Search results

A regular feature giving news and comments on events and productions in the field of visual aids for technical and scientific teaching and training

A regular feature giving news and comments on events and productions in the field of visual aids for technical and scientific teaching and training

This paper seeks to analyze the use of metaphor in the 1997‐2006 letters to shareholders (LTS) of Nortel Networks Corporation (Nortel). It aims to assess the prevalence of metaphor and changes in the use of metaphor as turnover in corporate leadership took place and as Nortel's financial fortunes changed.

Metaphors in the LTS are part of a corporation's voluntary disclosures, which in turn may be used for impression management purposes. The paper uses discourse analysis, in particular quantitative and qualitative content analysis, of the LTS to identify key metaphors and to evaluate changes in the prevalence of these metaphors across corporate leaders and during phases of growth and decline.

Several key metaphors are identified in Nortel's letters to shareholders, including science, journey, vision, construction and theatre. Evidence is also found that demonstrates changes in the prevalence of metaphors across various chief executive officers, and changes in the meaning of metaphors in periods of growth and decline.

The contribution of the paper is to highlight the use of metaphor in the voluntary disclosures (i.e. letters to shareholders) of a major North American corporation during a turbulent decade. The preferences of four very different CEOs are reflected in their choice of metaphor, supporting arguments that metaphor is used in voluntary disclosures as a means of impression management, particularly in relation to trends in corporate financial performance.

This paper tests the degree to which Sunstein's law of group polarization predicts the increase or decrease in polarization among individuals in an out-group during a polarizing event. The authors use the discourse on Parler surrounding the events of January 6th as a case study.

The study includes an overall sentiment analysis, a statistical analysis of emotions, along with eight other feelings, including anger, anticipation, disgust, fear, joy, sadness, surprise and trust. Specifically, the authors measure the differences in feelings related language used in posts as they pertain to Donald Trump and the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement vs. Trump's Vice President Mike Pence both before and after January 6, 2021. The authors use this empirical analysis to show whether polarization in the Parler community increased or decreased after January 6th.

The authors find evidence that there is more complexity to polarization than Sunstein's theory would predict. The authors would expect a very polarized outed group to become more polarized relative to the general public after a central event; however, the authors see two extremes emerging within the Parler community (both strongly positive and strongly negative feelings toward Trump). The authors do not see unanimous consent across the Parler platform as Sunstein's theory would suggest; the out-group is becoming more polarized relative to the rest of the population. Instead, the authors observe a wide mix in reactions. The results of this study demonstrate that there is dissent even among the Parler echo chamber. For many themes surrounding the January 6th riots, Parler users express strong disagreement with each other and a lack of unity in their feelings for former President Trump.

The results suggest further research into polarization of outed groups and the policy implications of their polarization changes over time.

Increases in group polarization are often a motivator for public policy and are further becoming a major focus for research. Brookings' authors Stephanie Forrest and Joshua Daymude point to polarization as a substantial threat to American society, claiming “reducing extreme polarization is key to stabilizing democracy” (2022). Researchers Diana Epstein and John D. Graham demonstrate that polarized politics has impacted the “substance of rulemaking, judicial decisions, and legislation” along with “complicating long-term policy changes” (2007). The authors study how entrepreneurs have responded to this increase in polarization and its implications for public policy.

Not only does group polarization impact all types of groups, from the social to the economic, but also it has “particular implications for insulated ‘outgroups’” (Sunstein, 1999, p. 21). Groups that are excluded by either coercion or choice from dialog with other groups become even more polarized and extreme (Sunstein, 1999; Turner et al., 1989).

The authors have engaged in an empirical analysis that no other paper has addressed. This paper summarized the Parler sample data set and analyzed various themes associated with the events of January 6th, namely President Trump and MAGA themes and Vice President Pence. The analysis demonstrated a dramatic increase in negative sentiment and emotion related to Vice President Mike Pence after January 6th as well as mixed support for President Trump and an increase in disgust before and after the Capitol riot.

The purpose of this paper is to review the current LIS literature for document supply and related topics.

The paper is based on the reading of about 150 journals, reports and web sites.

This study finds that the prices of the big deals are under greater attack than ever. Alternatives are being actively explored. A more assertive approach is being adopted to expand the role of open access. Resistance is growing, particularly in the UK, to the publishers' ability to override copyright law in their contracts with libraries.

This is the only regular literature review that focuses on document supply.

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.