College of Business completes weeklong takeover of national research podcast

Social Security fundamentally changed how Americans viewed government responsibility by creating a financial safety net for those exiting the workforce. The program has become a cornerstone of economic security, providing critical stability for retirees. However, its initial exclusions — particularly of agricultural and domestic workers, who were disproportionately African Americans and women — reflect the inequities embedded in early policy design. My work examines how Social Security has evolved over time to address these disparities, including its growing impact on same-sex couples. While significant progress has been made, these analyses highlight the ongoing need for reform to achieve greater equity.

At the same time, the New Deal reshaped the physical landscape of the nation through investments in public lands. Programs like the Civilian Conservation Corps didn’t just create jobs during a time of mass unemployment — they also built trails, planted trees, and laid the foundation for much of the infrastructure in today’s state and national parks. The trails, campgrounds, and comfort stations in these parks reflect the contributions of one of the most ambitious public works projects in American economic history. My public-facing work combines archival research with innovative approaches to create digital projects, making the legacy of the New Deal accessible and engaging for a broader audience.

Together, Social Security and the development of parks demonstrate the wide-ranging impact of the New Deal, extending from economic security for individuals to the transformation of the nation’s physical landscape. By studying these legacies, my work highlights how past policies addressed urgent needs while offering lessons for shaping equitable and lasting outcomes today.

Our recent research has shown that the total spending by brands on sponsorship has returned, and in some cases increased, since the pandemic, but they are being much smarter in how they spend, “with activation” increasing relative to rights fees. Activation is the amount invested in addition to a rights fee paid for the ability to associate with a given property and its marketing assets. This represents a more sophisticated and effective approach to the marketing tool, as return for the brand is much higher when they can activate it more.

For example, in 2018, let’s say a brand spent $100,000 for the right to associate with a professional women’s basketball club, and they set aside another $100,000 to amplify the impact of that investment with additional media spots, athlete ambassadors, a dedicated social media channel, and an email marketing campaign. This results in a 1:1 activation ratio.

In 2025, if we assume that this sponsorship is representative of all sponsorships and that inflation is held constant, it is likely that this sponsorship is now approximately $80,000 in rights fees and $120,000 in activation. The only challenge is that the rights fees going to properties in return for their marketing rights are under pressure. To illustrate this dynamic, if you’re a music festival and you’ve felt this shift, you have a partner who is likely happier with the return on the sponsorship due to more activation, which is good, but with less money going directly to your operations to help run your festival.

This policy shift reflects the growing recognition of the value athletes bring to their schools and communities. However, it also introduces new complexities. Different states have different NIL laws, creating a patchwork of rules that schools and athletes must navigate. International athletes face even more hurdles, as visa regulations often limit their ability to participate in NIL opportunities.

Despite these challenges, the potential of NIL is transformative. Athletes now have the chance to gain financial independence, build their professional networks, and prepare for life after sports. For institutions, NIL changes the way they approach recruiting, marketing, and alumni engagement.

At the same time, questions remain. What role should schools play in helping athletes manage these opportunities? How can equity be ensured across sports, genders, and institutions of different sizes? And how do we balance the commercialization of college athletics with its educational mission?

NIL isn’t just about athletes making money — it’s a case study in how business, law, and education intersect in real time. By examining its impacts and challenges, we can better understand how to support athletes and institutions in this evolving space.

The NIL era represents a defining moment in college sports, and its story is still being written.

We applied our method to the Twitter network of the 116th U.S. Congress members and compared with two measures: 1) Content-based measures (and) 2) real-world political behavior-based polarization measures, such as voting patterns and co-sponsoring bills in Congress. The results highlight that users’ social media connections reflect their polarization behavior. Furthermore, a significant correlation was observed between Connectivity Scores and real-world political behavior measures like Roll Call and Ideology scores.

Interestingly, Democrats’ behavior on social media showed stronger alignment with their legislative actions compared to Republicans. These findings emphasize the potential of network-based approaches to provide deeper insights into polarization dynamics.

By leveraging structural data, this research advances the understanding of political polarization on social media. Moreover, the results underscore the importance of whom we follow on social media.

The interview questions for my first study were designed to explore women surfers’ experiences in southern California, focusing on gender inequality, surfing ability, frequency, locations, and companions. The goal was to determine whether gender inequality exists in surfing and how it shapes the experiences of women. A follow-up study in 2018 revisited this topic, comparing the experiences of women surfers in Huntington Beach over the past decade.

Since conducting the original study, significant progress has been made for women surfers. In November 2016, Sarah Gerhardt became the first woman to surf Maverick’s, a legendary wave in northern California capable of producing 60-foot swells. In 2017, the Agadir Open in Morocco introduced a women’s division for the first time, and by 2019, equal prize money for male and female surfers was announced.

Despite these advancements, the 2018 study revealed that gender inequality persists in surfing. The research highlighted the enduring challenges faced by women in this male-dominated sport, critically examining the resilience and determination required to carve out a space for themselves.

A predominant theme that emerged in the interviews was female intimidation. A majority of the participants complained of coercion in the water because their male counterparts are incredibly aggressive. This concept has a direct connection to the theme of male surfer aggressiveness. This ongoing struggle underscores the broader barriers women encounter when participating in male-dominated sports.