Television reboots often rekindle nostalgia, but the 2021 reboot of “The Wonder Years” did something more ambitious: it reimagined Black masculinity and family life during the Civil Rights era. A recent study reveals how storytelling by the mass media can reclaim Black history and challenge common negative portrayals of Black men.

The original 1990s program focused on a white suburban family from the perspective of a 12-year-old boy growing up in the late 1960s and early 1970s. By focusing on a middle-class Black family in 1968 Montgomery, Alabama, the reboot offers a fresh perspective on a turbulent period in American history — one typically told from a white viewpoint. According to the study, the characters and narratives of “The Wonder Years” reboot present a complex, multidimensional view of Black life, rejecting common media stereotypes.

The research team of Rachel Grant, University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications Journalism assistant professor and Hayley Markovich, Ph.D. 2022 viewed all 22 episodes of Season 1 and documented three major narrative themes illustrating how the show succeeds in presenting authentic portrayals of Black life and identity.

• Reimagining Black Excellence shifts the focus away from stories of racial struggle and highlights the richness of everyday Black life. The show portrays moments of joy, love and ambition, demonstrating that Black history is not just about oppression but also resilience and success. Dean Williams, the show’s 12-year-old protagonist, navigates universal coming-of-age experiences — first crushes, family dynamics, school troubles — while also processing the realities of being Black in 1960s America. His father, Bill, a musician and professor, exemplifies professional and creative excellence, reinforcing that Black success isn’t limited to breaking racial barriers — it also exists in ordinary moments of daily life.
• Recontextualizing Black Masculinity challenges the traditional stereotypes of Black men as hypermasculine, violent or absent fathers. Instead, “The Wonder Years” presents a spectrum of Black male experiences. Bill Williams is a strong yet emotionally available father, guiding his son with care rather than strict discipline. Dean’s older brother, Bruce, a Vietnam War veteran, highlights the struggles of Black soldiers who returned home only to face discrimination. Even Dean’s grandfather, Clisby, adds depth to the portrayal of Black masculinity as he struggles with aging and maintaining independence. By showcasing these different perspectives, the show expands the definition of what it means to be a Black man.
• Revisiting Respectability Politics examines the pressure on Black individuals to conform to white societal norms to gain social acceptance. The show critiques this through various storylines, such as when Dean’s mother, Lillian, faces workplace discrimination despite being the most qualified person in her office. Another episode highlights how Black students are often expected to educate their white peers about racism — an unfair burden placed on them from a young age.

Television has long played a role in shaping cultural perceptions of race, including negative black male stereotypes. The study explores the question, could the reboot of a nostalgic TV show serve as a corrective tool by reframing Black experiences truthfully and connecting them to current race issues?

Though “The Wonder Years” reboot was canceled after two seasons, Grant and Markovich argue that its impact remains significant. The show reclaims history by centering Black experiences within a nostalgic, family-friendly format. It proves that mainstream television can challenge outdated portrayals of race while still being entertaining.

The original article, “Rehistoricizing Black Masculinity in ”The Wonder Years” Reboot,” was published online in Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly on October 26, 2024.

Authors: Rachel Grant, Hayley Markovich

This summary was written by Gisele McAuliffe.

How “The Wonder Years” Reboot Redefined Black Masculinity was originally published in CJC Insights on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

This article is a part of University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications Ph.D. student Francis Akanbi’s three-pronged dissertation, titled “The Shift from Corporate Social Responsibility to Corporate Purpose: Evolution, Perception, and Trust in Contemporary Business Practices.” The disseratation explores how organizations articulate purpose, how authenticity influences trust in CSR efforts, and how alignment between corporate purpose and CSR initiatives affects stakeholder engagement.

In today’s interconnected world, businesses are no longer judged solely by their profitability but also by the impact they have on society, the environment and the well-being of their employees. As companies navigate a landscape defined by rapid technological advancements, economic shifts, and growing calls for accountability, the role of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and corporate purpose has never been more critical.

