Explaining the misconduct: Meaning-making of legitimation strategies in corporate apologies on Weibo
-
Yu Che
Yu Che (Ph.D., Southwestern University of Finance and Economics) is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of International Studies at Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, China. Her research interests include discourse analysis and organizational communication. She has published articles in journals such as
International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems ,Nankai Business Review International ,Journal of Promotion Management ,Asian Journal of Business Research , etc.
and
Xinxin Jiang
Xinxin Jiang (Ph.D., Bowling Green State University) is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of International Studies at Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, China. Her research interests include critical studies in media, gender, discourse, and intercultural communication. She has published articles in journals such as
Information, Communication & Society ,Feminist Media Studies ,Media, Culture & Society ,Television & New Media ,Journal of Contemporary China , etc.
Abstract
Using a selected corpus of 20 corporate apology texts and 11,766 user comments on Sina Weibo, a Twitter-like Chinese social media, this study first evaluates the effectiveness of legitimation strategies underpinning these apologies offered by examining their distribution patterns based on frequency, percentage of use, and user reactions. It then employs textual analysis to discuss several apology cases that demonstrate both successful and unsuccessful applications of different legitimation strategies, revealing how cultural values influence the meaning-making process in the Chinese context and affect the effectiveness of corporate apologies. The findings suggest that appeals to role models, analogies, and the combined use of goal- and explanation-based strategies can justify corporate misconduct and evoke positive feedback. This meaning-making process shows how corporations leverage lexical, rhetorical, and cultural power to legitimize their misconduct, while audiences exercise agency in evaluating these apologies through specific socio-cultural norms.
About the authors
Yu Che (Ph.D., Southwestern University of Finance and Economics) is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of International Studies at Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, China. Her research interests include discourse analysis and organizational communication. She has published articles in journals such as International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems, Nankai Business Review International, Journal of Promotion Management, Asian Journal of Business Research, etc.
Xinxin Jiang (Ph.D., Bowling Green State University) is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of International Studies at Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, China. Her research interests include critical studies in media, gender, discourse, and intercultural communication. She has published articles in journals such as Information, Communication & Society, Feminist Media Studies, Media, Culture & Society, Television & New Media, Journal of Contemporary China, etc.
References
Ancarno, Clyde. 2015. When are public apologies successful? Focus on British and French apology press uptakes. Journal of Pragmatics 84. 139–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.04.015.Search in Google Scholar
Austin, Lucinda & Yan Jin. 2018. Social media and crisis communication. New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Benoit, William. 1995. Accounts excuses and apologies: A theory of image restoration strategies. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Search in Google Scholar
Bennett, Samuel. 2022. Mythopoetic legitimation and the recontextualization of Europe’s foundational myth. Journal of Language and Politics 21. 370–389. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.21070.ben.Search in Google Scholar
Berger, Peter & Thomas Luckmann. 1966. The social construction of reality: A treaties in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Penguin Books.Search in Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, Juliane House & Gabriele Kasper. 1989. Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar
Ceron, Andrea & Sergio Splendore. 2018. From contents to comments: Social TV and perceived pluralism in political talk shows. New Media & Society 20(2). 659–675. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816668187.Search in Google Scholar
Chen, Zifei & Bryan H. Reber. 2018. Examining public responses to social media crisis communication strategies in the United States and China. In Lucinda Austin & Yan Jin (eds.), Social media and crisis communication, 114–126. New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Coombs, W. Timothy. 2007. Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and application of situational crisis communication theory. Corporate Reputation Review 10. 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550049.Search in Google Scholar
Chien, Chin-Lung. 2016. Beyond authoritarian personality: The culture-inclusive theory of Chinese authoritarian orientation. Frontiers in Psychology 7. 924. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00924 (accessed 10 April 2024).Search in Google Scholar
Chu, Shu-Chuan, Hsuan-Ting Chen & Chen Gan. 2020. Consumers’ engagement with corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication in social media: Evidence from China and the United States. Journal of Business Research 110. 260–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.01.036.Search in Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 2003. Analyzing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Fairclough, Isabela & Norman Fairclough. 2012. Political discourse analysis: A method for advanced students. New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Glantz, Mark & William L. Benoit. 2018. The world’s all atwitter: Image repair discourse on social media. In Lucinda Austin & Yan Jin (eds.), Social media and crisis communication, 168–179. New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Goldenberg, Amit, David Garcia, Eran Halperin & James Gross. 2020. Collective emotions. Current Directions in Psychological Science 29(2). 154–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420901574.Search in Google Scholar
