IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/aaajpp/v27y2014i4p602-633.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rhetoric and argument in social and environmental reporting: the Dirty Laundry case

Author

Listed:
  • Niamh M. Brennan
  • Doris M. Merkl-Davies

Abstract

Purpose - – The purpose of this paper is to explore the interactive element in social and environmental reporting during a controversy between business organisations and a stakeholder over environmental performance. Design/methodology/approach - – The paper adopts Aristotle's triangular framework of the rhetorical situation to examine how the writer, the audience, and the purpose of communication interact in the choice of rhetorical strategies used to persuade others of the validity and legitimacy of a claim during a public controversy. The analysis focuses on the strategies (i.e. moves and their rhetorical realisations) in the form oflogos(appealing to logic),ethos(appealing to authority), andpathos(appealing to emotion), with a particular emphasis on metaphor, used to achieve social and political goals. The authors base the analysis on a case study involving a conflict between Greenpeace and six organisations in the sportswear/fashion industry over wastewater discharge of hazardous chemicals. The conflict played out in a series of 20 press releases issued by the parties over a two-month period. Findings - – All six firms interacting with Greenpeace in the form of press releases eventually conceded to Greenpeace's demand to eliminate hazardous chemicals from their supply chains. The paper attributes this to Greenpeace's ability to harness support from other key stakeholders and to use rhetoric effectively. Results show the extensive use of rhetoric by all parties. Originality/value - – The authors regard legitimacy construction as reliant on communication and as being achieved by organisations participating in a dialogue with stakeholders. For this purpose, the paper develops an analytical framework which situates environmental reporting in a specific rhetorical situation and links rhetoric, argument, and metaphor.

Suggested Citation

  • Niamh M. Brennan & Doris M. Merkl-Davies, 2014. "Rhetoric and argument in social and environmental reporting: the Dirty Laundry case," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 27(4), pages 602-633, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:v:27:y:2014:i:4:p:602-633
    DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-04-2013-1333
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2013-1333/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2013-1333/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2013-1333?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:eme:aaajpp:v:21:y:2008:i:8:p:1085-1115 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Philip Linsley & Peter Kajuter, 2008. "Restoring reputation and repairing legitimacy: a case study of impression management in response to a major risk event at Allied Irish Banks plc," International Journal of Financial Services Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(1), pages 65-82.
    3. Jeff Everett & Dean Neu, 2000. "Ecological Modernization And The Limits Of Environmental Accounting?," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 5-29, March.
    4. Niamh Brennan & Doris Merkl-Davies & Annika Beelitz, 2013. "Dialogism in Corporate Social Responsibility Communications: Conceptualising Verbal Interaction Between Organisations and Their Audiences," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(4), pages 665-679, July.
    5. Paul H Thibodeau & Lera Boroditsky, 2011. "Metaphors We Think With: The Role of Metaphor in Reasoning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(2), pages 1-11, February.
    6. Walters, Melissa, 2004. "Alternative accounting thought and the prison-house of metaphor," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 157-187, February.
    7. Brennan, Niamh M. & Daly, Caroline A. & Harrington, Claire S., 2010. "Rhetoric, argument and impression management in hostile takeover defence documents," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 253-268.
    8. Niamh Brennan & S. J. Gray, 2000. "Rhetoric and argument in financial reporting : disclosures in profit forecasts and takeover documents," Open Access publications 10197/2965, Research Repository, University College Dublin.
    9. Suzanne M. Carter, 2006. "The Interaction of Top Management Group, Stakeholder, and Situational Factors on Certain Corporate Reputation Management Activities," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(5), pages 1145-1176, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Niamh Brennan & Doris M. Merkl-Davies, 2013. "Accounting Narratives and Impression Management," Open Access publications 10197/4949, Research Repository, University College Dublin.
    2. Merkl-Davies, Doris M. & Koller, Veronika, 2012. "‘Metaphoring’ people out of this world: A Critical Discourse Analysis of a chairman's statement of a UK defence firm," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 178-193.
    3. Davison, Jane, 2011. "Paratextual framing of the annual report: Liminal literary conventions and visual devices," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 118-134.
    4. Brennan, Niamh M. & Edgar, Victoria C. & Power, Sean Bradley, 2022. "COVID-19 profit warnings: Delivering bad news in a time of crisis," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(2).
    5. Lauwo, Sarah & Kyriacou, Orthodoxia & Julius Otusanya, Olatunde, 2020. "When sorry is not an option: CSR reporting and ‘face work’ in a stigmatised industry – A case study of Barrick (Acacia) gold mine in Tanzania," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    6. Lorenzo Gelmini & Valentina Minutiello & Patrizia Tettamanzi & Maurizio Comoli, 2021. "Rhetoric, Accounting and Accountability: COVID-19 and the Case of Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-21, April.
    7. Beattie, Vivien, 2014. "Accounting narratives and the narrative turn in accounting research: Issues, theory, methodology, methods and a research framework," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 111-134.
    8. Juan Pineiro-Chousa & Marcos Vizcaíno-González & M. Ángeles López-Cabarcos, 2016. "Reputation, Game Theory and Entrepreneurial Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-13, November.
    9. Chandler, Jeffrey A. & Payne, G. Tyge & Moore, Curt & Brigham, Keith H., 2019. "Family involvement signals in initial public offerings," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 8-16.
    10. Stéphanie Chatelain-Ponroy & Olivier Vidal, 2013. "Comptabilité Sans Frontières : Intérêt D'Une Cartographie," Post-Print hal-00997956, HAL.
    11. Horvat Robert & Korošec Bojana, 2015. "The Role of Accounting in a Society: Only a techn(olog)ical solution for the problem of economic measurement or also a tool of social ideology?," Naše gospodarstvo/Our economy, Sciendo, vol. 61(4), pages 32-40, August.
    12. Zhe Ouyang & Xiaojiao Wang & Yang Liu, 2024. "The use of corporate social responsibility in response to product‐harm crisis: How do stock market reactions matter?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 3081-3097, July.
    13. Rihab Grassa & Nejia Moumen & Khaled Hussainey, 2021. "What drives risk disclosure in Islamic and conventional banks? An international comparison," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(4), pages 6338-6361, October.
    14. Thibodeau, Paul H. & Perko, Victoria L. & Flusberg, Stephen J., 2015. "The relationship between narrative classification of obesity and support for public policy interventions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 27-35.
    15. Dillard, Jesse, 2008. "A political base of a polyphonic debate," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 894-900.
    16. Annika Veh & Markus Göbel & Rick Vogel, 2019. "Corporate reputation in management research: a review of the literature and assessment of the concept," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(2), pages 315-353, December.
    17. Isidora Tachmatzidi, 2018. "Takeover Defenses in the United Kingdom," International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), vol. 0(4), pages 105-118.
    18. Graupe, Silja & Steffestun, Theresa, 2018. ""The market deals out profit and losses": Wie ökonomische Standardlehrbücher das unreflektierte Denken in Metaphern fördern," Working Paper Serie des Instituts für Ökonomie Ök-38, Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung (HfGG), Institut für Ökonomie.
    19. König, Andreas & Fehn, Angela & Puck, Jonas & Graf-Vlachy, Lorenz, 2017. "Primary or complex? Towards a theory of metaphorical strategy communication in MNCs," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 270-285.
    20. Burnett, Royce D. & Hansen, Don R., 2008. "Ecoefficiency: Defining a role for environmental cost management," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 551-581, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:v:27:y:2014:i:4:p:602-633. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.