MA Theis Draft Proposal 08/18/08

Working Title: The Illusion of Social Responsibility,
The Production of Coca-Cola’s Corporate Image in Chile

Proposed Table of Contents (need to edit titles)
Acknowledgments
Abstract
Introduction: Theory and Methods for Analyzing Coca-Cola Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Campaigns
Chapter 1: The Coca-Cola System
Chapter 2: Coca-Cola’s Marketing of CSR
Chapter 3: Case Studies: CSR Campaigns in Chile and Colombia
Conclusion: The Production of the Socially Responsible Image as Part of a Global Strategy
Appendices
Bibliography


Introduction

In August of 1990, the Coca-Cola Company opened The World of Coca-Cola, a corporate museum dedicated to displaying a polished version of the Company’s history through a collection of antique bottles, memorabilia, advertisements, and corporate archives (see exhibit 1). One of the first displays to welcome visitors is a “spectacular behemoth carrying overhead apparently endless lines of Coca-Cola bottles… the relentless continuity of this ‘Bottling Fantasy’ by Jan Bochenek is startling and absorbing” (Harris 154). Outside the museum hangs a thirty-foot globe containing a twenty-six foot neon, rotating Coca-Cola sign; a gaudy and overbearing symbol of Coca-Cola’s domination and presence in over 200 countries worldwide (Harris 154). Yet, there is something inherently problematic with Coca-Cola’s historical account. As Neil Harris points out, “the Coke story is told absolutely without tension or conflict… Coca-Cola’s impact on the world is projected as problem-free” (157). It is as if Coca-Cola had placed over 100 years of history into a black box and the end result was a story where Coca-Cola was always the hero, always welcome, always a friend. The museum is more of a fantasyland, a refashioned hip interpretation of corporate history, the way Coca-Cola would like to view itself and be viewed by the world.

Although The World of Coca-Cola is only one site of Coca-Cola advertising, it is emblematic of a larger marketing strategy; one that attempts to process complex cultural, political and economic differences into a unified narrative. When Coca-Cola introduced the “Always Coca-Cola” campaign in 1993 it ran twenty-seven different commercial designs. Even though each design was different, the final message was the same: Always Coca-Cola. As Mark Pendergrast explains, “Coke has created ‘patterned advertising’ which, with little or no modification, can appeal to any culture in the world. The Coke message has universal appeal- by drinking this product, you will be self-assured, happy, popular, sexy, youthful…” (464). Aside from the obvious message of: Buy Coca-Cola!, what other intended or unintended messages come across through the stories told in Coke ads? What cultural values do they enforce or reject?

Antonio Gramsci pointed to the coordination of politics, economics, intellect, and morals in establishing and maintaining hegemony. As Gavin Smith explains, hegemony is used "to refer to the complex way in which power infuses various components of the social world" (216). The relationship between power and hegemony is broadly conceived by social scientists, yet Gramsci names a few institutions which were instrumental in acquiring hegemony in Italy during the early 1900s, including the church and the public schooling system. He also draws attention to the economy as a potential site for the consolidation of power. Smith states,

"Gramsci identified a very particular compact for securing social order between corporations and the state: “an intensification of exploitation achieved through new forms of management and corporatist strategies, and expansion of state intervention in the economy and society” (225).

Tracing the relationship between state institutions and corporations provides an entry point to examine how hegemony is secured through relationships between educational, state, and economic institutions, as well as the media.

In The Political Psyche, Andrew Samuels outlines two basic locations where political and economic power can be secured which he labels the “public and private dimensions” (4). Within the public dimension he defines economic and political power as “[the] control of processes of information and representation to serve the interests of the powerful as well as the use of physical force and possession of vital resources such as land, food, water or oil” (3). Within the private dimension political power is reflected in “struggles over agency, meaning the ability to choose freely whether to act and what action to take in a given situation” (3). Samuels suggests analyzing the interplay between these two dimensions as a way to get an in depth understanding of how power operates within a society. Multinational corporations provide an interesting case study because they are commercial entities operating in the public sphere. Yet, through various forms of advertising they can virtually shake off their corporate bodies and step into the private sphere with a kind of disembodied corporate image. Within the more intimate setting of the private sphere, corporations can operate in a more flexible manner and potentially influence the values and beliefs of individuals.

