2010 China Communication Forum Global Communication, Local Perspectives English Papers 10-12, December ,2010 Hong Kong，China China Association of Communication Chinese Communication Association Department of Media and Communication, City University of Hong Kong National Center for Radio and Television Studies, Communication University of China 2010 China Communication Forum Copyright Statement 1.All papers in this symposium (including text, graphics) are provided by the participants of the 2010 China Communication Forum on "Global communication, local perspective" . All papers are restricted for discussions within this symposium only. It is forbidden for anyone to use these thesis for any commercial purposes. 2.The conference organizers and the symposium do not have any rights about the papers (including text, graphics). The copyright is reserved within the legal owners of all papers. Any quotation and reproduction without the permission of copyright owners is forbidden. All the copyright disputes are irrelevant to the conference organizers and the symposium. 3.This symposium has not done any modifications to the papers included. Thus we do not guarantee the accuracy, security, integrity and the legitimacy of all the thesis. We also do not take any responsibility for the damage it has done to the users of these papers and the harm the users have done to others.If the papers in this symposium are disputed on intellectual property right, the authors should take the responsibility themselves. 2 2010 China Communication Forum CONTENTS Angela K. Y. Mak The “Customer” Metaphor in Social Institutions in the Public’s Eyes: An Exploratory Study in Singapore...........................................................4 Augustine Pang Yeo Su Lin Crisis Management Consultancy: Exploration of the Expertise, Experience and Expediency of Consultants in Public Relations Agencies in Singapore ............................................................................................ 12 Chwen Chwen Chen Animation “With Chinese Characteristics”? Exploring Chinese Animation on the Global Stage ..................................................................... 28 Daniel Ng An exploratory study of different perception on the usage of text message lingo among male and female college students ............ 37 Fanbin Zeng The effect factors of the second digital divide----based on positive analysis among the college students............................................50 Manzie Vincent Doh The Mass Media and Social transformation: Development journalism in the People’s Republic of China – An example to the World. .. 70 Ran Wei Reconsidering Media Displacement Effect: A New Typology for Multitasking Research ................................................................. 82 Suwichit (Sean) Chaidaroon Analysis of Thai PM Abhisit’s Media Interviews: Lessons Learned for International Public Diplomacy while the Nation Is in Crisis90 Usharani Narayana Priti Kapur Indian Media Framing of the Image of Muslims: Content Analysis of Indian English Language Newspapers .................................... 98 Waheeda Sultana Web Journalism: The Changing Horizons of Journalism .......... 104 Wenge Liang Xiaoqin Li Media Evaluation and Interpersonal Communication Pattern: Testing Cognitive Mediation Model of Beijing audience......... 114 Yan Yan The Invisible Disaster: A Cross-Culture Comparative Analysis of Newspaper Photographic Coverage of Hurricane Katrina and Whenchuan Earthquake ............................................................. 137 Yanqiu Zhang Media Literacy in China: Research, Practice and Challenge .... 154 Zhihui Tian User-Created Content in China ................................................. 166 3 2010 China Communication Forum The “Customer” Metaphor in Social Institutions in the Public’s Eyes: An Exploratory Study in Singapore Angela K. Y. Mak Abstract:This study evaluated the public attitudes in Singapore toward the use of customer metaphor in social institutions through an online survey (646 respondents with a stratified distribution) and three focus groups. Results showed that respondents rated their acceptability among the social institutions (high to low ranking) as news media, hospitals, colleagues and universities, government institutions, primary and secondary schools, and lastly religious institutions. The rationales behind such rankings also relate to the political-economic structure and social-cultural values of Singapore. News media was ranked highest in terms of acceptability because of the government control of providing accurate and credible news source. The majority participants viewed that hospitals should not be totally marketed; however, a goodwill-based marketing is acceptable. Students shouldn’t be treated as customers but schools should be run as business. There was a clear consensus that religious institutions should not treat their followers as customers. Marketing in the government was generally from the money and the tax-paying rationale. In addition, the potential role of demographic variables in determining public attitudes produced benchmark data for future research in consumer behavior and implications in advertising and public relations practice. Background Traditionally, marketing – as an information subsidy – has been largely confined to the business context, where firms engage in transactions of tangible consumer goods and/or services with their customers (Kotler, 2005). A global financial crisis, China and India’s economic rises, and radical economic reforms among Asian countries have combined in recent years to raise questions about the fundamental nature of markets and economic systems in non-Western contexts. In particular, trends of social institutions moving toward privatization have emerged, leading us to the unanimous conclusion that marketing has transcended business boundaries and crept into social institutions (Kotler, 2005). Is marketing then acceptable in these social institutions, where their goods are sometimes bounded by moral responsibilities and obligations? Would marketing inadvertently bring along with it the customer metaphor into such institutions and render their audience as “consumers” or “customers”? Specifically in Chinese-speaking populations, in what ways traditional Chinese values remain a strong force in the belief systems of the public? These questions serve to establish the premises for social institutions in today’s context. In the face of intrusive marketing and communication, what are the limits that social institutions should draw? Coming from the perspectives of the receiving end, are there things that social institutions – as marketing communicators – can or cannot do? Literature Review The debate In the academic realm, the debate was first purported as early as the late 1960s when Kotler and Levy (1969) introduced the idea of broadening marketing and the customer metaphor. Kotler (1972) explained how 4 2010 China Communication Forum this observable fact is possible whereby churches would market a “religious experience” to the congregation, tertiary institutions would market education and learning to students, and politicians would market an “honest government” to the public. This school of thought was met with opposition when Laczniak and Michie (1979) contended that a disruption to social order would arise. Luck (1969) contributed to the opposition stand and made the claim that “if marketing is so many things, then it is nothing.” The discussion carried on through the millennium when Hutton (2001, 2005) put forth the view that marketing in social institutions would distort the purposes and roles they have in the society. Kotler (2005) defended the broadening position by contending such a movement would “free the marketing paradigm from the narrow confines of commercial marketing” and apply to many other contexts “in which exchange and relationship activities take place” (p. 114-116). Marketing in social institutions In the education sector, the opposition continued to arise. Rotfeld (2000) suggested that treating students as customers would render the students less responsible. Ritzer (1996, 1998) criticized that such a form of higher education would remove any meaningful contact between students and educators. Albanese (1999) argued that the problem of “dysfunctional feeding frenzy over marks” is one of the many “pathologies” that would ruin education should marketing be allowed. In healthcare, the use of marketing can improve the disseminating information on the most cost effective treatments to consumers and among doctors (Kay, 2007). Herzlinger (2004) also spoke of how consumer-driven healthcare would allow transparency in the cost, and quality of services and treatments being offered. Porter and Teisberg (2004), however, elaborated on the limits of the consumer-driven model, which, although gives consumers choice, is limited to choice of health plans, and not choice of providers and treatments which are far more significant. In political marketing, Scullion (2008) propounded that “consumer sovereignty” renders the public power which will meet “democratic ideals” because “citizenship can exist within a consumer culture” and that consumerism in politics can path ways for the voting public to undertake civic responsibilities. Contrary, Needham (2003) argued that consumerism on politics would “threaten the notion of citizens and associated democratic values” such as collective obligation, community, exchange of ideas to ensure optimal resource allocation