Observing the “Observed Vulnerability”: A Critical Discourse Analysis

Consumer Vulnerability

Consumer vulnerability encompasses a nuanced concept focusing on how consumers face varying forms and degrees of susceptibility to harm, disadvantage, and exploitation within the marketplace and beyond (Hill & Sharma, 2020; Khare & Jain, 2022). This concept deals with understanding of how market-related power dynamics create barriers for certain group of consumers to access physical, technological, or financial resources, turning the marketplace to an uneven playing field (Pavia & Mason, 2014).

As a broader field of research, the study of consumer vulnerability has evolved toward different directions in recent years, which highlights the multifaceted nature of this concept (Khare & Jain, 2022; Mende et al., 2024). This evolution includes how the field has transcended from a simplistic understanding of economic disadvantage, for example, as the source of consumer vulnerability toward encompassing a comprehensive theorization of this concept in relation to different groups of consumers, situations and sources of vulnerability – e.g., racial groups and ethnic minorities (Crockett, 2017; Sandikci & Ger, 2010; Visconti et al., 2014), LGBTIQ + communities and consumers (Eichert & Luedicke, 2022; McKeage et al., 2018; Ong et al., 2020) and economically deprived consumers (Blocker et al., 2013; Saatcioglu & Corus, 2014; Varman et al., 2022). In the case of the latter, Saatcioglu and Corus (2014) showed how disadvantage experiences are interconnected and co-constitutive by a variety of categories such as socio-economic status, health, education level, employment, and type of housing. This trend in the literature has resulted in a more intersectional understanding of consumer vulnerability that includes how factors such as race, ethnicity, class, gender, and sexual orientation intersect in constituting the experiences of vulnerability (Khare & Jain, 2022; Mende et al., 2024).

When investigating and theorizing, however, the focus of these studies has been primarily on a phenomenological account of consumer vulnerability (Riedel et al., 2022) – i.e., how vulnerability is experienced by a specific group of consumers (e.g., Azzari et al., 2021; Bruce & Banister, 2019; Elms & Tinson, 2012; McKeage et al., 2018). The overemphasis on consumer experiences in consumer vulnerability studies can be viewed within the bigger picture of the domination of an existential phenomenological approach in consumer research (Askegaard & Linnet, 2011; Giesler & Fischer, 2017; Moisander et al., 2009). While these phenomenological studies have led to the creation of a rich understanding of vulnerable consumers’ experiences and subjectivities, they failed to provide a thorough understanding of the processes and conditions that lead to the construction of consumer vulnerability. This includes a scarcity of knowledge about the relationship between the third-party observers (e.g., the government, media and researchers) and the observed vulnerable consumer, and how this relationship can affect the experiences of vulnerability.

Observed Consumer Vulnerability

Hill and Sharma (2020) posited a theoretical distinction between the observed and experienced vulnerability and discussed it as a direction for future research. They defined observed vulnerability as “instances of consumer vulnerability that third parties, such as policymakers, detect and identify, regardless of whether the observed individuals do” (p. 555). However, Hill and Sharma (2020) did not delve deeply into the concept of observed vulnerability, its significance, or its interplay with experiences of vulnerability.

This study aims to theoretically extend the concept of observed vulnerability as a potential determinant of consumer vulnerability. Specifically, we seek to elucidate how the act of observation can influence the experiences of vulnerability. This inquiry is particularly pertinent considering the power dynamics inherent in the observer-observed relationship (Bratich, 2018; Hamilton et al., 2014). This power dynamic exists between those who identify, label, frame, and represent the vulnerable and vulnerability, and those consumers who are experiencing some form of a harmful and undermining situation, temporarily and/or systematically (Commuri & Ekici, 2008).

The power dynamic between the observer and the observed is established from the outset (Bratich, 2018). This dynamic begins with the observer's application of the vulnerability label, whether explicit or implicit, literal or figurative, to a specific consumer group based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. This labeling process constitutes the initial act of identification. The power dynamic persists as the observer frames and represents the vulnerable and their experiences within various contexts, including policymaking, media reporting, and academic research. This process is particularly important given the typically powerful positions held by observers, such as government officials, media professionals, and researchers, who possess the authority to control resources or influence their distribution and accessibility.

Previous consumer vulnerability scholarships have addressed the issue of identifying and labeling vulnerable populations, i.e., determining who is considered vulnerable as a foundational step in research design and data collection, by developing and adopting bottom-up approaches. These methodologies emphasize context-specific understandings of vulnerability, prioritizing stakeholder dialogue and active community engagement. Such strategies often incorporate approaches such as relational engagement (Ozanne et al., 2022), deliberative democracy (Ozanne et al., 2009), participatory action research (Ozanne & Saatcioglu, 2008), and strengths-based perspectives on vulnerability (Raciti et al., 2022; Russell-Bennett et al., 2023).

