This study examines Wal-Mart representatives' presentation to the community on their site plan and Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Given the ongoing controversy and criticisms from local residents, it is interesting to see Wal-Mart's strategies in attenuating these risks and negative impacts. The discursive practices found here are: formulating prior citizen complaints by a neutral-sounding, legalistic language which works euphemistically or as a gloss. Citizen concerns are fitted into a problem-solution format where the solutions involve engineering technology. The Wal-Mart representatives display their expertise through describing these technological answers. Scientific documents or tests are presented which point to counter-intuitive results. They draw on a discourse of `facts' and `information', but use these to make arguments in support of their proposals. In addition to displaying scientific-technological expertise, they avow openness to dialogue and willingness to work with the town. The Wal-Mart representatives present themselves as both technical experts and trustworthy partners, but they also may be seen as rhetor in using facts, findings, and documents to make an argument for their project.
Atkinson, J.M. and Heritage, J. (1984) `Transcript Notation', in J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds) Structures of Social Action, pp. ix-xvi. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2.
Bakhtin, M.M. (1981) The Dialogic Imagination, ed. M. Holquist, trans. C. Emerson and M. Holquist.Austin: University of Texas Press.
3.
Beck, U. (1992) Risk Society. London: Sage.
4.
Brunn, S.D. (2006) Wal-Mart World: The World's Biggest Corporation in the Global Economy. New York: Routledge.
5.
Buttny, R. (1993) Social Accountability in Communication. London: Sage.
6.
Buttny, R. (2004) Talking Problems: Studies on Discursive Construction . Albany: State University of New York Press.
7.
Buttny, R. and Cohen, J.R. (2007) `Drawing on the Words of Others at Public Hearings: Zoning, Wal-Mart, and the Threat to the Aquifer', Language in Society36: 735-56.
8.
Cameron, D. (2000) Good to Talk? London: Sage.
9.
Clift, R. (2001) `Meaning in Interaction: The Case of Actually' , Language77: 245-91.
10.
Cohen, J.R. and Buttny, R. (2008) `"This is Not About Wal-Mart": Immeasurable Environmental Risk in the Rhetoric of Public Meetings', presentation at the National Communication Association Convention, San Diego, CA.
11.
Cohen, M.J. (2000) `Environmental Sociology: Social Theory, and Risk: An Introductory Discussion', in M.J. Cohen (ed.) Risk in the Modern Age, pp. 3-31. London : St Martin's Press.
12.
Cox, R. (2006) Environmental Communication and the Public Sphere . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13.
Craig, R.T. (2005) `How We Talk about How We Talk: Communication Theory in the Public Interest', Journal of Communication55: 659-67.
14.
Douglas, M. (1992) Risk and Blame: Essays in Cultural Theory. New York: Routledge.
15.
Douglas, M. and Wildavsky, A. (1982) Risk and Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press.
16.
Dryzek, J.S. (2005) The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses , 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17.
Fischer, F. (2000) Citizens, Experts, and the Environment. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
18.
Fishman, C. (2006) `The Wal-Mart Effect and a Decent Society: Who Knew Shopping was So Important?', Academy of Management Perspectives20: 6-25.
19.
Friesema, H.P. and Culhane, P.J. (1976) `Social Impacts, Politics, and Environmental Impact Statement Process', Natural Resources Journal16: 339-56.
20.
Garfinkel, H. and Sacks, H. (1970) `On Formal Structures of Practical Action', in J.C. McKinney and E.A. Tiryakian (eds) Theoretical Sociology: Perspectives and Developments, pp. 338-66. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
21.
Gregory, R., Keeney, R. and Von Winterfeldt, D. (1992) `Adapting the Environmental Impact Statement Process to Inform Decision Makers', Journal of Policy Analysis and Management11: 58-75.
22.
Halebsky, S. (2006) `Explaining the Outcomes of Antisuperstore Movements: A Comparative Analysis of Six Communities', Mobilization11: 443-60.
23.
Harré, R. and Van Langenhove, L. (eds) (1999) Positioning Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
24.
Harré, R., Brockmeier, J. and Mühlhäusler, P. (1999) Greenspeak: A Study of Environmental Discourse . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25.
