Join our free online event with Dr Alejandro Estudillo, Thursday evening at 6pm.
An ESRC Festival of Social Science 2021 event
What is it about?
We judge so much from faces – attributes like age, gender and identity, as well as how someone is feeling emotionally. So what happens when faces are partially covered? The COVID-19 pandemic has changed a lot about how humans communicate and interact with each other, one of the most significant of which is the wearing of face masks.
Dr Alejandro Estudillo has been studying how face masks affect how we perceive faces – and what this can tell us about the psychology of face perception in general. At this online event we’ll learn what this means for social interactions, but also issues of security, eyewitness identification and face-recognition technology.
Everyone is welcome to join us online from 6pm, where you can chat to each other and type questions for Alejandro, or just sit back and enjoy the talk. Either way, your microphone and camera will be disabled so everyone can focus on the speaker.
What’s on offer?
This talk will be held online, and will take about 1 hour. Dr Estudillo will explore his research, and you will have the opportunity to interact, test your knowledge and share your thoughts throughout the talk.
Come along to support our postgraduate research community at the Annual Postgraduate Research Conference, Wednesday 1 December 2021, 09:30 – 17:30. Oral presentations will be hosted on Zoom.
You are also invited to FG06 during the day to network, and for PGRs we will be offering the opportunity to get a free professional headshot during the lunch break.
There will be a virtual poster exhibition on the BU website and across the blogs during the week of the conference with further pre-recorded presentations available to view at your leisure.
The full brochure, with all presenters and presentation types, will be circulated shortly. In the meantime, please see the live presentation conference programme for the day below.
It would be great to see many of you there. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to get in touch: pgconference@bournemouth.ac.uk.
Natalie Stewart (Research Skills & Development Officer), Doctoral College.
We’ll hear from Dr Mel Hughes and colleagues about PPI (Public and Patient Involvement in Research) and a new internal funding stream for public engagement.
Public engagement with research intersects with a number of other ways of communicating your research or involving people in it. At our next PER Network meeting we’ll look at one of those other ways, welcoming Dr Mel Hughes, Academic Lead for the BU PIER (Public Involvement in Education and Research) Partnership, Rachel Jury, PIER member, and Angela Warren, PIER coordinator who will provide a brief introduction to the what, why and how of public involvement in research, or PPI.
This is an opportunity to learn about different approaches to public involvement, the benefits to your research and the pitfalls to avoid. This session is co-designed and facilitated with a representative from the PIER partnership (Public Involvement in Education and Research), who has extensive experience of sharing their lived experience expertise in research studies. There will be opportunity at the end to ask your questions about public involvement.
Bournemouth University is involved in a wider collaboration which organises the Advanced Dementia Research Conference (ADRC 2021). The conference is delivered online today and tomorrow (19th-20th November). ADRC 2021 is led by Dr. Brijesh Sathian, BU Visiting Faculty, based in the Geriatric Medicine Department, Rumailah Hospital, in Doha, Qatar. Saturday morning Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen will be delivering a session on qualitative research, preceded by a session on mixed-methods research from Prof. Padam Simkhada, also BU Visiting Faculty, from the University of Huddersfield.
The programme shown is for Day 2 tomorrow. All sessions today and tomorrow are free to attend! You can register here! Please, note that advertised times a Qatar times which three hours ahead of the UK at the moment.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
CMMPH (Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health)
Come along to support our postgraduate research community at the Annual Postgraduate Research Conference, Wednesday 1 December 2021, 09:30 – 17:30. Oral presentations will be hosted on Zoom.
You are also invited to come along to FG06 during the day to network, and for PGRs we will be offering the opportunity to get a free professional headshot during the lunch break.
There will be a virtual poster exhibition on the BU website and across the blogs during the week of the conference with further pre-recorded presentations available to view at your leisure.
The full brochure, with all presenters and presentation types, will be circulated in the next few weeks. In the meantime, please see the conference programme for the day below.
It would be great to see many of you there. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to get in touch: pgconference@bournemouth.ac.uk.
Natalie Stewart (Research Skills & Development Officer), Doctoral College.
At BU we promote and celebrate the work done to engage public audiences with BU research.
The public engagement with research team in Research Development and Support (RDS) can help promote your event to relevant audiences through our regular newsletter and social media channels. It also helps us to stay informed on the public engagement work being carried out by BU.
Please note: we are keen to promote BU public engagement with research activity wherever possible, but completing this form does not guarantee that we will be able to promote your event. To be considered for inclusion, your event or activity must be;
Focused on BU research, either solely or as part of a wider programme.
Events or activities that do not involve BU research, such as marketing or recruitment events, will not be accepted.
Intended for and open to non-academic audiences, either entirely or as a portion of the audience.
