<p>This study aims to develop and interpret patterns in the barriers reported by Polish public companies as reasons for not applying principles 4.1 and 4.3 of the Warsaw Stock Exchange’s Best Practice 2021, which concern hybrid and live webcast general meetings, respectively. Empirical data, in the form of publicly disclosed explanations provided by companies under the ‘comply or explain’ mechanism, were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. The results reveal six categories of barriers: ‘Adequacy of current practices’, ‘Cost adequacy’, ‘Legal and internal regulatory requirements’, ‘Security, identification and privacy’, ‘Shareholder structure and shareholder expectations’, and ‘Technical limitations’. Arguments concerning the adequacy of existing practices, shareholder structure and shareholder expectations, and costs predominate in the case of Principle 4.3, whereas technical limitations, shareholder structure and shareholder expectations, and the adequacy of existing practices are most prominent in the case of Principle 4.1. The interpretation of the results shows that the declared barriers may function as narratives that legitimise maintaining the existing model of general meetings. The study suggests that the ‘comply or explain’ mechanism may promote formal transparency while also perpetuating the status quo.</p>