Food Protection Trends - July/August 2017 - 253

where additional accurate and trustworthy information can
be found. In addition, Internet platforms could be used for
different purposes - for instance, social media can be used
to post timely updates and websites can be linked to provide
more detailed information.
Additionally, it is important to note that media, information, and source characteristics all influence consumers'
usage of information. This shows that while the media
have a great impact on communication outcomes, simple
improvements in media functionality may not yield the
best results. Information quality has to be maintained or
improved before better media functionality can produce
effective communication outcomes.
Moreover, it appears that the line between source and
medium is somewhat blurred in the minds of consumers;
for example, news sites (e.g., CNN.com) appeared to be
viewed as both the source and the medium. To a certain
degree, there does appear to be some inseparability of
the medium and source on the Internet, compared with
traditional news sources that include more print media.
This is particularly true if the source mainly communicates
over Internet-based platforms. For example, it is hard for
participants to distinguish between msn news [source]
on the msn.com website [media]. Entities interested in
leveraging the Internet should keep this in mind and
be aware that, especially in online communication, the
reputation of the information source will influence
media usage, and the ways media are used will reflect
back (positively or negatively) on the reputation of the
information source.
Lastly, it appears that it is not necessary to use separate
platform communication strategies for different demographic
groups, except for the group that is somewhat against the use
of the Internet. While previous studies have suggested the
existence of potential individual differences, this study found
that individual characteristics had no significant impact on
platform preferences for social media vs. websites, perhaps
because social media and websites are both Internet-based
platforms. This finding suggests that the use of websites
might be sufficient in contacting hard-to-reach populations,
such as younger consumers, with food safety information. On
the other hand, the existence of a group that would refuse to
use the Internet for foodborne illness outbreak information
indicates the need to maintain traditional media for food
safety communication; if the Internet is not a preferred
platform for certain populations, it may be better used as a
supplement to other forms of communication.
Limitations
In distributing the questionnaires, the goal was to get
a representative sample of the U.S. population, but as
seen, the participants are concentrated in the younger age
groups. However, this relatively young sample may in fact
be highly appropriate for the purpose of this study, since

younger groups have long been hard to reach in health
communication (6) and understanding their food safety
information needs can provide needed insights. Further,
because the data were collected online, the response group
may have had more access to the Internet. Additionally, it is
possible that the participants, instead of evaluating source
and medium together, misunderstood the terms and thus
did not distinguish between source and medium; further
investigation is needed.
Future research
First, although the Internet was clearly the most preferred
medium in this study, the possibility of employing multiple
media should be explored. Additionally, as websites were
identified as the preferred Internet platform, investigation is
recommended into how consumers form their perceptions
towards a website; for example, what makes consumers
perceive information as being accurate and trustworthy,
and what makes consumers feel the platform is easy to use?
In this regard, a qualitative study that observes consumers'
actual interactions with a website would be particularly
useful in providing insights.
Further, it would be valuable to dive deeper into
consumers' reasons for their current preferences. For
example, why do consumers feel that websites outperform
social media with regard to the criteria found to be
important to their food safety information seeking? Is it
because the current food safety communication primarily
happens on websites, so consumers feel social media would
not suit their needs in seeking information or because
websites provide superior functionality or because the
reputations of entities using various media are different?
Further, investigating source and information preferences
of consumers can be useful. Lastly, information, source,
and media characteristics appear to be, to a certain extent,
inseparable in consumers' evaluation and selection
of a medium, so it would be valuable to examine the
relationships among these characteristics and determine
how they interact and influence communication outcomes.
Efforts to ensure food safety cannot be successful unless
the resulting information is effectively communicated to
others. Although consumers may first find out about a
foodborne illness outbreak on social media, they prefer to
use websites to obtain more information about the outbreaks.
Media characteristics play an important role in consumers'
choice of where to find food safety information. Compared to
social media's interactivity, websites' existing advantages (e.g.,
more control over feature availability and greater perceived
security) are more important to consumers, although
websites' introduction of aspects of interactivity (e.g.,
functions to sign up for updates, leave comments, and share
information) could leverage consumer preferences for them
even further and lead to better communication outcomes.
Usability matters in food safety communication.

July/August Food Protection Trends

253

http://www.CNN.com http://www.msn.com

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Food Protection Trends - July/August 2017