Book Bans in American Libraries: Impact of Politics on Inclusive Content Consumption

References

• Ackerberg DA (2001) Empirically distinguishing informative and prestige effects of advertising. RAND J. Econom. 32(2):316–333.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal S, Sen A (2022) Antiracist curriculum and digital platforms: Evidence from Black Lives Matter. Management Sci. 68(4):2932–2948.Link, Google Scholar
• Ahluwalia R, Burnkrant RE, Unnava HR (2000) Consumer response to negative publicity: The moderating role of commitment. J. Marketing Res. 37(2):203–214.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berger J, Sorensen AT, Rasmussen SJ (2010) Positive effects of negative publicity: When negative reviews increase sales. Marketing Sci. 29(5):815–827.Link, Google Scholar
• Berkes E, Nencka P (2021) Knowledge access: The effects of Carnegie Libraries on innovation. Preprint, submitted December 27, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3629299.Google Scholar
• Borah A, Tellis GJ (2016) Halo (spillover) effects in social media: Do product recalls of one brand hurt or help rival brands? J. Marketing Res. 53(2):143–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borusyak K, Jaravel X, Spiess J (2021) Revisiting event study designs: Robust and efficient estimation. Preprint, submitted August 27, https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.12419.Google Scholar
• Bursztyn L, Kolstad JT, Rao A, Tebaldi P, Yuchtman N (2022) Political adverse selection. NBER Working Paper No. w30214, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Callaway B, Sant’Anna PH (2021) Difference-in-differences with multiple time periods. J. Econometrics 225(2):200–230.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Foerstel HN (2002) Banned in the USA: A Reference Guide to Book Censorship in Schools and Public Libraries (Greenwood Publishing Group, Westport, CT).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fujiwara T, Müller K, Schwarz C (2021) The effect of social media on elections: Evidence from the United States. NBER Working Paper 28849, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Gavigan K, Pribesh S, Dickinson G (2010) Fixed or flexible schedule? Schedule impacts and school library circulation. Library Inform. Sci. Res. 32(2):131–137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilpin G, Karger E, Nencka P (2021) The returns to public library investment. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Working Paper WP-2021-06, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Chicago.Google Scholar
• Goncalves MS, Langrock I, LaViolette J, Spoon K (2024) Book bans in political context: Evidence from us schools. PNAS Nexus 3(6):pgae197Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gordon BR, Hartmann WR (2013) Advertising effects in presidential elections. Marketing Sci. 32(1):19–35.Link, Google Scholar
• Gordon BR, Hartmann WR (2016) Advertising competition in presidential elections. Quant. Marketing Econom. 14:1–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jansen SC, Martin B (2015) The Streisand effect and censorship backfire. Internat. J. Commun. 9:656–671.Google Scholar
• Kan Y, Liu Y, Ananthakrishnan UM, Tan Y (2024) One size fits all? Informational accessibility and inclusivity in online platforms. Preprint, submitted May 28, 2024, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4844630.Google Scholar
• Karger E (2021) The long-run effect of public libraries on children: Evidence from the early 1900s. Preprint, submitted January 27, 2021, https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/e8k7p.Google Scholar
• Kempf E, Tsoutsoura M (2021) Partisan professionals: Evidence from credit rating analysts. J. Finance 76(6):2805–2856.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liaukonytė J, Tuchman A, Zhu X (2023) Frontiers: Spilling the beans on political consumerism: Do social media boycotts and buycotts translate to real sales impact? Marketing Sci. 42(1):11–25.Link, Google Scholar
• Mach M (2022) Streisand effect in the context of the right to be forgotten. Eur. Stud. 9(1):110–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marthews A, Tucker CE (2017) Government surveillance and internet search behavior. Preprint, submitted March 15, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2412564.Google Scholar
• Mathur A, Wang A, Schwemmer C, Hamin M, Stewart BM, Narayanan A (2023) Manipulative tactics are the norm in political emails: Evidence from 300K emails from the 2020 US election cycle. Big Data Soc. 10(1):20539517221145371.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mumma KS (2024) Politics and children’s books: Evidence from school library collections. Amer. Educational Res. J. 61(5):883–914.Google Scholar
• Petrova M, Sen A, Yildirim P (2021) Social media and political contributions: The impact of new technology on political competition. Management Sci. 67(5):2997–3021.Link, Google Scholar
• Reimers I, Waldfogel J (2021) Digitization and pre-purchase information: The causal and welfare impacts of reviews and crowd ratings. Amer. Econom. Rev. 111(6):1944–1971.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reimers IC, Waldfogel J (2022) The first sale doctrine and the digital challenge to public libraries. NBER Working Paper 30392, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Schoenmueller V, Netzer O, Stahl F (2023) Frontiers: Polarized America: From political polarization to preference polarization. Marketing Sci. 42(1):48–60.Link, Google Scholar
• Shipilov AV, Greve HR, Rowley TJ (2019) Is all publicity good publicity? The impact of direct and indirect media pressure on the adoption of governance practices. Strategic Management J. 40(9):1368–1393.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Soberman D, Sadoulet L (2007) Campaign spending limits and political advertising. Management Sci. 53(10):1521–1532.Link, Google Scholar
• Socal MP, Wang Y, Plummer E, Anderson GF, Bai G (2024) Spending on dual over-the-counter and prescription drugs in the Medicare Part D program. JAMA 331(1):72–75.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stolle D, Micheletti M (2013) Political Consumerism: Global Responsibility in Action (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stolle D, Hooghe M, Micheletti M (2005) Politics in the supermarket: Political consumerism as a form of political participation. Internat. Political Sci. Rev. 26(3):245–269.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sun L, Abraham S (2021) Estimating dynamic treatment effects in event studies with heterogeneous treatment effects. J. Econometrics 225(2):175–199.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang H, Overby E (2023) Do political differences inhibit market transactions? An investigation in the context of online lending. Management Sci. 69(8):4685–4706.Link, Google Scholar
• Wang K, Lu S (2022) Corporate political positioning and sales: Evidence from a natural experiment. Preprint, submitted May 3, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4084106.Google Scholar
• Zhang S, Lee D, Singh PV, Srinivasan K (2022) What makes a good image? Airbnb demand analytics leveraging interpretable image features. Management Sci. 68(8):5644–5666.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhu K, Shi Q, Banerjee S (2023) Monetizing platforms: Empirical evidence of supply and demand responses to entry costs in two-sided markets. Preprint, submitted May 7, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4440563.Google Scholar