I'm sorry, Tom, I just don't see it. Sure, for dramatic purposes, an authority figure, a power figure, is often shown as the villain. Even in westerns, it's always the bad rancher who's trying to run the sod-busters off the prime grazing land he wants. After Star Trek today, I watched a dubbed Pale Rider on the Spanish station (if you can grok Clint speaking Mexican Spanish!): evil mine company trying to run off gentle subsistence miners off their land, yadda-yadda. That doesn't mean ranchers or miners are criminals, or that western movie makers are opposed to ranchers and miners.

How many power figures does this society have? Besides cops and politicians, businessmen are just about the only ones, people with real power, who can be corrupted. And what do they deal with? Money, the major motive for corruption. Sure, there are other sources of crime, gangsters, thugs, hoodlums, but none have the opportunities for major scandal in a drama that businessmen do. And since most of the economy is managed by businessmen, business crime will be common so people are familiar with it.

If you're going to make a film about the corruption of power, or little people being victimized by powerful people, what are your choices? Government bureaucrats, crooked cops? Mafia Dons? Or businessmen? Examples of each exist, but the latter outnumber the others by far and look at the possibilities. Giant corporate criminals like Lex Luthor, corrupt small town businessmen like the Bill Macy character in Fargo, or the usual suspects of evil companies poisoning the local stream or trying to pave over some Indian burial ground. You can come up with a plausible corporate criminal for any dramatic situation you want. In a society dominated by commerce, the vast majority of organized, institutional crimes will be committed by businessmen, even if the vast majority of businessmen are honest.

Finally, as far as the business of making movies is concerned, the average person going to the show doesn't want to see a film about a big company being victimized by its employees. He's more likely to be sympathetic if it's the other way round.

I'm sorry, but I just think you're over-sensitive about this. The examples which support your case are etched in your mind, the counter-examples glossed over.