Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences

SUBMITINFORMATION
EnglishTürkçe

Research Article


DOI :10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026   IUP :10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026    Full Text (PDF)

Reading Instagram Posts of Environmental Nongovernmental Organizations in the Context of Dialogic Principles and Public Relations Models

Mine Yeniçeri Alemdar, Celal Kocaömer

The Web 2.0 technology structure that activates users paved the way for the “direction of communication, interaction, dialogue” of discussions in the public relations literature. Examining the concept of dialogue specifically for NGOs may be important in terms of developing social media usage. As a social media platform, Instagram is not adequately addressed in the literature in terms of dialogic principles. For this reason, the aim of this study is to determine how environmental NGOs use the principles of dialogic communication, public relations models, and interactivity in their Instagram posts. It is found that the most popular environmental NGOs are TEMA, Greenpeace, and WWF, and their posts have been evaluated through content analysis. In the process, their posts have been examined according to Kent & Taylor’s dialogic principles. In addition, the categorization and ratio calculations have been made according to Grunig & Hunt’s four models of public relations, and interaction rates have been calculated according to Avidar’s responsiveness pyramid. Findings suggest that environmental NGOs use Instagram by reflecting dialogic communication principles. For public relations models, being asymmetrical with a high frequency and weakness of interaction ratios begs the question: can dialogic principles be performed by a onesided information flow and low interaction?

Keywords: Public relations models, dialogic communication, interaction, social media, Instagram
DOI :10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026   IUP :10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026    Full Text (PDF)

Çevreci Sivil Toplum Kuruluşlarının Instagram Paylaşımlarını Diyalogsal İlkeler ve Halkla İlişkiler Modelleri Bağlamında Okumak

Mine Yeniçeri Alemdar, Celal Kocaömer

Web 2.0 teknolojisinin kullanıcıları aktifleştiren yapısı halkla ilişkiler alan yazınında “iletişimin yönü, etkileşim, diyalog” tartışmalarına zemin hazırlamıştır. Diyalog kavramının STK’lar özelinde incelenmesi ise sosyal medya kullanımlarını geliştirme noktasında önemlidir. Sosyal medya platformu Instagram, alan yazında diyalogsal ilkeler özelinde yeterince ele alınmamaktadır. Bu nedenle çalışma, çevreci STK’ların Instagram içeriklerindeki diyalogsal iletişim ilkelerini, halkla ilişkiler modellerini ve etkileşimi anlama çabasındadır. Instagram üzerinde en fazla takipçiye sahip üç çevreci STK olan; TEMA, Greenpeace ve WWF’nin paylaşımları; içerik analizi tekniği ile değerlendirilmektedir. Bu süreçte paylaşımlar; Kent ve Taylor tarafından belirlenen diyologsal ilkeler ışığında irdelenmekte, Grunig ve Hunt tarafından sunulan halkla ilişkilerin 4 modeline göre kategorileştirilmekte ve Avidar’ın yanıt piramidine göre etkileşim oranları hesaplanmaktadır. Bulgular, çevreci STK’ların Instagramı diyalogsal iletişim ilkelerini yansıtacak şekilde kullandığı yönündedir. Halkla ilişkiler modelleri açısından değerlendirildiğinde ise en çok kamuoyu bilgilendirme modeli kullanılmştır. Halkla ilişkiler modelleri arasından asimetrik bir modelin en yüksek frekansa sahip olması, ayrıca etkileşim oranlarının zayıflığı, bilgi akışının yönüne (STK’lardan kullanıcılara yönelik) ilişkin “tek yönlü bilgi akışı ve zayıf etkileşim ile diyalogsal ilkeler yerine getirilebilir mi?” sorusunun düşünülmesi gerektiğini ortaya koymaktadır.

Keywords: Halkla ilişkiler modelleri, diyalogsal iletişim, etkileşim, sosyal medya, Instagram

EXTENDED ABSTRACT


Studies in the literature show how public relations models (Alemdar, Elgün, & Maden, 2018; Beverly, 2013; Grunig, Grunig, Sriramesh, Huang, & Lyra, 1995; Grunig & Hunt, 1984; Waters & Jamal, 2011;) and dialogic communication (Arslan, 2019; Bortree & Seltzer, 2009; Eray, 2016; Kent, & Taylor, 1998; Köseoğlu & Köker, 2014; Linvill, McGee, & Hicks, 2012; McAllister, 2013; Rybalko & Seltzer, 2010; Taylor, Kent, & White, 2001) are used in the new media. One social media platform, namely Instagram, is not adequately addressed in the field of literature in terms of dialogic communication and public relations models. In the literature, only one study (Beverly, 2013) examining public relations models and dialogic communication was found.

