An emerging field of research views Corporate Political Advocacy (CPA) as a communication strategy that responds to the challenges of public relations in divided societies. CPA takes a political position in public and, by doing so, appears to deliberately alienate some of its stakeholders. This study challenges the assumption that CPA discards a unifying epideictic rhetoric in favour of agonistic politics. The investigated case is Nike’s Dream Crazy campaign starring American football player Colin Kaepernick, whose protest against race discrimination in the United States sparked a heated public debate. Although the critical analysis of the campaign and responses on Twitter reveal deep political cleavages, Nike is concurrently engaged in unchallenged communication praising the hyper-individualism of a market ideology. The epideictic contingency of Nike’s CPA undermines the social cause ostensibly at the heart of the campaign: the fight against racial discrimination.

中文翻译：

---

企业政治主张的偶然性：耐克与科林·卡佩尼克的“疯狂梦想”运动

一个新兴的研究领域将公司政治宣传（CPA）视为一种沟通策略，可以应对分裂社会中公共关系的挑战。CPA在公众场合担任政治职务，这样做似乎是故意疏远其某些利益相关者。这项研究对以下假设提出了质疑，即注册会计师舍弃了统一的流行言论，以支持竞争性政治。被调查的案例是由美国足球运动员科林·卡佩尼克（Colin Kaepernick）主演的耐克（Nike）的“疯狂梦想”运动，该运动对美国种族歧视的抗议引发了激烈的公众辩论。尽管对该活动的批评性分析和Twitter上的回应显示出深深的政治分歧，但耐克同时进行了无可挑剔的沟通，称赞市场意识形态的高度个体化。