Redefining Corporate Purpose

Historically, businesses were primarily concerned with maximizing shareholder value. However, a shift is occurring — a shift towards stakeholder capitalism, where companies are expected to deliver value not only to shareholders but also to employees, customers, communities, and the environment. This evolution signals a deeper understanding that sustainable success hinges on shared prosperity and responsible governance.

At the heart of this transformation is the concept of corporate purpose. A well-defined purpose acts as a company’s moral compass, guiding decisions and actions to ensure alignment with broader societal needs. It goes beyond surface-level commitments and demands authenticity, transparency, and measurable impact. Companies that embed purpose into their DNA build trust, enhance reputation, and drive long-term resilience.

Why Purpose Matters to CSR

In today’s world, CSR initiatives can often come across as performative or, in some cases, as greenwashing — appearing socially responsible without taking meaningful action. A clear example of this was in the aftermath of George Floyd’s death, when numerous companies rushed to issue statements supporting racial equality and social justice. While these public declarations drew attention, many of these organizations had no prior history of meaningful CSR efforts. This lack of credibility led to skepticism and highlighted the need for businesses to align their actions with their stated values.

This is why purpose is essential. When stakeholders recognize a brand as genuinely committed to social responsibility, rolling out CSR strategies becomes more trustworthy and authentic. Purpose-driven companies do not wait for public pressure to act — they integrate CSR into their core values and operations from the start. Such alignment builds lasting trust and enables organizations to respond to societal issues with integrity and impact.

For example, companies like Ben & Jerry’s have built their reputation around social activism and fairness. Their long-standing commitment to racial and environmental justice made their responses to recent social movements credible and consistent with their established identity. In contrast, brands without a clear purpose often struggle to convey sincerity, undermining their efforts to create meaningful change.

Purpose also ensures that CSR efforts are sustainable and impactful rather than reactive and short-lived. Businesses that embed purpose into their DNA attract purpose-driven employees and customers, fostering loyalty and long-term growth. By prioritizing purpose, organizations position themselves as leaders in creating positive societal impact.

Bridging Research and Practice

Academics play a crucial role in bridging the gap between research and practice in CSR and corporate purpose. Through rigorous inquiry, researchers provide empirical data that guides businesses in adopting ethical and sustainable practices. This research is vital for ensuring that CSR strategies are not only well-intentioned but also effective and measurable.

By developing frameworks grounded in data, academics help businesses align their CSR initiatives with their core purpose, enabling them to create meaningful and lasting change. Furthermore, collaboration between academic institutions and industry leaders strengthens this process. Researchers provide insights that drive evidence-based decision-making, while businesses apply these insights to real-world challenges. This partnership ensures that CSR efforts are credible, impactful, and capable of delivering measurable results.

The importance of producing actionable research cannot be overstated. Organizations and brands benefit from data-driven strategies that not only enhance their reputation but also improve stakeholder trust and loyalty. Research-backed practices lead to innovation, competitive advantages, and sustainable growth, creating a ripple effect that benefits both businesses and society.

A Vision for Impact

The impact of purpose-driven CSR initiatives extends far beyond boardrooms, influencing stakeholders, shareholders, and organizations themselves. For stakeholders, these initiatives create opportunities for better employment practices, equitable community development, and improved access to essential services such as education and healthcare. Employees experience healthier, more inclusive workplaces that prioritize well-being and foster engagement, loyalty, and productivity.

For shareholders, purpose-driven CSR provides measurable value through risk mitigation, enhanced reputation, and long-term profitability. Companies that prioritize sustainable practices are better positioned to navigate regulatory changes, meet consumer expectations, and attract socially conscious investors. This alignment between purpose and profit demonstrates that ethical responsibility and financial success can coexist.

Organizations also benefit internally by strengthening their corporate culture and aligning their values with operational strategies. A clearly articulated purpose helps businesses attract top talent, drive innovation, and sustain competitive advantages. Furthermore, purpose-driven CSR fosters resilience, enabling companies to adapt to societal shifts and market demands while maintaining stakeholder trust.

