While free speech values are broad in scope, one particular value—dissent—is regarded by some theorists as one that should be the most fiercely protected. At the same time, dissent can expose a disconnect in First Amendment theory and practice. Scholar Steven Shiffrin has written extensively about dissent and his work is foundational to this dissertation. Shiffrin (1999) argues that the First Amendment presents a “paradox” whereby it protects dissenters from losing legal claims, yet it does very little to actually encourage this type of free speech in everyday society. Might this paradox be evident in sports settings? Sports have long stuck to colorblind convictions, yet it may be one of the few contexts in which diverse social actors come to deliberate. Athlete activism in American sport, for example, is fertile ground for debate about players' rights to express their views about social justice and dissent. Former NFL player Colin Kaepernick, whose decision to kneel during the national anthem throughout the course of the 2016 NFL season in protest of racial inequality, became a symbol for a clash of ideals: how America views the link between free speech theory and free speech doctrine. The realm of sport, therefore, becomes a relevant location to study the sociology of the First Amendment’s Free Speech clause and an examination of how much institutions—other than courts—can either promote or discourage the free speech value of dissent. This dissertation explores how backlash against NFL players kneeling during the national anthem during the 2016 and 2017 seasons stands in contrast to the spirit of the First Amendment. The paper analyzes theoretical approaches to First Amendment law to illuminate a great paradox that exists within the First Amendment. Case law is examined to tackle the issue of potential government interference in the free speech rights of protesting players, and whether there is a significant nexus between private sports teams and the government to determine the extent that free speech principles might apply within a sports stadium. This dissertation also probes the deeper questions relating to the NFL protest debate regarding the cultural struggles in America that can contribute to the contradiction in values which suppress the spirit of the First Amendment, or the paradox that emerges from the divide in letter-of-the-law symbology and spirit-of-the-law ideology in First Amendment philosophy.

This thesis examines the ongoing debate/discussion surrounding the compensation of NCAA student-athletes. While some athletes receive full academic scholarships in addition to other perks that non-athletes might not receive, this makes one wonder if the compensation programs and protocols in place are fair, particularly considering the large sums of money athletes generate for their respective universities. Through lengthy interviews with two former Division I athletes, an associate athletic director at a major university, and a journalist who has covered this polarizing topic since some of its earliest milestones, we have covered both sides of this debate in the hope that the audience can take that information and form their own, thoughtful opinions. In addition to the interviews conducted during the process of writing this paper, we also conducted an extensive literature review of some of the most in-depth stories about the major milestones in the history of this discussion. While there may not be an amicable solution, knowledge and information constitutes the most powerful element that seems to largely be missing, often replaced by emotion. We seek to contribute to the solution by showing the human side of the debate and laying out exactly what is at stake before offering what we think, after this entire process, could be the answer. The issue is explored in more depth with supplemental podcasts submitted to Barrett, the Honors College at Arizona State University.

This thesis examines the ongoing debate/discussion surrounding the compensation of NCAA student-athletes. While some athletes receive full academic scholarships in addition to other perks that non-athletes might not receive, this makes one wonder if the compensation programs and protocols in place are fair, particularly considering the large sums of money athletes generate for their respective universities. Through lengthy interviews with two former Division I athletes, an associate athletic director at a major university, and a journalist who has covered this polarizing topic since some of its earliest milestones, we have covered both sides of this debate in the hope that the audience can take that information and form their own, thoughtful opinions. In addition to the interviews conducted during the process of writing this paper, we also conducted an extensive literature review of some of the most in-depth stories about the major milestones in the history of this discussion. While there may not be an amicable solution, knowledge and information constitutes the most powerful element that seems to largely be missing, often replaced by emotion. We seek to contribute to the solution by showing the human side of the debate and laying out exactly what is at stake before offering what we think, after this entire process, could be the answer. The issue is explored in more depth with supplemental podcasts submitted to Barrett, the Honors College at Arizona State University.

The term “female sportscaster” elicits a broad range of feelings among the sports media consumer base. Many of the women who fall into the category of “female sportscaster” appear to be greatly admired while many others evoke considerable scorn, making the electronic sports media industry a seemingly dangerous and often vitriolic environment for women. The gendered mistreatment of women sportscasters is not unfamiliar to sports media scholars. Indeed, phenomena such as sex biases, double standards, and harassment have been documented, primarily through positivistic or quantitative research. What has not been investigated, however, is how these phenomena persist and evolve despite the extant research.

This dissertation employs Michel Foucault’s power/knowledge paradigm to take a discursive analytic approach to understand how the “female sportscaster” subjectivity, or imagined idea, is constructed through statements, images, and practices. That is, this dissertation investigates the way society “talks about” the “female sportscaster” and how those discussions affect the experiences of women sportscasters. Using one-on-one interviews with 10 women sportscasters, focus groups with sports media consumers, netnography, and textual analysis under the umbrella of a feminist methodological approach, this dissertation finds that the American female subjectivity is constructed through postfeminist and neoliberal discourses. These discourses “empower” women sportscasters to be responsible for their own success but, in doing so, normalize the obstacles women in sportscasting endure.

As a result of this normalization, the electronic sports media industry is seemingly justified in taking little to no meaningful action toward improving conditions for women sportscasters. Specific manifestations of these discourses are traced across phenomena such as double standards, bias in hiring and development, harassment, and the expectation of affective labor. Suggestions are made for improving conditions for women sportscasters.

The purpose of this study is to explore the shifting cultural norms of copyright law, and that concept’s impact on the performance and practice of artists producing original works of authorship. Although related concepts predate it, and today it exists as a subset of a broader category known as intellectual property, the purpose of copyright beginning with the United States Constitution was to allow for a temporary economic monopoly to an author of a fixed creative work. This monopoly was meant to incentivize authors to contribute to the public good with works that promote progress in science and art. However, increases over time in the scope and duration of copyright terms grant broader protections and controls for copyright owners today, while advances in technology have provided the public with the potential for near-limitless low-cost access to information. This creates a conflict between proprietary interest in creative works and the public’s right and ability to access and build on those works. The history of copyright law in America is rife with efforts to balance these competing interests.

The methodology for this study consisted of flexible strategies for collecting and analyzing data, primarily elite, semi-structured interviews with professional artists, attorneys, and others who engage with the cultural and legal norms of intellectual property regimes on a regular basis. Constant comparative analysis was used to maintain an emic perspective, prioritizing the subjective experience of individuals interviewed for this research project. Additional methods for qualitative analysis were also employed here to code and categorize gathered data, including the use of RQDA, a software package for Qualitative Data Analysis that runs within the R statistical software program. Various patterns and behaviors relevant to intellectual property reforms as they relate to artist practices were discussed in detail following the analysis of findings, in an effort to describe how cultural norms of copyright intersect with the creation of original works of authorship, and towards the development of the theory that the semiotic sign systems subject to intellectual property laws are not themselves forms of real property, as they do not meet the categorical requirements of scarce resources.