A predominant assumption in studies of deliberative democracy is that stakeholder engagements will lead to rational consensus and to a common discourse on corporate social and environmental responsibilities. Challenging this assumption, we show that conflict is ineradicable and important and that affects constitute the dynamics of change of the discourses of responsibilities. On the basis of an analysis of social media engagements in the context of the grand challenge of plastic pollution, we argue that civil society actors use mobilization strategies with their peers and inclusive-dissensus strategies with corporations to convert them to a new discourse. These strategies use moral affects to blame and shame corporations and solidarity affects to create feelings of identification with the group and to avoid disengagement and polarization. Our research contributes to the literature on deliberative democracy and stakeholder engagement in social media in the collective constructions of discourses on grand challenges.

协商民主研究中的一个主要假设是，利益相关者的参与将导致理性共识和关于企业社会和环境责任的共同讨论。挑战这一假设，我们表明冲突是根深蒂固的和重要的，影响构成了责任话语变化的动力。基于对塑料污染这一巨大挑战背景下社交媒体参与情况的分析，我们认为，民间社会参与者与同行一起使用动员策略，与公司一起使用包容性分歧策略，将他们转变为一种新的话语。这些策略利用道德影响来责备和羞辱公司，利用团结影响来创造对群体的认同感，避免脱离接触和两极分化。