Discursive struggles and contested stigma extensions: explaining the gradual stigmatization of the U.S. tobacco industry
Despite extensive research on stigma, we still lack a comprehensive understanding of how industry stigmatization progresses when constantly contested by resourceful incumbents. To shed light on this issue, we focus on the revealing case of the U.S. tobacco industry between 1980 and 2016. Combining s...
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
INFORMS
2024
|
| _version_ | 1826315484182609920 |
|---|---|
| author | Aranda, AM Vaara, E Etchanchu, H Guyt, JY |
| author_facet | Aranda, AM Vaara, E Etchanchu, H Guyt, JY |
| author_sort | Aranda, AM |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | Despite extensive research on stigma, we still lack a comprehensive understanding of how industry
stigmatization progresses when constantly contested by resourceful incumbents. To shed light on this
issue, we focus on the revealing case of the U.S. tobacco industry between 1980 and 2016. Combining
structural topic modeling and discourse analysis to explore the extensive media discussions surrounding
the industry, we find that stigmatization unfolds through three phases, each characterized by discursive
struggles, which result in contested stigma extensions: contested stigma extension by establishing harm
(1980-1992), contested stigma extension by assigning responsibility (1993-2010), and contested stigma
extension by creating new norms (2011-2016). We develop a process model highlighting three key
mechanisms in stigmatization processes: attention, which shifts focus to new issues and discussions;
stigma construction work, where the stigmatizers use discursive strategies to establish stigma; and
resistance work, where targets use discursive strategies to slow down stigmatization. The interplay of
these mechanisms reveals that stigmatization is neither linear nor complete but characterized by partial
and contested stigma extensions. While acknowledging the limitations of our case, our study advances
research by showing how industry stigmatization persists even when challenged, opening new avenues
for future research in related settings. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-09T03:26:17Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:4f3c5135-44a4-4b6f-8c89-c0dea2360298 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-09T03:26:17Z |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| publisher | INFORMS |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:4f3c5135-44a4-4b6f-8c89-c0dea23602982024-11-29T09:11:29ZDiscursive struggles and contested stigma extensions: explaining the gradual stigmatization of the U.S. tobacco industryJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:4f3c5135-44a4-4b6f-8c89-c0dea2360298EnglishSymplectic ElementsINFORMS2024Aranda, AMVaara, EEtchanchu, HGuyt, JYDespite extensive research on stigma, we still lack a comprehensive understanding of how industry stigmatization progresses when constantly contested by resourceful incumbents. To shed light on this issue, we focus on the revealing case of the U.S. tobacco industry between 1980 and 2016. Combining structural topic modeling and discourse analysis to explore the extensive media discussions surrounding the industry, we find that stigmatization unfolds through three phases, each characterized by discursive struggles, which result in contested stigma extensions: contested stigma extension by establishing harm (1980-1992), contested stigma extension by assigning responsibility (1993-2010), and contested stigma extension by creating new norms (2011-2016). We develop a process model highlighting three key mechanisms in stigmatization processes: attention, which shifts focus to new issues and discussions; stigma construction work, where the stigmatizers use discursive strategies to establish stigma; and resistance work, where targets use discursive strategies to slow down stigmatization. The interplay of these mechanisms reveals that stigmatization is neither linear nor complete but characterized by partial and contested stigma extensions. While acknowledging the limitations of our case, our study advances research by showing how industry stigmatization persists even when challenged, opening new avenues for future research in related settings. |
| spellingShingle | Aranda, AM Vaara, E Etchanchu, H Guyt, JY Discursive struggles and contested stigma extensions: explaining the gradual stigmatization of the U.S. tobacco industry |
| title | Discursive struggles and contested stigma extensions: explaining the gradual stigmatization of the U.S. tobacco industry |
| title_full | Discursive struggles and contested stigma extensions: explaining the gradual stigmatization of the U.S. tobacco industry |
| title_fullStr | Discursive struggles and contested stigma extensions: explaining the gradual stigmatization of the U.S. tobacco industry |
| title_full_unstemmed | Discursive struggles and contested stigma extensions: explaining the gradual stigmatization of the U.S. tobacco industry |
| title_short | Discursive struggles and contested stigma extensions: explaining the gradual stigmatization of the U.S. tobacco industry |
| title_sort | discursive struggles and contested stigma extensions explaining the gradual stigmatization of the u s tobacco industry |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT arandaam discursivestrugglesandcontestedstigmaextensionsexplainingthegradualstigmatizationoftheustobaccoindustry AT vaarae discursivestrugglesandcontestedstigmaextensionsexplainingthegradualstigmatizationoftheustobaccoindustry AT etchanchuh discursivestrugglesandcontestedstigmaextensionsexplainingthegradualstigmatizationoftheustobaccoindustry AT guytjy discursivestrugglesandcontestedstigmaextensionsexplainingthegradualstigmatizationoftheustobaccoindustry |