Search results

This paper examines the state’s accountability to its citizens, in particular the First Peoples of settler colonial nations such as Australia, and how these responsibilities may be enacted via a process of compensatory justice in Native Title claims. We focus on the landmark Timber Creek ruling and the impacts of racialized preconceptions on the accountability outcomes of the case.

This study draws on critical race theory to reveal embedded racialised perspectives that perpetuate exclusion and discriminatory outcomes. Court documents including hearing transcripts, case judgements, witness statements, appellant and respondent submissions, expert reports and responses from First Nations leaders, form the basis of our analysis.

The case highlights how the compensation awarded to Native Title holders was based on racialised assumptions that prioritised neoliberal values, commercial activities and reaching a “socially acceptable” judgement over valuing Aboriginal uses of land. A critical analysis of court documents reveals the pervasiveness of presumed “objectivity” in the use of accounting tools to calculate economic value and the accountability implications of a process based on litigation, not negotiation. These findings reveal the hiding places offered by calculative practices that equate neoliberal priorities with accountability and reaffirm the importance of alternative accountings to resist inequitable distributive outcomes.

Novel insights, drawing on First Nations peoples’ connections to land and their perspectives on accountability and justice, are offered in this study. Our analysis of Native Title holders’ submissions to the courts alongside historical and anthropological sources leads to the conclusion that compensation decisions regarding Native Title land must be approached from the perspective of Aboriginal landowners if accountable outcomes are to be achieved.

This study aims to investigate how two different types of brand-to-brand dialogues – “roasting” versus “toasting” – impact consumers’ brand perceptions, particularly perceived entertainment, and influence brand attitudes.

The research design comprises four studies. The preliminary study involves Web scraping to gauge consumer perception about the two communication approaches followed by two well-known brands. Study 1 involves an online experiment to compare these communication types within each brand tested in the pilot study and examines the mediation effect of perceived entertainment. Study 2, also an online experiment, investigates the role of message neutralization, demonstrating that “roasting” can be acceptable when the humor is neutralized. Study 3 further tests the effects of neutralized “roasting” at different levels of brand familiarity and personality.

Roasting can lead to more favorable consumer perceptions than toasting. The effect can be explained by roasting’s higher level of perceived entertainment. However, this positive outcome is contingent on the successful neutralization of the aggressive humor in the “roasting” messages. When it comes to brand familiarity and personality, familiar brands benefit more from neutralized “roasting,” whereas brand personality does not have a strong influence.

The findings suggest that “roasting” can be effective when messages are neutralized, and “toasting” works best when spontaneous and genuine. It highlights how brand familiarity and personality influence consumer reactions, thus, offering strategic insights for both established and lesser-known brands. The study also prompts further research to examine other brand traits, cultural factors and behavioral dimensions in brand-to-brand dialogue, signifying the complexity and richness of this growing research area.

This study advises lesser-known brands to adopt “toasting” strategies to build a positive image, while established brands can try “roasting,” ensuring message neutrality to avoid negativity. The research emphasizes the role of brand familiarity and personality in shaping brand dialogues. Marketers must consider these to make humor strategies effective and bolster positive brand image.

This research uniquely examines message neutralization through contextual cues as a strategy brands can use to aid their sensitive dialogues with others on social media. The findings provide new insights into how brands can use different types of messages in digital communications to attract consumers and ensure positive reception, offering valuable guidance for academics and practitioners in brand-to-brand dialogue.