The strength-based perspective, as an emerging approach to consumer vulnerability, particularly advocates for a bottom-up understanding of consumer vulnerability, emphasizing the lived experiences of individuals. The strength-based approach stresses on using empowering language by researchers, seeking to avoid deficit-language, which can have disempowering implications by focusing on what consumers lack (Russell-Bennett et al., 2023). However, constrained by its largely normative framework (Hill, 2024), this approach does not critically address the intrinsic power dynamics of the observer-observed relationship and their potential effects on the observed. The current study aims to address this under-theorized power dynamic within consumer vulnerability research. To investigate these power relations, we draw on Stuart Hall's theory of representation, which provides a suitable lens to examine how the experiences of migrant workers during lockdowns were observed, framed, and represented.

Stuart Hall's Theory of Representation

Widely influential in critical media and cultural studies (Rojek, 2009; Sender & Decherney, 2016), Stuart Hall's theory of representation remains underutilized in marketing and consumer research. Hall's (1994, 2013a, 2013b) framework illuminates the production and circulation of meaning associated with specific social groups. From this perspective, representation is understood as a meaning-making, signifying practice; “a practice that produces meaning, that makes things mean” (Hall, 2013b, p. 10). According to Hall, meanings and representations emerge from the interplay of three interconnected spheres. The first sphere encompasses the experiences of the “real” world, encompassing both material and social realities. The second sphere pertains to the conceptual world, comprising the systems of concepts or conceptual maps that individuals employ to interpret their experiences of the world. The third sphere involves signs, which are organized into languages and serve as representations of concepts.

Hall's theoretical framework is grounded in a constructionist approach to meaning, language, and representation. This approach diverges from two alternative perspectives: the reflective and intentional approaches. The reflective approach, rooted in a realist epistemology, posits that meanings and representations are linguistic reflections of the “real” world. In this view, language functions as a mirror, mirroring the external reality. The intentional approach places human agency at the center of the meaning-making and representational process. This perspective emphasizes the role of individuals in communicating their intended meanings through language, in its broadest sense, including spoken, written, and visual forms. Therefore, the intentional approach posits that individuals impose their interpretations upon the world through linguistic practices (Hall, 2013b).

The constructionist approach emphasizes the sociocultural production of meanings and representations. Michel Foucault's conception of knowledge, power, and discourse has significantly influenced this approach, both as a broader epistemological framework and specifically within Hall's representation theory (Hall, 2013b; Keller, 2024). Central to this conception is the inextricable link between power and knowledge (Foucault, 1980; Hall, 1994).

Knowledge, in this context, refers to the dominant common-sense understanding of the world prevalent within a particular society at a given time, which has been sanctioned as “truth” (Burr, 2015). Foucault (1980) termed this the “regime of truth,” encompassing the discursive mechanisms that construct what is considered true and false within a society, thereby shaping the relationships and statuses of individuals, objects, and events. This discursive construction and circulation of knowledge and power permeates every aspect of our lives and forms how we make sense of it. Therefore, Foucault's conception of power diverges from the traditional notion of power as repressive force. Instead, it is a subtle, taken-for-granted, pervasive, and substantially masked form of power that underpins our actions and thoughts (Foucault, 1980). As Foucault (1982) stated, “what makes power hold good, what makes it accepted, is simply the fact that it doesn't only weigh on us as a force that says no, but that it traverses and produces things, it induces pleasure, forms knowledge, produces discourse” (p. 119).

Building upon this epistemological foundation and theoretical framework, within the context of cultural and media studies, Hall's representation theory examines how representational practices, particularly through media, construct differences and signify otherness within a society. However, these representational practices are not considered intentional, as discussed earlier. Instead, they are rooted in the prevailing discursive formations of a specific time, which shape representations of differences based on factors such as gender, sexuality, race, ethnicity, religion, and class. These are often referred to as ‘representational paradigms’ (Hamilton, 1997) or ‘regimes of representation’ (Hall, 1994, 2013b).

Rather than focusing on the intended meaning of the content producer (Campbell, 2016), Hall's theory emphasizes the more crucial question of how meanings are produced by the discursive formations that generate regimes of representation in a society within a specific historical context. This can be illustrated by examples such as the representation of whiteness at English seaside resorts, which results in a racialized production of space embodied through leisure practices (Burdsey, 2011), or the sexualized representation of cheerleaders as objects of heterosexual male desire (Jane, 2017).

