Corporate Frame Failure and the Erosion of Elite Legitimacy

Abstract

Extant research on official frames centers on state campaigns, yet nonstate entities also utilize their own official frames. We extend the existing social movement literature by examining the unsuccessful framing efforts of a uranium mill in Cañon City, Colorado. Despite a history of environmental contamination and resultant health problems, the corporation deployed an official frame to reestablish the company's legitimacy and justify their actions following the controversy. Our data included newspaper coverage, archival documents, in-depth interviews, and direct observation. Findings highlight critical factors that can undermine corporate official frames, and show that failed framing efforts can ultimately erode elite legitimacy.

NOTES

Notes

¹ The Manhattan Project was a classified project intended to develop nuclear weapons in the United States during the 1940s. The multibillion-dollar project ultimately led to the development of the first atomic bomb, but left massive amounts of poorly stored nuclear waste in its wake. The leftover uranium tailings accepted by the Cotter plant had levels of thorium 230 (a uranium decay product that is toxic to the liver and spleen) 76 times higher than that of uranium ore.

² Uranium may cause damage to kidney cells through breathing air containing uranium dust or eating products containing uranium particles. Exposure to uranium may also increase the probability of developing cancer. Exposure to molybdenum may cause fatigue, joint pain, and more commonly, gout-like symptoms. There are several physiological and psychological symptoms associated with the consumption of selenium in water (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry 2010).

³ The FCIOC committee initially allowed CCAT members to attend meetings and participate in the organization in order to deflect accusations of the organization's partiality to Cotter interests; however, the FCIOC forced the CCAT representatives' resignation less than a year later after CCAT members had publicly accused the organization of simply operating as a mouthpiece for Cotter (Bloomquist 2003; Wooley 2003).