Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Understanding the Significance of Juneteenth
Alan Singer, professor of education, is featured in a USA Today article about the historical significance and observation of Juneteenth. The article notes that Juneteenth marks the day the last African American slaves were notified that they had been freed from their masters, according to the National Museum of African American History and Culture. Dr. Singer said that during this time, an estimated 250,000 people were kept enslaved in Texas despite the Emancipation Proclamation, issued by President Abraham Lincoln on Jan 1, 1863. While Juneteenth is becoming more widely known and understood, Dr. Singer explained that there was a time when Black History was not widely discussed within the educational system. “I didn’t learn it (until) I was an adult, really (in the) 1990s, when as a teacher, I started studying more, so I (could) incorporate it into my lessons,” he said. “I went to City College in the 1960s, and they had first introduced a course called ‘American Negro History’ and that was the first time I had learned about any of these things. I took the course because I became a political activist while at City College and I needed to know more about the African American civil rights struggles.” Alan Singer is a Professor of Teaching, Learning and Technology. He is available to speak with media - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
AI Art: What Should Fair Compensation Look Like?
New research from Goizueta’s David Schweidel looks at questions of compensation to human artists when images based on their work are generated via artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence is making art. That is to say, compelling artistic creations based on thousands of years of art production may now be just a few text prompts away. And it’s all thanks to generative AI trained on internet images. You don’t need Picasso’s skillset to create something in his style. You just need an AI-powered image generator like DALL-E 3 (created by OpenAI), Midjourney, or Stable Diffusion. If you haven’t tried one of these programs yet, you really should (free or beta versions make this a low-risk proposal). For example, you might use your phone to snap a photo of your child’s latest masterpiece from school. Then, you might ask DALL-E to render it in the swirling style of Vincent Van Gogh. A color printout of that might jazz up your refrigerator door for the better. Intellectual Property in the Age of AI Now, what if you wanted to sell your AI-generated art on a t-shirt or poster? Or what if you wanted to create a surefire logo for your business? What are the intellectual property (IP) implications at work? Take the case of a 35-year-old Polish artist named Greg Rutkowski. Rutkowski has reportedly been included in more AI-image prompts than Pablo Picasso, Leonardo da Vinci, or Van Gogh. As a professional digital artist, Rutkowski makes his living creating striking images of dragons and battles in his signature fantasy style. That is, unless they are generated by AI, in which case he doesn’t. “They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. But what about the case of a working artist? What if someone is potentially not receiving payment because people can easily copy his style with generative AI?” That’s the question David Schweidel, Rebecca Cheney McGreevy Endowed Chair and professor of marketing at Goizueta Business School is asking. Flattery won’t pay the bills. “We realized early on that IP is a huge issue when it comes to all forms of generative AI,” Schweidel says. “We have to resolve such issues to unlock AI’s potential.” Schweidel’s latest working paper is titled “Generative AI and Artists: Consumer Preferences for Style and Fair Compensation.” It is coauthored with professors Jason Bell, Jeff Dotson, and Wen Wang (of University of Oxford, Brigham Young University, and University of Maryland, respectively). In this paper, the four researchers analyze a series of experiments with consumers’ prompts and preferences using Midjourney and Stable Diffusion. The results lead to some practical advice and insights that could benefit artists and AI’s business users alike. Real Compensation for AI Work? In their research, to see if compensating artists for AI creations was a viable option, the coauthors wanted to see if three basic conditions were met: – Are artists’ names frequently used in generative AI prompts? – Do consumers prefer the results of prompts that cite artists’ names? – Are consumers willing to pay more for an AI-generated product that was created citing some artists’ names? Crunching the data, they found the same answer to all three questions: yes. More specifically, the coauthors turned to a dataset that contains millions of “text-to-image” prompts from Stable Diffusion. In this large dataset, the researchers found that living and deceased artists were frequently mentioned by name. (For the curious, the top three mentioned in this database were: Rutkowski, artgerm [another contemporary artist, born in Hong Kong, residing in Singapore] and Alphonse Mucha [a popular Czech Art Nouveau artist who died in 1939].) Given that AI users are likely to use artists’ names in their text prompts, the team also conducted experiments to gauge how the results were perceived. Using deep learning models, they found that including an artist’s name in a prompt systematically improves the output’s aesthetic quality and likeability. The Impact of Artist Compensation on Perceived Worth Next, the researchers studied consumers’ willingness to pay in various circumstances. The researchers used Midjourney with the following dynamic prompt: “Create a picture of ⟨subject⟩ in the style of ⟨artist⟩”. The subjects chosen were the advertising creation known as the Most Interesting Man in the World, the fictional candy tycoon Willy Wonka, and the deceased TV painting instructor Bob Ross (Why not?). The artists cited were Ansel Adams, Frida Kahlo, Alphonse Mucha and Sinichiro Wantabe. The team repeated the experiment with and without artists in various configurations of subjects and styles to find statistically significant patterns. In some, consumers were asked to consider buying t-shirts or wall art. In short, the series of experiments revealed that consumers saw more value in an image when they understood that the artist associated with it would be compensated. Here’s a sample of imagery AI generated using three subjects names “in the style of Alphonse Mucha.” Source: Midjourney cited in http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4428509 “I was honestly a bit surprised that people were willing to pay more for a product if they knew the artist would get compensated,” Schweidel explains. “In short, the pay-per-use model really resonates with consumers.” In fact, consumers preferred pay-per-use over a model in which artists received a flat fee in return for being included in AI training data. That is to say, royalties seem like a fairer way to reward the most popular artists in AI. Of course, there’s still much more work to be done to figure out the right amount to pay in each possible case. What Can We Draw From This? We’re still in the early days of generative AI, and IP issues abound. Notably, the New York Times announced in December that it is suing OpenAI (the creator of ChatGPT) and Microsoft for copyright infringement. Millions of New York Times articles have been used to train generative AI to inform and improve it. “The lawsuit by the New York Times could feasibly result in a ruling that these models were built on tainted data. Where would that leave us?” asks Schweidel. "One thing is clear: we must work to resolve compensation and IP issues. Our research shows that consumers respond positively to fair compensation models. That’s a path for companies to legally leverage these technologies while benefiting creators." David Schweidel To adopt generative AI responsibly in the future, businesses should consider three things. First, they should communicate to consumers when artists’ styles are used. Second, they should compensate contributing artists. And third, they should convey these practices to consumers. “And our research indicates that consumers will feel better about that: it’s ethical.” AI is quickly becoming a topic of regulators, lawmakers and journalists and if you're looking to know more - let us help. David A. Schweidel, Professor of Marketing, Goizueta Business School at Emory University To connect with David to arrange an interview - simply click his icon now.
Aston University researcher takes on leadership role within biomedical engineering
Dr Antonio Fratini is the new chair of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers Biomedical Engineering Division It is one of the largest group of professional biomedical engineers in the UK The specialism merges professional engineering with medical knowledge of the human body, such as artificial limbs and robotic surgery. An Aston University researcher has been given a leading role within the biomedical engineering sector. Dr Antonio Fratini CEng MIMechE has been elected as the new chair of the Biomedical Engineering Division (BmED) of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE), one of the largest groups of professional biomedical engineers in the UK. The IMechE has around 115,000 members in 140 countries and has been active since 1847. Biomedical engineering, also known as medical engineering or bioengineering, is the integration of engineering with medical knowledge to help tackle clinical problems and improve healthcare outcomes. Dr Fratini previously served as chair of the Birmingham centre of the division for five years and as vice-chair of the division for one year. His research includes responsible use of AI, 3D segmentation and anatomical modelling to improve surgical training and planning, motor functions and balance rehabilitation. He leads Aston University’s Engineering for Health Research Centre within the College of Engineering and Physical Sciences and has vast experience in the design, development and testing of new medical devices. Currently he is the University’s principal investigator for the West Midlands Health Tech Innovation Accelerator and he has a growing reputation in the UK and internationally within the biomedical engineering profession. He said: “Biomedical engineering is continuously evolving and our graduates will create the future of health tech and med tech for more effective, sustainable, responsible and personalised healthcare. “I am very honoured of this appointment. This three-year post will be a great opportunity to further develop the biomedical engineering profession worldwide and to show Aston University’s commitment to an inclusive, entrepreneurial and transformational impact within the field.” Professor Helen Meese, outgoing chair of the division, said: “I am delighted to see Antonio take on the chair’s position. He has, over the years, contributed significantly to the growth of the Birmingham regional centre and has actively supported me throughout my tenure as chair. I know how passionate he is about our profession and will undoubtedly continue to drive the division forward over the next three years.” Dr Frattini was presented with his new title on 20 June at the IMECHE HQ at 1 Birdcage Walk, London during the Institution’s technology strategy board meeting. For media inquiries in relation to this release, contact Nicola Jones, Press and Communications Manager, on (+44) 7825 342091 or email: n.jones6@aston.ac.uk
