Critical Criminology

, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp 289–305 | Cite as

What’s in the Water? How Media Coverage of Corporate GenX Pollution Shapes Local Understanding of Risk

  • Sarah Hupp WilliamsonEmail author


Media coverage of water pollution has been a topic of theoretical examination and empirical testing. Still, green criminologists have not fully explored issues relating to water pollution. This paper draws from the environmental literature on risk society and criminology’s crime news frame to explore media coverage of corporate deviance through the lens of green cultural criminology. A content analysis of local newspaper articles in a southeastern city analyzes constructions of corporate deviance, risk, and blame regarding the discovery of GenX. Results demonstrate how media discourse around risk and science plays an important role in shaping concerns about corporate environmental pollution. Magnification of risk and uncertainty draws the public’s attention to issues of regulatory enforcement and funding. At the same time, risk is minimized by corporate and regulatory officials who urge the public to wait for more research before introducing new laws and regulations while also individualizing the blame.


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Adam, B. (2000). The media timescapes of BSE news. In S. Allan, B. Adam, & C. Carter (Eds.), Environmental risks and the media (pp. 117–129). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Allan, S., Adam, B., & Carter, C. (2000). Introduction: The media politics of environmental risk. In S. Allan, B. Adam, & C. Carter (Eds.), Environmental risks and the media (pp. 1–26). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Beck, U. (1996). World risk society as cosmopolitan society? Ecological questions in a framework of manufactured uncertainties. Theory, Culture and Society, 13(4), 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bradshaw, E. A. (2015). Blacking out the Gulf: State-corporate environmental crime and the response to the 2010 BP oil spill. In G. Barak (Ed.), The Routledge international handbook of the crimes of the powerful (pp. 363–372). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Brisman, A., & South, N. (2012). A green-cultural criminology: An exploratory outline. Crime, Media, Culture, 9(2), 115–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brisman, A., & South, N. (2014). Green cultural criminology: Constructions of environmental harm, consumerism, and resistance to ecocide. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Brisman, A., & South, N. (2016). Water, inequalities and injustice: Social divisions, racism and colonialism—Past and present. In G. Meško & B. Lobnikar (Eds.), Criminal justice and security in Central and Eastern Europe: Safety, security, and social control in local communities: Conference proceedings (pp. 359–366). Ljubljana, Slovenia: Faculty of Criminal Justice and Security, University of Maribor, Slovenia.Google Scholar
  9. Burns, R. (2015). Corporate crimes and the problems of enforcement. In G. Barak (Ed.), The Routledge international handbook of the crimes of the powerful (pp. 157–171). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Cavender, G., Gray, K., & Miller, K. W. (2010). Enron’s perp walk: Status degradation ceremonies as narrative. Crime, Media, Culture, 6(3), 251–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cavender, G., & Mulcahy, A. (1998). Trial by fire: Media constructions of corporate deviance. Justice Quarterly, 15(4), 697–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. De Pryck, K., & Gemenne, F. (2017). The Denier-in-Chief: Climate Change, Science and the Election of Donald J. Trump. Law and Critique, 28, 119–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dukes, T., Leslie, L., & Fain, T. (2017). Timeline: Tracking the route of GenX in the Cape Fear River. WRAL, August 17. Retrieved from
  14. Dunlap, R. E., & McCright, A. M. (2011). Organized climate change denial. In J. S. Dryzek, R. B. Norgaard, & D. Schlosberg (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of climate change and society (pp. 144–160). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. EPA. (2017a). Basic information about per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs). United States Environmental Protection Agency. Retrieved from Accessed 15 Sept 2017.
  16. EPA. (2017b). Drinking Water Health Advisories for PFOA and PFOS. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Retrieved from Accessed 15 Sept 2017.
  17. Evans, S. S., & Lundman, R. J. (1983). Newspaper coverage of corporate price-fixing. Criminology, 21(4), 529–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ferrell, J. (2013). Tangled up in green: Cultural criminology and green criminology. In N. South & A. Brisman (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of green criminology (pp. 349–364). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Fitzgerald, A., & Baralt, L. B. (2010). Media constructions of responsibility for the production and mitigation of environmental harms: The case of mercury-contaminated fish. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 52(4), 341–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hagerty, V. (2017). Toxin taints CFPUA drinking water. Star-News, June 7. Retrieved from