Thus, the far-reaching impacts influence broader ecosystems. Policymakers gain insights from CSR research, allowing them to develop regulations that promote fairness and accountability. Communities thrive as businesses invest in infrastructure, environmental protection, and social programs. This creates an ecosystem where businesses, governments, and civil society work collaboratively to address global challenges.

Looking Ahead

The road ahead demands bold leadership and unwavering commitment to purpose. Companies must embrace transparency, listen to stakeholders, and hold themselves accountable for their actions. In the end, the future of business is not just about profits; it is about purpose. And as we look to this future, one thing is clear — companies that lead with purpose will be the ones that thrive in a world demanding authenticity, responsibility, and impact.

The Future of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Purpose-Driven Approach to Sustainable Growth was originally published in CJC Insights on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Public trust in science has been declining for decades, a challenge that may be exacerbated by pop culture and media portrayals of scientists as cold and disconnected. Could a female face give science communication the warmth it needs to succeed?

Olivia Bullock, University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications (UFCJC) Advertising assistant professor, and Austin Hubner of the University of Louisville (Hubner will be joining UFCJC in fall 2025), wanted to explore this question. Although women who defy gender norms can trigger a backlash that hurts their likability, recent research has found that female scientists often seem friendlier. This has been dubbed the “women are wonderful” effect in which accomplished women inspire their audience by “doing it all.”

However, women in the public eye face an interesting paradox: They are often seen as more likeable, but does that likeability translate into perceptions of competence? Female experts may be seen as more approachable, but not as authoritative as their male counterparts. Understanding how the public views female scientists’ competence is important because people tend to be more likely to listen to those they deem competent. This effect of source credibility on one’s persuasive power can be seen in political, leadership, and scientific fields.

If people like female scientists more, how does this impact perceptions of the experts’ competence and people’s overall trust in the science that the expert represents?

To test this question, Hubner and Bullock created a series of mock Instagram posts showing a fictional scientist. The caption described their role and expertise. The study’s participants viewed either the male or female version of each post, then ranked their likability and competence. Finally, they rated their agreement with statements about the trustworthiness of science and scientists.

The posts with women scientists earned higher ratings in warmth and friendliness. Moreover, those deemed more likable were seen as more competent. After reading the captions from female experts, participants were more likely to say they trusted in science related to the message they’d just read.

Hubner and Bullock and also hypothesized that participants would prefer scientists who matched their gender, but the opposite effect was found; male participants preferred female scientists, and vice versa. But, overall, participants preferred female experts.

This study offers intriguing guidance for science organizations hoping to increase public trust in their communications: put a female face to it. Women scientists are often seen as more approachable, which enhances their credibility and makes their message more likely to be heard. In other words, female experts can come off as “Wonder Woman,” better able to wield their “lasso of truth” to help increase public trust in science.

The original article, “Why Science Should Have a Female Face: Female Experts Increase Liking, Competence, and Trust in Science,” was published online on Nov. 12, 2024.

Authors: Austin Hubner, Olivia Bullock

This summary was written by Rachel Wayne.

Calling Wonder Woman for Science: How Female Experts Engender Likability and Trust was originally published in CJC Insights on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

In just a decade, artificial intelligence (AI) has become a normal part of our daily lives. Whether we’re consulting Alexa for the weather, asking Netflix to choose movies for us or trusting algorithms for medical diagnoses, we question how these technologies make decisions — and who ultimately leads the communication. AI or human?

As AI continues to play an increasing role in both personal and professional spheres, the need to understand not just the outputs of these technologies, but also the processes behind them, becomes ever more critical.

This gap between AI’s capabilities and human understanding is at the heart of the research led by Kun Xu, associate professor in emerging technologies at the University of Florida’s College of Journalism and Communications, and his colleague Jingyuan Shi, associate professor of interactive media at Hong Kong Baptist University.