Hear From an Expert: CNN Offers Debate Feed with Conditions
Dean of the Lawrence Herbert School of Communication Mark Lukasiewicz was interviewed by the Tribune News Service about the ways in which CNN plans to strengthen its brand and maximize exposure when it broadcasts the first presidential debate between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump on June 27. Dean Lukasiewicz said the requirements CNN has stipulated are a reasonable trade-off for a simulcast that other networks can run with their own commercials. “I think this is a very fair arrangement,” he said. “It’s a good model if this is how the networks do the debates going forward. I hope they take CNN up on this offer so the debate is seen as widely as possible.” Mark Lukasiewicz is a veteran producer, journalist, and media executive who has spent his professional career telling important stories to worldwide audiences and helping media organizations deal with transformational change. He is available to speak with media regarding this important debate. Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
New research from Goizueta’s Diwas KC unpacks the dual impact of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs on opioid prescriptions and heroin overdose deaths. More than two million individuals in the US are experiencing Opioid Use Disorder (OUD). The CDC defines OUD as “a problematic pattern of opioid use that causes significant impairment or distress.” Around 130 people die of opioid overdoses every day. Perhaps more startlingly, four million people over the age of 12 have reported using pain medication recreationally, including opioids. Prescription opioids are a highly-regulated class of drug. They interact with the opioid receptors on nerve cells throughout the body, as well as the brain, which reduces the intensity of pain signals to the body. For many, they are a necessary prescription to get through the pain of surgery or injury, as the body heals itself. Unfortunately, the function of opioids in the body—releasing endorphins and boosting feelings of pleasure, as well as reducing pain—also make them highly addictive. PDMP: A Successful Federal Mandate The United States continues to see increases in deaths from opioid overdoses. So, federal and state governments have been working in enact policies that are designed to decrease those fatalities. One of the methods states are using to prevent common abuse patterns like “doctor shopping,” which is the pattern of visiting multiple physicians to obtain prescriptions, is the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP), designed to be used in conjunction with Health Information Technology (HIT) programs. PDMP serve two purposes: identifying drug-seeking behaviors in patients, and identifying physicians with patterns of inappropriate prescribing. Nearly all 50 states have enacted PDMPs of some degree. Some programs require physicians to check the PDMP before prescribing restricted pharmaceuticals, but in others it’s only suggested. Intrastate communication between PDMPs is not always possible, however. The Unintended Consequences The use of PDMPs has been shown to reduce the number of opioid prescriptions, the intended outcome of the program. Enter a recently published study by Diwas KC, Goizueta Foundation Term Professor of Information Systems & Operations Management. The research shows that during time the research was conducted, prescriptions for opioids declined by 6.1%. However, the research also brought to light a very serious and unintended consequence of the implementation of PDMPs. The study concluded that while the implementation of PDMPs did reduce opioid prescriptions, it did not reduce overall numbers of prescription opioid deaths. In fact, it may have contributed to a 50% increase in heroin overdose fatalities. “The heroin increase was definitely something we were not expecting, it was a total surprise,” says KC. "It was something that we had hypothesized. You’ve got a bunch of individuals who have used prescription opiates and had presumably been dependent. Now with the passage of this PDMP law, it has become more difficult to obtain prescription opiates. Therefore, some people might be forced to turn to the street version of it." Diwas KC “We didn’t expect the effect size it to be as significant as it is,” says KC. Heroin and commonly prescribed opioids like oxycodone and hydrocodone are very similar on a biochemical level. What’s more, they generate a similar sensation in the body, according to KC. That’s why he and his team had the initial hypothesis that some addicted individuals, when unable to get prescription medication, might turn to street drugs, which are much more dangerous on many levels. “There are many aspects to this. One has to do with the potency and the toxicity of the things you get on the streets. There are very little checks and balances on those. There’s no control in quality for sure,” KC says. He also notes the lack of checks and balances on the frequency of usage. “So the frequency of usage, the quality of the substances you’re putting inside your body, and possibly the circumstances of acquiring it might also be very risky too.” A Dual Impact The research concludes that mandating PDMP use is an example of a successful use of policy for intervention. It does, in fact, decrease the number of opioid prescriptions available to patients. That’s critical information for policy makers and physicians to take in. And it’s a solid reason to keep using and expanding PDMP usage, according to KC. "I should point out very clearly that the policy did have the intended effect of reducing prescriptions. So, it definitely benefited people who