Blame-avoiding strategies for a digital scandal

References

1. Benoit, William L., Paul Gullifor, and Daniel A. Panici
   1991 “President Reagan’s defensive discourse on the Iran-Contra affair.” Communication Studies42 (3): 272–294. 10.1080/10510979109368342
   https://doi.org/10.1080/10510979109368342 [Google Scholar]
2. Boatwright, Brandon Carl, and Candace White
   2020 “Is privacy dead? Does it matter?” The Journal of Public Interest Communications4 (1): 78–78. 10.32473/jpic.v4.i1.p78
   https://doi.org/10.32473/jpic.v4.i1.p78 [Google Scholar]
3. Fairclough, Norman
   1995 Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London and New York: Longman.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Halliday, M. A. K.
   1994 An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed.London: Arnold.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Hansson, Sten
   2015a “Calculated overcommunication: Strategic uses of prolixity, irrelevance, and repetition in administrative language.” Journal of Pragmatics841: 172–188. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.014
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.014 [Google Scholar]
6. Hansson, Sten
   2015b “Discursive strategies of blame avoidance in government: A framework for analysis.” Discourse & Society26(3): 297–322. 10.1177/0957926514564736
   https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926514564736 [Google Scholar]
7. Hansson, Sten
   2017 “Anticipative strategies of blame avoidance in government: The case of communication guidelines.” Journal of Language and Politics16(2): 219–241. 10.1075/jlp.15019.han
   https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.15019.han [Google Scholar]
8. Hansson, Sten
   2018a “Analysing opposition-government blame games: Argument models and strategic maneuvering.” Critical Discourse Studies15(3): 228–246. 10.1080/17405904.2017.1405051
   https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2017.1405051 [Google Scholar]
9. Hansson, Sten
   2018b “Defensive semiotic strategies in government: A multimodal study of blame avoidance.” Social Semiotics28(4): 472–493. 10.1080/10350330.2017.1334358
   https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2017.1334358 [Google Scholar]
10. Hart, Christopher
    2018 “Event-frames affect blame assignment and perception of aggression in discourse on political protests: An experimental case study in critical discourse analysis.” Applied Linguistics39(3): 400–421.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Hering, Martin
    2008 “Welfare state restructuring without grand coalitions: The role of informal cooperation in blame avoidance.” German Politics17(2): 165–183. 10.1080/09644000802075757
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09644000802075757 [Google Scholar]
12. Hinds, Joanne, Emma J. Williams, and Adam N. Joinson
    2020 “‛It wouldn’t happen to me’: Privacy concerns and perspectives following the Cambridge Analytica scandal.” International Journal of Human-Computer Studies1431: 102498. 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2020.102498
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2020.102498 [Google Scholar]
13. Hinterleitner, Markus
    2017 ”Reconciling perspectives on blame avoidance behaviour.” Political Studies Review15 (2): 243–254. 10.1111/1478‑9302.12099
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1478-9302.12099 [Google Scholar]
14. Hobolt, Sara B., and James Tilley
    2014 Blaming Europe?: Responsibility without Accountability in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665686.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665686.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
15. Hood, Christopher
    2002 ”The risk game and the blame game.” Government and Opposition37 (1): 15–37. 10.1111/1477‑7053.00085
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-7053.00085 [Google Scholar]
16. Hood, Christopher
    2010 The Blame Game: Spin, Bureaucracy, and Self-preservation in Government. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 10.1515/9781400836819
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400836819 [Google Scholar]
17. Hood, Christopher
    2014 ”Accountability and blame–avoidance.” InThe Oxford Handbook of Public Accountability, edited byMark Bovens, Robert E. Goodin and Thomas Schillemans, 603–616. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Hood, Christopher, Will Jennings, and Paul Copeland
    2016 ”Blame avoidance in comparative perspective: Reactivity, staged retreat and efficacy.” Public Administration94 (2): 542–562. 10.1111/padm.12235
    https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12235 [Google Scholar]
19. Howlett, Michael
    2012 ”The lessons of failure: Learning and blame avoidance in public policy-making.” International Political Science Review33 (5): 539–555. 10.1177/0192512112453603
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512112453603 [Google Scholar]
20. Isaak, Jim, and Mina J. Hanna
    2018 ”User data privacy: Facebook, Cambridge Analytica, and privacy protection.” Computer51 (8): 56–59. 10.1109/MC.2018.3191268
    https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2018.3191268 [Google Scholar]
21. Kabachnik, Peter, Joanna Regulska, and Beth Mitchneck
    2012 ”Displacing blame: Georgian internally displaced person perspectives of the Georgia-Abkhazia conflict.” Ethnopolitics11 (2): 123–140. 10.1080/17449057.2012.675210
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2012.675210 [Google Scholar]
22. Kozlowska, Iga
    2018 ”Facebook and data privacy in the age of Cambridge Analytica.” Available online at: https://jsis.washington.edu/news/facebook-data-privacy-age-cambridge-analytica/. Accessed on15 May 2021.
23. Leong, Ching, and Michael Howlett
    2017 ”On credit and blame: Disentangling the motivations of public policy decision-making behaviour.” Policy Sciences50 (4): 599–618. 10.1007/s11077‑017‑9290‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-017-9290-4 [Google Scholar]
24. McIntosh, Janet, and Norma Mendoza-Denton
    2020 Language in the Trump era: Scandals and emergencies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108887410
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108887410 [Google Scholar]
25. Meredith, Sam
    2018 ”Facebook-Cambridge Analytica: A timeline of the data hijacking scandal”. CNBC. Available online at: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/10/facebook-cambridge-analytica-a-timeline-of-the-data-hijacking-scandal.html. Accessed on12 March 2021.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Shapiro, Michael J.