Their work merges two growing fields — explainable AI (XAI) and human-machine communication (HMC) — to address how we can begin to bridge the divide between AI’s decision-making processes and human comprehension.

Xu and Shi suggest that a conversation between XAI and HMC is not just helpful but also necessary. XAI focuses on making the internal workings of AI more transparent and understandable, while HMC explores how humans and machines communicate. By connecting these two fields, their research advocates for a more comprehensive approach to human-AI interaction.

The central thesis of their work presents a two-level human-machine communication framework. The first level covers how humans interact with AI, focusing on the outputs and decisions made by these systems. At the second level, the researchers argue that we must also account for how those decisions are made, highlighting the transparency of AI’s inner workings.

By bridging the gap between these two levels — understanding both the “what” and the “how” of AI decision-making — the research offers a roadmap for how we can build trust in and comprehension of increasingly complex technologies.

This study underscores the need to make AI’s decision-making processes visible and interpretable, particularly in everyday use. Whether it’s a recommendation system on a streaming platform or an algorithm used in medical diagnostics, transparency is crucial for building trust with human users.

“While communication researchers have growingly stressed the importance of how AI can be communicative, the question of how AI can be communicated remains understudied,” the researchers write.

The team’s work paves the way for future studies to explore the intersection of communication and AI, urging further collaboration between communication scholars and AI developers to ensure that future systems are both intelligent and understandable. This research offers practical implications not only for AI design but also for how we approach the evolving relationship between humans and machines to ensure more effective and trustworthy AI interactions in the future.

The original paper, “Visioning a two-level human–machine communication framework: initiating conversations between explainable AI and communication,” was published in Communication Theory, Volume 34, Issue 4, November 2024.

Authors: Kun Xu and Jingyuan Shi.

This summary was written by Gigi Marino.

Can AI Speak Our Language: Exploring Human-Machine Communication was originally published in CJC Insights on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

We’ve all had the experience of searching online for a product — be it the latest iPhone, cool cargo pants or a used washer. Then suddenly, every time we open a webpage, we’re blasted with ads for iPhones, cargo pants and washers in a kaleidoscope of colors.

Thanks to personalized ads, companies know our preferences better than our cousins, and while our data is gold for advertisers, many find this practice creepy and downright stalkerish.

According to the Pew Research Center, nearly 80% of Americans don’t trust social media or CEOs to handle their data responsibly. Today, nearly every website you visit, asks you to choose your cookie preferences. While now commonplace, opt-out options are relatively new.

Won-Ki Moon, Advertising assistant professor at the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications, and his colleagues wanted to find out how consumers really feel about this practice when transparency is factored in. Does being upfront about data collection make people more comfortable with online behavioral advertising, or does it just remind them of how much they’re being tracked?

Study participants were shown various versions of privacy policies and disclosures related to behavioral advertising, and their perceptions of trust, privacy invasion and ad effectiveness were measured.

The results of the study suggest that transparency does not necessarily build trust. While companies claim that clearer privacy disclosures reassure users, the research found that transparency can backfire, making consumers more aware of the extent of data collection and less comfortable with it.

Interestingly, while some participants appreciated detailed privacy policies, a significant portion became more resistant to personalized ads when they fully understood the level of tracking involved. This suggests that discomfort with behavioral advertising is not just about secrecy — it’s about the nature of data-driven targeting itself.

“Our research sheds light on the positivity of transparent privacy policy of privacy policies,” the authors write. “To balance securing consumers’ rights for privacy and improving advertising effectiveness, policymakers can encourage digital marketers and website developers to proactively disclose their privacy policy.”

Personalized ads are unlikely to disappear, but with increasing pressure for regulation and consumer control, the industry may have to rethink its approach. Whether companies shift toward less invasive contextual advertising or simply refine how they present tracking policies remains to be seen. What is certain is that as long as data remains the currency of the internet, advertisers will continue finding ways to follow us — whether we like it or not.