The Coca-Cola Company and Social Responsibility in Chile

Over the past 50 years Chile has proven to be a very profitable location for the Coca-Cola Company, with 12 established bottling plants throughout the country (see exhibit 2). As of 2001, Chile had one of the highest per capita consumption rates of Coca-Cola products in the world, following closely behind the United States and Mexico. From 2002-2004 a survey conducted by Hill and Knowlton Captiva,, La Tercera newspaper, and Collect Market Investigations ranked Coca-Cola de Chile as having the best overall corporate reputation (see exhibit 3). In March 1992, Coca-Cola de Chile created the Coca-Cola Chile Foundation (CCFCH) as a way to channel corporate donations in education. Coca-Cola enjoys a relatively friendly corporate environment in Chile (Herrera 2-4).

Beginning in the 1980s and 90s multinational corporations (MNC), including Coca-Cola became increasingly concerned with corporate social responsibility (CSR). Corporate scandals, public outcry, and grassroots movements calling for corporate accountability brought negative attention to companies like Coca-Cola. These movements also challenged (and continue to challenge) the image Coca-Cola had been projecting of itself; they pointed out contradictions in the corporate narrative. One response to public pressure has been the incorporation of social responsibility into corporate branding strategies as an attempt to rescue the corporate image.

The corporate branding trend began in the 1980s and advocated the marketing of a corporate image alongside a product. Ideally the image was supposed to represent the abstract essence of a corporation. As Naomi Klein explains, “think of the brand as the core meaning of the modern corporation, and of the advertisement as one vehicle used to convey that meaning to the world” (5). Yet, the purpose of this MA project is not to assess the success or failure of Coca-Cola’s corporate branding strategies or their social responsibility campaigns, but to attempt to understand how Coca-Cola processes regional differences and incorporates them into micro-organizational strategies by focusing on ad campaigns and social responsibility initiatives. One way to understand how Coca-Cola digests messages from international campaigns calling for corporate accountability would be to focus on four sites of Coke public relations campaigns: the local, national, regional, and global. Alongside these four sites I also hope to analyze how Coca-Cola is straddling the public and private spheres.

This MA project will attempt to explore how the Coca-Cola Company processes differences in culture, local and national institutions, foreign policy, and other factors that contribute to a country’s unique social/economic environment and uses that information to create a ‘socially responsible’ corporate image. My main arguments thus far are (which are subject to review and revision following in depth research):

1.) Corporate ‘social responsibility’ campaigns have allowed corporations, like Coca-Cola to create new relationships with powerful NGOs and institutions. These campaigns created new locations for corporate advertising and have increased corporate encroachment into the private sphere. Coca-Cola has used the socially responsible image as a tool to attempt to leverage themselves in the global economy, to enforce/reinforce relationships that secure their hegemony, and to discredit organizations that threaten their status.

2.) The Coca-Cola Company does not have a specific or consistent global vision for social responsibility, but instead creates (or neglects to create) a socially responsible image tailored to the location in which it is operating. There is some synchronization between international, regional and local campaigns, but there are inconsistencies in the overall coordination.

3.) The Coca-Cola Company relies heavily upon corporate sanctioned studies, technology, and institutions to create an image of social responsibility. This ‘top down’ approach serves three main functions: first, to gain specific information about the local environment which is incorporated into a micro-organizational strategy; secondly, it serves as a mechanism to co-opt and control local discourses on social responsibility; and third Coca-Cola is able to position themselves (amongst various institutions) as a moral authority.