might otherwise have become addicted." Diwas KC “By reducing unnecessary prescriptions it might have limited the number of people who would have gotten hooked on the drugs in the first place. So there’s definitely the benefit of that,” says KC. “It’s just that when the policy was implemented, there was also this side effect because of people who were already using it. So, when those people were forced to look for alternatives, that’s when things got bad.” Research papers like this one show an important side of using data to mark successes and failures of government policies. Taken on the surface, data can show a policy’s impact for the greater good. But a deeper dive into the surrounding data—like the increase in heroin use after the implementation of PDMPs—gives everyone a better idea of the full impact of this mandate. "Policies have intended as well as unintended consequences. In this case of PDMP it had the desired effect of reducing prescriptions. That probably helped a lot of people not get addicted to opiates in the first place." Diwas KC “But sometimes policies also have unintended consequences,” says KC. “Like in the case of people who were already addicted to painkillers suddenly stopping it, causing them to take drastic actions, and that’s what happened for some of the people in the study. Policies need to consider the possibility of unintended consequences and take actions to also mitigate those unintended consequences.” Interested in knowing more? Diwas KC is the Goizueta Foundation Term Professor of Information Systems & Operations Management. He is available to talk about this important topic - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today
Hot Topic: Regents Not Mandatory for Graduation
Professor of Education Alan Singer spoke to WNYW-TV Fox 5 about a move to make the Regents exams optional in New York. “I agree younger students are over-tested, but I don’t think they’re being over-tested in high school,” said Dr. Singer. “The exams shouldn’t be abandoned until after assessments are developed.” Alan Singer is a Professor of Teaching, Learning and Technology. He is available to speak with media - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
The 2024 Cision State of the Media Report is jam-packed with all sorts of detailed PR info which can be somewhat overwhelming. But there's an important theme to be found in the data. Kudos to the team at Cision for running this survey that polled over 3,000 staff journalists and freelancers, which is now in its 15th year. The big takeaway for me? Give journalists what they want. Sounds simple enough. Yet, with so many organizations competing for media attention amidst a sea of new AI-enabled platform hacks, many need to focus on the fundamentals of media relations, which this report nicely captures. The media is inundated with pitches. So, the secret to success lies in understanding what jobs journalists have to do and giving them what they need to file their stories…fast. According to the Cision 2024 survey, at the top of the journalists' wish list are: Topical Relevance (68%): Understanding the target audience and what they find relevant. Access to Experts (52%): Connecting journalists with experts and setting up interviews. Credible Data and Research (48%): Providing data and key research. Speed of Response (47%): Responding quickly to inquiries and respecting journalists’ deadlines. In short, journalists want relevant pitches, expert connections, and credible data, and they want it ASAP so they can meet their deadlines. While the Cision report outlines many other best practices that will undoubtedly improve your coverage rate (such as helping journalists quickly source multimedia assets like images), I want to focus on the importance of nailing these first four rules. Rule #1: Pitch Relevant Topics to Journalists Irrelevant pitches not only waste a journalist's time but also damage your credibility. In fact, 77% of journalists in the Cision study cited being spammed with irrelevant pitches as a reason to block a PR professional or put them on the "do not call" list. The study also reported that journalists are "fed up" with follow-ups to unsolicited pitches. Now, only 8% of journalists think it's okay to follow up more than once to check on a story they have pitched. Rule #2: Get Your Experts in Front of Journalists Connecting with credible expert sources is time-consuming. Joint research conducted by ExpertFile and the Associated Press revealed it takes on average, over 2 hours for journalists to secure an expert source for an interview. We can do better than that. As a PR/Media Relations pro, one of your "superpowers" needs to be the ability to spot a story opportunity and get your subject matter experts lined up for the media interview. This is an area where journalists see comms and media pros playing a vital role inside the organization. But if your pitch "sounds like a marketing brochure" the Cision survey shows that 55% of journalists would add you to their naughty list. One of the best ways to avoid this trap and enrich your story is to bring experts and their unique, specialized knowledge to the interview. That means ensuring you are attributing the source of your blog posts to experts in your organization and including links to their expert profile in your pitch. Enclosing a link to an outdated, boring biography on your website or a LinkedIn profile that hasn't been updated since the Yankees last won the World Series (2009), won't score points with journalists. Rule 3: Provide Journalists with Credible Data and Key Research Providing this information not only supports your story but also builds trust. Ensure that your pitches include the latest research findings, statistics, and data from reputable