Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), Ohio University, 2017, Journalism (Communication)

Using the theoretical perspectives of Spiral of Silence and Securitization, this dissertation examines (1) how censorship practices such as content removal were employed by the United States and the Indian governments to securitize the internet and social media, and (2) whether such practices contribute to an online spiral of silence. To explore these aspects, this study used a mixed-method approach with in-depth interviews and surveys. Seven interviews with authors of Transparency Reports and legal experts provided information about the U.S. and Indian government-initiated content removal process from Google Web Search, Blogger, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter between 2010 and 2015. Surveys with 587 respondents from the United States and India explored self-censorship on Facebook and Twitter, on issues related to national security and government criticism. The findings indicate that in the United States, “defamation” is the frequently cited yet an often-misused reason for content removal, while in India “religious offense” and “defamation” are prominent reasons for content takedowns. On several occasions, protected speech was removed from the internet and social media in both countries. Such acts of state-level censorship, in turn impacts self-censoring on controversial issues by individuals on social media. The implications here are that using the law to criminalize dissent increases self-censorship and this is counter-productive to democratic discourse.

Committee: Yusuf Kalyango Jr., Ph.D. (Committee Chair); Aimee Edmondson Ph.D. (Committee Member); Eve Ng Ph.D. (Committee Member); Nukhet Sandal Ph.D. (Committee Member) Subjects: Communication; Information Technology; International Law; Journalism; Legal Studies; Mass Communications; Mass Media; Technology

Doctor of Philosophy, The Ohio State University, 1985, Graduate School

Committee: Not Provided (Other) Subjects: Political Science

Doctor of Philosophy, The Ohio State University, 1980, Graduate School

Committee: Not Provided (Other) Subjects: Education

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), Ohio University, 2020, History (Arts and Sciences)

World War II was a media war. Most previous scholarship on the press focuses on censorship, propaganda, or the adventures of war correspondents. This dissertation takes a new direction and shows how the press and public opinion influenced the conflict. U.S. military leaders attempted to use the press as a weapon to improve morale, build public support for national strategies, assist Allied relations, confuse the enemy, and inspire soldiers. The media and public opinion, however, also began shaping military actions on the battlefield. Commanders in Europe and the Pacific competed with other Allied forces for prestige objectives, waged public relations campaigns to have their theaters receive priority for supplies, and vied with each other for headlines. This influence of the press on the battlefield demonstrates how the media was an essential, though previously overlooked, component of total war. Nevertheless, the media-military relationship formed during World War II did not translate well into later limited wars.

Committee: Ingo Trauschweizer (Advisor); John Brobst (Committee Member); Pach Chester (Committee Member); Sweeney Michael (Committee Member) Subjects: American History; European History; History; Journalism; Mass Communications; Mass Media; Military History; Military Studies; Modern History; Political Science; World History

Master of Arts, The Ohio State University, 2017, East Asian Studies

In June 1915, the president of the Republic of China, Yuan Shikai ¿¿¿ (1859-1916), attempted to reform China's state system into a constitutional monarchy, and assume the title of Emperor of the Empire of China. Although Yuan Shikai's “monarchical attempt” has been often cited in historical scholarship on the early Republican period (1912-1916), it has been oversimplified, and characterized as reactionary and conservative. Often, it is presented as part of a teleological account of the origins of the Warlord Period (1916-1928) in early Republican China. This thesis demonstrates that rather than a historical aberration, Yuan's monarchical attempt should be viewed as one of several efforts to reform Chinese political culture along constitutional lines during the early Republican period. It was rooted in late Qing and early Republican (1895-1916) reformist discourses and developments in religion and political ethics. An examination of contemporary government proclamations, polemical essays, and periodical articles illuminates the institutional, rhetorical, and religious foundations utilized by Yuan to enact the monarchical attempt. This analysis reveals that the monarchical attempt was influenced by republican-style institutional models, populist rhetoric, and the religious ethics of late-Qing Confucian populism rather than imperial tradition.

