research focuses on phenomena
within specic real-life situations (Yin, 2003).
The present study aims to examine the
relationship among the self-perceived identi-
ties of an activist organization, its goals and its
public relations practices. Therefore, a case
study is most appropriate. In particular, the use
of qualitative interviewing (Lindlof and Taylor,
2002; Rubin and Rubin, 1995) enables the
authors to obtain descriptive accounts with
richness and depth from participants. In
addition, document analysis of the organiz-
ations Web site allows the authors to analyse
the themes from a second data source.
To recruit potential participating organiz-
ations, the authors used the contact infor-
mation listed in a pamphlet called Washington
Peace Center Activist Guide 2005. Email
enquires were sent to the enlisted activist
groups. The Executive Director of the organ-
ization in this case study replied and agreed to
participate in the study. The staff and board
members were later contacted via telephone
and email. The authors ultimately interviewed
six staff members and ve members of its
Board of Directors. These semi-structured
interviews ranged from 45 minutes to 2 hours.
This study did not sample the organizations
publics because the focus was to examine how
the organization self-denes its own identities.
Document analysis examined the groups
online communication materials. The docu-
ments analysed consist of statements,
announcements, literature, media logs and
other publications publicized on the organiz-
ational Web site. The interviews were tran-
scribed for data analysis. The authors used the
research questions as their framework to
develop a coding scheme. The documents
collected were also used to check if there were
any similar patterns among data.
Results
RQ1: How does an activist group dene
itself as an organization?
As revealed in both interviews and document
analysis, the organization denes itself as a
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Public Affairs, November 2009
DOI: 10.1002/pa
292 Hua Jiang and Lan Ni
non-partisan and conservative faith organ-
ization focused on advocacy, counselling and
education. Participants admitted that the organ-
ization may be seen as an activist group because
it is anti-war and anti-draft, but they differen-
tiated their operation fromactivism, which they
believed is characterized by protests, demon-
strations and civil disobediences.
Multiple self-perceived identities
The organization is an advocacy group that
encourages COs to be explicit about their
beliefs. Participants emphasised that the
advocacy is non-partisan and conservative.
The Executive Director pointed out that . . .
we are more on the role of a conservative
organization, not actively pursuing civil dis-
obedience or illegal resistance. This conserva-
tive self-identity is also evidenced on its Web
site: This group denes itself as a non-prot
organization focused on promoting the rights
of conscientious objectors.
The conservative and non-confrontational
self-identity was reected in different ways by
most participants. For example, Board Member
2 argued that the organization is an interfaith
organization that represents a large body of
religious organizations. Board Member 3
indicated that the organization is largely a
counselling organization because it helps
people in the military with questions about
discharges and works on counselling people
about the draft, draft registration and counter-
recruitment. On its Web site, the organization
labels itself as a support group committed to
help military personnel about military con-
scientious objection.
Attempting to stay away from other typical
activist groups, the organization focused on
educational efforts instead. According to the
Counselling Coordinator, it educates the Con-
gress and the Selective Service about the reality
of conscientious objection and its implications
for laws and public policies. As revealed on its
Web site, the organization works closely with
diverse communities on public education of CO-
related issues such as changes in regulations and
legislation related to military conscription.
Different interpretations of activist
organizations
Participants believed that their target organiz-
ations may perceive them as an activist group
but they see themselves as a faith and
counselling organization. According to the
Executive Director, people may think of the
organization as very activist because it does
attempt to change the opinion of the society
as well as the opinions of some large
organizations such as the Congress and the
military. The BVS Volunteer concurred, I
would say they denitely think we are an
activist organization. . .We are anti-war, anti-
drafts. Participants, however, dened an
activist organization in a different way. The
Executive Director indicated that an activist
organization should be involved in protests,
demonstrations, civil disobediences. . . For
Board Member 3, an activist organization
was connected with grassroots activism,
getting people out, protesting. . . The Lobbyist
admitted that the organization does send out
email alerts mobilizing its constituencies to
take certain actions. However, this type of
activism is only a minimum part of the
organizations operation. As Board member 3
explained, Mostly, we do counselling and
educational work, not exactly what an activist
organization does. . .. We would like to change
the law, but mostly getting people information
necessary for them to exercise their rights.
RQ2: How does an activist group
accommodate its dual role as a public
to target organizations it attempts to
change and as an organization itself
communicating with its own publics?
