Analysis: Research has identified seven distinct strategies used by companies in controversial industries to communicate on controversial issues
By Aideen O'Dochartaigh, DCU; Donna Marshall, UCD; Jakob Rehme, Linköping University, Sweden; Stephen Kelly, University of Salford; Roshan Boojihawon and Daniel Chicksand, University of Birmingham
New regulation like the EU's Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) will soon force companies to report annual data on their social and environmental impacts, making it easier to spot bad corporate behaviour like greenwashing. But social and environmental reporting (SER) is more than facts and figures. It's also a powerful way for companies to shape the narrative on what is acceptable behaviour and maintain their licence to operate despite harming society and the environment.
Ironically, some of the highest quality social and environmental reporting comes from companies in "controversial" industries, such as fossil fuels, tobacco, gambling and armaments. These companies take SER seriously, reporting more and better than other industries. Meanwhile, they cause substantial harm to society or the environment, by selling weapons to countries with dubious human rights records or contaminating the environment in communities. For example, arms giant Boeing has maintained a steady supply of weapons to Israel in its war on Gaza, despite protests across the US.
Our research, Reporting controversial issues in controversial industries, reveals the sophisticated communications strategies these companies use to support their licence to operate and continue with harm-causing behaviour. This was based on an analysis of Sustainability and Annual Reports published by companies in controversial industries over three years. We analysed how five companies in each of seven harm-causing industries communicate their controversial issues - alcohol, gambling, armaments, and tobacco harm human health, oil and coal impact climate change, and agricultural chemicals affect both environmental and human health.
The analysis revealed seven distinct communication strategies that controversial companies use to communicate on their controversial issues: Adapt, Deflect, Distort, Dazzle, Decoy, Deny, Ignore. Strategies are distinguished by two key attributes. First, Issue/Harm orientation (x-axis), where the company will either admit the harm caused by their product, mention more obliquely the issue or harm, or avoid it entirely. Second, Solution orientation (y-axis), where companies offer a less harmful product as a solution, no solution, or most nefariously, a misleading solution.
Adapt and Deflect - providing a less harmful product
With increasing awareness of the health risks of smoking, the tobacco industry has pivoted. Major tobacco companies now produce popular vape brands, such as Vuse (British American Tobacco) and Blu (Imperial Brands).
In their SER communications, these companies used the Adapt strategy, promoting these alternative products and their comparatively reduced harm to human health. BAT for example is committed to "Building a Smokeless World and Creating a Better Tomorrow". In contrast, their peers Japan Tobacco and Philip Morris International adopted the Deflect strategy, providing less-harmful alternative products and mentioning human health, but failing to admit to the harm caused by their products.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Brainstorm, how vaping has an unhealthy impact on indoor air quality
Distort, Dazzle and Decoy - misleading solutions
Offering misleading solutions for harm caused by the company's product is a dangerous form of greenwashing. The 2023 COP28 climate summit in Saudi Arabia was controversially chaired by Al Jaber, then CEO of oil company Saudi Aramco, the world's most profitable company which is committed to oil and gas exploration and reluctant to invest in renewable energy. Using a Distort strategy to admit harm but offer an operational solution, Al Jaber highlighted the efficiency benefits of its oil rigs now running on electricity.
Aspirational solutions are often at the heart of the Dazzle strategy, where harm is mentioned but the primary focus is exciting new technology. Fossil fuel companies emphasize their research into alternative fuels such as biofuels or hydrogen but assign them only a fraction of their investment. ExxonMobil states in its Sustainability Report that it is developing biofuels from algae, but similar vague statements have been made for over a decade with no detail or time frame.
The Decoy strategy was adopted by gambling company MGM International, the largest casino company in the world. In its 2019 annual report, it delicately fails to mention the harm caused by gambling, focusing instead on an operational solution, namely training casino staff to recognise problem gambling in customers. Earlier this year Boeing announced its sponsorship of a STEM programme for young children in Yeruham, Israel, less than a 100km from Gaza.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Radio 1's Drivetime, Oisin McConville on the need for more funding to treat gambling addiction
Deny and Ignore - no solution
Several companies chose to Ignore the harm caused by their product entirely. Three arms manufacturers, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon (now RTX Corporation) did not mention the controversial issue or the harm caused by their product and failed to provide a solution to this harm. Harm is a selling point for Raytheon and their annual reports feature descriptions of "hit-to-kill technology" and the "lethality" of their products.
Most companies in the agricultural chemicals industry adopt an Ignore strategy, apart from Monsanto, the only company which Denies the impact of its products. In its 2017 sustainability report, Monsanto stated that "no regulatory agency in the world considers glyphosate a carcinogen." This is in stark contrast to the findings of the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer that same year.
We also need to investigate how committed they are to solutions that actually work
Our research illustrates how far companies in controversial industries will go to convince us they do no harm, and assure us that the planet is safe in the hands of business. We need to interrogate the proposed solutions offered by these companies. The tobacco industry has successfully positioned vaping as a healthy alternative, but there is increasing evidence of the dangers of e-cigarettes.
We also need to investigate how committed they are to solutions that actually work. Fossil fuel companies spend only 2.5% of their capital on clean energy technologies. Use our model to interrogate corporate communications, call out greenwashing and hold powerful corporations to account for social and environmental harms.
Follow RTÉ Brainstorm on WhatsApp and Instagram for more stories and updates
Dr. Aideen O'Dochartaigh is Assistant Professor in Accounting at Dublin City University Business School. She is a former Irish Research Council awardee. Prof Donna Marshall is Professor of Supply Chain Management at University College Dublin. Prof Jakob Rehme, is a professor of Industrial Economics and Management at Linköping University, Sweden. Dr Stephen Kelly is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Salford Business School. Dr Dev K (Roshan) Boojihawon is an Associate Professor of Strategy at the Birmingham Business School at the University of Birmingham. Dr Daniel Chicksand is a Professor of Operations and Supply Management at the Birmingham Business School at the University of Birmingham.
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the views of RTÉ