A central concept within Hall's theory is stereotyping as a representational practice. Hall (2013a) defines stereotyping as the process of reducing, essentializing, naturalizing, and fixing differences among individuals based on factors such as religion, ethnicity, race, sexuality, gender, and class. As Hall (2013a) explains, “Stereotypes get hold of the few ‘simple, vivid, memorable, easily grasped and widely recognized’ characteristics about a person, reduce everything about the person to those traits, exaggerate and simplify them, and fix them without change or development to eternity” (p. 258). The stereotyping process contributes to the construction and functioning of othering mechanisms, which divides the “normal” from “abnormal,” the “acceptable” from “unacceptable,” marginalizing those who do not conform to the dominant representation of the normal and acceptable. Previous research has demonstrated how such stereotypical representations and othering mechanisms shape the experiences of historically marginalized social groups (Crockett, 2017; Eichert & Luedicke, 2022), exclude them from the marketplace (Beudaert et al., 2017; Bruce & Banister, 2019), and provide justifications for systemic violence (Varman et al., 2022; Varman & Vijay, 2018). However, relatively little scholarly attention has been paid to the role of observers, such as government officials, media professionals, and researchers, in the production of these othering mechanisms, particularly through representational practices.

The theoretical framework developed in this section provides a relevant lens through which to investigate the power dynamics between observers and observed in the context of migrant workers’ experiences during COVID-19 lockdowns. The following section provides contextual background for this study.

Data Collection

This study investigates the discursive representation of migrant workers during the COVID-19 lockdown in India, utilizing a CDA framework. Our data set includes 291 relevant articles in the TOI published between 26 March to 18 May 2020. The corpus comprises a diverse range of media outputs, including news articles, interviews, and commentary pieces. Articles were included in the sample if they explicitly addressed the conditions, experiences and challenges of migrant workers during the lockdowns.

The TOI was selected as the primary data source due to its prominent position within the Indian media landscape and its significant influence on public discourse. The TOI is one of the oldest and most influential newspapers in India, recognized for its extensive reach and trustworthiness, as highlighted by the Reuters Institute Digital News Report (Newman et al., 2021), which ranked it as the most trusted news brand in the country. The selection of the TOI is particularly pertinent given its generally center-right political orientation, perceived to be to some extent aligned with the government of Prime Minister Modi. This positioning enables a nuanced investigation of how dominant discourses are constructed and contested within the media sphere, as the newspaper often reflects a dynamic interplay between governmental perspectives and public sentiment. As Burr (2015) emphasizes, prevailing discourses are subject to ongoing contestation, highlighting the crucial role of media representations in shaping societal perceptions and influencing public actions.

Data Analysis

This study adopts Fairclough's (1992, 2013) framework of CDA as it allows for an in-depth analysis of how texts are embedded within broader, macro-level social and political contexts. By examining the interplay of linguistic (textual analysis), discursive (intertextual analysis), and sociocultural practices that shape and are shaped by these texts, we aim to develop a macro-level understanding of observed vulnerability and its functioning. This approach is particularly well-suited to this study because Fairclough conceptualizes discourses as “ways of representing aspects of the world” (Fairclough, 2013, p. 124), which aligns with the aim and theoretical lens of this study.

Our analysis employed a thematic coding approach, focusing on the content, form, and presentation of the texts. Similar to Beverland et al. (2022), we prioritized understanding the meanings and representations within the articles and in relation to each other (i.e., intertextuality) rather than focusing on a micro-linguistic analysis. Intertextuality, defined as the accumulation of meanings across different texts (Hall, 2013a), enabled us to connect the TOI articles with relevant discursive and macro-level practices and processes within the study's context. This analysis revealed how migrant workers’ representations were constructed within the framework of dominant societal discursive formations. This approach is grounded on the theoretical premise that discourse is not merely a reflection of reality, but actively constitutes it, shaping subject positions, power relations, and regimes of representation (Fairclough, 1992; Hall, 2013a).

In our analysis, we systematically investigated and mapped the three-dimensional conception of discourse (Fairclough, 2013) as shown in Figure 1. This framework facilitated a comprehensive examination of how the TOI articles not only represent migrant workers but also engage with and reflect the sociopolitical context of India during the pandemic and beyond. In doing so, we focused on a reciprocal relationship between text and context, where our CDA was informed by intertextual analysis. This method allowed us to examine how the TOI articles interact with broader sociocultural processes, thereby illuminating the macro-level social structures that contextualize the narratives presented in the media. As Fairclough (1992) emphasizes, understanding the dialectical relationship between macro-level practices and micro-level texts is crucial for a comprehensive CDA.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Dimensions of Discourse. Adopted from Fairclough (2013, p. 133).

This study employed a process approach (Cloutier & Langley, 2020; Giesler & Thompson, 2016) to analyze the evolving representation of migrant workers during the COVID-19 lockdowns. By adopting a process approach, we contrast our theory building from a variance approach where the focus is on the relationship between concepts/constructs/variables (Mohr, 1982). Instead, our theorization is guided by the sequence of the events during the COVID-19 lockdowns in relation to migrant workers’ situation and how dynamically it unfolded (Cloutier & Langley, 2020; Giesler & Thompson, 2016; Jarzabkowski et al., 2017). More specifically, based on Cloutier and Langley's (2020) classification, our analysis and presentation of the findings follows a conjunctive process approach, which is characterized by connecting diverse elements to explore and describe the dynamic interpenetration of the phenomena under study (i.e., migrant workers’ representations).

