Featured Post from Baylor University

Can the Olympics Help Americans Forget Politics (at Least for 16 Days)?

No matter their political leanings, Americans are equally likely to follow the Olympics

Jul 22, 2024

3 min

Kirk Wakefield, Ph.D.

Americans are divided on a multitude of different issues, but could the Olympic Games unite the country – at least for the duration of an Olympiad? A Baylor University sports marketing and branding expert says yes, the Olympics can help bring people together even when it’s hard for them to agree about anything else.


In his latest Forbes Sports Money column, Baylor University sports marketing and branding expert Kirk Wakefield, Ph.D., executive director of the Curb Center for Sales Strategy in Sports and Entertainment (S3E) program at Baylor’s Hankamer School of Business, analyzed a July 8 national population poll that asked Americans questions about politics but also included the Steen Happiness Index (SHI).


The 20-item happiness index provides a series of statements for participants to read and choose the one from each group that describes their state at that moment. Happiness items focus on three types of happy lives: the pleasant life (experiencing and savoring pleasures), the engaged life (losing the self in engaging activities) and the meaningful life (participating in meaningful activities).


Are people happier when watching the Olympics?


“Happy people follow the Olympics and people who follow the Olympics are happy people,” Wakefield wrote.


The higher people scored on the happiness index, the more likely they are to:

  • Watch at least some of the Olympics (49.75%)
  • Root for the U.S. to win (31.8%)
  • Follow the results of the Olympics (28.1%)
  • Read stories about athletes in the Olympics (19.6%)
  • Will talk with others about the Olympics events (18.7%)


“Controlling for age, gender, income, education, race and marital status, Americans who follow the Olympics in one, two, or three of these ways are somewhat more happy people (+4% on the SHI). But those who follow the Olympics in four or all five of these ways are significantly happier people (+10% on the SHI),” Wakefield wrote.


Who is happiest when the Olympics are on?


The happiest? Those would be the Americans who love to talk about the Olympics with others while also cheering for U.S. athletes to win. In fact, they are about 14% happier than those who don’t follow the Olympics, according to the SHI.


“Perhaps best of all, people of all political leaning and presidential preferences are equally likely to follow the Olympics. No matter the party, people can party together in unity following the Olympics,” Wakefield wrote.


“Maybe we can’t forget politics. But we can give it a break to watch the Olympics.”


ABOUT KIRK WAKEFIELD, PH.D.


Kirk Wakefield, Ph.D., is The Edwin W. Streetman Professor of Retail Marketing at Baylor University, where he is the Executive Director of the Curb Center for Sales Strategy in Sports and Entertainment (S3E) program in the Hankamer School of Business. The author of Team Sports Marketing and founder of Wakefield Research Partners, Wakefield has conducted fan research on partnerships, pricing, promotions, sportscape, service, and anything else that explains why fans do what they do in nearly every venue in sports, including the NBA, NFL, MLB, MLS, NHL and NASCAR. His scholarly works appear in a breadth of journals: Journal of Marketing, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Journal of Service Research, Journal of Retailing, Journal of Advertising, Journal of Advertising Research and Journal of Sport Management, among others. Wakefield is a regular contributor to Sports Money on Forbes.com.


ABOUT THE CURB CENTER FOR SALES STRATEGY IN SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT (S3E)


The Center for Sales Strategy in Sports and Entertainment (S3E) at Baylor University is the only program in the U.S. focused on generating revenue for sports. S3E graduates have career opportunities in sales, digital marketing or business analytics for major league teams, university athletics, corporations and agencies. Baylor is the only university combining learning with practice in partnership with the Athletics Department to prepare graduates for careers in the business of sports. The S3E program is unique in vision, values, mission and culture to transform the business of sports and entertainment. Consistent with the Christian mission and purpose of Baylor University, we prepare passionate servant leaders to positively influence lives in places people go to play or watch others play.


Connect with:
Kirk Wakefield, Ph.D.

Kirk Wakefield, Ph.D.

