THE ILLUSION OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY:COCA-COLA AND CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Under contemporary globalization, corporations have achieved a size and scope unparalleled to any other time in history (May 24). In response to growing corporate power,there have been contestations from unions, environmentalists, and anti-corporate activists stressing corporate reform. One result of social pressure has been the incorporation of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) campaigns into corporate branding strategies (May 201). On thesurface, these campaigns appear to address and integrate social concerns into regular business practices. Yet, I argue that CSR campaigns are one component of a broader strategy to improvethe management of market crises by incorporating criticisms into corporate managed social responsibility initiatives and can be understood using Foucault’s concept of governmentality. Instead of addressing critiques in a substantive manner, CSR initiatives “break off the sharp points of contention” to bolster legitimacy for free market policies (Hobsbawm). To further understand this process, I focus on the Coca-Cola Company’s CSR campaigns on two scales; theinternational and the national in Chile.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".