Filtering by
- All Subjects: Social Media
- Member of: Barrett, The Honors College Thesis/Creative Project Collection
We developed multiple surveys that were distributed to Marketing & Business Performance (MKT 300) students at Arizona State University and AWS Mechanical Turk Workers. The goal of obtaining information from both college students and paid survey-takers was to compile a diverse set of opinions regarding how consumers react to athletes’ social media and public behavior. This led us to analyze how consumers interact with athletes on social media platforms based on the sport they play and consequences of their actions. After examining our consumer research, interviewing executives in the legal background, and talking to some of the university’s top-prospective athletes to gain different viewpoints, we created consumer and athlete categories.
We established six main consumer categories and six main athlete social media strategy personas in order to create social media strategy recommendations. With this information, athletes have the opportunity to develop well-thought out social media strategies that are more tailored to their fan base(s). Athletes must be cognizant of how the content on their social media accounts and their public actions will affect consumers’ perceptions about who they are and their personal brand.
"No civil discourse, no cooperation; misinformation, mistruth." These were the words of former Facebook Vice President Chamath Palihapitiya who publicly expressed his regret in a 2017 interview over his role in co-creating Facebook. Palihapitiya shared that social media is ripping apart the social fabric of society and he also sounded the alarm regarding social media’s unavoidable global impact. He is only one of social media’s countless critics. The more disturbing issue resides in the empirical evidence supporting such notions. At least 95% of adolescents own a smartphone and spend an average time of two to four hours a day on social media. Moreover, 91% of 16-24-year-olds use social media, yet youth rate Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter as the worst social media platforms. However, the social, clinical, and neurodevelopment ramifications of using social media regularly are only beginning to emerge in research. Early research findings show that social media platforms trigger anxiety, depression, low self-esteem, and other negative mental health effects. These negative mental health symptoms are commonly reported by individuals from of 18-25-years old, a unique period of human development known as emerging adulthood. Although emerging adulthood is characterized by identity exploration, unbounded optimism, and freedom from most responsibilities, it also serves as a high-risk period for the onset of most psychological disorders. Despite social media’s adverse impacts, it retains its utility as it facilitates identity exploration and virtual socialization for emerging adults. Investigating the “user-centered” design and neuroscience underlying social media platforms can help reveal, and potentially mitigate, the onset of negative mental health consequences among emerging adults. Effectively deconstructing the Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram (i.e., hereafter referred to as “The Big Three”) will require an extensive analysis into common features across platforms. A few examples of these design features include: like and reaction counters, perpetual news feeds, and omnipresent banners and notifications surrounding the user’s viewport. Such social media features are inherently designed to stimulate specific neurotransmitters and hormones such as dopamine, serotonin, and cortisol. Identifying such predacious social media features that unknowingly manipulate and highjack emerging adults’ brain chemistry will serve as a first step in mitigating the negative mental health effects of today’s social media platforms. A second concrete step will involve altering or eliminating said features by creating a social media platform that supports and even enhances mental well-being.
These difficult flowcharts and confusing websites have a huge impact on a student’s ability to adequately receive the information they need and, in the end, can have a negative impact on their ultimate decision when deciding if Barrett is right for them. A better user experience can be a more effective way of displaying information to students. A better design that allows to user more interaction would allow for the user to better understand the information they are presented. Instead of a monotone flowchart displaying the requirements necessary to graduate with honors status, A web application where a user can input their information and get an output of the necessary requirements tailored to the unique circumstance would be more informative, useful, and easier to use. The web app would take information such as a student’s year, whether it be an incoming freshman or transfer student, and their current and previous course credit to determine the specific number of honors credits, The Human Event courses, and Thesis project required for this user to complete the requirements for Barrett Honors College. This application would give the user a better understanding of what is required of them and in turn lead to a better user experience.