The organizations communication with
internal publics and external target organiz-
ations exemplies the dual role it plays. A
balance between internal and external com-
munication is pivotal. The organization is
expected to represent a variety of publics in
a single, clear and consistent voice. It is
also relied upon as a source of accurate
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Public Affairs, November 2009
DOI: 10.1002/pa
Activists playing a dual role 293
information. Constraints in playing the dual
role are also analysed.
Separation and connectedness in the duality
of the role
Participants suggested that the organization
plays two separate roles: communicating with
its own publics and communicating with
target organizations. As the Counselling Coor-
dinator said:
In one case, we are informing them [our
publics], supporting them, [and] encoura-
ging them in what we understand they are
concerned about. In the case of the Con-
gress and other governmental agencies, we
are trying to inuence, [and] we are trying
to change them for most part.
Participants also realized that the two
separate roles are actually connected and
complementary to each other. The Outreach
Coordinator ascribed the connectedness to
the organizations consistency in its goal:
the organization is committed to advocating
and educating about conscientious objection
no matter whom it communicates with. The
two separate roles are complementary to
each other because communication with
publics actually gives the organization credi-
bility in its communication with the
Congress. As the Counselling Coordinator
commented, Experiences of people [the
organizations publics, such as GIs and COs]
inuence us when we go to the Congress and
talk about the changes they have to make. We
have an understanding of it because of the
realities that people in the system are strug-
gling with.
Participants further elaborated the connect-
edness as the organization representing COs
and people in the military who are publics of
the Congress. The BVS Volunteer said, By
communicating with them, we can be kind of a
better representative of them, those conscien-
tious objectors. We are communicating for
them as a representative [of them] to the
Congress.
Playing a funnelling role
Participants emphasized that in representing
its constituencies to the Congress, the organ-
ization ought to speak with a single clear voice,
although it represents a variety of publics
groups. The Law Clerk said, We have to take
over the views, kind of ltering them and
creating one view and one voice to the
Congress. If we present every single view,
we will have inconsistence. The Executive
Director dened the aforementioned action as
a funnelling role:
I think the Centre is playing a funnelling
role to help bring the voices of our
constituencies to the Congress. . .I get a lot
of different voices, so I try to create, again
kind of funnelling effect, so its intensied
by all kinds of groups and what the groups
mean, that kind of concentrated voice, so
make it stronger.
Board Member 3 pointed out that the
organization often needs to persuade its
constituencies to accommodate and compro-
mise one another because the purpose of the
organization is to make a difference around
the common concern [conscientious objec-
tion]. He suggested that people with different
political, social and religious convictions
should speak with a focus and think about
how they can promote the rights of COs by
working as a community.
Being reliable
Being reliable is a critical component in the
dual role the organization plays. Evident on its
Web site, the organization is committed to
provid[ing] accurate information on selective
service registration, alternative to enlistment,
GI rights, the draft, the military, etc. The
organization debunk[s] false information
about any of the aforementioned topics.
Participants indicated that the organization
always tries to make sure the information is
reliable and current before it makes such
information available to its publics as well as to
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Public Affairs, November 2009
DOI: 10.1002/pa
294 Hua Jiang and Lan Ni
the Congress. The Outreach Coordinator
argued, Whether we are viewed as a reliable
source of information for both of them[publics
and the Congress] is very critical. The
Executive Director also emphasized the
importance of being reliable and honest:
Having integrity and being reliable is a
fundamental thing. . .You have to have a
reputation of being honest and thats valuable.
A balance in playing the dual role
Participants indicated that the Centre, in
playing its dual role, encounters conicting
expectations. As Board Member 1 said, the
organization, as a public communicator,
attempts to stand up for the rights of the COs
andother publics totheCongress; however, the
Congress expects the organization, as its
public, to show respectful faithfulness. The
Lobbyist concurred:
Sometimes publics might have certain
expectations of us. But that could be in
conict with how the Congress views this
organization. You knowwhat I mean, and
so for example, the public might want us to
be more...some sort of peace march that
might be very radical. But we do get
involved in the Congress...
Therefore, it is critical for the organization to
nd a balance in communicating with its target
organizations and its own publics. Board
Member 3 provided a good example:
When we work with the Selective Service,
whats important to us is that we dont
cross certain line. We dont really want to
work with them to make the draft work
better because we dont really want to have
a draft. But on the other hand, we really
want to help people who will be subject to
the draft if there is a draft there [and
educate our constituencies about their
rights]. There is a balance there.
