Over the past two decades, a growing number of large multinational corporations have come to view philanthropy as an important part of their business operations. This has stimulated research on the many different strategies that are pursued by these corporations in their attempts to become more philanthropic while remaining economically responsible. In this situation, some researchers have argued, corporations run the risk of being caught out as hypocrites. Through an analysis of the corporate social responsibility reports of the biggest multinational corporations, this article shows how the risk of hypocrisy is managed communicatively through the use of euphemisms. The article argues that the use of euphemisms makes it possible to communicate both economically and philanthropically without manifest contradictions. Euphemisms, however, are also risky in their own right.
This article is written as an invitation to sociologists to rethink the concept of voluntary social work. Rather than comprehensive theory, it is an essay seeking to explore new ways of perceiving voluntary social effort. Voluntary work has traditionally been defined according to whether or not the subject of the study is organized and unpaid. However, these formal measures overlook the fact that much voluntary work is provided by people who do not fit the categories, and they fail to recognize the special nature of voluntary social work. In this article, we employ the works of the German sociologist Niklas Luhmann to examine what happens when voluntary social work is constructed as a particular form of care work. In this perspective, all care work is formed in the context of opposing expectation structures, and voluntary work is no exception. On the one hand, we have the expectation structures of the persons involved in care; on the other, the expectations of the administrative system and the political, juridical and economic layers of organization. Our assertion is that voluntary social work is fundamentally paradoxical in nature, and is formed as an impossible compromise between interactional and organizational logic. The question is not how to resolve or dissolve this paradox, but how to render it productive as a certain tension in the opportunity for voluntary work. Before we elaborate this thesis further, however, we briefly outline the background of social work and the reason why, today, it is followed especially closely by the state. This means looking at the way in which the couplings between welfare practice and voluntary work have traditionally been defined. While the article refers only to Danish social policy, very similar tendencies can be observed in many other Western welfare societies (see, for example, Wolch
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.