For this reason, this study aims to create a literature-based structure-code sheet that would allow the analysis of Instagram posts within the context of dialogic principles and public relations models, to compare these structures and to prepare the ground for future research. It aims to determine how environmental NGOs use the principles of dialogic communication and public relations models in their Instagram content. In this context, the research questions of this study are as follows:

Research Question 1: How do environmental NGOs use Instagram in terms of technical and design cluster?

Research Question 2: How do environmental NGOs use Instagram in terms of dialogic cluster?

Research Question 3: Which public relations models do environmental NGOs use on Instagram?

Research Question 4: How do environmental NGOs use Instagram’s interaction feature?

To answer the research questions, this study analyzes the Instagram profiles, feed posts, and stories of TEMA, Greenpeace, and WWF within the framework of two clusters (technical and design cluster, dialogic cluster) with the principles of dialogic communication. Furthermore, it codes the Instagram feed posts and stories of these three NGOs within the scope of public relations models. Finally, it emphasizes the direction of communication, which depends on how environmental NGOs respond to Instagram comments, and analyzes the feed posts and stories (photo+story+comment) through content analysis.

To briefly address the findings obtained within the scope of the study, TEMA, Greenpeace Turkey, and WWF Turkey are found to respectively cover Instagram in terms of technical and design cluster at 92%, 84%, and 88% rates (RQ1). As a result, it can be concluded that the three environmental NGOs use Instagram sufficiently based on the scores obtained in terms of technical and design cluster. TEMA, Greenpeace Turkey, and WWF Turkey are found to respectively cover Instagram in terms of dialogic cluster at 57%, 67%, and 71% rates (RQ2). Consequently, it is argued that the three environmental NGOs use of Instagram is partly effective in terms of dialogic cluster, and it should be improved. To answer Research Question 3, the rate of using public relations models in posts is decisive, and public information model is most commonly used in TEMA and WWF Turkey’s content. Greenpeace Turkey, on the other hand, uses the two-way asymmetrical model and public information model equally, and TEMA and WWF Turkey’s second most commonly used model is the two-way asymmetrical one. The usage rates of the press agentry and the two-way symmetrical model for three NGOs are lower than the other models. 

To answer Research Question 4, Instagram comments are examined. NGOs’ ability to respond to comments made to them is revealed. It is evident that TEMA, Greenpeace Turkey, and WWF Turkey respond to comments with both likes and explanations. During the examined period, TEMA responded to 19 out of 1219 comments received from 60 feed posts and liked 19 comments; Greenpeace Turkey responded 13 out of 1945 comments received from 49 feed posts and liked two comments; and WWF Turkey responded 28 out of 656 comments received from 32 feed posts and liked 187 comments. NGOs’ responsiveness and interaction elements result in “low-level responsiveness,” and it is observed that the interaction elements were not actively used.

In light of the above information, it is seen that NGOs have used Instagram effectively in terms of dialogic communication. Although the evaluated feed posts and stories were found to be sufficient for the formation of dialogic communication, when analyzed in terms of public relations models, it was determined that they rely on a one-way communication structure aimed at informing the public rather than two-way, dialoguebased communication. Although the necessary dialogical cluster items are included in the feed posts and stories in order to ensure dialogic communication, this study finds that the asymmetric model has the highest frequency and weakness of interaction rates among the public relations models. Regarding the direction of information flow (from NGOs to users), it raises the following question: can dialogic principles be fulfilled with a one-way information flow?


PDF View

References

  • Abdullah, A. N., Husain, K., & Mohin, M. (2013). Environmental online campaigns through website interactivity: The case of Malaysia environmental NGOs (MENGO). Journal of Human Capital Development (JHCD), 6(2), 81-98. google scholar
  • Avidar, R. (2013). The responsiveness pyramid: Embedding responsiveness and interactivity into public relations theory. Public Relations Review, 39(5), 440-450. google scholar
  • Alemdar, M. Y., Elgün, A., & Maden, D. (2018). Türkiye’deki kadın sivil toplum kuruşlarının twitter kullanımına yönelik bir araştırma. Bilge Kağan 1. Uluslarası Bilim Kongresi (pp. 251-261). Amsterdam: İdea Modern Eğitim Danışmanlık. google scholar
  • Armstrong, C., & Butcher, C. (2018). Digital civil society: How Nigerian NGOs utilize social media platforms. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 31(3), 251-273. google scholar
  • Arslan, C. (2019). An analysis of Instagram’s dialogical communication building potential in Turkish theater institutions, Anadolu Üniversitesi Sanat ve Tasarım Dergisi, 9(1), 84-98. google scholar
  • Askanius, T., & Uldam, J. (2011). Online social media for radical politics: Climate change activism on YouTube. International Journal of Electronic Governance, 4(1-2), 69-84. google scholar
  • Barbour, R. S. (2001). Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ, 322(7294), 1115-1117. google scholar
  • Beverly, J. A. (2013). Public relations models and dialogic communication in the twitterverse: an analysis of how colleges and universities are engaging their publics through Twitter (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Southern Mississippi, School of Communication, Mississippi, USA. google scholar
  • Bortree, D. S., & Seltzer, T. (2009). Dialogic strategies and outcomes: An analysis of environmental advocacy groups’ Facebook profiles. Public Relations Review, 35, 317-319. google scholar
  • Campbell, D. A., Lambright, K. T., & Wells, C. J. (2014). Looking for friends, fans, and followers? Social media use in public and nonprofit human services. Public Administration Review, 74(5), 655-663. google scholar
  • Cho, M., Schweickart, T. & Haase, A. (2014). Public engagement with nonprofit organizations on Facebook. Public Relations Review. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.01.008. google scholar
  • Curtis, L., Edwards, C., Fraser, K. L., Gudelsky, S., Holmquist, J., Thornton, K., & Sweetser, K. D. (2010). Adoption of social media for public relations by nonprofit organizations. Public Relations Review, 36(1), 90-92. google scholar
  • Diyalog. (2020). In Türk Dil Kurumu Sözlükleri. Retrieved from https://sozluk.gov.tr/ google scholar
  • Eray, T. E. (2016). Utilization of corporate websites as a dialogic public relations tool in Turkey. Global Media Journal TR Edition, 6(12), 201-213. google scholar
  • Evans, A., Twomey, J., & Talan, S. (2011). Twitter as a public relations tool. Public Relations Journal, 5(1), 1-20. google scholar
  • Goodell, L. S., Stage, V. C., & Cooke, N. K. (2016). Practical qualitative research strategies: Training interviewers and coders. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 48(8), 578-585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2016.06.001. google scholar
  • Grunig, J. E. (1993). Implications of public relations for other domains of communication. Journal of Communication, 43(3), 164-173. google scholar
  • Grunig, J. E., & Grunig, L. A. (1991). Conceptual differences in public relations and marketing: The case of health-care organizations. Public Relations Review, 17(3), 257-278. google scholar
  • Grunig, J. E., Grunig, L. A., Sriramesh, K., Huang, Y.-H., & Lyra, A. (1995). Models of public relations in an international setting. Journal of Public Relations Research, 7(3), 163-186. google scholar
  • Grunig, J. E., & Hunt, T. (1984). Managing public relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. google scholar
  • Ha, L., & James, E. L. (1998). Interactivity reexamined: A baseline analysis of early business web sites. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 42(4), 457-474. google scholar
  • Ihator, A. S. (2001). Communication style in the information age. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 6(4), 199-204. google scholar
  • Jensen, J. F. (1998). Interactivity. Nordicom Review, Nordic Research on Media and Comunication Review, 19(2), 191. google scholar
  • Jo, S., & Kim, Y. (2003). The effect of web characteristics on relationship building. Journal of Public Relations Research, 15(3), 199-223. google scholar
  • Kelleher, T. (2009). Conversational voice, communicated commitment, and public relations outcomes in interactive online communication. Journal of Communication, 59(1), 172-188. google scholar
  • Kent, M. L., & Taylor, M. (1998). Building dialogic relationships through the World Wide Web. Public Relations Review, 24(3), 321-334. google scholar
  • Kim, D., Chun, H., Kwak, Y., & Nam, Y. (2014). The employment of dialogic principles in website, Facebook, and Twitter platforms of environmental nonprofit organizations. Social Science Computer Review, 32(5), 590-605. google scholar
  • Kim, J., & Lee, K. H. (2019). Influence of integration on interactivity in social media luxury brand communities. Journal of Business Research, 99, 422-429. google scholar
  • Köseoğlu, Ö., & Köker, N. E. (2014). Türk üniversiteleri Twitter'ı diyalogsal iletişim açısından nasıl kullanıyor: Beş Türk üniversitesi üzerine bir içerik analizi. Global Media Journal: TR Edition, 4(8), 213-239. google scholar
  • Linvill, D. L., McGee, S. E., & Hicks, L. K. (2012). Colleges’ and universities’ use of Twitter: A content analysis. Public Relations Review, 38(4), 636-638. google scholar
  • Lombard, M., Snyder‐Duch, J., & Bracken, C. C. (2002). Content analysis in mass communication: Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability. Human Communication Research, 28(4), 587-604. google scholar
  • Lovejoy, K., & Saxton, G. D. (2012). Information, community, and action: how nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(3), 337-353. google scholar