Heritage, J. and Watson, D.R. (1979) `Formulations as Conversational Objects', in G. Psathas (ed.) Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, pp. 123-62. New York: Irvington.
26.
Kasperson, J.X., Kasperson, R.E., Pidgeon, N. and Slovic, P. (2005) `The Social Amplification of Risk: Assessing 15 Years of Research and Theory', in J.X. Kasperson and R.E. Kasperson (eds) The Social Contours of Risk, Vol. 1, pp. 202-29. London : Earthscan.
27.
Kasperson, R.E. (1992) `The Social Amplification of Risk: Progress in Developing an Integrative Framework', in S. Krimsky and D. Golding (eds) Social Theories of Risk, pp. 153-78. Westport, CT: Praeger.
28.
Katriel, T. and Philipsen, G. (1981) ```What We Need is Communication": "Communication" as a Cultural Category in SomeAmerican Speech', Communication Monographs48: 301-17.
29.
Killingsworth, M.J. and Palmer, J.S. (1992) Ecospeak: Rhetoric and Environmental Politics in America. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
30.
Killingsworth, M.J. and Steffens, D. (1989) `Effectiveness in the Environmental Impact Statement' , Written Communication6: 155-80.
31.
Kinsella, W. (2007) Presentation at the International Communication Association Annual Convention, San Francisco.
32.
Krimsky, S. and Plough, A. (1988) Environmental Hazards: Communicating Risks as a Social Process. Dover, MA: Auburn House Publishing.
Lichtenstein, N. (ed.) (2006) Wal-Mart: The Face of Twenty-First-Century Capitalism. New York: The New Press.
35.
Mühlhäusler, P. and Peace, A. (2006) `Environmental Discourses', Annual Review of Anthropology35: 457-79.
36.
Myers, G. (2004) Matters of Opinion: Talking about Public Issues . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37.
Otway, H. (1992) `Public Wisdom, Expert Fallibility: Toward a Contextual Theory of Risk', in S. Krimsky and D. Golding (eds) Social Theories of Risk, pp. 2153-228. Westport, CT: Praeger .
38.
Parr, J. (2005) `Local Water Diversely Known: Walkerton Ontario, 2000 and After', Environment and Planning D: Society and Space23: 251-71.
39.
Patterson, R. and Lee, R. (1997) `The Environmental Rhetoric of "Balance": A Case Study of Regulatory Discourse and Colonization of the Public', Technical Communication Quarterly6: 25-40.
40.
Pidgeon, N., Simmons, P. and Henwood, K. (2006) `Risk, Environment, and Technology', in P. Taylor-Gooby and J. Zinn (eds) Risk in Social Science, pp. 94-116. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
41.
Potter, J. (1996) Representing Reality. London : Sage.
42.
Renn, O. (1992) `The Social Arena Concept of Risk Debates', in S. Krimsky and D. Golding (eds) Social Theories of Risk, pp. 179-96. Westport, CT: Praeger.
43.
Roth, W.-M. et al. (2004) `Those Who Get Hurt Aren't Always Being Heard: Scientist- Resident Interactions over Community Water', Science, Technology, & Human Values29: 153-83.
44.
Rowan, K.E. (1995) `What Risk Communicators Need to Know: An Agenda for Research', in B.R. Burleson (ed.) Communication Yearbook 18, pp. 300-19. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
45.
Schultz, B. (2001) `Language and the Natural Environment', in A. Fill and P. Mühlhäusler (eds) The Ecolinguistics Reader, pp. 109-14. New York: Continuum.
46.
Slovic, P. (1999) `Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science: Surveying the Risk-Assessment Battlefield', Risk Analysis19: 689-701.
47.
Slovic, P., Finucane, M.L., Peters, E. and MacGregor, D.G. (2004) `Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality', Risk Analysis24: 311-22.
48.
Walker, G. (2007) Presentation at the Conference on Communication and Environment, Chicago.
49.
Wynne, B. (1992) `Risk and Social Learning: Reification to Engagement' , in S. Krimsky and D. Golding (eds) Social Theories of Risk, pp. 275-97. Westport, CT: Praeger.
