Strategic Silence and Discursive Repair: A Critical Genre Analysis of Negative Safety Disclosures in CSR Reports

Abstract

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports increasingly include negative disclosures acknowledging organizational failures and safety incidents, creating tensions between transparency obligations and reputation management. This study examines how Fortune 500 companies rhetorically construct negative safety disclosures using Critical Genre Analysis. Through systematic analysis of 20 safety disclosure sections from companies across five industries, we investigate rhetorical moves, interdiscursive practices, and cultural values characterizing these communications.

The analysis reveals a standardized three-move rhetorical structure: “presenting the safety scene,” “reporting safety disclosure,” and “prompting action,” comprising ten constituent steps. Key findings demonstrate systematic interdiscursivity involving demonstrative, legal, and evaluative discourse types that transform regulatory compliance into strategic positioning opportunities. Three dominant cultural orientations emerge: altruistic culture extending safety benefits beyond organizational boundaries, human-centered culture emphasizing employee value, and science-based culture foregrounding technological sophistication.

Results indicate companies strategically limit detailed incident reporting (15% of reports) while universally emphasizing safety commitments (100% of reports) and future endeavors (90% of reports). Negative disclosures function as complex rhetorical achievements rather than simple transparency exercises. These findings contribute to corporate communication research by illuminating how organizations balance competing stakeholder expectations while maintaining strategic advantage through sophisticated rhetorical strategies that simultaneously fulfill transparency obligations and advance corporate positioning.