Executive Director, Center for for Sales Strategy in Sports and Entertainment (S3E), and The Edwin W. Streetman Professor of Retail Marketing

A leading sports marketing expert, Kirk Wakefield researches what fans think, feel and do for pro sports franchises

Sports MarketingSports BrandingFan EngagementSports Business & Related IssuesSponsorships

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from Baylor University

2 min

Daylight Saving Time: Baylor Sleep Expert Offers Suggestions to Help Adjust to the Change

Daylight saving time, with its one-hour spring forward at 2 a.m. Sunday, March 12, may seem like a small shift of just a single hour, but on a societal level, it has startling effects, says Baylor University sleep researcher Michael Scullin, Ph.D., associate professor of psychology and neuroscience and director of the Sleep Neuroscience and Cognition Laboratory at Baylor. So what are the consequences of this one-hour time shift on our sleep quality and how can we quickly adjust when springing our clocks forward? "Many people not only lose that single hour of sleep," Scullin said, "but also have difficulty over several subsequent nights adjusting their circadian rhythms to the new bed-wake time schedules." For example, parents who have routine bedtimes for their children experience difficulty for the whole family because children will not want to (or be able to) go to bed one hour earlier than their body is used to. "When you couple this bedtime difficulty with the fact that most people have morning school and work schedules that require them to wake up at a set time," Scullin said, "it becomes clear that ‘springing forward’ has a larger consequence than skipping a single hour." The consequences of the spring daylight saving time shift are well documented. Researchers have observed changes in cognitive functioning, increased driving accidents, moodiness and willingness to punish others for mistakes. "Researchers have also documented that acute sleep loss and circadian dysregulation lead to an increase in cardiovascular events," Scullin said. "If someone's cardiovascular health is ‘borderline’ then the springtime shift can be the factor that precipitates a stroke or a myocardial infarction (heart attack)." Scullin offers some simple suggestions to anticipate and adapt to the spring forward shift: Adjust in advance. About a week before the "spring forward," go to bed 15 or 20 minutes earlier each day. Avoid long naps during the day. If you need a nap, take it earlier in the day and for no more than 20 minutes. Bring on the sunlight. Getting more natural sunlight in the morning hours is very beneficial in resetting our biological clock. In some cases, evening melatonin also can help people to adapt to the time change. Scullin has published numerous studies focusing on sleep and brain function, including the connection between sleep and creativity, musical “earworms” and their effect on sleep and how writing a to-do list before you turn in for the night can help you get better sleep. In fact, Scullin was named Baylor’s inaugural Newsmaker of the Year in 2018, after his “to-do list” research was widely covered by media outlets, including ABC’s Good Morning America, TODAY.com, USA TODAY, Discover, LiveScience, HealthDay, BBC Radio and many more, reaching an international circulation and viewership of nearly 1 billion people. Looking to interview or chat with Michael Scullin? Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.

