Systemic Failings or “Isolated Incidents”? A Discourse Analysis of Corporate Blame Avoidance for the Mistreatment of Immigration Detainees

This article draws on data from a major public inquiry in the UK to examine how the multinational corporation G4S sought to avoid blame for the mistreatment of immigration detainees in its care. Our analysis is based on a critical discourse analysis of oral and written evidence given by G4S and one of the company’s managing directors to the Brook House Inquiry. We show how discursive strategies of blame avoidance were prominent features of this evidence, including the scapegoating of individual custody officers, the legitimation of the profit-seeking management of immigration detention and the de-legitimation of those who brought the mistreatment of detainees to light. The article contributes to our understanding of the discursive practices employed by powerful actors to limit corporate responsibility for systemic failings.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of White Collar and Corporate Crime
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/2631309x241285415
Primary Topic
Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Systemic Failings or “Isolated Incidents”? A Discourse Analysis of Corporate Blame Avoidance for the Mistreatment of Immigration Detainees

Emily Luise Hart, Raphael Schlembach
Journal of White Collar and Corporate Crime
Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
article

Systemic Failings or “Isolated Incidents”? A Discourse Analysis of Corporate Blame Avoidance for the Mistreatment of Immigration Detainees

Emily Luise Hart, Raphael Schlembach
article en

Abstract

This article draws on data from a major public inquiry in the UK to examine how the multinational corporation G4S sought to avoid blame for the mistreatment of immigration detainees in its care. Our analysis is based on a critical discourse analysis of oral and written evidence given by G4S and one of the company’s managing directors to the Brook House Inquiry. We show how discursive strategies of blame avoidance were prominent features of this evidence, including the scapegoating of individual custody officers, the legitimation of the profit-seeking management of immigration detention and the de-legitimation of those who brought the mistreatment of detainees to light. The article contributes to our understanding of the discursive practices employed by powerful actors to limit corporate responsibility for systemic failings.

Journal of White Collar and Corporate CrimeVol. 6(2)
University of Brighton (GB), Leeds Beckett University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 75%
Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Systemic Failings or “Isolated Incidents”? A Discourse Analysis of Corporate Blame Avoidance for the Mistreatment of Immigration Detainees — Emily Luise Hart, Raphael Schlembach · Journal of White Collar and Corporate Crime (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS