Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
• Study Focus : Examines media framing (2018–2023) of Carillion’s failure by the FRC and stakeholder responses. • Blame Avoidance and Stalemate : The FRC initially deflected blame, citing systemic limits and government constraints. • Shift Toward Reform : The FRC later adopted a proactive stance, strengthening enforcement, issuing record fines, and reforming audit firms. • Policy Implications : Despite delayed ARGA reforms, the FRC repositioned itself as a credible agent of regulatory change. • Theoretical Contribution : Advances framing theory by showing how regulatory legitimacy is dynamically shaped through media narratives. This paper examines the interaction between two sets of frames: firstly, how the UK audit regulator (the FRC) framed the failure of a large construction firm (Carillion Plc) and secondly, how stakeholders framed the regulator. An analysis of UK press coverage between 2018 and 2023 reveals how politicians, audit firms, professional bodies, journalists and the FRC itself advance competing narratives in the media which shift over time. Early media coverage captured stakeholders’ views that the FRC was under-resourced, conflicted and toothless. At the same time, the regulator framed Carillion as a threat to its legitimacy, leading to an initial period of inertia. This was not, however, long-lived. As the FRC adopted a stronger public stance, evidenced by increased investigations, fines and proposed structural reforms, stakeholders increasingly framed the regulator as credible and reformed. This transition shows how crises can move from blame and stalemate toward selective accountability and policy experimentation. Our findings demonstrate that regulatory legitimacy is negotiated in public arenas rather than determined solely by institutional design. By conceptualising the media as a space where multiple actors frame and contest regulatory roles, we offer new insights into how crises can be reframed from threats into opportunities, something which can result in regulatory innovation.
Maroun et al. (Thu,) studied this question.