Accordingly, rather than centering our analysis on fixed concepts, we adopted a processual approach that emphasized the unfolding of discursive events and the temporal embeddedness of emerging themes (Cloutier & Langley, 2020). We treated our data as a longitudinal corpus, enabling us to trace how migrant workers were represented during the COVID-19 lockdowns, and how these representations changed over time. Our analysis focused on identifying discursive and representational shifts, attending to how representations were constructed, stabilized, and transformed across different temporal junctures. While we situated these discourses within the broader ideological context of neoliberal dominance in the country, our primary analytical lens was the variable temporal embeddedness of these discursive constructions. This allowed us to theorize how media narratives contributed to the framing and reframing of migrant worker subjectivities in relation to broader socio-political structures.

Migrant Workers as Economic Resources in the Dominant Regime of Representation

Historically, the caste system in India has been intricately intertwined with class relations, accounting for the formation of power dynamics that perpetuate inequality, marginalization, and deprivation, particularly in terms of access to market resources (Patnaik & Jha, 2020). However, the nature of these power relations has undergone significant transformation in recent decades, driven by the neoliberal economic reforms implemented since the 1990s (Lerche & Shah, 2018; Vakulabharanam & Motiram, 2016; Varman et al., 2011). While the Indian middle class remains predominantly composed of individuals from upper-caste backgrounds, there has been a notable increase in social mobility, with individuals from other castes ascending to this social position (Hatekar & Krishnan, 2017). These structural shifts have led to a reconfiguration of class relations in India, transitioning from a system primarily defined by religious and sociocultural factors to one increasingly shaped by economic mechanisms.

Our intertextual analysis reveals that a significant outcome of these mechanisms is the reproduction of a binary opposition between the middle class and the working class, which marks distinct subject positions within the societal production and consumption processes. In other words, subject positions are defined in relation to roles within the production and consumption spheres of a neoliberal capitalist system. This middle-class-working-class dichotomy is explicitly signified in the following excerpt from a May 17th article in the TOI:

We, the so-called urban middle class, the prosperous, the educated, have collectively failed you. We are the beneficiaries of the new economy, we are the aspirational Indians, we love our malls, our penthouses, our swimming pools. You built all of these, yet we could not see you. You were invisible to us, hidden away behind the metallic jungle of scaffolding. Today you walk on the six-lane highways you built for our SUVs. (TOI, 17 May)

The aforementioned excerpt, taken from a commentary article, offers a collective apology from the middle class to migrant workers for their treatment during the lockdowns. One interesting aspect of this text is how the dichotomy of the middle class and working class is manifested and the differences are signified in many ways—e.g., consumers versus producers, urban versus rural, educated vs uneducated. But more importantly, this text underscores a recurring theme in the migrant workers’ representation and subject position: their reduction to mere economic resources. This regime of representation prioritizes migrant workers’ value as producers of commodities for consumption by the affluent, educated, urban middle class, rather than recognizing their inherent human dignity and value, particularly as one of the most vulnerable group of people during a global pandemic. The apology itself is framed in terms of economic utility, emphasizing the migrant workers’ role as “skilled breadwinners” and their contribution to the construction of middle-class homes. This perspective reinforces the notion that migrant workers’ worth is derived from their capacity to serve the needs and aspirations of the middle class.

Entangled within the complex interplay of the caste system and the more recent, neoliberal-driven capitalist class relations in India (Jagannathan & Rai, 2022; Patnaik & Jha, 2020), migrant workers have been reduced to an unprotected, commodified economic resource, instrumental to the acceleration of the country's economic development. This is evident in the following excerpt from a commentary article that offers recommendations to the government for mitigating the economic consequences of the pandemic and lockdowns:

Government must look at opening most industrial establishments where 50% staff could be called for work on a daily basis in rotation in the first two weeks. Work areas must be sanitised on a daily basis and workers given minimum essential safety kits where necessary. Each worker must undergo scanning at factory entry as done at airports on a daily basis. Meanwhile arrangements for bringing in migrant workers in a planned manner in batches could be put in place. (TOI, April 5)

As evident in the above excerpt, migrant workers are often portrayed as objects, devoid of agency and entirely subject to the control of the state and private sector. They are seen as expendable resources who can be deployed in “patches” from here to there for the sake of saving the economy for the beneficiaries of the current economic system.