The original paper, “Is It Transparent or Surveillant? The Effects of Personalized Advertising and Privacy Policy on Advertising Effectiveness,” was published online in the Journal of Interactive Advertising on December 11, 2024.

Authors: Sangwook Lee, Won-Ki Moon and Greg Song.

This summary was written by Gigi Marino

Personalized Ads: Friend, Foe or Creepy Stalker? was originally published in CJC Insights on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

From those on the right accusing the left of being out of touch with rural America to the left saying that the right was responsible for the divisive rhetoric further polarizing rural and urban communities — the term “rural America” was bandied about widely by politicians and pundits in the 2024 presidential election.

While traditional media research has focused on how news coverage shapes perceptions of racial, ethnic and religious groups, less is known about media’s role in influencing how people feel about others based on where they live. Extensive research has documented the increasing partisan hostility in American politics, but researchers from the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications wanted to know specifically what predicts people’s feelings toward individuals living in rural parts of the U.S.

In an era of increasingly partisan media outlets catering to specific political and geographic audiences, Public Relations Associate Professor Jay Hmielowski and doctoral candidate Brittany Shaughnessy asked what factors color the way individuals view those from rural areas.

The team used Social Identity Theory, which suggests one’s world view is shaped by creating in-groups and out-groups based on certain traits, to explain how media consumption, political ideology, and geographic identity combine to shape how Americans view rural residents.

Drawing on the theory’s tenet that people generally favor their in-groups while besmirching out-groups, the researchers examined how different identities — political and geographic — influence attitudes toward rural Americans. Their study analyzed data from over 4,700 respondents to the 2020 American National Election Survey.

Predictably, people identifying as rural held the most positive views of their rural compatriots, while urban identifiers expressed less favorable attitudes, aligning with Social Identity Theory.

Political identity revealed similar patterns. Conservative media consumption and conservative political ideology both predicted a sunnier view of rural residents. However, when researchers controlled for political ideology, liberal media use showed no significant relationship to these attitudes.

The study’s most striking media-related finding revealed that conservative media’s influence on rural attitudes was actually the strongest among conservatives living in urban areas rather than rural ones. This suggests media portrayals may have their greatest impact when people lack direct experience with a group — a finding that aligns with previous research on media’s role in shaping social perceptions.

The researchers posit this may be because urban conservatives have less direct contact with rural residents and are, therefore, more influenced by media portrayals that reinforce their political in-group preferences.

“Throughout American history, researchers posit that there have been gaps in how rural and urban residents view the world,” write the researchers.

Recent studies have revealed geographic belief gaps between rural and urban residents on issues ranging from voting behaviors to trust in journalists. Social Identity Theory helps explain why these gaps persist — people tend to maintain positive self-perceptions by favoring their own group while viewing other groups more critically.

The findings have implications for understanding America’s growing geographic divides. As the researchers note, “This is not an issue unique to America. There is a growing divide across the globe between rural and urban residents.”

The study concludes that while partisan media and political beliefs play important roles in shaping views of rural residents, geographic identity remains a crucial factor in how people categorize themselves and others into in-groups and out-groups.

This suggests that straddling America’s urban–rural divide may require addressing both media portrayals and the fundamental psychological processes that dominate group-based biases.

The original article, “I’ve got friends in rural places: Examining predictors of people’s feelings about rural residents,” was published in the Journal of Rural Studies online on December 12, 2024.

Authors: Jay Hmielowski and Brittany Shaughnessy.

This summary was written by Gigi Marino.

Partisanship, Politics and Place: How Media Shape Perception of Rural America was originally published in CJC Insights on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

According to a recent Pew Research Center study, more than half of Americans get some, if not all, of their news from social media. With built-in sharing options on all our devices, we are living in a one-click world where reposting has become a way of life.

The internet has been a great democratizer, allowing all to voice their opinions, but it’s also a minefield of misinformation, confabulation and propaganda, which has only become murkier as more and more people are sharing articles on Facebook without even reading them.