Submitted, at the latest, in the first two weeks of the month preceding the event.
For example, an event taking place in June should be submitted via the form any time before 14 May. This is due to lead times on producing and sending the newsletter.
Event descriptions may be edited for consistency in style with other content. If you have any questions about this process, please contact us.
At Café Scientifique, you can explore the latest ideas in science and technology in a relaxed online setting. Enjoy listening to a short talk before engaging in debate and discussion with our guest speaker and audience.
We’ll be joined by Dr Marin Cvitanovicon Tuesday 7 December from 7.00pm until 8.30pm.
Wildfires and Us
Every year wildfires engulf 3.4 million square kilometres of Earth’s surface – approximately the size of India. These fires have massive economic, social and environmental impacts and, due to climate change, are expected to increase in the future. However, wildfires are also a naturally occurring global phenomenon that many ecosystems depend on.
Join us to discover how scientific research at Bournemouth University could fill in some of the gaps in this complicated relationship between humans and wildfires.
BU Social Entrepreneurs Forum (BUSEF) is proud to announce our newest members of the team, our advisory board consisting of Bournemouth University members of staff- Ian Jones, Head of External Engagement; Lois Betts, Sustainability Manager; Stacy Wall, Senior Lecturer In Digital Advertising And Marketing Communications, Faculty of Medica Communications (FMC). With this stellar team in place, we are humbled to be supporting, through mentorship and other support, BU Eco Entrepreneurs Competition 2022 with Santander.
Lois Betts, Sustainability Manager at BU
Ian Jones, Head of External Engagement, BU
Stacy Wall, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Media Communications, BU
Background
BUSEF was set up in June 2019 by three individuals who are passionate about the power of social entrepreneurs in changing society- Sukanya Ayatakshi-Endow, BU; Gwyn Jones, Association of Sustainability Practitioners and Alun Williams, Rotarian.
Our Vision
To champion social entrepreneurshipin BCP/Dorset.
Aims
Support and develop social entrepreneurship within BCP/Dorset
Encourage businesses generally to consider adopting a social entrepreneurship approach
Promote and encourage social entrepreneurship amongst students
Objectives
Support and develop social entrepreneurship within organisations in Dorset
Encourage businesses generally to consider adopting a social entrepreneurship approach
Promote and encourage social entrepreneurship among students through
Encourage BU students to undertake projects/placements/careers with social entrepreneurs
Establish BUSEF as an independent, sustainable, organisation
Since its inception, BUSEF has explored numerous avenues to support the development and growth of socially focused businesses in the community, including student-led projects at BU; showcase events including the Global Entrepreneurship week events – two in 2019 and two in 2020 on Women’s Entrepreneurship in Covid-19 and Refugee Entrepreneurs and Covid-19; numerous skills-based sessions supporting the specific needs of individuals and businesses who aspire to or identify with social entrepreneurship.
Through numerous student projects at Bournemouth University Business School and Faculty of Media Communications, BUSEF has worked closely with many local small businesses and purpose-led organisations in supporting them with digital and social media marketing outputs; and business model innovation and business planning support. Some of the projects, our students in the final year of their study, have worked on, include Musica; The Poole Powerhouse Project; We Do Ethical; Vita Nova and many more. Kelly Levell, Founder of We Do Ethical, said ” students brought in tremendous value added to our vision and gave us wider perspectives“. Stacy Wall, whose final year students in FMC, who worked with B.O.L.D Lewy Body Dementia project, said , “An exceptional piece of work that was developed by our 2019/20 final year Communication & Media students was the piece that I shared at a BUSEF event that was developed for B.O.L.D. Colour & Sound”. The Poole PowerHouse Team capped it all up by adding , “we are extremely grateful to all the students for their engagement, research and insights into our project. They have all given us useful data, ideas and cause for thought”.
Through the pandemic and its associated lockdown, BUSEF continued supporting social entrepreneurship through knowledge exchange projects via BU courses and other events and workshops. BUSEF was an exemplar in BUBS Small Business Charter Accreditation application (2021) and included in the BU Race Charter Application (2020-21).
With the experiential knowledge and observed impact of BUSEF on social entrepreneurship and on education, BUSEF is now poised to grow and is seeking additional support on numerous levels. With our new advisory board, BUSEF aims to create a lasting impact on social entrepreneurship in the region through meaningful collaborations and projects.
If you are interested in the work of BUSEF and want to know more or get involved, please contact Sukanya Ayatakshi-Endow at the following email address: sayatakshi@bournemouth.ac.uk
At Café Scientifique, you can explore the latest ideas in science and technology in a relaxed online setting. Enjoy listening to a short talk before engaging in debate and discussion with our guest speaker and audience.