The common use of divisive language to signify the otherness of migrant workers, portraying them either as mere economic objects or as helpless victims (as discussed in the second part of the findings), reflects the reciprocal interaction between the text and these representations with the broader structural power relations within the country, which contribute to the marginalization and disempowerment of one of society's most vulnerable groups. As detailed in the second part of our findings, the dehumanizing representation of migrant workers as economic resources within a neoliberal system becomes particularly evident during the COVID-19 pandemic, as they experience invisibility, exclusion from the market and government support systems, and exposure to various forms of violence.

Accordingly, the dehumanizing representation of migrant workers as economic resources should be considered within the broader context of neoliberal dominance in the country's socioeconomic and political spheres. While neoliberalism, as a modality of governance, manifests differently across various contexts, shaped by specific historical, socioeconomic, and political factors (Brown, 2015), it consistently reshapes societal understanding and individual identities (Harvey, 2005). Neoliberal governance fosters a culture of individualism and entrepreneurship, producing subjects who are oriented toward economic self-interest, the so-called Homo Oeconomicus (Brown, 2015). The findings presented in this section highlight how these macro-level socioeconomic processes in India have contributed to the dehumanization of migrant workers, reducing them to mere economic objects to facilitate the rise of the ‘economic man.’ In other words, the dehumanization of migrant workers is a necessary condition for the construction of other individuals as economic subjects within a neoliberal framework (Varman & Vijay, 2018).

Migrant Workers During the Lockdowns: Invisible, Outlaw, Rehumanized

Building upon the broader context established in the first part of our findings, we adopt a process approach (Cloutier & Langley, 2020; Giesler & Thompson, 2016) in the second part to examine migrant workers’ representation during the COVID-19 lockdowns and how it shifts across three distinct phases of ‘invisibles’, ‘outlaws’, and ‘rehumanization’.

Invisible

Our analysis reveals the exclusion of migrant workers from public discourse and government crisis management strategies during the initial stages of the COVID-19 lockdowns in India. While the first case was reported in Kerala in January 2020, stricter measures were implemented in March 2020 as case numbers increased. The government's response, mirroring global trends, adopted a rationalized approach of authoritarian interventions, primarily relying on lockdowns to curb viral transmission. Prime Minister Modi's sudden announcement of a 14-h curfew on March 19th, 2020, followed by a 3-week nationwide lockdown with a mere four-hour notice period, significantly impacted the nation of 1.4 billion population.

Not a desirable situation for any social group, the abrupt and extensive nature of the lockdowns disproportionately impacted the most vulnerable populations, including migrant workers. Already marginalized and deprived, these workers found themselves in a precarious situation, with limited access to basic resources.

As unregistered daily wage earners, they faced immediate economic hardship, losing their income and struggling to afford food and shelter. Moreover, the uncertainty and fear associated with the pandemic were exacerbated by their geographical displacement, far from family and community support networks. The rationalized, masculine crisis management approach, characterized by utilitarian logic (Branicki, 2020), prioritized the well-being of the majority population but failed to adequately address the structural vulnerabilities of marginalized groups like migrant workers (McKeage et al., 2018). This oversight resulted in a significant gap in care and support for these individuals during the lockdowns.

The invisibility of migrant workers before and during the early stages of the COVID-19 lockdowns highlights their representational exclusion from public discourse. This exclusion, exacerbated by government crisis management interventions, resulted in severe marketplace exclusion, limiting their access to essential goods and services. Drawing on Saren et al.'s (2019) definition of marketplace exclusion as “the mechanisms through which certain individuals and communities are barred from the resources and opportunities provided by the market to other citizens” (p. 476), we can see how migrant workers were disproportionately affected. While the pandemic restricted market access for many, for migrant workers, it became a matter of survival. Their representational and participatory exclusion from the marketplace (Burgess et al., 2017) placed their lives in danger.

Consequently, the government's crisis management, intended to save lives, paradoxically exacerbated the vulnerability of this marginalized group. By excluding migrant workers from the marketplace, the government's actions put their lives at serious risk. Faced with this dire situation, many migrant workers were compelled to undertake perilous journeys, walking hundreds of kilometers toward their homes.

Theoretical Contributions

Our findings make four contributions to consumer vulnerability theory, especially from a macromarketing perspective. First and foremost, this study theoretically extends the concept of observed vulnerability, which was first introduced by Hill and Sharma (2020), who distinguished it from experienced vulnerability. We extend Hill and Sharma's (2020) framework by foregrounding the power dynamics inherent in the observer-observed relationship (Bratich, 2018), which, in the case of vulnerable consumers, is markedly asymmetrical. Hill and Sharma's (2020) framework acknowledges a degree of independence between observed and experienced vulnerability. However, it does not explore how observational practices actively shape or influence the experience of vulnerability. By adopting a constructionist approach to representation ( Hall, 2013b), our study delineates the mechanisms through which the representational practices of observers shape the subjectivities of vulnerable individuals and influence their lived experiences of precarity.

