Examining University E-mails Surrounding the 2020 U.S. Elections

• In Event: Electoral Engagement

Abstract

Every presidential election year carries the weight and excitement of uncertainty. In 2020, that weight felt particularly heavy in the United States. Political polarization and negative partisanship hit a fever pitch during a contentious presidential election, with many pundits, journalists, and academics saying this level of hyperpartisanship was unsustainable and dangerous to democracy (Drutman, 2020). There were countless protests in the wake of George Floyd’s murder calling for criminal justice reform, all while cities instituted curfews and brought in the National Guard (Taylor, 2021). The COVID-19 pandemic brought with it a seemingly unending amount of uncertainty, anxiety, and grief, causing disruption in almost every corner of daily life. Amidst this chaotic environment, many college students were navigating campus closures and pivots to online classes to protect their health and safety, all while figuring out how to register to vote and safely cast potentially their first ballot. To cut through the turmoil and ambiguity, students may have turned to their universities for guidance. As college students, it is already a norm to seek out information from their university. With the health of the nation on the line, both figuratively and literally, what guidance did universities offer their students in the run up to the 2020 election? This study addresses this question with a quantitative content analysis of university e-mails sent to students leading up to the US 2020 election.

Numerous studies have examined what factors affect college student turnout, often depending on surveys and experiments that account for students’ personal backgrounds and test message content, source, or mode of delivery (see Bennion & Laughlin, 2018; Bennion & Nickerson, 2011, 2016, 2018, 2021; Holbein & Hillygus, 2020; Kumler & Whittaker, 2020; Teresi & Michelson, 2015; Ulbig & Waggener, 2011). To date, no study has conducted a systematic content analysis of what messages college students receive from their universities leading up to an election. Such analysis is important for three reasons. First, there is descriptive value in establishing a benchmark for what universities are communicating to their students about voting and civic engagement. With this benchmark established, subsequent experiments and audience reception research can test the effects of themes that were present in students’ information diets. Second, college is a formative time in young adults’ lives and research shows that messages and experiences in college can affect civic engagement (e.g., Barnhardt et al, 2012; Shulmand & Levine, 2012). It is important, then, to understand what messages universities are giving students during these crucial years and whether they align with noted best practices. Third, colleges, and education in general, are embroiled in the hyperpartisanship recently sweeping America, epitomized by past president Donald Trump’s tweet, “Too many Universities and School Systems are about Radical Left Indoctrination, not Education” (Santucci, 2020). Considering recent ideological charges, the political volatility of 2020, and America’s continued backsliding in Freedom House’s democracy rating (Repucci & Slipowitz, 2020), it is valuable to synthesize what messages universities were providing their students amidst this turmoil. How were universities helping students navigate this instability and enact civic engagement?

To address this overarching question, this study is rooted in scholarship on young voter turnout and education’s role in civic engagement, with a focus on relevant barriers for college students and how colleges may overcome those barriers in their messaging. This examination is guided by two research questions: What themes were universities using in their messages about voting and elections leading up to the 2020 election? (RQ1) How and to what extent did themes vary based on a university’s social environment (e.g., state’s ideological slant)? (RQ2)

Author

• Lindsey Meeks, University of Oklahoma