We’ll be joined by Dr Luciana Esteveson Tuesday 2 November from 7.00pm until 8.30pm.
Climate change and coastal flooding – relocate before it’s too late?
For an increasing number of people, coastal flooding and erosion are a real threat to property, the local economy and, in some cases, life. With the effects of climate change, this threat is quickly growing.
Should coastal communities at risk be relocated before they are forced from their homes? Or could engineering and nature-based solutions provide the defences they need?
Join us to discover the challenges faced by coastal communities in an uncertain climate future, and what society could do to address them.
What’s in it for us? An introduction to Public and Patient Involvement from the public’s perspective
Sign up for the new RKEDF online interactive workshop to find out about getting the public involved with your research.
Date:Tuesday 19 October 11-12:30pm
This short workshop offers an engaging introduction to the what, why and how of public involvement in research. It is co-designed and facilitated by Rachel Jury and Tim Worner who have extensive experience of sharing their lived experience expertise in research studies, Dr Mel Hughes, Academic Lead for the BU PIER (Public Involvement in Education and Research) Partnership and Angela Warren, PIER involvement coordinator. The workshop will cover the different approaches to public involvement; the public contributor role; the benefits of public involvement and what pitfalls to avoid.
The workshop will also provide an opportunity for researchers to learn about public involvement and to consider this from the perspective of experts by experience and in relation to their own research. This will be an interactive workshop with opportunities for researchers to share and discuss ideas and plans.
What is public involvement in research?
Public involvement in research means research that is done ‘with’ or ‘by’ the public, not ‘to’, ‘about’ or ‘for’ them. It means that patients or other people with relevant experience contribute to how research is designed, conducted and disseminated.
Intended learning outcomes of this session
Develop knowledge and understanding of different models of public involvement
Consider the benefits of public involvement for a research study and all those involved
Identify best practice in designing and conducting public involvement in research
Who is this session aimed at?
Researchers at any career stage or level who are actively considering or developing a public involvement strategy for their own research or wish to find out more.
• Individuals or teams whose educational research work has shown demonstrable public engagement or impact
• Practitioners or researchers whose work is grounded in educational research and has led to demonstrable public engagement or impact
• Those whose activities have boosted public engagement with educational research or its impact, or whose efforts have increased recognition and support for education research in public
Two awards, worth £500 each are available. One is given to an individual’s research and the other for a team of researchers. The winners will also have a featured article in BERA’s magazine.
This award is designed to support early-career researchers who show exceptional talent in both research and public engagement, emphasising and demonstrating the importance of academic research and creative thought at a time of rapid political and societal change.
The British Academy, in collaboration with the Wolfson Foundation emphasises the importance of award-holders communicating their plans and results to a broad audience. It is expected that six awards will be offered and that they will continue to participate with future cohorts building a network of outstanding researchers.
Funding
The grant maximum is £130,000 across three years. Awards can be used flexibly: at least £90,000 for time buy out, and up to £40,000 for research and travel expenses and dissemination of findings.
The funding is expected to be divided:
First, to buy out time of the academic duties of the award-holder in order to focus on their research goals.
Secondly, for travel and public engagement across the three years of the award to help with research costs and to undertake dissemination of the findings from the fellowship research locally, nationally and globally.
Eligibility
Applicants must have a full-time or part-time permanent or fixed term post that covers the length of the award (three years) at a UK university or other research institution, such as a museum or gallery, which can provide a suitable environment and support for applicants.
Applicants should have research, teaching and other related duties from which they would need to be released from in order to heighten their focus on the research and engagement supported through the fellowship.
Applicants should be within seven years of completion of their doctorate, though applications are also welcome from those researchers who have taken time out since the completion of their PhD for maternity/paternity/adoption leave, for caring responsibilities or for periods of illness.
Applications are welcome from museums and galleries, including but not necessarily limited to those with Independent Research Organisation (IRO) status.
At BU we promote and celebrate the work done to engage public audiences with BU research.
The public engagement with research team in Research Development and Support (RDS) can help promote your event to relevant audiences through our regular newsletter and social media channels. It also helps us to stay informed on the public engagement work being carried out by BU.
Please note: we are keen to promote BU public engagement with research activity wherever possible, but completing this form does not guarantee that we will be able to promote your event. To be considered for inclusion, your event or activity must be;
Focused on BU research, either solely or as part of a wider programme.
Events or activities that do not involve BU research, such as marketing or recruitment events, will not be accepted.
Intended for and open to non-academic audiences, either entirely or as a portion of the audience.
Submitted, at the latest, in the first two weeks of the month preceding the event.
For example, an event taking place in June should be submitted via the form any time before 14 May. This is due to lead times on producing and sending the newsletter.