Constraints in playing its dual role
Participants identied several constraints the
organization face in playing its dual role. For
example, according to Board Member 1, the
organization has to move from a really
marginal entity in the public sphere to a voice
that is considered to have expertise and be
positively proactive. This marginalization has
led to incorrect preconceptions in the minds of
their publics as well as those of people in the
Congress, which the organization is trying to
overcome. As the Outreach Coordinator
argued,
A lot of people have preconceived notions
about what conscientious objection is and
who CO is and you know, what the eld
looks like. . .I think we have to gure out a
way to correct those notions and commu-
nicate with them in a way that tries to x
the very incorrect information they
receive, update and educate them about
what the situation really is.
In addition, in playing the dual role, the
organization encountered difculty in both
mobilizing their own publics and trying to be a
good public communicator in front of their
target organization. For example, it is very
challenging for the organization to get its
constituencies to really act on what they care
about. The Counselling Coordinator discussed
this in detail: You need to come to Washing-
ton and talk to the Congress. People would say
yeah, but they do not actually do it. On the
other hand, unsuccessful negotiations with the
Congressmen are sometimes due to their
constituencies who disagree or refuse to
compromise. As the Law Clerk pointed out,
The fact that a lot of Congressmen are not
interested in what we say is . . .because they
have constituencies who disagree. . .As a
result, what we represent is generally ignored.
Finally, Board Members 2 and 5 identied
getting and allocating resources as one big
concern of the organization in playing its dual
role. The Centre ought to keep on getting
resources that help us do what we do and
think about whether we should spend more
resources on our constituencies who already
support us or on the Congress that we are
attempting to inuence and change.
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Public Affairs, November 2009
DOI: 10.1002/pa
Activists playing a dual role 295
RQ3: How do the self-perceived
identities of an activist organization
interplay with its organizational goals
to inuence the way public relations is
practiced?
The organization adopts various public rela-
tions tactics when communicating with both
internal and external publics.
Internal communication with its publics
Participants indicated that it is imperative for
the organization to communicate with a wide
range of individuals, groups and organizations.
The main constituencies participants men-
tioned include GIs, COs, different religious
organizations and faith groups, other peace or
activist organizations, and organizations with
similar missions.
The organization communicates with differ-
ent constituency groups for different reasons.
According to the Counselling Coordinator, the
organization communicates with people in
the military to ensure that their rights are
protected, for instance, through the GI Rights
Hotline and other forms of counselling. The BVS
Volunteer argued that the organization needs to
build relationships with different religious
organizations as they are the backbone of
the organization, or the source of the majority
of our donations. Board Member 1 added, It is
very important to engage them [the religious
and faith organizations] in our advocacy efforts.
The Executive Director revealed in the inter-
view that the organization participates in
activities other organizations with similar mis-
sions arrange: [We] go and table [set up a table
in those activities for] the Centre... We work
with some organizations to set up conferences.
The BVS Volunteer regarded the communi-
cation between the organization and other
organizations with similar missions as a kind of
alliance-building effort:
Beyond just the different faith organiz-
ations, there are a lot of other organiz-
ations with similar missions that we need
to communicate with, like XXXX, a very
very similar organization to us, like
different counter-recruitment organiza-
tions...I mean, especially now they are
planning a kind of large international
conscientious objection day with all the
other different groups that are against
wars persistently.
The organization communicates with its
publics through literature, newsletters, the GI
Rights Hotline, conferences and meetings,
speaking engagement, trainings and work-
shops. Among them, literature is probably
the most used communication channel, as
evident on its Web site.
Participants conrmed the critical role of
literature. The BVS Volunteer thought litera-
ture is a good way to help the organization
reach a large group of publics or constitu-
encies all at once. For the Executive Director,
literature is also an important part of their
educational efforts. All participants nominated
the GI Rights Hotline as one big part of the
organizations public relations. Also demon-
strated on its Web site, the organizations
counsellors do address critical issues and
concerns through the Hotline.
The Lobbyist, the Outreach Coordinator and
the Counselling Coordinator suggested that
the organization also works with local organ-
izations, such as community councils and
schools, to organize speaking engagements
and draft trainings. As the Outreach Coordi-
nator said, We go there and educate them
about conscription, CO issues, and draft
regulations. And we train pre-enlistment
counsellors and draft counsellors.
