Featured Post from University of Rochester

How the Black Sea ceasefire could backfire for Ukraine

University of Rochester’s Hein Goemans says the deal suggests Russia is “playing” the United States.

Apr 4, 2025

1 min

Washington is touting the proposed Black Sea ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia, but there are signs that Russia could emerge from the deal with the upper hand.

Hein Goemans, a political science professor at the University of Rochester whose research focuses on territorial disputes and what starts and ends wars, says the agreement “doesn’t really mean much.”

“What matters is territorial divisions,” Goemans says. “I see this ceasefire deal as Russia trying to play the United States.”

Goemans says the deal would be reasonable if the U.S. were willing to enforce it with sanctions if, or when, Russia reneges.

“Ukraine should not believe this deal is in any way credible if the U.S. is not willing to commit to sanctions if Russia reneges, which it will,” Goemans says.

He adds that the deal also favors Russia if other parts of it, like the repatriation of Ukrainian children, are not effected.

“The chance that Russia would effectively help with the repatriation of Ukrainian abducted children is zero,” Goemans says. “It appears Russia has not compromised on any dimension.”

Goemans recently shared similar thoughts with Newsweek, and is regularly tapped by news outlets around the world for his insights on the war in Ukraine and territorial disputes in hotspots across the globe. Reach Goemans by clicking on his profile.

Connect with:

Hein Goemans

Professor of Political Science

Goemans is an expert on international conflict and war termination

UkraineInternational Conflict War terminationInternational RelationsWar and Conflict

Find Experts

Sep 24, 2026

2 min

When Brand Activism Meets the Bottom Line

Should companies speak out on political issues? When does taking a stand become a business risk? University of Rochester political scientist and professor of business administration David Primo studies the tension between corporate strategy, free expression, and consumer backlash. His insights have become indispensable for journalists covering the CEOs, sports owners, and brands that increasingly find themselves at the center of public controversies. Primo was recently quoted in The Boston Globe about the fallout from New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft’s intervention in Ed Sheeran’s stadium tour after rapper Macklemore was dropped as an opening act. While Kraft had the legal right to regulate speech on private property, Primo argued, the larger business question is whether companies benefit from policing the political views of performers, employees, or partners. “You’re not going to be a successful arena owner if you start checking people’s politics before you book them,” Primo told The Globe. His expertise extends beyond concerts and stadiums. Primo researches corporate political activity, regulation, governance, and the strategic decisions organizations make when navigating contentious public issues. He has been a source in news stories about boycotts involving big brands like Harley-Davidson and Target. Primo can discuss: • Brand activism and corporate political speech • When companies should — or shouldn’t — take public positions • Consumer backlash and reputational risk • CEO activism and its business consequences • Corporate governance and political decision-making • The intersection of free expression and private businesses As debates over corporate values, sponsorships, employee activism, and executive leadership continue to shape headlines, Primo offers evidence-based insight into how businesses weigh the costs — and potential benefits — of entering the political arena. Connect with him by clicking on his profile.

Aug 19, 2026

2 min

Fantasy Football Draft: Watch for 'Brain Bias'

National Football League fantasy drafts are underway in preparation for the season — and that means millions of fantasy football coaches are already overthinking their lineups. Before they blame a bad draft slot or a fluke injury for bombing from one week to the next, they might want to look in the mirror and give their head a shake. That’s because there’s good science behind those bad fantasy football decision. Renee Miller, a professor of brain and cognitive sciences at the University of Rochester, studies cognitive biases and literally wrote the book on bias in fantasy sports. She plays fantasy football, too. She warns that our brains are wired to interpret fantasy football results in ways that are suboptimal and illogical. “Biased thinking occurs in everyday life and work, and in fantasy sports,” Miller says. “Through the course of a season, you can see a full range of the ways cognitive bias affects a person’s weekly fantasy matchups.” Here’s the good news: Miller says we can untangle those wires if we know what to look for. Among the biggest culprits are what Miller calls “the endowment effect” (overvaluing and clinging to players you drafted high), “recency bias” (falling in love with last week’s star), and “confirmation bias” (cherry-picking stats that support what you already believe). But especially beware of Week One. Thanks to the “primacy effect,” those games early in the season loom larger in memory than later ones. One hot debut or a disappointing flop can warp a coach’s thinking for weeks. The result? Lineups driven more by emotion than logic — and possibly a lot of pick sixes. Biases aren’t all bad, though. Sometimes instincts pay off. First impressions and recent performances sometimes hold fast. But the best fantasy players, Miller says, know when to slow down and think systematically. They stay skeptical, challenge their gut reactions, and accept that they’ll be wrong sometimes. So before you rage-drop that underperforming wide receiver or crown your Week One sleeper a superstar, remember, the smartest move might be to take a look in the mirror and give your head a shake. Miller is available for interviews for journalists covering fantasy sports. Connect with her by clicking on her profile.

Jul 8, 2026

2 min

Can Music Legends Rewrite Their Legacy?

The Stones didn’t need another hit. With six decades of chart-topping albums, sold-out tours, and songs woven into popular culture, their place in rock history has long been secure. Yet the band’s scheduled release of another studio album, “Foreign Tongues,” on July 10, raises questions about how late-stage work can impact the legacy of the Stones and other enduring musical acts. For John Covach, director of the Institute of Popular Music at the Univeristy of Rochester and a leading scholar of rock music, that’s where the real story is. “Every late-career album asks us two questions,” Covach says. “What does it say about where the artist is now? And does it change how we hear everything that came before?” It’s a question that could be applied to artists from Bob Dylan and Paul McCartney to Bruce Springsteen and Neil Young. Sometimes late work reflects an unexpected creative renaissance. Sometimes it simply reinforces an artist’s legacy. Sometimes it challenges audiences to rethink musicians they thought they already understood. Sometimes it becomes a footnote to their career. “An artist's latest act can in many ways be as revealing as their first,” Covach says. Covach, who co-edited The Cambridge Companion to the Rolling Stones (Cambridge University Press 2019) and whose online course on the music of the Rolling Stones has enrolled thousands of students worldwide, says reporters covering the Stones’ new album have an opportunity to explore broader issues that resonate across popular culture: • Can new work meaningfully change an artist’s historical legacy? • Why do some musicians continue creating well into their seventies and eighties while others stop? • Can a new release introduce younger listeners to artists whose biggest hits predate them by decades? • How do critics — and fans — judge new music from legendary performers differently than music by younger artists? • What determines whether late-career work becomes an essential part of an artist's catalog — or a historical footnote? Covach has spent decades studying the evolution of popular music, and his books and scholarship have helped shape how the genre is taught. He is also a frequent media commentator on the cultural significance of major artists and musical milestones. Click on his profile to connect with him.