Event descriptions may be edited for consistency in style with other content. If you have any questions about this process, please contact us.
Dr Sue Thomas shares her experience of presenting at a BU Café Scientifique event on 6 July 2021.
For my talk at Café Scientifique I took a fresh look at the topic of my 2017 book “Nature and Wellbeing in the Digital Age: How to feel better without logging off”, which has new relevance in the age of digital wellbeing during COVID-19. This continued the theme of my previous book, “Technobiophilia: Nature and Cyberspace”, which looked at the prevalence online of nature-derived metaphors and imagery, and which I discussed at Café Sci in 2013.
My talk topic – Technobiophilia
Intuitively we all know that Nature is good for us. Research has backed that up, showing that contact with nature can support emotional wellbeing and better concentration, as well as reduce stress and lower heart rate and blood pressure. Sometimes even simple psychological connectedness to nature can produce the same effects.
Biophilia is a hypothesized hidden programme which runs in the background of our lives. The term was first coined by Erich Fromm but became more popular when the eminent biologist EO Wilson described it as “the innate attraction to life and lifelike processes”. Wilson believes that biophilia may have the ability to lie dormant for periods of time until something triggers it into action again.
The notion of biophilia led to my own definition of ‘technobiophilia’ as “the innate attraction to life and lifelike processes as they appear in technology”. Technobiophilia connects our lives in nature with our lives in the digital, and this process has been very evident during the Covid-19 Lockdowns. Here are some examples:
In October 2020, the Metro newspaper declared that “Nature documentaries are ‘perfect lockdown viewing and make people happier’ in an article about the TV programme “Seven Worlds, One Planet” which highlighted the story of the last two northern white rhinoceros left alive on the planet.
On Instagram, thousands of RSPB #breakfastbirdwatch watchers shared their photos. Sussex_sara posted “Is anyone else feeling in a state of suspended animation these days? 😕 Living alone, the only tangible sense I have of days passing are the changes in nature as our lives are put on hold.”
Country Life magazine, perhaps not the most techie of periodicals, listed the best live animal webcams to get you through lockdown. Their Top 3 were: Little penguins, Phillip Island Nature Parks, Australia; Folly Farm, Pembrokeshire (sheep, goats, newborn lambs) and Edinburgh Zoo (Panda cam, Penguin Cam, Koala Cam and Lion Cam)
The BBC launched a collaboration to bring virtual soundscapes of music and nature directly to audiences with Radio 3, 6 Music, and BBC Sounds, and also embarked on The Virtual Nature Experiment with The University of Exeter, a ground-breaking study exploring how virtual experiences of nature might impact wellbeing.
Nintendo relaunched its old online game “Animal Crossing” and it was soon dubbed ‘the game of the pandemic’. Slate Magazine said “Animal Crossers new and old found comfort in exerting control over their islands’ virtual terrain as the world outside grew more and more chaotic” and the MIT Technology Review reported that “Gentle, comforting games like Nintendo’s latest hit are perfect escapist entertainment, but they’re also helping us to connect in these strange times.”
This last observation was born out by a study conducted before the pandemic and published in 2020, which reported a significant increase of feelings of connectedness to the community after watching digital nature. Interestingly, they also found that tended nature scenes elicited more social aspirations than wild nature scenes.
In 2020, Natural England surveyed the changing relationship with nature during lockdown. It reported that 41% of people said that visiting natural spaces had become even more important to them than before. Also in 2020, in a study conducted before the pandemic, the University of Exeter found that the best way of delivering virtual nature for improving mood was computer-generated virtual reality, which proved more effective than high definition TV or 360° video.
During the lockdown pause, Nature was busy regenerating. As early as April 2020, carbon dioxide and nitrogen dioxide fell by up to 40%. Air traffic fell 50%. UK road traffic fell 70%. And during that year, wildlife came closer – wild goats wandered the empty streets of Llandudno, coyotes walked across the Golden Gate Bridge, there were deer in Washington DC, and wild boar in Spain and Italy. Everyone heard more bird song. By April 2021, marine noise pollution had decreased so much that the seas had become measurably quieter.
So, what has lockdown taught us about digital nature and wellbeing? It seems that we have learned that we can connect with nature in many different ways, both physically and digitally. We have been reminded that we can live more of our lives outdoors, and that nature can help connect our local communities.
But individual nature connection is not enough. Covid has taught (some of us) to better connect with nature, but has that process sedated us? Distracted us? Separated us even more from what else is happening? This year, floods and fires around the world have reminded us that there are other disasters too, most of them a result of the global warming.
