Corporate Accountability for Human Rights Violations: Civil Society and Transnational Action across the World

Grosesçu, Raluca and John G. Dale, eds. Corporate Accountability for Human Rights Violations: Civil Society and Transnational Action across the World (Series on Interdisciplinary Studies in Human Rights, vol.16, Springer Nature, Cham, Switzerland). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-05569-9.

This edited volume is the first collection to critically explore the role, limitations, and internal fragmentation of social activism for corporate accountability across Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Europe. It analyses a variety of NGOs, trade unions, and grassroots movements and their transnational mobilizations for holding accountable business actors involved in human rights violations and environmental degradation. The book emphasizes the diverse visions and strategies extolled by these civic actors: from civil and criminal litigations, efforts to prohibit and punish business misconduct through national and international legislation, to boycotts, and memorialization projects. By adopting an actor-focused perspective and examining their national and transnational activism, the collection provides an innovative perspective across three main themes: civil society and social movements as key drivers of corporate accountability efforts; the fragmentation of the global corporate accountability movement across ontological, ideological, regional, and professional lines; the Janus-faced paradigm of transnational activism for corporate accountability. The volume argues that corporate accountability coalitions are successful especially when social actors form alliances across borders and professional sectors. Such transnational and intersectoral engagements create counter-hegemonic discourses against corporate impunity, push for more inclusive justice projects, and multiply spaces and ideas of accountability. Yet, civil societies and social movements themselves are fragmenting over the meaning, scope, and tactics of corporate accountability due to different local, national and regional contexts, ideological variations regarding human rights and economic development, and diverse professional understandings of accountability processes. This is an open access book.

Outgroups and ingroups: how support for torture and aggressive counterterrorism policies varies by extremist type

Haner, Murat, Melissa M. Sloan, Justin T. Pickett, and Francis T. Cullen. 2025. “Outgroups and ingroups: how support for torture and aggressive counterterrorism policies varies by extremist type.” Social Forces. soaf190, https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf190

As domestic terrorism has become central to US national security, the American public has shown divided reactions to political violence. In the current context of increasing political polarization and racial tension, we draw on social identity theory to compare responses to Islamist, left-wing, and right-wing terrorism and identify moderators of those responses. Analyses of data from a 2022 national survey experiment (n = 1,300) reveal that Americans’ responses to terrorism depend heavily on who is doing the terrorizing. Whereas Americans are equally outraged by Islamist, right-wing, and left-wing terrorism, support for controversial policies varies by terrorist type, with greater support for the use of torture on Islamist terrorists. Our findings also point toward the importance of Republicanism and white nationalist sentiment. Compared to Democrats, Republicans were more supportive of policy and the use of torture targeting Islamist terrorists and less supportive of policy targeting right-wing extremists. In addition, white nationalist sentiment corresponded to increased support for aggressive counterterrorism policy and the use of torture when applied to left-wing and Islamist terrorists. As public opinion is key to the development of government policies, it is critical that policymakers recognize the role of outgroup animosity in public support of counterterrorism measures.

How Do (Human) Child Welfare Workers Respond to Machine-Generated Risk Scores?

Eiermann, Martin, Maria Fitzpatrick, Katharine Sadowski, and Christopher Wildeman. “How Do (Human) Child Welfare Workers Respond to Machine-Generated Risk Scores?.” Sociological Science 13 (2026): 1-21.

Algorithmic risk scoring tools have been widely incorporated into governmental decision making, yet little is known about how human decision makers interact with machine-generated risk scores at the street level. We examined such human–machine interactions in the child welfare system, a high-stakes setting where caseworkers ascertain whether government interventions in family life are warranted. Using novel data—verbatim transcripts of caseworker discussions—we found that decision makers: (1) disregarded scores in the middle of the distribution while paying attention to extremely high or low risk scores and (2) rationalized divergences between human decisions and machine-generated scores by highlighting the algorithm’s overemphasis on historical data and specific risk factors and its lack of contextual knowledge. This meant that caseworkers were unlikely to modify their decisions so that they aligned with risk scores. However, we did not find evidence of principled resistance to algorithmic tools. Our findings advance research on such tools by specifying how human perceptions of the utility and limitations of novel technologies shape discretionary decision making by state officials; and they help to explain their uneven and potentially modest impact on the bureaucratic management of social vulnerability.

Environments of Disbelief: Serbian Youth, Conspiracy Theory, and Practices of Digital Distrust

Brandt, E.E.S. Environments of Disbelief: Serbian Youth, Conspiracy Theory, and Practices of Digital Distrust. Qual Sociol 48, 637–663 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-025-09610-3

Conspiracy theories are often understood as resulting from a lack of proper skepticism or an inability to approach narratives critically. This paper argues that we should instead see conspiracy theories as resulting from an excess of skepticism. Interviews with Serbian youth show how conspiracism coincides with other skeptical media practices, including fact-checking with Google, averaging for objectivity, and a preference for unmediated information. Living in an environment of disbelief, where institutions and official narratives cannot be trusted, young Serbians deploy conspiracy theories and related skeptical media practices as methods of political and social critique. More generally, this case study demonstrates the need for scholars to focus on conspiracy theories as part of a broader repertoire of media consumption practices characteristic of environments, rather than as pathologies of individuals.


Racial framing contests: How anti-Asian racism and its resistance enacted racial projects during COVID-19

Regla-Vargas, Alejandra, A.J Alvero, & Hajar Yazdiha. 2026. “Racial framing contests: How anti-Asian racism and its resistance enacted racial projects during COVID-19.” Big Data & Society, 13(1). https://doi-org/10.1177/20539517261424160

This study examines the dynamics of racial framing contexts taking the case of anti-Asian hate speech and counter-hate speech on social media during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using the COVID-HATE dataset (n = 2,491,405 tweets posted 15 January 2020 to 26 March 2021), we analyze racial framing contests between movements and counter-movements. Through a mixed-methods approach, we find that: (1) hate frames deployed racial projects characterizing Asians as public health and national security threats, while counter-frames either directly challenged these characterizations or bypassed them to focus on systemic racism and (2) hate and counter-hate movements often “spoke past” each other rather than engaging in direct frame–counterframe dynamics as prevailing theories would predict. Counter-movements did not consistently produce opposing frames for each hate frame but rather developed independent messaging focused on combating racism itself. This study advances our understanding of how both hate and resistance operate through racial projects, with implications for theories of social movements, social media, and racial formation.