In defense of sugar: a critical analysis of rhetorical strategies used in The Sugar Association's award-winning 1976 public relations campaign.

摘要: In 1976, the U.S. Sugar Association (SA), a globally networked trade organization representing cane and beet sugar industry, won Public Relations Society of America’s (PRSA) Silver Anvil Award for crisis communication campaign. Their campaign successfully limited diffusion restriction policies to control obesity, heart disease, diabetes, dental caries, marked beginning modern-day SA. The industry continues resist measures reduce consumption, therefore understanding addressing opposition is crucial achieving global targets non-communicable disease. We critically analyze common management rhetorical strategies used by SA defend itself from perceived wrongdoing, perceptions harm using thematic content analysis based on Hearit’s Corporate Apologia theory. Data sources were internal documents related 1976 in 1) PRSA records, 2) Great Western Company 3) William Jefferson Darby Papers. SA, prototypical apologia stances (counterattack, differentiation, apology, corrective action) dissociation (appearance/reality, opinion/knowledge, act/essence) constructed persuasive narrative product safety crisis, social legitimacy crisis. SA’s overarching was that restricting sugar, which it claimed valuable food makes healthy foods more palatable, would cause claims contrary made opportunists, pseudoscientists, food-faddists, lay nutritionists or those who had been misled them. does not meet criteria truthfulness sincerity. theory provides an accessible way strategies. It enables public health actors recognize predict corporate response ongoing challenges. Industry counterarguments can be examined sincerity (or lack thereof), explained policymakers considering policies, public, thereby decreasing effectiveness illegitimate efforts oppose regulation legislation.