While we in the First World are busy self-soothing with nature, many millions of people have no access to vaccines. In January 2021, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus WHO Director-General, warned “The world is on the brink of a catastrophic moral failure – and the price of this failure will be paid with lives and livelihoods in the world’s poorest countries.”
Of course, this moral failure can be seen in the climate emergency too. In his 2020 film ‘A Life on Our Planet’ David Attenborough delivered his Witness Statement and told the story of ‘our greatest mistake’. The film begins and ends in Chernobyl which, although still devoid of humans, has seen the return of many thriving animals and plants. This allows Attenborough to make his final message one of hope. ‘We have’, he says, ‘the opportunity to become a species in balance with nature’.
When my book ‘Technobiophilia: Nature and Cyberspace’ was published in 2013, some thought the idea of using technology to connect with nature was contradictory, even harmful. But the last 18 months of the pandemic have shown the benefits of nature in the digital age, for some of us at least. But there is much more work to do. Perhaps digital nature can play a part in helping humanity to finally, to quote Attenborough, “become a species in balance with nature” – if there is time.
My Café Scientifique experience
I enjoyed my second Café Scientifique session. It went very well and was followed by a lot of positive feedback and a lively exchange of ideas, which brought the July lecture to a successful conclusion, slightly over the scheduled two hours.
The audience asked some excellent questions and we were pleasantly able to deepen our exchanges. It was interesting to hear from those providing opportunities for engaging with digital nature, especially Radio Lento https://radiolento.podbean.com/ who produce entrancing virtual nature tours in the form of weekly sound postcards from beautiful places. Find them on Twitter @RadioLento where they regularly share some wonderful sounds. There was a lively exchange of views about the relative values of visual, audio, VR and analogue nature experiences, especially when created from the same sources.
It was a great experience with people from all over the world, including old friends. My talk was recorded and is available to watch on the Café Sci YouTube channel. I hope that it inspires you to think and act on the relationship between nature, digital nature and our well-being.
At Café Scientifique, you can explore the latest ideas in science and technology in a relaxed online setting. Enjoy listening to a short talk before engaging in debate and discussion with our guest speaker and audience.
We’ll be joined by Dr Ashok Patnaikon Tuesday 5 October from 7.00pm until 8.30pm.
The COVID-19 pandemic has worsened children’s mental health, which was already in decline. Researchers have observed increased levels of anxiety, depression and other psychological distress. However, children with poor mental health do not always receive the support they need from schools and mental health services.
Stormbreak is a new programme that combines simple, fun movements with well-being techniques such as talking therapies and mindfulness, to help children care for their mental health. Join us to discover what happened when Stormbreak was trialled in several local schools, and where it could go next.
We are delighted to announce the publication of Olympic and Paralympic Analysis 2020: Mega events, media, and the politics of sport
Edited by Daniel Jackson, Alina Bernstein, Michael Butterworth, Younghan Cho, Danielle Sarver Coombs, Michael Devlin and Chuka Onwumechili
Featuring 114 contributors from leading academics from around the world – including several from BU staff and PGR students – this publication captures the immediate thoughts, reflections, and insights from the 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games from the cutting edge of sport, communication and media research.
Published in the wake of the Tokyo 2020 Games, these contributions are short and accessible. Authors provide authoritative analysis of the Olympics and Paralympics, including research findings and new theoretical insights. Contributions come from a rich array of disciplinary influences, including media, communication studies, cultural studies, sociology, political science, and psychology.