Drawing from our findings, we conceptualize observed vulnerability as a discursive practice (Fairclough, 2013) that intricately connects macro-level sociopolitical, economic, and historical processes to micro-level practices and experiences through reiterative processes of normalizing and homogenizing representations. This concept describes how observation, particularly by influential actors who control resources or influence their distribution and accessibility, can shape experiences of vulnerability. This occurs through observers’ representational practices, specifically how they identify, label, frame, and portray vulnerability and vulnerables. Representational practices, particularly those disseminated through media, contribute to the prevailing discursive formations within a specific era, establishing what Hall (2013b) terms a “regime of representation” that essentializes and naturalizes vulnerability and those perceived as vulnerable.

Our findings underscore the inherent power dynamics within observer-observed relationships (Bratich, 2018), demonstrating how the framing and representation of vulnerability by influential observers (e.g., the government, media, and researchers) can exacerbate existing homogenized, stereotypical representations and the stigmatization of already marginalized groups of consumers. Previous research has shown how stereotypical representation can stigmatize groups of consumers and place them in vulnerable situations in their marketplace- and consumption-related activities (Crockett, 2017; Liu & Kozinets, 2022; Mirabito et al., 2016; Sandikci & Ger, 2010), and how this can lead to consumers’ isolation and exclusion from marketplace (Beudaert et al., 2017; Bruce & Banister, 2019; Gurrieri et al., 2013).

Additionally, this theoretical advancement broadens the boundaries of consumer vulnerability research, which is primarily engaged with a phenomenological approach to investigate experiences of vulnerability (Raciti et al., 2022). By incorporating macro-level processes into the analytical framework, researchers are better positioned to engage with the structural conditions that shape consumer vulnerability. This broader lens enables a more nuanced understanding of how macro-level processes and discursive representations intersect with the micropolitics of everyday life – i.e., how macro-level dynamics inform and construct the lived realities of vulnerable consumers (Saatcioglu & Ozanne, 2013).

Second, the findings of this study contribute to the scholarly understanding of language use in relation to vulnerable consumers. In recent years, particularly through the emerging ‘strength-based approach’ to vulnerability, social marketing researchers have critiqued the use of ‘deficit-language’ that focuses on vulnerable consumers’ deficiencies. Instead, the strength-based approach advocates for the use of ‘strength’ language to empower consumers (see, e.g., Raciti et al., 2022; Russell-Bennett et al., 2023). However, the strength-based approach primarily focuses on normative ideologies, delineating what is considered appropriate or inappropriate to say about “marginalized customers who may potentially experience vulnerability” (Russell-Bennett et al., 2023, p. 167). This normative orientation limits the approach's capacity to engage with the underlying processes and mechanisms of representation. Consequently, it fails to critically examine how language use can be performative and influence the lived experiences of those who encounter vulnerability.

Additionally, our findings indicate that the employment of positive language in framing and reporting vulnerability can yield paradoxical outcomes. In the context of migrant workers’ experiences during COVID-19 lockdowns, while the utilization of positive language facilitated the mobilization of essential resources like food and shelter in the short term, it also inadvertently contributed to othering mechanisms, which may potentially have disempowering effects and serve to reinforce pre-existing social boundaries and hierarchies. The discourse of pity, as theorized by Arendt (2006), surrounding migrant workers’ plight has functioned as a boundary-making practice, separating the sufferer from the observer. Consequently, instead of fostering compassionate and shared suffering, the pitiful representation of the vulnerable can create a spectacle of suffering for those who do not directly experience it (Boltanski, 1999), further distancing the observer (e.g., the broader society) from the vulnerable. This spectacle, as described by Hall (2013a), transforms real-world experiences (e.g., migrant workers’ vulnerability) into a form of fantastical consumption for the rest of society. These findings underscore the need for a more nuanced comprehension of the intricate relationship between language, power, and vulnerability to effectively address the challenges faced by marginalized populations.

Third, this study contributes to the existing theorization of justified violence against vulnerable consumers (Gurrieri et al., 2016; Varman & Vijay, 2018) by elucidating the underlying mechanisms of observation and representation. The findings reveal how market exclusion exposes migrant workers to life-threatening conditions and State-sanctioned violence. The systemic application of violence in this context normalizes the vulnerability and injury of marginalized groups (e.g., migrant workers) within society, justified by a selective and accepted form of State violence for the perceived greater good. As Butler (2009) argues, this stems from an epistemological problem that “fails to apprehend the lives of others as lost or injured” (p. 1). Drawing on Hall's (1994, 2013b) representation theory, this epistemological problem is exacerbated within a neoliberal context that dehumanizes migrant workers as mere economic resources, excluding them from the State's purview of care and rendering them vulnerable to “justified” State violence.