Hagren, Karin Idevall & Theres Bellander. 2024. National discourses in(de)legitimations of the Swedish COVID-19 strategy. Text & Talk 44(6). 715–737. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2022-0100.Search in Google Scholar
House, Juliane & Daniel Kadar. 2021a. Cross-cultural pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
House, Juliane & Daniel Kadar. 2021b. German and Japanese war crime apologies: A contrastive pragmatic study. Journal of Pragmatics 177. 109–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.02.001.Search in Google Scholar
Ji, Yingchun & Xiaogang Wu. 2018. New gender dynamics in post-reform China: Family, education, and labor market. Chinese Sociological Review 50(3). 231–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/21620555.2018.1452609.Search in Google Scholar
Kadar, Daniel Z., Puyu Ning & Yongping Ran. 2018. Public ritual apology–A case study of Chinese. Discourse, Context and Media 26. 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2018.01.003.Search in Google Scholar
Kampf, Zohar. 2008. The pragmatics of forgiveness: Judgments of apologies in the Israeli political arena. Discourse & Society 19(5). 577–598. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508092244.Search in Google Scholar
Kaszynska, Patrycja. 2024. Cultural value as meaning-making. Cultural Trends. 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/09548963.2024.2381767 (accessed 15 October 2024).Search in Google Scholar
Kauffman, James. 2012. Hooray for hollywood? The 2011 golden globes and ricky gervais’ image repair strategies. Public Relations Review 38(1). 46–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.09.003.Search in Google Scholar
Kim, Sara, Kang Hoon Sung, Yingru Ji, Xing Chen & Jiayu Qu. 2021. Online firestorms in social media: Comparative research between China Weibo and USA Twitter. Public Relations Review 47(1). 102010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2021.102010 (accessed 18 February 2024).Search in Google Scholar
Kriz, Anton & Byron Keating. 2010. Business relationships in China: Lessons about deep trust. Asia Pacific Business Review 16(3). 299–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602380903065580.Search in Google Scholar
Liebersohn, Yosef Z., Yair Neuman & Bekerman Zvi. 2004. Oh baby, it’s hard for me to say I’m sorry: Public apologetic speech and cultural rhetorical resources. Journal of Pragmatics 36(5). 921–944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2003.12.003.Search in Google Scholar
Lin, Yuting. 2021. Legitimation strategies in corporate discourse: A comparison of UK and Chinese corporate social responsibility reports. Journal of Pragmatics 177. 157–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.02.009.Search in Google Scholar
Lutzky, Ursula. 2021. “You keep saying you are sorry”: Exploring the use of sorry in customer communication on Twitter. Discourse, Context & Media 39. 100463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2020.100463.Search in Google Scholar
Morrow, Phillip & Kenta Yamanouchi. 2020. Online apologies to hotel guests in English and Japanese. Discourse, Context & Media 34. 100379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2020.100463 (accessed 3 May 2024).Search in Google Scholar
Page, Ruth. 2014. Saying “sorry”: Corporate apologies posted on Twitter. Journal of Pragmatics 62. 30–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.12.003.Search in Google Scholar
Phillips, Nelson, Lawrence Thomas & Hardy Cynthia. 2004. Discourse and institutions. Academy of Management Review 29(4). 635–652.Search in Google Scholar
Reyes, Antonio. 2011. Strategies of legitimization in political discourse: From words to actions. Discourse & Society 22(6). 781–807. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926511419927.Search in Google Scholar
Shukla, Sangeeta & Rajita Shukla. 2020. The pragmatics of Indian political apologies: Sorry, but not sorry. Discourse & Society 31(6). 648–669. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926520939688.Search in Google Scholar
Simonsen, Sandra. 2019. Discursive legitimation strategies: The evolving legitimation of war in Israeli public diplomacy. Discourse & Society 30(5). 503–520. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926519855786.Search in Google Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen. 2008. Face, (im)politeness and rapport. In Helen Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally speaking: Culture, communication and politeness theory, 11–47. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Van Dijk, Teun A. 1998. Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London: SAGE.Search in Google Scholar
Van Leeuwen, Theo. 2007. Legitimation in discourse and communication. Discourse & Communication 1(1). 91–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481307071986.Search in Google Scholar
Van Leeuwen, Theo & Ruth Wodak. 1999. Legitimizing immigration: A discourse-historical analysis. Discourse Studies 1(1). 83–119.Search in Google Scholar
Wang, Georgette & Zhong-Bo Liu. 2010. What collective? Collectivism and relationalism from a Chinese perspective. Chinese Journal of Communication 3(1). 42–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/17544750903528799.Search in Google Scholar
Wang, Qian, Cindy Sing-Bik Ngai & Rita Gill Singh. 2021. A discursive analysis of crisis response strategies in CEO apologies: Drawing on linguistic insights from the appraisal framework. Management Communication Quarterly 35(4). 602–622. https://doi.org/10.1177/08933189211012009.Search in Google Scholar
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