Committee: Ying Zhang PhD (Committee Member); Meow Hui Goh PhD (Committee Member); Christopher Reed PhD (Advisor) Subjects: Asian Studies; History; Political Science

Master of Arts, Miami University, 2009, Mass Communication

This study examined the agenda-setting function of mass communication in Kenya's 2007 General Election whose outcome plunged the country into a political crisis never witnessed before. It was founded on the media agenda-setting theory which postulates that topics ranked highly in the mass media are accorded similar importance by the audience. Therefore, the study correlated salience of nine campaign issues in three national newspapers, Daily Nation, The Standard, and The People Daily to Strategic Research's opinion poll. The research also correlated attributes agenda-setting influence of the three newspapers about presidential candidates Mwai Kibaki, Raila Odinga, and Kalonzo Musyoka to another opinion poll by the same poll organization. To establish the level of salience of issues and attributes correlations, the study employed Spearman's Rank Correlation. Results showed no significant evidence of correlations in salience of issues and in candidates' attributes. The three newspapers, therefore, didn't set the agenda in the election.

Committee: Lisa McLaughlin PhD (Committee Chair); David Sholle PhD (Committee Member); Ronald Scott PhD (Committee Member) Subjects: Communication; Journalism; Mass Media

Master of Social Work, The Ohio State University, 1966, Graduate School

Committee: Not Provided (Other) Subjects:

Master of Arts, The Ohio State University, 1923, Graduate School

Committee: Not Provided (Other) Subjects:

Master of Arts, The Ohio State University, 1947, Graduate School

Committee: Not Provided (Other) Subjects:

Master of Arts, The Ohio State University, 1965, Graduate School

Committee: Not Provided (Other) Subjects:

Master of Arts, The Ohio State University, 1950, Graduate School

Committee: Not Provided (Other) Subjects:

PhD, University of Cincinnati, 2024, Arts and Sciences: Political Science

Legalizing marijuana is often advocated as a measure to address the persistent racial injustices within the American criminal justice system. Previous research indicates that support for marijuana legalization has become increasingly entrenched. However, there has been no prior study that directly evaluates the influence of pro- and anti-legalization arguments by elites, specifically those framed in terms of their impact on the African American community. Considering this, the primary objective of this study is to understand how deeply rooted opinions about marijuana legalization are. I do so by examining the extent to which elite racial appeals prime voters' racial predisposition to marijuana policies. Specifically, I investigate the effect of explicit elite racial framing on respondent's policy position on the extent of legalization (recreational use nationwide, medical use nationwide, illegal nationwide, or leave the decision to the states), social equity-focused policies (reparative justice), and beliefs about whether legalization would help improve underrepresented communities. I further study why some sectors of the population are fiercely opposed to marijuana policies even when exposed to positive information about legalization, thereby investigating whether the American public is willing to change their beliefs towards marijuana policies in the face of countervailing information that confounds stereotypes. To address these research inquiries, I employ a two-step methodology. Initially, I analyze support for marijuana policies utilizing nationally representative surveys. Subsequently, I incorporate a novel survey-embedded experiment to assess the impact of elite racial communication on voters' views about marijuana. The experimental manipulation revealed statistically significant differences across the three conditions on several dependent variables. These include respondents' policy positions on the extent of legalization, opinions on th (open full item for complete abstract)

Committee: Stephen Mockabee Ph.D. (Committee Chair); Brian Calfano Ph.D. (Committee Member); David Niven (Committee Member) Subjects: Political Science

Doctor of Philosophy, The Ohio State University, 2024, Sociology

Framing research shows that the way issues are presented can shape people's reactions and opinions. Anti-drug sentiment is deeply woven into the American cultural fabric such that negative framing may easily evoke previously internalized attitudes and discourses. However, it is unclear whether these attitudes could be influenced with an alternative framing of drug issues. This study examines whether framing of drug policy liberalization influences drug policy opinions, specifically whether people would support a decriminalization ballot initiative when presented with positive framing. I conducted an online vignette experiment (N=1,917) through Prolific to measure factors that influence support for drug decriminalization. Audiences were split into 9 groups (8 treatment groups and a control group). The control group was asked only about their support for decriminalization, while the treatment groups first watched a video where an actor playing a scientist detailed why all drugs should be decriminalized. Videos differed in terms of the scientist's race and his assertion that he personally uses drugs. Four of the treatment groups were then shown negative counter-framing in the form of disparaging social media comments after watching the video and before ranking their support for decriminalization. Results showed that treatment groups only receiving the scientific and positive video primer had significantly higher odds of supporting decriminalization than the control group. However, when shown negative counter-framing, participants had significantly lower odds of supporting decriminalization. Further examination of the intersection between respondent characteristics and framing also revealed some differentiation in effects based on demographics and personal experience such as age, political orientation, and drug use. Qualitative analysis of respondent comments also showed that after viewing positive framing, respondents tended to discuss more favorable aspects and pote (open full item for complete abstract)