Fourth, this study contributes to the existing literature on subsistence markets by illuminating how the dominance of neoliberal ideology within India's socioeconomic landscape has eroded traditional and communal support mechanisms that are more readily available through subsistence markets. While subsistence markets inherently offer limited resources to consumers, they are often embedded within broader social networks of family and community (Mason et al., 2013; Viswanathan & Rosa, 2010). Our findings demonstrate how migrant workers were marginalized from both formal markets and subsistence markets, along with the associated support systems of traditional institutions. This exclusion resulted in severe vulnerability characterized by health, income, housing, shelter, and food insecurity. In essence, the dehumanizing representation of migrant workers as mere economic resources, and their displacement, not only limited their access to formal and informal markets but also severed their connection to the resources they would have had access to in their rural communities. This highlights the failure of the liberalist market's “invisible hand” to provide adequate support and the simultaneous erosion of traditional support networks.

Implications for Macromarketers

This paper offers macromarketers a novel theoretical lens—observed vulnerability—and a pertinent methodological approach—CDA—for the nuanced study of consumer vulnerability, a concept of significant and ongoing interest within the field (e.g., Castelo Branco & Alfinito, 2024; Enriques & Peterson, 2025; McKeage et al., 2018; Pavia & Mason, 2014). While the phenomenological approach has provided valuable insights into the lived experiences of consumer vulnerability, this paper argues for the complementary utility of CDA for macromarketing. This enables macromarketers to have a broader, systemic perspective on the conditions of vulnerability, which is more in line with foundations and principles of the field.

In the case of this study, CDA provided a framework for contextualizing the precarious situation of migrant workers during the COVID-19 lockdowns within the broader systemic influence of neoliberal hegemony in India's sociopolitical and economic landscape. This analytical approach facilitated the identification of migrant workers’ subject position as cheap and readily accessible economic resources, integral to the accelerated pace of the country's economic development. As a hegemonic ideology, neoliberalism actively constructs subjectivities and normalizes modalities of thought and action, thereby shaping individual and collective behavior in accordance with its core tenets (Harvey, 2005). Key institutions, such as international financial organizations (e.g., the International Monetary Fund, World Bank), economic think tanks, business schools, and a significant portion of mainstream media, play a pivotal role in validating, disseminating, and normalizing neoliberal ideas at both micro and macro levels. At the micro-level, manifestations of neoliberal governmentality (Foucault, 2008, 2009) are predominantly observed in the shaping of individual subjectivity, evident in the construction of the “economic man,” the “entrepreneurial self,” and the intensification of individuation (Brown, 2015). At the macro-level, as the findings of our study suggest, this is reflected in representational practices and the construction and reconstruction of subject positions that facilitate the system's more effective and efficient pursuit of its capitalist objectives, such as maximizing profit and accumulating capital.

Within this context, “influential observers” (e.g., the government, media, and researchers) may engage in discursive and representational practices that construct, reconstruct and perpetuate “vulnerables” and vulnerability. As the findings of our study shows, such practices can occur even when ostensibly driven by perceived benevolent intentions, such as safeguarding the country from an unknown virus like COVID-19, or more broadly, advancing national progress and development aligned with neoliberal ideology.

In other words, from this perspective, actors and their intentions are embedded within and shaped by the dominant ideological system and the interactions therein. In the context of this study, observed shifts in discourses and representations regarding migrant workers do not necessarily arise from direct alterations in the conscious intentions of individual actors or observers, but rather from the dynamic interplay among various actors within the system. For example, the evolving representation of migrant workers toward being rehumanized is not solely attributable to shifts in benevolent intentions. Instead, it emerges from complex sociopolitical forces, including media narratives, political dynamics, and even international discourses concerning COVID-19 and lockdowns. However, as highlighted in the findings section, this apparent shift is characterized as “temporary” rehumanization. This temporality is contingent upon the continued portrayal and treatment of migrant workers as cheap, accessible, yet essential economic resources for rapid “national development”. This dependency underscores how the conditions for their systemic vulnerability (arising from, for example, their unregistered status, displacement, and estrangement from family and community) are perpetuated for the benefit of the prevailing economic system.

Additionally, for populations confronting systemic conditions of vulnerability (e.g., migrant workers in this study), even temporary positive representations often manifest as pitiful portrayals. While these portrayals may garner transient attention for their suffering, they simultaneously maintain a critical distance between observer and sufferer (Arendt, 2006). This ultimately reinforces their othered status and, crucially, obfuscates the underlying structural conditions that result in their systemic vulnerability. This theorization, however, does not dismiss the presence or significance of competing discourses—such as those that humanize migrant workers by highlighting their agency, familial responsibilities, and contributions. Rather, our focus in this paper is on critically examining how dominant neoliberal discursive practices often co-opt empathy in ways that depoliticize suffering and deflect attention from the root causes of inequality.

