CMC Strategic Communication: Media, Stakeholders, and Social Media
This paper examines the Central Marketing Corporation (CMC) of Antigua and Barbuda, a state-linked entity responsible for the acquisition, storage, distribution, and marketing of agricultural produce. Using Central Route Persuasion theory and systems theory as interpretive lenses, the paper analyzes CMC's relationship with large and small media, social media influencers, and key stakeholders. It explores how negative media coverage, conspiracy theories, and public opinion affect CMC's brand and inter-organizational strategy, while also identifying opportunities to leverage social media and transparent communication to rehabilitate its image. The paper further considers how global news pressures, the commercial dependencies of journalism, and the interconnected nature of public discourse shape organizational policy and stakeholder relations.
- Introduction and Background of CMC: CMC's origins, mandate, and governance structure
- Media Perception of CMC: Negative and distorted media portrayal of CMC
- The Importance of Media for CMC: Why media matters for large agricultural corporations
- Strengths and Weaknesses of Media Coverage: Big media advantages and conspiracy theory risks
- Stakeholders, Public Opinion, and Inter-Organizational Strategy: Systems theory applied to stakeholder and media dynamics
- Global News Pressures and Social Media as Strategic Tools: Leveraging social media to reshape CMC's public narrative
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Grounds organizational analysis in two distinct theoretical frameworks — Central Route Persuasion theory and systems theory — applying each systematically to real-world scenarios involving CMC.
- Balances abstract theory with concrete examples, such as the Taylor Swift/Apple Music case and the CMC armed robbery incident, making arguments tangible and relatable.
- Demonstrates awareness of multi-directional media influence, distinguishing carefully between big media, small media, and social media influencers and their respective impacts on CMC's brand.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper effectively deploys dual-framework analysis: Central Route Persuasion is used in the first task to assess how CMC can communicate more compellingly with consumers and media, while systems theory structures the second task's examination of how external forces — news cycles, stakeholder pressure, public opinion — interact and feed back into organizational policy. This layered approach shows how communication theory can illuminate real business challenges.
Structure breakdown
The paper is organized into two tasks. Task 1 covers CMC's background, its media perception, the strategic importance of media, and the specific strengths and weaknesses of both big and small media coverage. Task 2 shifts to a broader systems-level analysis, examining global news pressures, the commercial constraints on journalism, the #MeToo and BLM media environment, and how social media can be harnessed to reshape CMC's inter-organizational strategy and public narrative. References are drawn from academic, journalistic, and organizational sources.
Introduction and Background of CMC
This paper examines CMC, a corporate entity that assists in the acquisition, distribution, and advertising of produce in the Antigua and Barbuda region. It looks at the specific relationship that CMC has with large and small media — as manifested through news and broadcasting — as well as with social media and bloggers. Central Route Persuasion theory is harnessed as a lens of interpretation. In the second task, the paper examines the complex overlap among CMC, the media, stakeholders, consumer opinion, and inter-organizational strategy and policy, using systems theory as an interpretive lens.
The origins of the Central Marketing Corporation (CMC) date back to 1974, when it was established via an act of Parliament as a means of providing an entity for the acquisition, storage, distribution, and marketing of farmers' fruits and vegetables. The concept behind the creation of the company was to give farmers an immediate way to sell their goods through a secure and certain market. In this manner, farmers could be relieved of anxiety and trust a more experienced entity to handle marketing and distribution. CMC is overseen by a board created by the Ministry of Agriculture. This board is the body that CMC communicates with directly; together they observe the company's performance, managerial conduct, and the public and private policies that directly affect the company.
CMC also has the responsibility of verifying that national agricultural policy directives align with the corporation's mandate and that management adheres to the pillars of sound corporate oversight. This mandate also means that CMC is responsible for developing methods that ensure all produce is handled to the highest standards of quality. Any company that deals with produce needs the most efficient strategies to maintain freshness. CMC is empowered to both buy and sell produce, as well as to import and export it. However, one major issue CMC faces is that it has not engaged meaningfully in the export aspect of its business for many years, largely because agricultural planners have continued to fail to develop a successful national production plan that would allow export needs to be properly forecast.
Media Perception of CMC
The media perception of CMC's adopted inter-organizational strategy is, at present, very negative and often misconstrued. The media consistently portrays CMC as mismanaged and financially troubled — unable to meet its financial obligations or its debts to the smaller agricultural entities it works with. Some branches of the media even portray the company as deliberately attempting to exploit small farmers. It can appear that even the most innocuous story is misconstrued by the media in order to manufacture controversy.