sources within your institution. This evidence-based approach enhances the credibility of your pitches and increases the likelihood of them being picked up by the media. While primary data is best, if you are curating data from other sources, it's critical to cite sources and, ideally, create derivative insights that help the journalist look at the information in a fresh way. For example we have many economists on our ExpertFile network that provide insights regularly on data they didn't gather. But their ability to critically analyze economic data from trusted sources such as the US Census Bureau or the European Union and generate unique, often counterintuitive or provocative insights is what sets them apart from other experts. Rule #4: Help Meet the Journalist's Deadline Journalists often work under tight deadlines and timely responses from PR professionals. Our software has helped organizations handle thousands of media requests every year and if there is one thing we've learned, media is all about speed. If you are a "serious player" you need protocols and processes to quickly respond to media inquiries and get your expert sources lined up to provide the necessary information and insights to meet same-day deadlines. This shows journalists you respect their time and are a reliable source and you will be on speed dial for future stories. Are You Pitching Effectively? Here’s a few tough questions. Answer truthfully. Are You Personally Wasting Time Pitching? How much time do you spend pitching the media vs. responding to inbound media opportunities? Data from Propel Media shows 97% of media pitches fail. While journalists open approximately half of the pitches they receive they only respond to an average of 2.99% of the pitches. Yet the Cision data shows that it's not always your fault. Why? Well, unless you're a gifted psychic, you simply can't know for sure how a journalist is going to react to your pitch. That's why more media departments and their PR agencies are cutting back on spammy pitch activities and moving to more strategic activities that get more traction. With the extra time they save, they can focus on promoting their experts online where journalists are actively searching for credible sources. The result is more qualified inbound inquiries from journalists genuinely interested in interviewing your experts. And that means a lot less anxiety about meeting your media coverage targets. Are You Wasting Journalists' Time? Is your newsroom or media relations page set up to allow journalists to quickly serve themselves 24x7? Can they easily search by specific topics to find an expert within seconds to help meet their deadlines? Or are you expecting them to email or call you for help. (hint: journalists don't have time for that kind of friction). Here's a nice example of how US-based health system, ChristianaCare makes their medical experts available to journalists round the clock while saving hundreds of hours a year for their Comms and Digital team. I'd love to hear more about how you are helping journalists and how that's paying off with increased media coverage. Let me know in the comments below or connect/follow me on LinkedIn or on ExpertFile.
Naronda Wright elected President of NAGAP, the Association for Graduate Enrollment Management
Naronda Wright, Ed.D., associate dean of Graduate Student Services in Georgia Southern University’s Jack N. Averitt College of Graduate Studies, was recently elected president of NAGAP, the Association for Graduate Enrollment Management. She is the first African American to hold the role of president in the association. Wright, a seasoned professional in the field of graduate enrollment management, brings more than 15 years of experience to her new role. In her position at Georgia Southern, Wright has been instrumental in implementing innovative recruitment strategies and enhancing student services, contributing significantly to the growth and diversity of the graduate programs. Under her leadership for NAGAP, Wright plans to focus on expanding the association’s reach, enhancing member engagement and advancing the association’s strategic initiatives aimed at supporting its members’ professional development. “I am deeply honored to serve as the president of NAGAP and look forward to working closely with our members across the globe to foster an environment of knowledge sharing and professional growth,” said Wright. Wright’s election comes at a pivotal time as the association seeks to navigate the challenges of the ever-evolving educational landscape and harness opportunities to drive positive change in graduate enrollment practices worldwide. “We are thrilled to welcome Dr. Wright as the new president of NAGAP,” said Haley Brust, executive director of NAGAP. “Her extensive experience and dedicated leadership are vital as we continue to support our members and advocate for the importance of graduate enrollment management.” Wright holds a Doctor of Education in Higher Education Leadership from Clark Atlanta University and a Master of Education in Higher Education Administration from Georgia Southern. She has previously served NAGAP as vice president, secretary and conference committee chair. NAGAP is dedicated to the professional advancement and support of individuals in graduate enrollment management. NAGAP offers its members professional development opportunities, cutting-edge research and a community network to foster best practices in graduate education. For additional information about NAGAP and its services, please visit www.nagap.org. If you're interested in learning more or a reporter looking to speak with Naronda Wright - simply Contact Georgia Southern's Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to arrange an interview today.
