This phrase refers to language used by corporations, often published in prominent media outlets like the New York Times, that appears to express support for social or political causes while primarily serving to enhance the company’s public image or deflect criticism. For example, a company might issue a statement condemning a social injustice while simultaneously engaging in practices that contribute to the problem. This type of communication is often characterized by vague commitments, carefully crafted language designed to avoid concrete action, and an emphasis on shared values rather than tangible solutions.
Analyzing this type of corporate communication is crucial for media literacy and holding corporations accountable. By understanding the underlying motivations and dissecting the language employed, readers can distinguish genuine commitment from performative allyship. Historically, corporations have used various communication strategies to manage their public perception, and the increasing scrutiny of corporate social responsibility in recent decades has led to a proliferation of this type of carefully constructed messaging. Understanding this historical context helps to illuminate the present-day dynamics of corporate communication and public perception.
