English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Conventional thinking proposes that naming and shaming pushes publics to oppose government policies that are claimed to violate human rights. We explore the extent to which international organizations’ (IOs’) efforts to name and shame target governments can be frustrated by the target governments’ efforts to advance a counter-narrative. We test this using a survey-based experiment that focuses on the use of prolonged solitary confinement in US prisons. The results suggest that government messaging has powerful effects on public opinion. These effects are more readily discernible than the effects of IO signals. We also find some limited evidence to suggest that messages from international nongovernmental organizations can, by themselves, elicit a backlash among the respondents. Surprisingly, we found similar effects among both Democrats and Republicans. This demonstrates important limitations to IOs’ naming and shaming tactics.

Naming and shaming, government messaging, and backlash effects: Experimental evidence from the Convention Against Torture