From Boring to Brilliant: Writing that Transforms Your Thought Leadership into Must-Read Content
Insights from our Webinar with Author, Rhea Wessel Ask anyone who develops Thought Leadership programs, and they will tell you that experts are essential to a successful program. But experts are busy people. That makes expert engagement strategies a very popular topic with our Comms and Media Relations pros. That’s why we invited Rhea Wessel, Founder of The Institute for Thought Leadership, to join us last week for our ExpertFile webinar. Rhea, a former tech and financial journalist and author of “Write Like a Thought Leader,” has worked with organizations such as Harvard, CFA Institute, Accenture and the Max Planck Institute to help their experts focus on developing unique story angles while getting high-quality work produced. Having seen her in action at last year's IABC Global Conference, speaking to a standing-room-only crowd, I was really impressed by Rhea’s approach. Rhea uses a system that experts and comms teams can use to brainstorm topics and craft story angles that frame expertise and research to make them more compelling. In the session, she showed us how she helps brainstorm and select the best angles for thought-leadership stories using ideas such as “origin” stories, “what if” scenarios, personal-impact stories, and opinion pieces. Experts often have issues with the "dreaded first draft.” The frameworks Rhrea showed us from her book were clever and designed to pragmatically move experts from brainstorming into a writing mode that doesn’t feel forced. Here are some key points I took away from Rhea’s session: Defining Thought Leadership An essential attribute of Thought Leaders is that they share their knowledge for free, using journalistic skills to engage their audience by articulating emerging ideas, steering conversations and influencing others. Finding the Niche Finding and framing thought leadership is not about covering a broad topic. The best topics are often very narrow. And they are best found at the intersection of the expert’s passion, purpose, and big ideas. Think Like a Journalist Write in a conversational tone and include data, quotes & statistics, but not too much. Use short sentences and paragraphs while keeping the story fast-moving. And don’t forget your sense of humor. Spend Time on the Headlines By “thinking like a journalist” and focusing on headlines, one can narrow the focus when examining research and insights to create more clarity. Quoting Author Sean Coyne, Rhea referred to headlines as having the benefit of being an “enabling constraint." "One of the curses of subject matter expertise is that your experts know a lot. They tend to pack a lot [of their knowledge] in, and for a good story, you've got to slice out a narrow bit. That’s the constraint.” Rhea Wessel Time & Place Matters Stories are best anchored in time and place. When you are working with an expert and you want to enrich a story, don’t just think about how they developed their research and insights. Also, think about “where they were” and “when did it happen?” A good origin story explains why an insight is significant for the expert, creating a more emotional, relatable connection for the audience. Frame Your Story Keep it focused on a single yet relevant problem the audience has. Then explain why this matters to your audience and why now. Based on the feedback we received from this session, we'll have Rhea Wessel join us for more conversations on topics related to storytelling. We'd love to know what you think. Details about this session are below: Full Webinar Recording bit.ly/4e9YuWb Presentation Slides To get a copy of the presentation & Templates, just hit the connect button on my profile and let me know. Enjoy!
NYS Budget Provisions May Protect Incumbent Democrats
Lawrence Levy, associate vice president and executive dean of the National Center for Suburban Studies, was interviewed by City & State New York about how Governor Kathy Hochul’s budget and focus on issues like affordable housing and retail theft may provide some protection for incumbent Democrats this November. The state budget may be designed to insulate Democrats from Republican attacks, but it’s not clear that it will be the deciding factor in various races. The 2024 election cycle is an entirely different beast than 2022. Two years ago, Hochul was at the top of the ticket in New York. This year, she’s not even on the ballot. That may actually be a boon for Democrats, as many observers credited her lackluster performance with negatively impacting races down ballot and the latest Siena College polling has her favorability and job approval ratings at all-time lows. Hochul notably did not stump for Suozzi during his high-profile race in February despite her role as de facto head of the state Democratic Party. And in the weeks following the state budget, she has only visited a swing district to celebrate her policy successes in the spending plan once. Instead, President Joe Biden and Donald Trump will be at the top of the ticket, and any thoughts about the specific policies included in the state budget could be reflected by voters’ sentiments about the two presidential candidates. “With the presidential campaign at the top of the ticket, I don’t think what Hochul does, or doesn’t do, will make a particular difference in any of the competitive congressional races,” said Lawrence Levy, executive dean of the National Center for Suburban Studies at Hofstra University. “Yes, she may be cited by Republicans along with several other high-profile Democrats as supposedly insensitive to their constituents on housing and crime, to see if that still sticks, but mostly it’s going to be about Trump and Biden.” May 13 - City and State New York Covering New York politics - we have experts ready to help with any of your questions and stories. Lawrence Levy is the Executive Dean of the National Center for Suburban Studies at Hofstra University. He's available to speak with media - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