External communication with target
organizations
The two key target organizations the organiz-
ation works with are the Selective Service and
the Congress. Participants indicated that their
relationship with the Selective Service is
largely cooperative, with mostly direct and
two-way communication. Board Member 3
analysed the reasons for such a relationship:
We communicate with the Selective Service
for two reasons. For one, we get information
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Public Affairs, November 2009
DOI: 10.1002/pa
296 Hua Jiang and Lan Ni
fromthemand their manuals so that we get
information to draft counsellors who need
to know how the Selective Service functions.
And also, we need to communicate with
them because we want to change the
procedure, i.e. the way they handle things
related to the draft or CO.
The organization communicates with the
Congress mainly through lobbying, indicated
by the Lobbyist and shown on its Web site as
well. When the Lobbyist goes to Congress, he
brings the organizations various publications
such as rationale for a Military Conscientious
Objector Act, a ow chart of current Con-
scientious Objector policy versus proposed
bill, a brochure about the organization, etc.
The Lobbyist stressed the importance of
talking to those Congresspersons face to face
in order to inuence and change their attitudes
and inform them about what the organization
actually does.
Discussion and conclusions
The ndings of this study have important
implications to both theory and practice about
activist public relations.
Explicating the levels of identity for
activist organizations
This study suggests that the identity of an
activist organization does involve multiple
levels (Cote and Levine, 2002). First, regarding
the ego identity, the way an activist organiz-
ation identies itself comes from its funda-
mental goals and missions. The activist organ-
ization aims to serve as an educator and
protector for a certain population (GIs and
COs), which was revealed as a key concept in
both the interviews and on-line publications.
Second, its personal identity is manifested in its
interactions with other organizations and
publics. The participants knew very well that
the target organizations (e.g. the Congress)
might perceive themas a typical activist group.
However, this organization tried to maintain its
own identity as mostly an education and rights-
protection based faith organization and made a
visible effort to differentiate itself from other
activist groups who were perceived to engage
in disobedience behaviours. Third, social
identity is established by conforming to
accepted conventions or norms, in this case,
being a credible representation for its publics.
When explaining what it is and who it is
working for, this activist organization con-
structed its central identities that originated
from its fundamental goals and values, which
were used to distance itself from other activist
groups but were still conforming to accepted
social norms for any activist group. This nding
provides a useful framework for understanding
the identities of activist organizations, not from
how they stand in relation to target organiz-
ations, but from their own multi-level con-
struction of identities. This nding has prac-
tical implications as well. Practitioners
communicating with activist groups may use
the framework as a general guideline; prac-
titioners working for activist groups, on the
other hand, may use this to learn how to
overcome one major challenge all current
activist groups confront (Smith and Ferguson,
2001), i.e. to position the organizations and to
compete for the limited resources and atten-
tion from publics.
A dual rolethe most salient feature
of identity negotiation for activists
When playing the dual role in their interactions
with internal publics and target organizations,
activist groups face great challenges. Results of
this study helped explicate what the dual role
actually entails.
The biggest challenge for the organization
was the expectation of being the full repres-
entation for the multiple voices uttered by their
diverse publics internally and serving as the
representative with a clear, unied and easy-to-
understandmessagewhencommunicatingwith
target organizations. Such a challenge or
dilemma, to a large extent, stemmed from the
manifestation of this organizations identity
salience in different situations. As a public, it
has tomakesureits voices areheard. As a public
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Public Affairs, November 2009
DOI: 10.1002/pa
Activists playing a dual role 297
communicator, it is supposed to be a respon-
sible and ethical representative.
The way this activist organization resolved
this challenge has much to do with establishing
overlapping zones of meaning in identity
negotiation. First of all, the organization stayed
truetoits fundamental goals andvalues, toserve
as the educator and source of information.
These goals remained the same with different
audiences. Second, it remainedcredibleinfront
of both audiences. By being an honest advocate
for its own publics, the organization gained
trust from its target organizations. By speaking
up in front of target organizations, it won
credibility from its own publics. Such a
theoretical understanding may help prac-
titioners address the dilemma of facing con-
icting expectations from different publics.
Identities and public relations
practices
The activist organization used publicity or
public information as its key public relations
strategies. From the perspective of the norma-
tive models (Grunig and Grunig, 1997; Rodino
and DeLuca, 1999) or the developmental stage
model (Heath, 1997), this organization may not
be practicing the best public relations. How-
ever, we found that this organization did what
they did because of their self-perceived
identities: a peace and education faith organ-
ization. For example, they distributed a large
amount of literature because they wanted to
educate people about what CO actually is.