For example, one of the more routine things that CMC does is import rice and sugar through long-standing importation agreements with reputable suppliers, which allow the company to purchase these goods at a slightly lower cost. Such a move is typical in nearly every business around the world: securing supplies at a lower price point is a common business practice. However, the media tends to present such strategies as though CMC is attempting to swindle suppliers or purchase items at exploitatively low prices. When an agreement was made to purchase five 20-foot containers of white and brown sugar per month at an annual value of more than $10 million, several media outlets portrayed this as exploitation of the world's sugar farmers. Negotiating competitively with suppliers is essential for almost any business, and many people consider such a move to be simply business as usual. Yet the media likes to portray such moves as the company being manipulative and exploitative of local farmers.
CMC is known for offering competitive prices direct to consumers in the meat and vegetables market and across essentially all its products. However, the company has not been able to maintain a strong market share because of factors such as inconsistent supply and crippled distribution capacity, compounded by financial resource constraints. Multiple media outlets gave the appearance that the company was floundering and approaching financial ruin, with more than one even arguing that CMC had damaged its relationships with suppliers.
When considering media perception of CMC and its internal strategies, one can accurately assert that there is a wide range of significant domestic and international media that impact the company. The domestic media influence on CMC is twofold: it consists of a combination of big and small media. Big media refers to large print and broadcasting organizations — major newspapers, magazines, and news programs. The influence these entities have had on CMC has been largely twofold: in some instances they simply report the facts about the company, while in others they join a particularly negative bandwagon if it appears that everyone else is doing so. Big media is often controlled by governments or by corporations with governmental influence, meaning its interests frequently come under fire (Turner, 2004). Small media can sometimes appear just as powerful and persuasive as big media. Small media refers to individuals online who have platforms: bloggers, YouTubers, social media influencers, and others who are able to sway opinion in small but significant pockets by expressing their views.
References
Bajarin, T. (2015, June 30). How Taylor Swift saved Apple Music. Retrieved from http://time.com/3940500/apple-music-taylor-swift-release/
Benson, R. (2017). Profit pressures transform American media; but journalists' debate over the 'Wall' obscures systemic problems. Retrieved from http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/culture/papers/Benson.pdf
Biermann, R. (2008). Towards a theory of inter-organizational networking. The Review of International Organizations, 3(2), 151–177.
Bradley, A. J., & McDonald, M. P. (2011). The social organization: How to use social media to tap the collective genius of your customers and employees. Harvard Business Press.
Brotherton, R. (2016). Suspicious minds: Why we believe conspiracy theories.
CIP.org. (2018). The impact of media — good or bad? CareersinPsychology.org. Retrieved from https://careersinpsychology.org/impact-media/
Freedman, D. (2008). The politics of media policy. Polity.
Gitlin, T. (2003). The whole world is watching: Mass media in the making and unmaking of the new left. University of California Press.
Gordon, T. (2016, March 14). Ministry prepares to enhance social programmes. Retrieved from
Jones, N., Borgman, R., & Ulusoy, E. (2015). Impact of social media on small businesses. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 22(4), 611–632. doi:10.1108/jsbed-09-2013-0133
Kaganer, E. A., & Vaast, E. (2010, September). Responding to the (almost) unknown: Social representations and corporate policies of social media. In ICIS (p. 163).
Malone, T. (2014, December 15). Gunman robs Central Marketing Corporation. Retrieved from
Marr, B. (2015, September 8). 4 ways big data will change every business. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2015/09/08/4-ways-big-data-will-change-every-business/
Olenski, S. (2015, November 3). Social media for small business: How it's different from how big brands do it. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveolenski/2015/10/29/social-media-for-small-business-how-its-different-from-how-big-brands-do-it/
Olenski, S. (2017, November 3). Social media for small business: How it's different from how big brands do it. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveolenski/2015/10/29/social-media-for-small-business-how-its-different-from-how-big-brands-do-it/
Otterson, J. (2017, April 19). Bill O'Reilly scandal timeline: From Fox News star to unemployed. Variety.
Pontefract, D. (2016, May 10). Should companies serve only their shareholders or their stakeholders more broadly? Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/danpontefract/2016/05/09/shareholders-or-stakeholders/
Talbot, C. (2005). Performance management. In The Oxford handbook of public management.
Turner, T. (2004, July). My beef with big media. Retrieved from https://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/julyaugust-2004/my-beef-with-big-media/
van der Linden, S. (2015, August 24). The surprising power of conspiracy theories. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/socially-relevant/201508/the-surprising-power-conspiracy-theories
Young Entrepreneur Council. (2017, May 24). How to communicate your company's vision to your stakeholders. Retrieved from https://www.inc.com/young-entrepreneur-council/communicating-your-vision-to-your-companys-stakeholders.html
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.