1. The typhoon games (Toby Miller) 2. A green Olympic legacy for future generations? (Brett Hutchins and Ben Glasson) 3. The rise of critical consciousness in Japan: An intangible and unintended legacy of the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games (Koji Kobayashi) 4. Host city and mega-events: Olympic legacy in Japan (John Horne) 5. Lessons from Tokyo: the impact of the Paralympics in Japan (Dennis J. Frost) 6. Let’s play! Inspiring an inclusive mindset with a hands-on Paralympic experience for children and teenagers in Japan (Olga Kolotouchkina and Carmen Llorente-Barroso) 7. The Olympic & Paralympic sponsorship without category exclusivity: Background of sponsorship exclusivity in Olympic and Paralympic Games (OPG) (Shintaro Sato) 8. Power sharing: Olympic sponsorship and the athlete’s personal brand (Bettina Cornwell) 9. What happened to Rule 40 at Tokyo 2020? (John Grady) 10. The Olympic Games and ambush marketing via social media (Gashaw Abeza) 11. The soft power of the Olympics in the age of Covid 19 (J. Simon Rofe) 12. Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games, nationalism, identity and soft power (Gayle McPherson and Solomon Ilevbare) 13. Tokyo 2020, East Asian geopolitics and Olympic diplomacy (Jung Woo Lee) 14. Cultural programming at Tokyo 2020: the impossible Olympic festival city? (Beatriz Garcia) 15. Anti-sex beds? Fake news! : why this video went massively viral? (Maki Hirayama) 16. Counting cases, counting medals: Containing the Olympic contagion during the Tokyo Games (Courtney M. Cox) 17. Public relations as the key in the 2020 Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic Games (Argyro Elisavet Manoli and Sungkyung Kim) 18. The Tokyo 2020 Organizing Committee’s veil of effective public relations to help save itself and the start of the Games (Karen Hartman) 19. Environmental leadership showcased in the Olympic Games (Brian P. McCullough) 20. Simone Biles and prioritizing athlete well-being (Kathleen Bachynski) 21. Pride and burden of striving for perfection at the Olympics (Wycliffe Njonorai) 22. Deliver a medal or apologize: A daunting task imposed on Japanese Olympians (Hatsuko Itaya)
Section 2: Media Coverage & Representation
23. What place is this? Tokyo’s made-for-television Olympics (David Rowe) 24. How do we truly interpret the Tokyo Olympic ratings? (Andrew C. Billings) 25. ‘A Games like no other’: The demise of FTA live Olympic sport? (Raymond Boyle) 26. The fleeting nature of an Olympic meme: Virality and IOC TV rights (Merryn Sherwood) 27. Tokyo 2021: the TV Olympics (Peter English) 28. The Olympic Channel: insights on its distinctive role in Tokyo 2020 (Xavier Ramon) 29. Reshaping the Olympics media coverage through innovation (José Luis Rojas Torrijos) 30. Temporality of emotionalizing athletes (Sae Oshima) 31. New Olympic sports: the mediatization of action sports through the Olympic Games 2020 Tokyo (Thomas Horky) 32. Media wins medal for coverage of athletes as people, instead of entertainers (Ryan Broussard) 33. Reporting at a distance. Stricter working conditions and demands on sports journalists during the Olympics (Jana Wiske) 34. Nigeria: Olympic Games a mystery for rural dwellers in Lagos (Unwana Akpan) 35. Tokyo 2020: A look through the screen of Brazilian television (William Douglas de Almeida and Katia Rubio) 36. Equestrian sports in media through hundred Olympic years. A roundtrip from focus to shade and back again? (Susanna Hedenborg and Aage Radmann) 37. An Olympic utopia: separating politics and sport. Primary notes after analyzing the opening ceremony media coverage of mainstream Spanish sport newspapers (Xavier Ginesta) 38. “Everything seemed very complicated”: Journalist experiences of covering the Tokyo 2020 Paralympic Games (Veronika Mackova) 39. “A ceremony for television”: the Tokyo 2020 media ritual (Andressa Fontes Guimarães-Mataruna, Adriano Lopes de Souza, Renan Petersen-Wagner, Doiara Silva dos Santos, Leonardo José Mataruna-Dos-Santos and Otávio Guimarães Tavares da Silva) 40. The paradox of the parade of nations: A South Korean network’s coverage of the opening ceremony at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics (Ji-Hyun Ahn) 41. Simone Biles, journalistic authority, and the ideology of sports news (Michael Mirer) 42. Representing high performance: Brazilian sports journalists and mass communication professionals discuss their philosophies on producing progressive Paralympic coverage (Fernanda Silva and John Watson) 43. How digital content creators are shaping meanings about world class para-athletes (Carolyn Jackson-Brown) 44. Is the Paralympic Games a second-class event? (Tatiane Hilgemberg) 45. Representations of gender in media coverage of the Tokyo 2020 Paralympic Games (Toni Bruce) 46. Reshaping the superhuman to the super ordinary: Observations on the Tokyo 2021 Paralympic games through Australian broadcasting coverage (Simon Darcy and Tracey J. Dickson) 47. Super heroes among us: A brief discussion of using the superhero genre to promote Paralympic Games and athletes (Cody T. Havard) 48. ”Unity