They offered the hotline service because they
wanted to provide assistance to GIs and COs.
They did not engage in violent or radical
actions, because they perceived themselves as
different from radical activists.
This nding also supported the notion that
language, semantics included, can play a
powerful role in the construction of identity
(Henderson, 2005). The way that the activist
group in the current study consistently chose
to use words such as education and infor-
mation provider demonstrated its choice in
presenting themselves, their values and their
missions.
As discussed in the conceptualization, an
activist organization may not go through all ve
stages of Heaths (1997) model. In fact, this
study supported the argument that an activist
groups mission or goal may determine which
stages it goes through. Positioned as an
education faith organization, this group did
not attempt to engage in confrontation, nego-
tiation or resolution. Rather, it focused mostly
on the stages of strain (recognizing issues and
seeking legitimacy) and mobilisation (forming
organizations and mobilizing resources).
Interestingly, many challenges facing this
group may also result from their self-identities.
The difculties they face, including misunder-
standing, misperceptions and the most frus-
trating one, the difculties in arousing actions
from its internal publics, might arise from its
perceived role of being mainly a helper or
educator. With a rather loose structure, the
organization found it difcult to create an
integrated whole. This interactive process
between identity and goals certainly presents
an important question for future study: to what
extent does an activist group negotiate its
identity to better achieve its goals? Can it or
should it?
Discussion about the proposition
Responding to the call for more studies on
activist public relations fromthe perspective of
activists themselves, this study suggested a
preliminary framework of the relationship
among goals, identities and public relations
practices. The proposition was mostly sup-
ported by the ndings. The identities of an
activist organization in communication with
target organizations and its own publics are
indeed consistent with its organizational goals.
In interacting with different audiences, it
engaged in identity negotiation through build-
ing an overlapping zone of meaning. In
addition, the self-perceived identities, to a
great extent, inuence the public relations
practices.
Theoretically, this framework helps inte-
grate different constructs (i.e. avowed
vs. ascribed identities, identity salience and
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Public Affairs, November 2009
DOI: 10.1002/pa
298 Hua Jiang and Lan Ni
identity negotiation) to the exploration of
activist public relations. Practitioners also get a
sense of the underlying reasons why activist
groups practice public relations in certain
ways. Practitioners may want to identify the
fundamental value and purpose of a particular
activist organization before planning public
relations strategies.
Biographical notes
Hua Jiang is a PhD candidate in Public
Relations at the University of Maryland. She
focuses her research on public affairs, social
justice and ethics, work-life conict and
employee-organization relationships, leader-
ship in public relations, and global public
relations. She has published scholarship in
Public Relations Journal and Public Relations
Review. She has also presented more than
10 papers at agship conferences such as
International Communication Association,
Association for Education in Journalism and
Mass Communication, and National Communi-
cation Association.
Lan Ni (PhD, University of Maryland, Col-
lege Park) is an Assistant Professor in the Jack
J. Valenti School of Communication at the
University of Houston. Her research focuses
on strategic management of public relations,
relationship management, identication of
publics, intercultural communication, and
internal communication. She has published
at major journals such as Journal of Public
Relations Research, Public Relations Review,
Journalism and Mass Communication Quar-
terly, Journal of Communication Manage-
ment and International Journal of Strategic
Communication. She has presented more
than 20 papers at major conferences such as
International Communication Association,
Association for Education in Journalism and
Mass Communication, and National Communi-
cation Association.
References
Aldoory L, Sha BL. 2007. The situational theory of
publics: practical applications, methodological
challenges and theoretical horizons. In The
future of excellence in public relations and
communications management: Challenges for
the next generation, Toth EL (ed.). Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ. pp. 339355.
Choi Y, Cameron GT. 2005. Overcoming ethno-
centrism: the role of identity in contingent prac-
tice of international public relations. Journal of
Public Relations Research 17: 171189.
Cote JE, Levine CG. 2002. Identity Formation,
Agency, and Culture: A Social Psychological
Synthesis. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mah-
wah, NJ.
Cupach, WR, Imahori TT. 1993. Identity manage-
ment theory: communication competence in
intercultural episodes and relationships. In
Intercultural Communication Competence,
Wiseman R L, Koester J (eds.). Sage: Newbury
Park, CA. pp. 112131.
Curtin PA, Gaither TK. 2005. Privileging identity,
difference, and power: the circuit of culture as a
basis for public relations theory. Journal of Pub-
lic Relations Research 17: 91115.