  • McAllister, S. M. (2013). Toward a dialogic theory of fundraising. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 37(4), 262-277. google scholar
  • McMillan, S. J., & Hwang, J. S. (2002). Measures of perceived interactivity: An exploration of the role of direction of communication, user control, and time in shaping perceptions of interactivity. Journal of Advertising, 31(3), 29-42. google scholar
  • Mossberger, K., Wu, Y., & Crawford, J. (2013). Connecting citizens and local governments? Social media and interactivity in major US cities. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 351-358. google scholar
  • Muckensturm, E. (2013). Using dialogic principles on Facebook: How the accommodation sector is communicating with its' consumers. (Unpublished master's thesis). Clemson University, College of Behavioral, Social and Health Sciences, South Carolina, USA. google scholar
  • Newhagen, J. E., & Rafaeli, S. (1996). Why communication researchers should study the Internet: A dialogue. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication, 1(4), JCMC145. google scholar
  • O’Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2020). Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: Debates and practical guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1-13. google scholar
  • Özdemir, B. P., & Yamanoğlu, M. A. (2010). Türkiye'deki sivil toplum kuruluşları web sitelerinin diyalojik iletişim kapasiteleri üzerine bir inceleme. Ankyra: Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1(2), 3-36. google scholar
  • Özoran, B. A. (2017). Bir halkla ilişkiler ütopyası: Diyalojik halkla ilişkiler. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, 53, 1-30. google scholar
  • Patton, M. Q. (1999). Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. HSR: Health Service Research, 34(5) Part II. google scholar
  • Rafaeli, S & Ariel, Y. (2007). Assessind interactivity in computer mediated research. pp.71-88. In A. N. Joinson, K. Y. A. McKenna, T. Postmes, & U. Reips (Eds.), Oxford handbook of internet psychology (pp.71-88). UK: Oxford University Press. google scholar
  • Rafaeli, S., & Sudweeks, F. (1998). Interactivity on the Nets. In S. Rafaeli, M. L. McLaughlin, & F. Sudweeks (Eds.), Network and Netplay: Virtual Groups on the Internet (pp. 173-189). USA: The MIT Press. google scholar
  • Raja-Yusof, R. J., Norman, A. A., Abdul-Rahman, S. S., & Mohd-Yusoff, Z. (2016). Cyber-volunteering: Social media affordances in fulfilling NGO social missions. Computers in Human Behavior, 57, 388-397. google scholar
  • Rogers, E. M. (1986). Communication technology: The new media in society. New York, USA: The Free Press. google scholar
  • Rybalko, S., & Seltzer, T. (2010). Dialogic communication in 140 characters or less: How Fortune 500 companies engage stakeholders using Twitter. Public Relations Review, 36, 336-341. google scholar
  • Saffer, A. J., Sommerfeldt, E. J., & Taylor, M. (2013). The effects of organizational Twitter interactivity on organization–public relationships. Public Relations Review, 39(3), 213-215. google scholar
  • Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2014). Towards cyberactivism 2.0? Understanding the use of social media and other information technologies for political activism and social movements. Government Information Quarterly, 31(3), 365-378. google scholar
  • Seo, H., Kim, J. Y., & Yang, S. U. (2009). Global activism and new media: A study of transnational NGOs’ online public relations. Public Relations Review, 35(2), 123-126. google scholar
  • Smith, B. G. (2010). Socially distributing public relations: Twitter, Haiti, and interactivity in social media. Public Relations Review, 36(4), 329-335. google scholar
  • Stromer-Galley, J. (2004). Interactivity-as-product and interactivity-as-process. The Information Society, 20(5), 391-394. google scholar
  • Taylor, M., Kent, M. L., & White, W. J. (2001). How activist organizations are using the ınternet to build relationships. Public Relations Review, 263-284. google scholar
  • Taylor, M. & Kent, M. L. (2014). “Te value of social media for pushing activist organizations social agendas: Implications for public relations theory and practice”. Quarterly Review of Business Disciplines, 1(1), 76–87. google scholar
  • TUİK. (n.d.). Retrieved December 11, 2019 from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1028 google scholar
  • Türkal, İ., & Güllüpunar, H. (2017). Diyalogsal halkla ilişkiler bağlamında sosyal medya kullanımı: Türkiye’de ilk 100’de yer alan şirketler üzerine bir inceleme. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, 5(2), 591-618. google scholar
  • Uzunoğlu, E., & Kip, S. M. (2014). Building relationships through websites: A content analysis of Turkish environmental non-profit organizations’ (NPO) websites. Public Relations Review, 40(1), 113-115. google scholar
  • Waters, R. D., Burnett, E., Lamm, A., & Lucas, J. (2009). Engaging stakeholders through social networking: How nonprofit organizations are using Facebook. Public Relations Review, 35(2), 1. google scholar
  • Waters, R. D. (2010). The use of social media by nonprofit organizations: An examination from the diffusion of innovations perspective. In S. Dasgupta (Eds.), Social computing: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 1420-1432). IGI Global, 02-106. google scholar
  • Waters, R. D., & Jamal, J. Y. (2011). Tweet, tweet, tweet: A content analysis of nonprofit organizations’ Twitter updates. Public Relations Review, 37, 321-324. google scholar
  • We Are Social & Hootsuite. (2019). Digital in 2018 in Western Asia essential insights into internet, social media, mobile, and ecommerce use across the region. google scholar
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara, Turkey: Seçkin Yayıncılık. google scholar
  • Zollet, R., & Back, A. (2015). Critical factors influencing diffusion of interactivity innovations on corporate websites. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 58(1), 2-19. google scholar