    1990 ”Strategic discourse/discursive strategy: The representation of “security policy” in the video age.” International Studies Quarterly34 (3): 327–340. 10.2307/2600573
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2600573 [Google Scholar]
27. Solomona, R. Patrick, John P. Portelli, Beverley-Jean Daniel, and Arlene Campbell
    2005 ”The discourse of denial: How white teacher candidates construct race, racism and ‛white privilege’.” Race Ethnicity and Education8(2): 147–169. 10.1080/13613320500110519
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13613320500110519 [Google Scholar]
28. Sulitzeanu-Kenan, Raanan, and Christopher Hood
    2005 “Blame avoidance with adjectives? Motivation, opportunity, activity and outcome.” Paper presented at theECPR Joint Sessions, Blame Avoidance and Blame Management Workshop, Granada, Spain, 14–20 April.
    [Google Scholar]
29. van Dijk, Teun A.
    1992 ”Discourse and the denial of racism.” Discourse & Society3 (1): 87–118. 10.1177/0957926592003001005
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926592003001005 [Google Scholar]
30. van Dijk, Teun A.
    1995 ”Aims of critical discourse analysis.” Japanese Discourse1 (1): 17–28.
    [Google Scholar]
31. van Dijk, Teun A.
    1997 ”Political discourse and racism: Describing others in western parliaments.” The Language and Politics of Exclusion: Others in Discourse21: 31–64.
    [Google Scholar]
32. van Dijk, Teun A.
    2003 ”Critical discourse analysis.” InThe Handbook of Discourse Analysis, edited byD. Schiffrin, D. Tannen and H. E. Hamilton, 352–371. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
33. van Dijk, Teun A.
    2013 ”Discourse, power and access.” InTexts and Practices, edited byC. R. Caldas-Coulthard and M. Coulthard, 93–113. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
34. van Dijk, Teun A.
    1993 ”Principles of critical discourse analysis.” Discourse & society4 (2): 249–283. 10.1177/0957926593004002006
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002006 [Google Scholar]
35. van Leeuwen, Theo
    1995 ”Representing social action.” Discourse & Society6 (1): 81–106. 10.1177/0957926595006001005
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926595006001005 [Google Scholar]
36. van Leeuwen, Theo
    2008 Discourse and Practice: New Tools for Critical Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195323306.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195323306.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
37. van Leeuwen, Theo, and Ruth Wodak
    1999 ”Legitimizing immigration control: A discourse-historical analysis.” Discourse Studies1 (1): 83–118. 10.1177/1461445699001001005
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445699001001005 [Google Scholar]
38. Vis, Barbara
    2016 ”Taking stock of the comparative literature on the role of blame avoidance strategies in social policy reform.” Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice18 (2): 122–137. 10.1080/13876988.2015.1005955
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2015.1005955 [Google Scholar]
39. Weaver, R. Kent
    1986 ”The politics of blame avoidance.” Journal of Public Policy6 (4): 371–398. 10.1017/S0143814X00004219
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X00004219 [Google Scholar]
40. Wenzelburger, Georg, and Felix Hörisch
    2016 ”Framing effects and comparative social policy reform: Comparing blame avoidance evidence from two experiments.” Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice18 (2): 157–175. 10.1080/13876988.2015.1053743
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2015.1053743 [Google Scholar]
41. Whittle, Andrea, and Frank Mueller
    2016 ”Accounting for the banking crisis: Repertoires of agency and structure.” Critical Discourse Studies13 (1): 20–40. 10.1080/17405904.2015.1074598
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2015.1074598 [Google Scholar]
42. Winder, Davey
    2019 Data breaches expose 4.1 billion records in first six months of 2019. Forbes.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Wodak, Ruth
    1999 ”Critical discourse analysis at the end of the 20th century.” Research on Language & Social Interaction32 (1–2): 185–193. doi:https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI321&2_22. 10.1207/S15327973RLSI321&2_22
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI321&2_22 [Google Scholar]
44. Wodak, Ruth
    2001 ”The discourse-historical approach.” InMethods of Critical Discourse Analysis, edited byRuth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 63–94. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Wodak, Ruth
    2006 ”Blaming and denying: Pragmatics.” InEncyclopedia of Language & Linguistics, edited byKeith Brown, 59–64. Oxford: Elsevier. 10.1016/B0‑08‑044854‑2/04307‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/04307-8 [Google Scholar]
46. Wodak, Ruth
    2015 The Politics of Fear: What Right-wing Populist Discourses Mean. London: Sage. 10.4135/9781446270073
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446270073 [Google Scholar]
47. Wodak, Ruth
    2016 ”The discourse-historical approach.” InMethods of Critical Discourse Analysis, edited byRuth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 23–61. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Wodak, Ruth
    2021 The Politics of Fear: The Shameless Normalization of Far-right Discourse. London: Sage. 10.4135/9781529739664
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529739664 [Google Scholar]
49. Wodak, Ruth, and Norman Fairclough
    2013 Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage. 10.4135/9781446286289
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446286289 [Google Scholar]
50. Wodak, Ruth, and Michael Meyer
    eds. 2009 Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. 2nd ed.London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Wodak, Ruth, and Michael Meyer
    2016a ”Critical discourse studies: History, agenda, theory and methodology.” InMethods of Critical Discourse Studies, edited byRuth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 1–22. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Wodak, Ruth, and Michael Meyer
    eds. 2016b Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]