malfeasance

I don't think aresant was implying any malfeasance on Matt Iman's part.

I wish the FBI was as diligent at pursuing corporate malfeasance.

I've seen a fair number of comments assuming malfeasance here, so I'm just gonna note an actual news article about this.

It's the land of unlimited corporate malfeasance, unchecked pollution, and a ban on fire codes.

Companies have spent decades whittling down the ability of people to correct corporate malfeasance through civil lawsuits.

Don't worry, in the "long run" the laissez-faire approach to corporate regulation will "end up" minimizing malfeasance and maximizing freedom.

It seems gratuitous to turn this into evidence of intentionally dishonest malfeasance and frame the whole thing as some kind of pseudo-political debate.

The standards applied to these CEOs do not admit of the precise specification needed for clear differentiation between error in judgment, bad luck, malfeasance or dereliction of duty.

As of my writing this we're six top-level comments in and already a full third of them miss the point of the article, going on to complain about The Economist advocating not punishing companies for malfeasance.

Fire-codes, health-codes, and fundamental liability for willful corporate malfeasance/negligence are not so easily dismissed.

In the West, an attitude of malfeasance-denialism has been encouraged in the educated and upper crust elements of society to the point that erudite people tend to almost deny the existence of elite deviance or official criminality.