| Popis: |
From the 1950s to the early 2000s, a potentially toxic chemical called “C8” was being released into the Ohio Valley water supply. E. I du Pont de Nemours and Company, more commonly known as DuPont (the company responsible for the chemical release) and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (the environmental regulatory agency) are challenged to communicate the health hazards of C8 to the public in the affected areas of the Ohio Valley. Previous research suggests that the level of outrage the public will experience depends on their perception of risk. Theories suggest that the level of hazard, risk reduction actions, coherence among communicators and engaging the public, influences public perception of risk. The purpose of this research is to examine the case of the C8 chemical release in the context of risk communication. Specifically, it focuses on evaluating if there are mixed messages between risk communicators of DuPont’s chemical release case in the Ohio Valley. The methods involve conducting a content analysis of materials from both DuPont and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) to identify similarities and differences and applying accepted risk communication principles to the messages. The evidence of the crisis communication strategies used in DuPont’s chemical release case is discussed in detail. The result suggests that there are some inconsistencies between DuPont and OEPA in this case. |
