This thesis research aims to define, identify, and promote community theatre as a “third space” for disadvantaged youth. A third space is defined by the Oxford dictionary as “...the in-between, or hybrid, spaces, where the first and second spaces work together to generate a new third space. First and second spaces are two different, and possibly conflicting, spatial groupings where people interact physically and socially: such as home (everyday knowledge) and school (academic knowledge)” (Oxford Dictionary, 2021). For disadvantaged youth, the creation of a third space in the theatre can give them a safe environment away from issues they may have at home or at school, it can further their learning about themselves and others, and it can also help those youth feel a sense of belonging to a community larger than themselves. Because of these benefits, it is clear that performing arts programs can offer a great impact on disadvantaged youth; however, many theatre companies struggle to market their programming to said communities. This may be in part, due to low marketing budgets, no specificity in labor resources dedicated to youth programming, or ineffective marketing strategies and tactics.<br/>In order to ideate marketing recommendations for these organizations, primary research was conducted to determine the attitudes and beliefs revolving around youth participation in community theatre, as well as the current marketing strategies and tactics being utilized by programmers. Participants included program managers of youth theatre programs, as well as youth participants from several major cities in the U. S. The secondary research aims to better understand the target demographic (disadvantaged youth), the benefits derived from participation in arts programming, and marketing strategies for the performing arts. Following data analysis are several recommendations for the learning, planning, and implementation of marketing strategies for theatre programmers.

Americans today face an age of information overload. With the evolution of Media 3.0, the internet, and the rise of Media 3.5—i.e., social media—relatively new communication technologies present pressing challenges for the First Amendment in American society. Twentieth century law defined freedom of expression, but in an information-limited world. By contrast, the twenty-first century is seeing the emergence of a world that is overloaded with information, largely shaped by an “unintentional press”—social media. Americans today rely on just a small concentration of private technology powerhouses exercising both economic and social influence over American society. This raises questions about censorship, access, and misinformation. While the First Amendment protects speech from government censorship only, First Amendment ideology is largely ingrained across American culture, including on social media. Technological advances arguably have made entry into the marketplace of ideas—a fundamental First Amendment doctrine—more accessible, but also more problematic for the average American, increasing his/her potential exposure to misinformation. <br/><br/>This thesis uses political and judicial frameworks to evaluate modern misinformation trends, social media platforms and current misinformation efforts, against the background of two misinformation accelerants in 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic and U.S. presidential election. Throughout history, times of hardship and intense fear have contributed to the shaping of First Amendment jurisprudence. Thus, this thesis looks at how fear can intensify the spread of misinformation and influence free speech values. Extensive research was conducted to provide the historical context behind relevant modern literature. This thesis then concludes with three solutions to misinformation that are supported by critical American free speech theory.

In 2020, the nation was hit with a pandemic both physically and socially. Due to COVID-19, media interaction, social media engagement, and online consumerism became necessary. In relation to widespread disease, social outbreaks concerning the black lives matter movement, police brutality, the presidential election and diversity & inclusion, set a call to action for Americans. Top fashion and shoe-manufacturing companies that engage with the public socially, financially, personally and for entertainment were evaluated on their contributions to Diversity and Inclusion initiatives. Through external marketing and communication strategies, shoe-wear companies display their approaches to social justice, equity and/or social responsibility. Inclusion & Diversity has different facets including, socioeconomics, gender roles, and race that contribute to how<br/>consumers interact with companies. This paper consists of a literary review, three company audits and analysis, and recommendations. The literary review in the introduction of my paper, explores the approaches to Diversity and Inclusion of shoe-wear companies as a response to social inequity. I conducted three audits to assess the history of Diversity and Inclusion at Nike, Adidas and PUMA to their approaches and commitment to Inclusion and Diversity through their marketing and communication strategies. I then conducted a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis based on the marketing and communications of the<br/>respective companies to gain depth in my findings of sentiment, message strategy, corporate hierarchy, and suggestions for future communications. My analysis provided a conclusion that Diversity and Inclusion in marketing and communication strategies is an essential factor in the growth and success of the company. I identified that each company has areas of opportunity to create more visibility for the LGBTQIA+ ( Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual and nonbiary people) community, should continue to produce reports that analyze exactly how they plan to support Diversity and Inclusion and continue displaying their<br/>commitment on social media.

The Arizona Global Development Network (AGDN) is a group of diverse nonprofit organizations within the state. This network is a platform for member organizations to collaborate and exchange ideas on a wide range of topics regarding international development. Announced in 2016, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) consists of 17 goals determined by the United Nations to address complex issues regarding human health, inequality and the environment around the globe. This self-designed code categorization study and semi-structured qualitative interviews aimed to explore Arizona’s international impacts and its alignment to the SDGs. First, the study completed a comprehensive observation of the information presented on these organizations’ websites. Second, interviews were conducted with representatives from each organization. The findings of this study provide an in-depth understanding of the network’s contributions to the wider, international community.

This podcast highlights the voices of organizers and activists across the nation. Representatives from various organizations and individual activists provide their experiences in working within reproductive health activist spaces. By listening to their stories and expertise, the hope is for listeners to center Reproductive Justice as a point of view. The goal is to encourage the audience to join an organization, support their local organizations, or at the very least, learn about resources provided to them by local and national organizations.

There has been a low rate of voter turnout in the U.S. in recent years, especially among young voters. In an effort to determine how to best encourage Americans to vote, emotional appeals and message frames were examined. The objective of this 2x2 study was to determine if positive or negative emotional appeals were more effective in changing voting behavior and if positively framed or negatively framed messages were more effective in changing voting behavior. An experiment was conducted via the Robert B. Cialdini Behavioral Research Lab at ASU, and each participant was shown a piece of voting communication that presented an emotional appeal and a message frame. It was found that, although the positive emotional appeals were not more effective than the negative emotional appeals in changing voting behavior, the positively framed messages were more effective than the negatively framed messages in changing voting behavior.