Citations

Copy and paste a formatted citation or use one of the options to export in your chosen format


EXPORT



APA

Yeniçeri Alemdar, M., & Kocaömer, C. (2020). Reading Instagram Posts of Environmental Nongovernmental Organizations in the Context of Dialogic Principles and Public Relations Models. Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences, 0(59), 299-331. https://doi.org/10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026


AMA

Yeniçeri Alemdar M, Kocaömer C. Reading Instagram Posts of Environmental Nongovernmental Organizations in the Context of Dialogic Principles and Public Relations Models. Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences. 2020;0(59):299-331. https://doi.org/10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026


ABNT

Yeniçeri Alemdar, M.; Kocaömer, C. Reading Instagram Posts of Environmental Nongovernmental Organizations in the Context of Dialogic Principles and Public Relations Models. Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences, [Publisher Location], v. 0, n. 59, p. 299-331, 2020.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Yeniçeri Alemdar, Mine, and Celal Kocaömer. 2020. “Reading Instagram Posts of Environmental Nongovernmental Organizations in the Context of Dialogic Principles and Public Relations Models.” Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences 0, no. 59: 299-331. https://doi.org/10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026


Chicago: Humanities Style

Yeniçeri Alemdar, Mine, and Celal Kocaömer. “Reading Instagram Posts of Environmental Nongovernmental Organizations in the Context of Dialogic Principles and Public Relations Models.” Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences 0, no. 59 (May. 2024): 299-331. https://doi.org/10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026


Harvard: Australian Style

Yeniçeri Alemdar, M & Kocaömer, C 2020, 'Reading Instagram Posts of Environmental Nongovernmental Organizations in the Context of Dialogic Principles and Public Relations Models', Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences, vol. 0, no. 59, pp. 299-331, viewed 17 May. 2024, https://doi.org/10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Yeniçeri Alemdar, M. and Kocaömer, C. (2020) ‘Reading Instagram Posts of Environmental Nongovernmental Organizations in the Context of Dialogic Principles and Public Relations Models’, Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences, 0(59), pp. 299-331. https://doi.org/10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026 (17 May. 2024).


MLA

Yeniçeri Alemdar, Mine, and Celal Kocaömer. “Reading Instagram Posts of Environmental Nongovernmental Organizations in the Context of Dialogic Principles and Public Relations Models.” Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences, vol. 0, no. 59, 2020, pp. 299-331. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026


Vancouver

Yeniçeri Alemdar M, Kocaömer C. Reading Instagram Posts of Environmental Nongovernmental Organizations in the Context of Dialogic Principles and Public Relations Models. Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences [Internet]. 17 May. 2024 [cited 17 May. 2024];0(59):299-331. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026 doi: 10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026


ISNAD

Yeniçeri Alemdar, Mine - Kocaömer, Celal. “Reading Instagram Posts of Environmental Nongovernmental Organizations in the Context of Dialogic Principles and Public Relations Models”. Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences 0/59 (May. 2024): 299-331. https://doi.org/10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0026



TIMELINE


Submitted11.03.2020
Accepted05.11.2020
Published Online30.12.2020

LICENCE


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


SHARE




Istanbul University Press aims to contribute to the dissemination of ever growing scientific knowledge through publication of high quality scientific journals and books in accordance with the international publishing standards and ethics. Istanbul University Press follows an open access, non-commercial, scholarly publishing.