Curtin PA, Gaither TK. 2006. Contested notions of
issue identity in international public relations: a
case study. Journal of Public Relations Research
18: 6789.
Dozier DM, Grunig LA, Grunig JE. 1995. Managers
Guide to Excellence in Public Relations and
Communication Management. Lawrence Erl-
baum Associates: Mahwah, NJ.
Dozier DM, Lauzen MM. 2000. Liberating the
intellectual domain form the practice: public
relations, activism and the role of the scholar.
Journal of Public Relations Research 2:
322.
Grunig LA. 1992. Activism: how it limits the effec-
tiveness of organizations and how excellent pub-
lic relations departments respond. In Excellence
in Public Relations and Communication Man-
agement, Grunig JE (ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates: Mahwah, NJ. pp. 503530.
Grunig LA, Grunig JE, Dozier DM. 2002. Excellent
Public Relations and Effective Organizations: A
Study of Communication Management in
Three Countries. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates:
Mahwah, NJ.
Grunig JE. 1997. A situational theory of publics:
conceptual history, recent challenges and new
research. In Public Relations Research: An Inter-
national Perspective, Moss D, MacManus T,
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Public Affairs, November 2009
DOI: 10.1002/pa
Activists playing a dual role 299
Vercic D (eds). International Thomson Business
Press: London. pp. 348.
Grunig JE, Grunig LA. 1997. Review of a program of
research on activism: incidence in four countries,
activist publics, strategies of activist groups, and
organizational responses to activism. In Mana-
ging Environmental Issues. Conducted at the
fourth Public Relations Research Symposium,
Lake Bled, Slovenia.
Hallahan K. 2000. Inactive publics: the forgotten
publics in public relations. Public Relations
Review 26: 499515.
Hallahan K. 2001. The dynamics of issues activation
and response: an issues processes model. Jour-
nal of Public Relations Research 13: 2769.
Hamilton PK. 1992. Grunigs situational theory: a
replication, application, and extension. Journal
of Public Relations Research 4: 123149.
Heath RL. 1997. Strategic Issues Management:
Organizations and Public Policy Challenges.
Sage: Thousand Oaks.
Heath RL, Palenchar M. 2000. Community relations
and risk communication: a longitudinal study of
theimpact of emergencyresponsemessages. Jour-
nal of Public Relations Research 12: 131161.
Henderson A. 2005. Activism in paradise: iden-
tity management in a public relations campaign
against genetic engineering. Journal of Public
Relations Research 17: 117137.
Karlberg M. 1996. Remembering the public in
public relations research: from theoretical to
operational symmetry. Journal of Public
Relations Research 8: 263278.
Leitch S, Davenport S. 2006. Talking with the silent
majority: an interest-identity framework. Public
Relations Review 32: 7173.
Leitch S, Neilson D. 2001. Bringing publics into
public relations: new theoretical frameworks for
practice. In The Handbook of Public Relations,
Heath R (ed.). Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA.
pp. 127138.
Lindlof TR, Taylor BC. 2002. Qualitative Com-
munication Research Methods, (2nd edn), Sage:
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Major AM. 1998. The utility of situational theory of
publics for assessing public response to a disaster
prediction. Public Relations Review 24: 489
508.
Motion J, Leitch S. 2002. The technologies of cor-
porate identity. International Studies of Man-
agement & Organization 32(3): 4564.
Rodino V, DeLuca K. 1999. Unruly relations: Not
managing communication in the construction of
the activist model of public relations. Paper
presented at the PRSA Educator Academy Sec-
ond Annual Research Conference, College Park,
MD.
Roper J. 2005. Organizational identities, identi-
cation and positioning: learning from political
elds. Public Relations Review 31: 139148.
Rubin HJ, Rubin IS. 1995. Qualitative Interview-
ing: The Art of hearing Data. Sage: Thousand
Oaks, CA.
Sha B-L. 2006. Cultural identity in the segmentation
of publics: an emerging theory of intercultural
public relations. Journal of Public Relations
Research 18: 4565.
Smith MF, Ferguson DP. 2001. Activism. In Hand-
book of Public Relations, Heath RL (ed.). Sage:
Thousand Oaks, CA. pp. 291300.
Yin RK. 2003. Case Study Research: Design and
Methods. Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA.
Copyright
#
2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Public Affairs, November 2009
DOI: 10.1002/pa
300 Hua Jiang and Lan Ni