in Diversity” – The varying media representations of female Olympic athletes (Riikka Turtiainen) 49. Why we need to see the “ugly” in women’s sports (Erin Whiteside) 50. Twitter conversations on Indian female athletes in Tokyo (Kulveen Trehan) 51. Between sexualization and de-sexualization: the representation of female athletes in Tokyo 2020 (Jörg-Uwe Nieland) 52. Megan Rapinoe: The scary Bear for many Americans? (Molly Yanity) 53. Representations of gender in the live broadcast of the Tokyo Olympics (Toni Bruce) 54. “The gender-equal games” vs “The IOC is failing black women”: narratives of progress and failure of the 2020 Tokyo Olympics (Cheryl Cooky) 55. The male and female sports journalists divide on the Twittersphere during Tokyo 2020 (Haim Hagay and Alina Bernstein)
Section 3: Performance & Identity
56. ‘The Games they are a-changin’’: footnotes on Olympic athletics in transition post-Tokyo 2020 (Christopher D. Tulloch) 57. Tokyo 2020: athlete welfare and coping with new anxieties (Emma Kavanagh and Keith D. Parry) 58. Tokyo Olympics: When athletes are faced with the impossible (Dikaia Chatziefstathiou) 59. Twitter helps normalize discussions on mental health beyond athletes (Yuya Kiuchi) 60. Communication of athlete risk with head injuries in the 2020 Olympics (David Cassilio) 61. Racist slurs, stubborn animals, and colonial fear (Karsten Senkbeil) 62. Tokyo 2021 and the LGBTQ athlete (Rory Magrath) 63. The media coverage of the Tokyo 2021 Paralympic Games: Visibility, progress and politics (Emma Pullen, Laura Mora and Michael Silk) 64. It’s complicated: Disability media and the Paralympic Games (Katie Ellis) 65. Companies escape attention as debate on women’s uniform rages (Steve Bien-Aime, Melanie Formentin and Michelle Crowley) 66. Policing the uniforms and sportswear of Tokyo 2020: Commercialism in the name of competition (Linda Fuller) 67. Despite “Gender Equal Olympics,” focus still on what women are wearing (Adrianne Grubic) 68. Black women and Tokyo 2020 games: a continued legacy of racial insensitivity and exclusion (Manase Kudzai Chiweshe) 69. Naomi Osaka Bearing the Torch for a Mixed Race Japan (Jennifer McClearen) 70. Bodies of change: Women’s artistic gymnastics in Tokyo 2021 (Carly Stewart and Natalie Barker-Ruchti) 71. How the female athletes of the Tokyo Olympics are reframing the way we think about motherhood (Kim Bissell and Tyana Ellis) 72. When women aren’t women enough to compete (Anne Osborne)
Section 4: Fandom & National Identity
73. Home advantage in the Summer Olympic Games: evidence from Tokyo 2020 and prospects for Paris 2024 (Girish Ramchandani) 74. Fans as MVP, or the need for sensuous audiences in sport (Meredith Bagley) 75. Silence in the stands: Does it matter for fans? (Dorothy Collins) 76. Red, white, and rivalry: A brief discussion of United States rivalry at the Tokyo Olympic Games (Cody Havard) 77. Empty stadiums and the other sites of Olympic fandom (Lou Antolihao) 78. Sports betting and the branded purity of the Olympics (Jason Lopez) 79. National and ethnic Chinese identities on the Indonesian badminton court (Friederike Trotier) 80. How much is too much home-nation focus in Olympic coverage? (Andrew Billings) 81. The Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games: British imperial identity affirmed (Edward Loveman) 82. Communicating corporate social responsibility at the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games (Jake Kucek) 83. Americans on ideological left more engaged in Summer Olympics (Darin W. White) 84. South Korea’s changing status and perspective on Japan (Seok Lee) 85. The Men’s 1500 metres: Not quite erasing the ghosts of history (Garry Whannel) 86. Ghana: Poor local organizing, and absence of football team dampens interest (Ernest Acheampong and Ralph Frimpong) 87. Historical disputes, national identity, and the South Korea-Japan summit that did not happen (Guy Podoler) 88. Pop culture diplomacy: Japan’s use of videogames, anime to promote the Olympics and appeal to younger audiences (Adolfo Gracia Vázquez) 89. At the intersection of COVID-19 and Tokyo Olympics 2020: Vlogs and the expression of Chinese nationalist sentiments (Tianwei Ren) 90. Fandom and digital media during the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games: A Brazilian perspective using @TimeBrasil Twitter data (Renan Petersen-Wagner, Andressa Fontes Guimarães-Mataruna, Adriano Lopes de Souza, Doiara Silva dos Santos, Leonardo José Mataruna-Dos-Santos and Otávio Guimarães Tavares da Silva) 91. National hierarchy in Israeli Olympic discourses (Ilan Tamir)
Section 5: Politics of Sport