4.) The image of a ‘socially responsible’ corporation is used as a tool to distract from unethical international corporate practices, as a way to discredit ‘grassroots’ organizations calling for corporate accountability, as a way to cultivate a set of values that benefit Coca-Cola, and as part of a preemptive plan to counter any accusations of human rights abuses/unethical business practices.

Proposed Methodology

My research will mainly entail analysis of material on the Coca-Cola Company’s website and the Coca-Cola de Chile website including corporate documents describing corporate structure and practices (e.g. ‘The Coca-Cola Management System’) to gain a sense of the Company’s managerial style and to compare social responsibility PR material (e.g. does social responsibility PR appear the same on the Chile site as on the US site?). It will also involve analyzing television advertisements aired in Chile, in Latin America and internationally to understand how Coca-Cola is marketing social responsibility. Finally, I will analyze material put out by organizations part of an international campaign to hold Coca-Cola accountable including SINALTRAINAL, India Resource Center, and Human Rights Watch to understand how the Coca-Cola Company utilizes a socially responsible image to discredit/challenge their campaigns. The analysis of anti-Coke material put out by international campaigns will provide insight into how Coca-Cola’s image is being challenged on the global level and to see how those campaigns are resonating and/or not resonating in Coca-Cola’s social responsibility PR material in Chile and Latin America.

George Gerbner in “Telling Stories, or How Do We Know What We Know?” discusses a ‘three-pronged research approach’ to analyzing media. The first step is “institutional process analysis” which calls for researching the formation of policies surrounding the flow of media messages. The second step entails “message system analysis” or analyzing the content of stories and messages in the media. The third step is “cultivation analysis” which mostly consists of polling light and heavy viewers of television to gauge the cultural effects of media. At the foundation of Gerbner’s approach is ‘cultivation theory’ or the idea that the media shapes a viewer’s conception of social reality and ‘cultivates’ a set of beliefs or values. As Gerbner explains, “the heart of the analogy of television and religion, and the similarity of their social functions, lies in the continual repetition of patterns (myths, ideologies, "facts", relationships, etc.), which serve to define the world and legitimize the social order” (Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, Signorielli, 1986).

Gerbner’s ‘cultivation theory’ will orient my analysis. I will approach advertising as a medium to convey and potentially cultivate a set of values and beliefs about social reality. What beliefs and values are behind the stories told in Coke ads? What do they say about race, class and gender? Although Gerbner called for an empirical analysis of media, including polling TV viewers, I will focus my MA project on analyzing the framework of Coca-Cola’s advertising strategy (e.g. How do they gain access to schools, tv, sports events, etc?) as well as the underlying messages in their advertising strategy (e.g. Who are they targeting? What are their techniques? What do the ads convey about race, class and gender?).

Proposed Questions

1.) How does Coca-Cola manage its image and operations between and within the public and private sphere?

2.) What value systems are enforced/reinforced in Coca-Cola ads aired in Chile and Latin America? What messages do the ads convey about race, gender, and class?

3.) What do the Coca-Cola advertisements in Chile reveal about the company’s understanding (or misunderstanding) of culture, local/national institutions, and foreign policy?

4.) How are they attempting to incorporate an image of social responsibility into their advertisements and branding strategy in Chile? What are the motives? Do US-based and international campaigns against Coca-Cola have any impact on local, national, regional, and international ad campaigns? Why? Why not? What are the differences between how they market themselves in Chile versus marketing geared towards Latin America or the international community?

5.) How do Coca-Cola ad campaigns focused on social responsibility attempt to co-opt and/or reorient international/national/local dialogues on corporate accountability and ethical behavior in general? In Chile, Coca-Cola channels most of their corporate donations into education- how do they benefit from this approach? What are the intended and unintended consequences of the Coca-Cola Chile Foundation?

6.) What are the intended/unintended consequences of how Coke navigates corporate social responsibility in Chile? How does it avoid having to do social responsibility campaigns in Latin America and/or Chile? Why? Why not?

7.) Are there holes in the coordination between local, national, regional and international social responsibility campaigns? What corporate weaknesses do they reveal?