“It's not my fault, I am in the right!” Exploration of neutralization in the justification of the support and use of a controversial technological collaborative consumption service

This study posits CBPs as ethically and morally questionable, and thus as controversial consumption schemes. Drawing on the neutralization theory research stream, this study seeks to identify how supporters and users justify the existence of controversial consumption systems such as CBPs. Our results show that, to justify CBPs, supporters and users both tend to depend heavily on neutralization techniques such as appealing to higher loyalties, condemnation of condemners, denial of victims, denial of responsibility and invocation of normalcy. Interestingly, these techniques are used in conjunction with non-neutralization techniques to defend controversial collaborative services such as Uber.

Source: Technological Forecasting and Social Change - July 11, 2018 Category: Science Source Type: research