Committee: Mike Vuolo (Advisor); Eric Schoon (Committee Member); Ryan King (Committee Member) Subjects: Mass Media; Public Policy; Sociology

Bachelor of Arts, Wittenberg University, 2023, Political Science

For a comprehensive understanding of attitudes toward the death penalty, it is crucial to examine the historical backdrop of racial inequality in the criminal justice system. By delving into the history of incarceration and influential policies from the abolition of slavery to the present day, this study seeks to uncover the potential connections between these policies and death penalty attitudes. Utilizing data from the Pew Research Center, bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to investigate the interplay among various variables, including race, partisanship, religion, age, and gender. The results revealed significant associations between all independent variables and attitudes toward the death penalty. Females exhibited a negative relationship, indicating a lower likelihood of supporting capital punishment compared to males. Religious denomination displayed a statistically significant relationship across all three categories, with Protestants, Catholics, and Mormons more inclined to support the death penalty. Party affiliation exhibited a statistically negative relationship, indicating that Democrats were less likely to support capital punishment compared to Independents and Republicans. Notably, race was found to be negatively associated with the death penalty, suggesting that black individuals are less likely to support it compared to their white counterparts. This finding can be attributed to the historical mistreatment and discriminatory practices faced by African Americans within the criminal justice system. Given the pervasive inequalities experienced by African Americans throughout history due to governmental policies, it is unsurprising to observe a substantial disparity in death penalty attitudes between African Americans and white individuals.

Committee: Staci Rhine (Advisor); Scott Rosenberg (Committee Member); Rob Baker (Committee Member) Subjects: African American Studies; African Americans; Criminology; Ethnic Studies; Political Science; Sociology

Doctor of Psychology (Psy.D.), Xavier University, 2023, Psychology

Racial disparities among adults and juveniles pervade the current US (retributive) justice system, with White and younger offenders often getting more lenient treatment. Very little research has explored the possibility that Restorative Justice (RJ) practices may be subject to the same biases. The current study explored how opinions about RJ were impacted by the offender's racial identity, the offender's age, and factors associated with respondent's identification with the offender. Participants (N=225) were randomly assigned to 1 of 6 survey vignettes. Each depicted the same road rage incident but varied the race (African American, European American, Hispanic) and age (17 years old/35 years old) and accompanying mugshot photo. Participants rated the appropriateness of seven potential consequences, which included retributive justice and RJ practices. Contrary to predictions, no significant differences in consequence severity appropriateness ratings emerged across offender race, age, or their interaction. Overall, participants rated RJ outcomes as significantly more appropriate for all offenders than retributive justice outcomes. However, results indicated that participants' who reported higher racial bias rated more severe consequences as more appropriate for African American offenders and LatinX offenders but did not show this pattern for European American offenders. Racial bias showed significant positive associations with identifying as non-White (r = .37) and with political conservatism (r = .28). The findings suggest that RJ practices are viewed positively by most individuals and as equally appropriate for all offenders.

Committee: Susan Kenford Ph.D. (Committee Chair); Kathleen Hart Ph.D., ABPP (Committee Member); Jennifer Gibson Ph.D. (Committee Member) Subjects: African Americans; Criminology; Hispanic Americans; Psychology

Master of Arts (MA), Bowling Green State University, 1966, Sociology

Committee: Donald S. Longworth (Advisor) Subjects: Sociology

Master of Arts (MA), Bowling Green State University, 1966, Theatre

Committee: Allen M. Kepke (Advisor) Subjects: Theater

Master of Arts (MA), Bowling Green State University, 1966, Sociology

Committee: Joseph K. Balogh (Advisor) Subjects: Sociology

Master of Education (MEd), Bowling Green State University, 1965, Curriculum and Teaching

Committee: Frank Arnold (Advisor) Subjects: Education

Master of Arts (MA), Bowling Green State University, 1962, Communication Disorders

Committee: Melvin Hyman (Advisor) Subjects: Speech Therapy