92. At Tokyo Games, athlete activism takes front row seat despite IOC’s attempts to silence athletes (Yannick Kluch, Nina Siegfried, Mary A. Hums and Eli A. Wolff) 93. Transgender participation at the Tokyo Olympics: Laurel Hubbard and a media tempest (Holly Thorpe, Shannon Scovel and Monica Nelson) 94. The sacred space of the Olympics (Anthony Cavaiani) 95. Media frames and the ‘humanity’ of athletes (Adam Rugg) 96. We want reform (Shaun M. Anderson) 97. In search of voice: behind the remarkable lack of protest at the Tokyo Paralympics (Filippo Trevisan) 98. The revolt of the Black athlete continues (Letisha Engracia Cardoso Brown) 99. WeThe15 shines a spotlight on disability activism (Damian Haslett and Brett Smith) 100. Will #WeThe85 finally include #WeThe15 as a legacy of Tokyo 2020? (Simon Darcy and Tracey J. Dickson) 101. Activism starts with representation: IPC Section 2.2 and the Paralympics as a platform for social justice (Nina Siegfried, Dr. Yannick Kluch, Mary A. Hums and Eli A. Wolff) 102. The colonization of the athletic body (Billy Hawkins) 103. Forced hijab and female athletes in postrevolutionary Iran (Shahrzad Enderle) 104. Pay equity & the Tokyo 2020 Olympics (Ellen Staurowsky) 105. Equal remuneration for a Paralympian (Mark Brooke) 106. Rooting for U.S. Olympians: Patriotism or polarization? (Amy Bass) 107. Anti-Olympics activism (Jules Boykoff) 108. The new kids on the block: Action sports at the Tokyo Olympic Games (Holly Thorpe and Belinda Wheaton) 109. Is there space on the podium for us all? (Jan Burns) 110. Softball’s field of Olympic dreams (Pamela Creedon) 111. Now you see them, now you don’t: Absent nations at Tokyo Paralympic Games (Nancy Quinn and Laura Misener) 112. The Tokyo Paralympics as a platform for change? Falling well short of sport and media ‘opportunities for all’ (Gerard Goggin and Brett Hutchins) 113. Tokyo 2020 Paralympics: inspirations and legacies (David McGillivray) 114. What social media outrage about Sha’Carri Richardson’s suspension could mean for the future of anti-doping policies (Natalie Brown-Devlin, Gary Wilcox, and Kristen Leah Sussman)
Dr. Ann Luce, Associate Professor in Journalism and Communication in FMC and her colleague, Dr. Ravivarma Rao Panirselvam, a psychiatrist in the Ministry of Health at Hospital Miri were honoured by The Honorable Dato Sri Hajah Fatimah Abdullah, Minister of Welfare, Community Wellbeing, Women, Family and Childhood Development in Sarawak, Malaysia earlier today (September 10th) for their work in creating guidelines for police on how to speak with journalists about suicide deaths and suicide attempts.
The guidelines were launched at a World Suicide Prevention Day event where policy makers, Members of Parliament and the Sarawak State Assembly learned about suicide prevention and discussed the decriminalisation of suicide within the country.
The guidelines, and an accompanying Z-fold flyer for police duty belts, have been distributed to officers within the Royal Malaysia Police in Sarawak. The guidelines advise police to identify a single point of contact (spokesperson) to discuss suicides with journalists and advise them on what type of information they should share with journalists and how to do this safely and responsibly. The guidance also states that police should avoid talking about specific suicide methods and locations of deaths. The guidelines also advise police to provide helpline information so journalists can educate the general population that suicide is a public health issue and not a criminal one.
While Malaysia’s crude suicide rate is about 5.6 per 100,000 inhabitants and below the global crude rate of 10.6 per 100,000 people, suicide rates in Malaysia have been steadily climbing since 2010. With only one psychiatrist for every 200,000 residents in the country, Malaysia falls short of the World Health Organisation recommendation of one psychiatrist to 10,000 residents. Coupled with social stigma regarding mental health and growing mental health problems amongst young people, there is a push within the country to now decriminalise suicide.
Malaysia is believed to be one of about 20 countries around the world that still treats suicide as an illegal act. There are a further 20 countries which follow Islamic or Sharia Law where suicide or suicide attempts are illegal and can be punished with jail sentences.
In partnership with the British Psychological Society (BPS), the summit aims to equip practicing mental health professionals with the most up-to-date, advanced knowledge and treatment options on suicide prevention.
With suicide rates amongst medical professionals some of the highest in the UK, Dr. Luce will share early findings from her most recent research here in Dorset on how suicide is stigmatised amongst mental health professionals, the attitudes and barriers to seeking help within mental healthcare Trusts and what Trusts need to do to make the workplace safer for mental health staff.
BU staff can login below:
Other services
Don’t miss a post!
Subscribe for the BU Research Digest, delivered freshly every day.
Apply now to take part in the 2025 ESRC Festival of Social Science
Photo exhibition happening now at Talbot Campus – Ageing in a digital world
A compassionate approach to Simulation: new national blog post published
The Future of Surface Protection: Nanocomposite Coatings Explained
MSCA Postdoctoral Fellowships 2025
Horizon Europe info days 2025
Update on UKRO services
European research project exploring use of ‘virtual twins’ to better manage metabolic associated fatty liver disease