Based on research conducted on social media usage and fan identification, an online survey was created and distributed. Respondents who identified as NBA fans answered questions regarding social media usage, live sports TV viewership, and more questions regarding presumptive factors leading to NBA game TV viewership. Analysis of the responses found that loyalty to team was a bigger factor than loyalty to player in getting NBA fans to watch games on TV. Results also indicated that loyalty to team increased based on an increase in live sports TV viewership per week, loyalty to player increased based on an increase in national TV NBA game viewership, and die-hard fans are more likely to watch NBA games for their favorite team and players than casual fans. Based on these results, it is recommended that the NBA markets their games towards casual fans, with player-focused marketing for their national TV games.
On September 30, 2019, the Governor of California, Gavin Newsom, signed the Fair Pay to Play Act which prohibited universities from taking away an athlete’s scholarship should they choose to profit off their name, image and likeness (NIL). This was a monumental moment in college athletics as numerous lawsuits against the NCAA had been filed by former and current athletes due to the unfair nature of “amateurism.” With California getting the ball rolling and the Supreme Court pressuring the NCAA to change their outdated ways, the NCAA withdrew their rule stating that student athletes could not monetize their NIL. While this was a massive step forward in regard to compensating athletes for the time and effort they put into their sport that in turn generates revenue for the school, it also posed many questions that needed an in-depth look into including how this will affect non-revenue generating sports. This study aims to measure the student-athlete knowledge surrounding name, image, and likeness, as well as capture the athletes, coaches, and administrators' projections of the future implications of this policy. On the surface, this is a wonderful opportunity for college athletes. However, with the variability in the popularity and profitability between revenue generating and non-revenue generating sports, this does not put student-athletes on a level playing field to profit off their name, image, and likeness. With non-revenue generating sports falling vastly behind revenue generating sports, a further divide between these two segments of collegiate sports will form. Though there is an opportunity for all collegiate athletes to profit off their name, image, and likeness, the feasibility of putting these athletes on a level playing field is slim. In addition, with this new era comes a whole new set of rules for recruiting tactics and the desire to get more influential athletes. The data collected for this thesis, in conjunction with this new rule, implies that sports producing more influential athletes will be given more money as more eyes will be on the individual athletes. This will leave smaller sports behind because it will continue to create a divide between revenue generating and non-revenue generating sports. This gap will be created by increasing the publicity and recognition surrounding the revenue generating sports, while pushing less relevant sports further behind.
On September 30, 2019, the Governor of California, Gavin Newsom, signed the Fair Pay to Play Act which prohibited universities from taking away an athlete’s scholarship should they choose to profit off their name, image and likeness (NIL). This was a monumental moment in college athletics as numerous lawsuits against the NCAA had been filed by former and current athletes due to the unfair nature of “amateurism.” With California getting the ball rolling and the Supreme Court pressuring the NCAA to change their outdated ways, the NCAA withdrew their rule stating that student athletes could not monetize their NIL. While this was a massive step forward in regard to compensating athletes for the time and effort they put into their sport that in turn generates revenue for the school, it also posed many questions that needed an in-depth look into including how this will affect non-revenue generating sports. This study aims to measure the student-athlete knowledge surrounding name, image, and likeness, as well as capture the athletes, coaches, and administrators' projections of the future implications of this policy. On the surface, this is a wonderful opportunity for college athletes. However, with the variability in the popularity and profitability between revenue generating and non-revenue generating sports, this does not put student-athletes on a level playing field to profit off their name, image, and likeness. With non-revenue generating sports falling vastly behind revenue generating sports, a further divide between these two segments of collegiate sports will form. Though there is an opportunity for all collegiate athletes to profit off their name, image, and likeness, the feasibility of putting these athletes on a level playing field is slim. In addition, with this new era comes a whole new set of rules for recruiting tactics and the desire to get more influential athletes. The data collected for this thesis, in conjunction with this new rule, implies that sports producing more influential athletes will be given more money as more eyes will be on the individual athletes. This will leave smaller sports behind because it will continue to create a divide between revenue generating and non-revenue generating sports. This gap will be created by increasing the publicity and recognition surrounding the revenue generating sports, while pushing less relevant sports further behind.