  21. Hansen, H. K., & Uldam, J. (2015). Corporate social responsibility, corporate surveillance and neutralizing corporate resistance: On the commodification of risk-based policing. In G. Barak (Ed.), The Routledge international handbook of the crimes of the powerful (pp. 186–196). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Hulme, M. (2009). Why we disagree about climate change: Understanding controversy, inaction and opportunity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Johnson, H., South, N., & Walters, R. (2016). The commodification and exploitation of fresh water: Property, human rights and green criminology. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 44, 146–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lynch, M. J., & Stretsky, P. B. (2003). The meaning of green: Contrasting criminological perspectives. Theoretical Criminology, 7(2), 217–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lynch, M. J., Stretsky, P. B., & Hammond, P. (2000). Media coverage of chemical crimes, Hillsborough County, Florida, 1987–97. British Journal of Criminology, 40, 112–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lynch, M. J., Stretsky, P. B., & Long, M. A. (2017). State and green crimes related to water pollution and ecological disorganization: Water pollution from publicly owned treatment works (POTW) facilities across US States. Palgrave Communications, 3, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McCarthy, M., Brennan, M., De Boer, M., & Ritson, C. (2008). Media risk communication: What was said by whom and how was it interpreted. Journal of Risk Research, 11(3), 375–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McClanahan, B. (2014). Green and grey: Water justice, criminalization, and resistance. Critical Criminology, 22, 403–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McClanahan, B., Brisman, A., & South, N. (2015). Privatization, pollution and power: A green criminological analysis of present and future global water crises. In G. Barak (Ed.), The Routledge international handbook of the crimes of the powerful (pp. 223–234). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. McMullan, J. L., & McClung, M. (2006). The media, the politics of truth, and the coverage of corporate violence: The Westray disaster and public inquiry. Critical Criminology, 14, 67–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Michaels, D. (2008). Doubt is their product. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2010). Merchants of doubt. New York: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
  33. Phillimore, P., & Moffatt, S. (2000). ‘Industry causes lung cancer’: Would you be happy with that headline? Environmental health and local politics. In S. Allan, B. Adam, & C. Carter (Eds.), Environmental risks and the media (pp. 105–116). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Ross, J. I. (2015). Controlling state crime and alternative reactions. In G. Barak (Ed.), The Routledge international handbook of the crimes of the powerful (pp. 492–502). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Rothe, D. L., & Kauzlarich, D. (2016). Crimes of the powerful: An introduction. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Ruggiero, V., & South, N. (2013). Green criminology and crimes of the economy: Theory, research and praxis. Critical Criminology, 21, 359–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. South, N. (1998). A green field for criminology? A proposal for a perspective. Theoretical Criminology, 2(2), 211–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Spencer, J. William, & Triche, E. (1994). Media construction of risk and safety: Differential framings of hazard events. Sociological Inquiry, 64(2), 199–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Strynar, M., Dagnino, S., McMahen, R., Liang, S., Lindstrom, A., Andersen, E., et al. (2015). Identification of novel perfluoroalkyl ether carboxylic acids (PFECAs) and sulfonic acids (PFESAs) in natural waters using accurate mass time-of-flight mass spectrometry (TOFMS). Environmental Science and Technology, 49(19), 11622–11630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sun, M., Arevalo, E., Strynar, M., Lindstrom, A., Richardson, M., Kearns, B., et al. (2016). Legacy and emerging perfluoroalkyl substances are important drinking water contaminants in the Cape Fear River Watershed of North Carolina. Environmental Science and Technology Letters, 3(12), 415–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. White, R. (2002). Environmental harm and the Political Economy of Consumption. Social Justice, 29(1/2), 82–102.Google Scholar
  42. White, R. (2003). Environmental issues and the criminological imagination. Theoretical Criminology, 7(4), 483–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. White, R. (2015). Climate change, ecocide and the crimes of the powerful. In G. Barak (Ed.), The Routledge international handbook of the crimes of the powerful (pp. 211–222). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Wilkinson, I. (2010). Grasping the point of unfathomable complexity: The new media research and risk analysis. Journal of Risk Research, 13(1), 19–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.North Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations