The ethicality of immersive sponsorship within a children’s edutainment centre

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016. In a shift away from traditional advertising, brands are increasingly embedding themselves into children’s lived experiences. Immersive brand placements within educational vehicles such schools, textbooks and edutainment centres are worthy of an ethical examination as children may find it difficult to understand their persuasive intent. This study investigates the ethicality of immersive sponsorship within a children’s edutainment centre. Pre, post, and follow-up interviews were undertaken with 17 children and one of their parents who visited the heavily branded edutainment venue, Kidzania. Applying a deontological perspective, the results suggest that immersive sponsorship is inherently wrong, as children aged twelve and under are generally unable to determine the persuasive intent of the sponsoring brands. Embedded within an educational and entertaining setting, the children engaged with the brands in a very positive light, unaware of persuasive intentions and unable to apply a cognitive defence. In contrast, the vast majority of parents perceived the immersive sponsorships to be ethical. Those who applied a relativist argument saw the act as ethical in the cultural context of our contemporary and commercialised world, and specifically the city of Dubai. In contrast, those who applied the utilitarian approach argued that the act was a form of corporate social responsibility, producing a net benefit for society by helping to fund and run a realistic educational experience, and increasing the confidence of the child participants. While the opposing conclusions make it difficult to provide clear policy guidance, one recommendation is to focus on advancing the marketing literacy of children

The Contextual Presidency: The Negative Shift in Presidential Immigration Rhetoric

Party platforms from 1993 through 2008 show a positive approach to immigration policy. Presidential rhetoric, however, does not match the tone of the platforms. There are negative frames (illegality, criminality, terrorism, and economic threats) in nearly 50% of immigration speeches. We argue that social context motivates presidents to talk about immigration negatively. This analysis provides insight into rhetoric as responsive to context rather than a mechanism of power. We coded each speech on immigration from Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama, and found statistically significant results that show that immigration rhetoric is more negative when certain social conditions are present

Presidential Rhetoric and the Federal Reserve

Presidents persistently use their rhetoric as a mechanism of influence over salient policies. As the economy has become more salient, presidents have tried to gain a semblance of control over its direction and robustness. Yet, there exists no substantial research regarding whether the rhetoric is influential with the most important economic actors such as the Federal Reserve. Assessing whether presidential cues and signals shape the Fed’s economic behavior provides an assessment of rhetoric’s effect. Utilizing the economic speeches from D.D. Eisenhower through B.H. Obama this paper questions whether the Fed’s behavior modeled what the presidents wanted. Presidents have increased their rhetoric on the economy significantly. However, the increased rhetoric and attention to the economy have not brought about that which presidents have sought. The results suggest that it is more likely that the Federal Reserve is paying attention to Congress and/or the economic indicators rather than the rhetoric of the president

Economic Demagoguery: The Limited Effects of Presidential Rhetoric

Given that there exists considerable disagreement about whether the president has a direct and measurable influence over the economy, I decided to research this divergence of views further (Edwards, 2003; Edwards, 2009; Eshbaugh-Soha, 2005; Wood, 2007; Dolan, Frendreis, & Tatalovich, 2008; Cohen, 1995; Beck, 1982; Golden & Poterba, 1980). In my review of the literature, I found that there is research, improperly measured from my perspective, that claims the president is the most powerful economic leader in the United States and that his words have the power to move economic actors and indicators (Wood, 2007). To show these effects statistically, the literature measures the spending, borrowing, and investing of consumers and businesses---economic actors and their perceptions about the strength of the economy from 1981 through 2005. Consumers take cues from the president about their economic futures. If he is positive about the economy in his speeches, then consumers respond accordingly, thus reinforcing positive outcomes in the economic indicators. The literature claims that the optimism present in presidential speeches about the economy was able to influence consumer confidence, which affected macroeconomic performance (Wood, Owens, & Durham, 2005). This literature and the data sources used raise more questions than answers and produce findings that require further inquiry. For instance, suggesting that optimism in the president\u27s rhetoric is the impetus in the changes to the Consumer Confidence Index is the wrong approach. Given the disconnect between a president\u27s optimism and this data source of the economy\u27s health, I maintain that this approach does not withstand scrutiny (Wood, 2007; Eshbaugh-Soha, 2006).;Therefore, the purpose of this dissertation was to utilize a better approach for analyzing the effectiveness of the president\u27s rhetoric and then employ a statistical methodology that would allow me to measure its effect on the economy. Through this exercise, I determined that presidents have little direct influence over economic indicators. Their influence comes only from externalities, such as party coalitions, and the connections they are able to create with economic actors. Determining presidential influence over the behaviors of economic actors and using the correct data sources allows for a better research operationalization than arguing that the president\u27s ability to change economic indicators comes from his position as the most important economic actor in the system (Wood, 2007; Wood, Owens, & Durham, 2005; Zarefsky, 2004; Cavalli, 2006)

Consumption-related values and product placement: The effect of cultivating fashion consciousness on the appeal of brands in reality television

By 2003, Baylor University\u27s forensic science program had grown by ten times the 1999 intake and other universities across the US were scrambling to create forensic science courses to cater for new student demand (Johnston 2003). The reason? Since it aired on the 6th of October 2000, Crime Scene Investigation (CSI), a television (TV) series, had stimulated enormous interest in forensics and the science of solving crime. So much so that it was affecting student choice and behavior. These types of TV inspired phenomenon are not uncommon. Although much of the evidence is anecdotal, there are many instances where very specific consumption trends have been fueled by television programs. The Biggest Loser has generated an interest in boot camps, American Idol has created a resurgence of karaoke games and various home improvement programs have inspired their audience to renovate. These trends have become more acute with recent reality and lifestyle television focusing on particular behaviors that transform the real people on their programs. This paper examines how the cultivation of relevant consumption values generates these trends through increasing the viewer\u27s desire for associated products and brands integrated within TV programs. Specifically, this longitudinal study explores the cultivation of fashion consciousness and its impact on the desire for brands that are implicitly endorsed within reality television programming. © 2012

Minority Games and stylized facts

The Minority Game is a generic model of competing adaptive agents, which is often believed to be a model of financial markets. We discuss to which extend this is a reasonable statement, and present minimal modifications that make this model reproduce stylized facts. The resulting model shows that without speculators, prices follow random walks, and that stylized facts disappear if enough speculators take into account their market impact.Comment: 6 pages, 2 figures. Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Application of Physics in Economic Modelling, Prague 2001. 2nd version: small modification of the abstrac

The Threat of Terrorism and the Changing Public Discourse on Immigration after September 11

This article uses articles from the opinion-leading press to investigate how the news media\u27s repertoire of negative portrayals changed after the September 11 terrorist attacks. It is based on a systematic random sample of 360 articles from two, opinion-leading newspapers---one known for its liberal slant (New York Times) and one known for its conservative slant (Wall Street Journal). The sample is drawn from a large population of articles published over a six-year period (1998-2004). The findings show that the percentage of negative frames involving not only terrorism but also other non-terrorist threats increased significantly after September 11. The elevated frequency of negative frames was found in both the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, but the increase was significantly greater in the conservative periodical. Immigrants from non-European countries were also significantly more likely to be associated with negative frames than European immigrants. These three variables-national origin, news source, and September 11-were strong predictors of negative frames, even when controlling for other correlates. Suggesting an authoritarian turn in American political discourse, the study highlights cultural factors, as opposed to the conventional psychological explanations, as key determinants of the changing public discussion of immigration after September 11

Consumer socialisation in a marketer-sponsored edutainment centre

© 2016, © Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate a marketer-sponsored edutainment centre as a consumer socialisation agent by examining effects on preference for the sponsor brands and the degree of socialisation children experience. Design/methodology/approach: Interviews were undertaken with 16 children in their analytical stage of development as well as one of their parents immediately prior, immediately after, and one week following a part-day visit to the heavily branded edutainment centre Kidzania. Findings: Results suggest that children did experience consumer socialisation. There was a movement in brand preferences towards the sponsored brands. The children also demonstrated advances in transaction knowledge. Specifically, significant increases were found in product and brand knowledge, shopping scripts and retail knowledge, with some children moving beyond perceptual and analytical thought and demonstrating reflective thought. In contrast, most children did not demonstrate an analytical level of advertising and persuasion knowledge. Research limitations/implications: Findings are constrained by the children’s specific experiences and the aptitude of both the children as interviewees and the parents as observers/interpreters. Although delayed measures were used this does not necessarily confirm permanency of the effects. Originality/value: This is the first study to date to examine a marketer-sponsored edutainment centre as a socialisation agent. Specifically, the study contributes to the understanding of this new, participatory form of marketing communications by demonstrating its value in achieving brand objectives while fostering the consumer socialisation of children

Congressional Hearings: Immigration Frames in Expert Testimonies

This book offers a broad interdisciplinary approach to the changes in the U.S. immigration debate before and after 9/11. A nation’s reaction to foreigners has as much to do with sociology as it does with political science, economics and psychology. Without drawing on this knowledge, our understanding of the immigration debate remains mundane, partial, and imperfect. Therefore, our story accounts for multiple factors, including culture and politics, power, organizations, social psychological processes, and political change. Examining this relationship in the contemporary context requires a lengthy voyage across academic disciplines, a synthesis of seemingly contradictory assumptions, and a grasp of research traditions so vast and confusing that an accurate rendering may seem implausible. And yet, to tell the story of the immigration debate in the age of terrorism, polarization, and Trump in any other way is to tell it in part. The immigration debate in the United States has always been about openness. Two questions in particular—how open should the door be and what type of immigrant should walk through it—have characterized policy disputes for well over a century. In the current debate, expansionists want to see more legal immigrants in the U.S. and greater tolerance, if not respect, for immigrants. Restrictionists favor lower levels of immigration, stronger borders, and tighter law enforcement measures to stop the stream of ‘illegal’ migration and alleged crime. The aim of this book is to describe how these opposing views materialized in the news media, political rhetoric, and, ultimately, in policy. Much of our argument rests on the idea that history matters, that the dominant narrative about immigration is in constant flux, and that the ‘winner’ of the immigration debate is determined by a vector of contextual elements: the joint impact of current events, enduring traditions, and political-economic forces. Our approach to the immigration debate avoids deterministic claims and grand-scale projections. Although we argue with conviction that a climate of fear played an important role in shaping the debate, the fear itself and its effects on social attitudes and public policy were neither inevitable nor necessarily long lasting