Jinping Wang, University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications Advertising assistant professor, and a team of researchers analyzed 35 million Facebook posts between 2017 and 2020 containing links.

The team discovered a troubling pattern. Approximately 75% of the news links shared on Facebook are reposted without the users ever reading the content. This phenomenon, termed “shares without clicks,” questions the quality and veracity of online discourse and the spread of misinformation.

The researchers found that politically extreme content received significantly more shares without clicks than moderate content, with partisan users inclined

to share unread material that aligned with their existing beliefs.

The study revealed distinctive patterns in sharing behavior across the political spectrum. More than 42 billion shares-without-clicks accounted for more than three-quarters of all sharing activity regardless of political affiliations.

There’s also a marked difference between conservative and liberal social sharers. Conservative users demonstrated higher rates of sharing false information (76.9%) compared to liberals (14.3%). However, the researchers emphasize this disparity appears linked to the source material itself, as the majority of false URLs in their dataset (76–82%) originated from conservative news sites.

“The virality of political content on social media appears to be driven by superficial processing of headlines and blurbs rather than systematic processing of the core content,” the researchers write. This finding suggests why misinformation can spread so rapidly — most shared stories circulate without any verification of their underlying facts.

Not surprisingly, the study showed that confirmation bias is rampant in social sharing. Politically aligned content received more shares-without-clicks, indicating users are more likely to share unverified information that confirms their existing beliefs. This behavior contributes to what researchers describe as “ideological segregation” in the online world.

The study’s implications extend beyond partisan politics to fundamental questions about information literacy and social media design. The researchers suggest platforms like Meta could implement interface solutions that encourage more deliberate engagement with news content, such as prompting users to read articles before sharing or providing notices about sharing patterns.

As social media platforms continue to shape public discourse, addressing these sharing behaviors becomes increasingly integral to creating an informed democratic dialogue in these highly partisan times.

The original paper, “Sharing without clicking on news in social media,” was published online in Nature Human Behaviour on Nov. 19, 2024.

Authors: S. Shyam Sundar, Eugene Cho Snyder, Mengqi Liao, Junjun Yin, Jinping Wang and Guangqing Chi.

This summary was written by Gigi Marino.

Spreading Misinformation with Careless Sharing was originally published in CJC Insights on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 opened the doors for Black women to enter politics in the 20th century. And though they have made significant gains in the last 60 years, Black female politicians still face overwhelming racism, sexism and derision, even from some Black men.

Stacey Abrams, an astute politician, understood this dynamic in her 2022 Georgia gubernatorial bid and launched her own internal campaign to court Black male voters, which is known as “Stacey and the Fellas.” She learned well from her 2018 campaign that garnered overwhelming support, 97%, from Black women voters but only 88% from Black men.

New research from University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications examines how Abrams’ 2022 campaign initiative attempted to address this gap amid the complex intersections of race, gender and political discourse.

The study by Journalism Assistant Professor Rachel Grant and doctoral student Nikki Lyons examined 273 tweets related to Abrams’ campaign between June and November 2022.

The team also used a “misogynoir” theoretical framework to analyze social media conversations surrounding Abrams’ targeted outreach to Black male voters. “Misogynoir” is a term created by author, activist and academic Moya Bailey that describes how racism and sexism contribute to the oppression of Black women. Only a handful of scholarly papers have used the lens of misogynoir to deconstruct political discourse.

The researchers’ analysis revealed three key discourse patterns: the impact of racialization, the masculinity of blackness and the presence of misogynoir in the election.

First, discussions of race highlight how political spaces remain steeped in racism while simultaneously erasing Black men’s perspectives. The campaign underscored the fact that racism still very much affects Black men’s lives, while demonstrating that Abrams’ own racial identity also is deeply rooted in the same experiences of discrimination.

