Sources of historical evidence
| Type of source | Examples of documents and materials | Analytical contribution |
|---|---|---|
| Corporate Reports and Disclosures | Samsung business reports; investor briefings; stock-exchange filings during the recall | Anchored firm self-disclosure on the incident, responses, and post-issue safety rhetoric |
| Official Communications | Press releases and recall pages; “Our Safety Promise”; Seoul press-conference transcript (Jan 23, 2017) | Reconstructed Samsung's public narrative, timing of admissions, and framing of corrective measures |
| Media Coverage | BBC, Reuters, The Verge, Time, Forbes, DigitalTrends coverage across Aug 2016–Jan 2017 | Provided contemporaneous reporting, external interpretation of risk, and triangulation of corporate statements |
| Industry and Technical Analyses | Statista market/shipments series; GSM Arena device specifications; published expert interviews with battery scientists (e.g. MIT) | Contextualized sales impact; clarified device architecture; explained battery-fault mechanisms for causal plausibility |
| Social Media and Online Communities | YouTube incident videos referenced in early coverage; forum threads and consumer posts (e.g. XDA) | Surfaced user-level evidence and sentiment signals that amplified salience of the hazard |
| Academic Literature | Academic work on error management, error response, and rhetorical history used to inform coding and interpretation | Linked the Samsung episode to established constructs and guided the process view of detection–communication–control |
| Published Interviews and Practitioner Commentary | Interviews with Samsung executives and external experts as reported by major outlets (e.g. Forbes, The Guardian, Time) | Offered insider perspectives via public sources; treated as secondary materials for triangulation |
| Type of source | Examples of documents and materials | Analytical contribution |
|---|---|---|
| Corporate Reports and Disclosures | Samsung business reports; investor briefings; stock-exchange filings during the recall | Anchored firm self-disclosure on the incident, responses, and post-issue safety rhetoric |
| Official Communications | Press releases and recall pages; “Our Safety Promise”; Seoul press-conference transcript (Jan 23, 2017) | Reconstructed Samsung's public narrative, timing of admissions, and framing of corrective measures |
| Media Coverage | BBC, Reuters, The Verge, Time, Forbes, DigitalTrends coverage across Aug 2016–Jan 2017 | Provided contemporaneous reporting, external interpretation of risk, and triangulation of corporate statements |
| Industry and Technical Analyses | Statista market/shipments series; GSM Arena device specifications; published expert interviews with battery scientists (e.g. MIT) | Contextualized sales impact; clarified device architecture; explained battery-fault mechanisms for causal plausibility |
| Social Media and Online Communities | YouTube incident videos referenced in early coverage; forum threads and consumer posts (e.g. XDA) | Surfaced user-level evidence and sentiment signals that amplified salience of the hazard |
| Academic Literature | Academic work on error management, error response, and rhetorical history used to inform coding and interpretation | Linked the Samsung episode to established constructs and guided the process view of detection–communication–control |
| Published Interviews and Practitioner Commentary | Interviews with Samsung executives and external experts as reported by major outlets (e.g. Forbes, The Guardian, Time) | Offered insider perspectives via public sources; treated as secondary materials for triangulation |
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.