Considering this, observed vulnerability, as conceptualized in this study, extends beyond mere strategic maneuvering by individual observers. Drawing upon Hall's (2013b) theory of representation, our analysis emphasizes the social construction of discourses and representations within a broader sociohistorical, economic, and political macro-level context. This systemic perspective, however, does not negate the existence of actors who benefit from the prevailing system, nor does it preclude their strategic actions in perpetuating specific representations. Consistent with Harvey's (2005) conceptualization of neoliberalism as a political project, it is evident that the dominant system, operating within the international capitalist framework, strategically promotes neoliberalism as the pathway to economic development. While governments and businesses undoubtedly operate within and derive benefits from this system, their roles and advantages are also profoundly shaped by overarching macro-level forces, including historical legacies, global financial structures, and dominant discourses of economic development. For example, within the globalized production and supply chain system, India's expanding economy relies, in part, on maintaining low production costs as a crucial competitive advantage. Consequently, the prevailing representation of migrant workers primarily as “economic resources” directly serves this systemic imperative (Jha & Pankaj, 2021). This perpetuates their subject position as cheap and accessible labor, even when temporary positive representations emerge.

The othering of vulnerable populations must also be understood through the lens of capitalism's inherently antagonistic nature, characterized by inherent conflicts, especially class conflicts (Fuchs, 2022). This means that the othering of vulnerable populations through representational practices, whether intentional or not, can significantly benefit specific segments of society. More precisely, the persistent othering and dehumanization of vulnerable populations within dominant societal discourses serve to facilitate capital accumulation and profit generation. While neoliberalism, as the prevailing form of capitalism, often presents itself as an emancipatory ideology through its emphasis on individuation and agency—purportedly transcending traditional hierarchies (e.g., the caste system in India)—it concurrently generates new forms of class relations and perpetuates systemic inequalities.

The concept of observed vulnerability, as we developed in this paper based on a constructionist approach to representation (Hall, 2013b), offers macromarketers a critical lens through which to examine a wide array of societal issues shaped by macro-level forces. This concept extends beyond the specific context of migrant workers to encompass vulnerability as it manifests in contexts such as displacement and international migration, age, disability, and homelessness, among others. It provides a means to analyze how macro-level dynamics contribute to the precarity experienced by various populations.

As an example of how this could be done in a different area, the neoliberal framing of age and ageing, which inherently ties individual worth to economic productivity, often results in the portrayal of older adults as societal burdens. This reinforcement of ageist ideologies is deeply embedded within policy and market structures and discourses (Skoss et al., 2024; Ylänne, 2015). Such representations are evident across various policy domains. A specific example of this is the recent reduction of the age limit for Australia's Temporary Graduate Visa (subclass 485), a post-graduation work visa for international students, from 50 to 35 years—a policy enacted despite its divergence from the Labour Party's stated social commitments—further illustrates how institutional mechanisms selectively privilege economically “salient” migrants (Cranston & Duplan, 2023; Szigeti, 2023). Hence, observed vulnerability offers a direct analytical tool to understand how influential observers, through representational practices, actively construct and reinforce age-related vulnerability within immigration and labor market frameworks. By foregrounding the observer's role in the construction and perpetuation of vulnerability and vulnerable populations, this framework enables a more nuanced investigation into the power dynamics inherent in the observer-observed relationship, particularly as they pertain to experiences of both temporary and, crucially, systemic vulnerability.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

While this study engaged with the observed vulnerability and representation of migrant workers in the broader socioeconomic and political spheres of India, its primary focus was on their plight during the COVID-19 pandemic—a temporally bounded and exceptional context of precarity. Future research could extend this inquiry by examining observed vulnerability across broader temporal and structural contexts. For instance, studies might explore how discursive practices of influential observers shape representations of other marginalized populations, such as individuals experiencing homelessness. In the context of the United States, where homelessness has persisted as a structural societal issue over recent decades, future research could investigate how media and public policy discourses construct and reinforce othering mechanisms. Such mechanisms may manifest through marketplace exclusion, symbolic and physical violence, and the legitimization of social hierarchies. This line of inquiry would contribute to a deeper understanding of how discursive constructions influence the lived realities of vulnerable populations over time.

In this study, we primarily focused on media representation. A significant avenue for future research involves analyzing data from other influential observers. For example, a CDA of consumer vulnerability literature could reveal how vulnerability and the vulnerable are conceptualized and represented by academic researchers. Similarly, examining policymakers’ statements and public policy documents may offer valuable insights into institutional framings of vulnerability. Marketing communication practices, particularly brand activism, also present a fertile ground for exploring how commercial actors observe, interpret, and potentially commodify vulnerability. Advancing this research agenda calls for an interdisciplinary approach that integrates perspectives from media studies, marketing and consumer research, policy analysis, and CDA to more comprehensively theorize and contextualize observed vulnerability.