Second, the discourse around Black masculinity shows how the campaign attempted to redefine mainstream perceptions of Black male identity. Through events featuring celebrities like Big Tigger, Charlamagne tha God and 21 Savage, the campaign elevated Black male points of view, allowing men to represent themselves with complexity outside of traditional stereotypes.

However, the researchers discovered that some Black men who publicly supported Abrams faced ridicule for not performing traditional masculinity. Social media comments implied these men were “feminine” or “weak” for supporting a female candidate, revealing how deeply misogynoir is embedded in political discourse.

The third key finding centers on how misogynoir manifested in attacks targeting both Abrams’ race and gender. Based on these enmeshed identities, her qualifications were frequently questioned. While supporters emphasized her credentials — including her Yale Law degree and leadership experience — critics often focused on her gender rather than her say on policy.

The study concludes that while the “Stacey and the Fellas” campaign represents an innovative approach to addressing misogynoir in political outreach, it also exposes how prejudice remains entrenched in American politics. The researchers note this is not unique to Abrams, as Black women politicians face similar challenges across the political landscape.

The findings have implications for understanding how social identities and media exposure shape attitudes toward candidates from marginalized groups. As the researchers note, bridging America’s political divides may require addressing both media portrayals and deeper questions of race and gender in political leadership.

The original article, “Focusing on the fellas: Stacey Abrams’ social media campaign addresses misogynoir in U.S. politics,” was published in Communication, Culture and Critique on Nov. 29, 2024.

Authors: Rachel Grant and Nikki Lyons.

This summary was written by Gigi Marino.

How Gender and Race Shaped Stacey Abrams’ Campaign to Court Black Male Voters was originally published in CJC Insights on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

While traditional advertising is considered a function of capitalism, public service announcements (PSAs) have long been considered a function for the public good, promoting social wellbeing through government and nonprofit messaging.

Historically, PSAs are attributed to Woodrow Wilson, the 28th president of the U.S., who is also known as the “father of public administration,” as his administration bolstered support for the first World War.

Given their fidelity to the public, PSAs should operate outside of market-driven forces. But new research from the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications (UFCJC) reveals how neoliberal ideology — which underscores personal responsibility and free-market solutions while minimizing government oversight — has increasingly infiltrated even these public-interest messages.

Led by Advertising Associate Professor Kasey Windels, the research team analyzed three decades of award-winning PSAs, which should theoretically be less constrained by marketplace demands since award winners are judged on their artistic and creative value.

Their findings showed nearly half of analyzed PSAs contained elements promoting the “entrepreneurial self,” messaging that encourages individuals to engage in behaviors to discipline and improve themselves. And one-third emphasized individual responsibility while ignoring the realms and ramifications of broader sociopolitical systems.

The research showed that this trend of leaning into the “entrepreneurial self” has increased over time. For example, PSAs in the 2020s were significantly more likely to ignore sociopolitical constraints, dissociate identities from historical structures and justify existing systems rather than promoting systemic change. These numbers represent substantial increases from earlier decades when PSAs focused more on the public good and collective action to address societal challenges.

Most concerning to the researchers was the dramatic rise in “hollow diversity” messaging in recent years. They found that 2020s-era PSAs were significantly more likely to present marginalized identities as “individual obstacles to overcome through hard work” while separating social issues from historical and systemic roots.

This “hollow diversity” manifested in various ways, including using marginalized identities as empty symbols of equality, capitalizing on social movements such as #BlackLivesMatter to create brand value, and suggesting that problems associated with identity differences (such as race, sexual orientation or disability) should be overcome through hard work, optimism and personal accountability. The researchers found all six measures of hollow diversity increased significantly in PSAs from the 2020s compared to previous decades.

“PSAs may even provide for a greater opportunity to shape public discourse about the value of neoliberalism,” write the researchers, “as the solutions to social issues espoused through these communications are rooted in the neoliberal regime of truth.”