4 min

Defining Oligarchy: The Fusion of Wealth and Power in American Democracy

Oligarchy is being thrown around a lot these days. But what does the term mean? Is America an oligarchy? And how does oligarchy help explain American democracy today? Political rhetoric scholar Luke Winslow, Ph.D., associate professor of communication at Baylor University and author of  “Oligarchy in America: Power, Justice, and the Rule of the Few,” has traced the evolution of oligarchy in the United States to shed light on how modern oligarchy is reshaping America through the increasing fusion of economic power and political influence. Winslow’s research focuses on how the influence of oligarchy has impacted American political rhetoric, as well as how it is showing up in modern politics and political communications. Defining Oligarchy Oligarchy is a term that most people associate with other countries, but it “is not something that just happens in Russia. It's something that happens everywhere, and it always has,” Winslow said. In the simplest of terms, oligarchy attempts to explain the convergence of economic and political power. Winslow offered four key distinctions on oligarchy: Oligarchy is exclusive. It represents a form of governance focused on preserving the political and economic influence of the wealthy by securing the approval of the rest of the population. “It assumes not everyone is qualified to deliberate, participate and legislate,” Winslow said. When it comes to oligarchy, there is a belief that extreme wealth is equated to intellectual fitness across all domains, including governance. Wealth vs. income. It is important to distinguish between wealth and income. Income covers daily expenses, whereas wealth is more easily used to exert political power. “What truly sets an oligarch apart is the political power their wealth can command,” Winslow said. Understated and subtle. Modern oligarchy operates through persuasion by “enticing rather than commanding citizens and maintaining what seems like an absence from political authority,” Winslow said. It is in this absence that oligarchs can influence indirect political actions, especially since they are not (typically) elected officials and cannot be removed from office. Legal Immunity. Oligarchs have no fear of legal consequences because oligarchy itself is not against the law, Winslow said. The First Amendment protects the right “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” legitimizing lobbying and campaign donations. A robust system of campaign contributions and political lobbying – both of which are perfectly legal – can shape media narratives and put pressure on state and local governments. While wealth and politics have always coexisted, oligarchy is about how these forces merge to create a system where the ultra-rich exert undue influence over democratic institutions, Winslow said. “This convergence has long existed in history but is now unfolding in the U.S. more visibly – and perhaps more accepted – than ever before,” he said. Communication of Oligarchy Winslow’s research shows that American society has come to view billionaires as transcendent figures – individuals whose success in business qualifies them to lead in politics – a mindset that is not new. The Gilded Age of the late 19th century saw figures like Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller wield enormous economic and political power, shaping legislation to favor their interests. Winslow’s research traces this historical precedent, suggesting that today’s tech titans are the latest iteration of a long-standing trend. Perhaps the most intriguing question Winslow raises is not just how oligarchy and its fusion of wealth and governance has taken root, but why the American public has been so willing to accept it as natural – perhaps even beneficial. “The arguments being made in public discourse encourage us to go along with it,” he said. “We’re being told, implicitly, that this is just how things work now.” Yet, these practices also reveal how the government serves the narrow interests of the ultra-wealthy, diverting resources from productive economic opportunities for the majority toward political wins that benefit a small, affluent minority, Winslow said. “What's so interesting about oligarchy now is that the cover has been ripped off, the veil has been thrown open and we’re not even hiding the fact that money gets you more influence,” he said. Ultimately, Winslow hopes his work will get people to be curious as to why Americans are now accepting oligarchy in the U.S. “The ways that the extremely wealthy are yielded political power is seemingly acceptable now, and that is a question that we all should be asking,” Winslow said. Looking to know more? Then let us help. To connect with Luke Winslow, simply contact Shelby Cefaratti-Bertin, M.A, Assistant Director of Media and Public Relations now to arrange an interview today.

2 min

Expert Research: Social Media's Double-Edged Sword: Study Links Both Active and Passive Use to Rising Loneliness

In an age where social media promises to connect us, a new Baylor University study reveals a sobering paradox – the more time we spend interacting online, the lonelier we may feel. Researchers James A. Roberts, Ph.D., The Ben H. Williams Professor of Marketing in Baylor's Hankamer School of Business, and co-authors Philip Young, Ph.D., and Meredith David, Ph.D., analyzed a study that followed nearly 7,000 Dutch adults for nine years to understand how our digital habits shape well-being. Published in the journal Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, the Baylor study – The Epidemic of Loneliness: A Nine-Year Longitudinal Study of the Impact of Passive and Active Social Media Use on Loneliness – investigated how social media use impacts loneliness over time. This eye-opening research suggests that the very platforms designed to bring people together contribute to an "epidemic of loneliness." The findings showed that both passive and active social media use were associated with increased feelings of loneliness over time. While passive social media use – like browsing without interaction – predictably led to heightened loneliness, active use – which involved posting and engaging with others – also was linked to increased feelings of loneliness. These results suggest that the quality of digital interactions may not fulfill the social needs that are met in face-to-face communication. “This research underscores the complexity of social media’s impact on mental health,” Roberts said. “While social media offers unprecedented access to online communities, it appears that extensive use – whether active or passive – does not alleviate feelings of loneliness and may, in fact, intensify them.” The study also found a two-way relationship between loneliness and social media use. "It appears that a continuous feedback loop exists between the two,” Roberts said. “Lonely people turn to social media to address their feelings, but it is possible that such social media use merely fans the flames of loneliness."​ The findings emphasize an urgent need for further research into the effects of digital interaction, underlining the essential role of in-person connections in supporting well-being. This study also adds a valuable perspective to the conversation on how digital habits influence mental health, offering insights to shape future mental health initiatives, policies and guidelines for healthier social media use. Are you covering social media and its impact on people?  Then let us help. These experts are available to speak with media, simply click or contact Shelby Cefaratti-Bertin, M.A, Assistant Director of Media and Public Relations now to arrange an interview today.

View all posts
Powered by