‘We are not the shoes of white supremacists’: a critical race perspective of consumer responses to brand attempts at countering racist associations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, brands have come under fire for being associated with groups like neo-Nazis and white nationalists. In reaction, brands have tried to distance themselves through appeals to diversity. This research contributes to the literature on multiculturalism in marketing through a critical race perspective of how and why consumers participate in social networks in efforts to counter racism. Our findings identify three ways in which consumers respond, by punishing, advising, and defending, and highlight the relevance of circulating affect and exalted national subjects for understanding the practice and impact of multiculturalism in marketing on social media. This research contributes to our understanding of multiculturalism in marketing by extending ideas of impact beyond questions of personal cognitive change. By connecting issues of race to the larger project of nation-building, this research also complements psychological accounts of how consumers engage with brands in social networks as they work to take up diversity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it