They suggest that broad social issues become personal problems that are better solved at the individual level, while structural or systemic government solutions are rendered nonviable. This shift reflects a wider ideological trend that places a greater value on privatization, individual action and minimal government intervention — ideals that characterize neoliberalism.

The study concludes that the increasing adoption of neoliberal frameworks used in contemporary PSAs may ultimately undermine their original purpose of serving the public good. PSAs have shifted toward individualistic messaging that aligns with the neoliberal focus on the personal rather than collective (or public) solutions — a shift that could affect how audiences understand and respond to systemic social issues.

The researchers implore marketing professionals to look inward and examine their messaging. They write, “We ask advertisers and advertising researchers to consider neoliberalism along with the kinds of inequalities it produces and ignores.”

The original article, “Agent of Your Own Destiny: How Neoliberal Discourses Permeate Award-Winning Public Service Announcements,” was published in the Journal of Advertising online on Jan. 8, 2024.

Authors: Kasey Windels, Sophia Mueller, Xiaofan Wei and Huan Chen.

This summary was written by Gigi Marino.

How Neoliberal Ideas Shaped Public Service Announcements: A Three-Decade Analysis was originally published in CJC Insights on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Video games have been getting a bad rap for decades — mostly from parents who are concerned that their kids are wasting time, ignoring more important pursuits or are becoming addicted to them. But perhaps what drives people to video games is, in fact, their desire for justice in society.

A new study from the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications argues that, regardless of their narratives, video games are rule-based and generally follow the rules of justice. The study examines players’ fundamental beliefs about fairness and justice and how they are associated with players’ gaming preferences and experiences.

The research team, led by Media Production, Management, and Technology Associate Professor of Yu-Hao Lee explores how people’s belief in a just world (BJW) shapes their interaction with video games. Lee and UFCJC graduate students Sunny (Qing) Xu, Xiaotong Yu and Hanzi He used the framework of justice motive theory, which posits that people have a fundamental need to see the world as a just place where people receive what they deserve.

The study comprised an online survey of 296 participants who responded to questions about their game use and preference for game features (strategy, role-playing, puzzles, etc.). The team examined two aspects of beliefs about justice: the belief that the world is just to oneself (BJW-self) and the belief that the world should be just to others (BJW-others).

The results revealed distinct patterns in how these specific beliefs influenced players in their gaming choices.

Players with strong beliefs in personal justice (BJW-self) showed a marked preference for strategy games that rely on tactical planning and skill and often lead to predictable outcomes. The personal-justice players also reported experiencing lower levels of loneliness, which suggests that engaging with rule-based systems might provide the individual with a sense of control and order that can extend beyond the gaming environment.

On the other hand, players who believe strongly in justice for others (BJW-others) gravitated toward games that allow them to assume the mantel of moral characters who have the ability to restore justice through actions and deeds. These players also had a greater interest in multiplayer games that involve both cooperation and competition — perhaps seeking worlds where they can pursue fair play and collective justice.

The researchers found no connection between justice beliefs and problematic gaming behaviors or unhealthy escapism — common complaints from those who criticize gaming. This finding challenges the narrative that gaming is mere escapism and suggests that seeking justice through video games may have positive ramifications.

Understanding how players’ justice beliefs influence their gaming preferences could lead to the creation of more impactful experiences. It also suggests that games might offer supportive and safe spaces for exploring and reinforcing healthy beliefs about justice and fairness.

This study has important implications for game designers and the gaming industry and provides opportunities for understanding the complex relationship between core values and entertainment choices. As video games continue to evolve as a dominant form of media, understanding the deeper motivations of players becomes increasingly important for both creators and consumers.

The original paper, “Seeking Justice in Video Games: Belief in a Just World and Video Game Preferences,” was published in the Psychology of Popular Media on Sept. 19, 2024.

Authors: Yu-Hao Lee, Qing Xu, Xiaotong Yu, and Hanzi He.

This summary was written by Gigi Marino.

Fair Play: How Justice Beliefs Drive Gaming Habits was originally published in CJC Insights on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.