You Gotta Be There: A Thematic Content Analysis of the Historically Black College and University Sporting Experience

Abstract

The college sport landscape is a unique arena where institutional and social norms merge with an erratic, but highly-traditioned, sporting space. While the broader scope of college sport is framed through a Predominantly White Institution (PWI) lens, the context of differing institutions is often forgotten or misunderstood. This process is primarily evident with Minority-Serving Institutions. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) are educational spaces that leverage their historical foundations and missions in an effort to create safe and equitable spaces for Black students and community members. Traditionally, scholarly inquiries about HBCUs have focused primarily on exploring and understanding institutional missions and culture. The dynamic and complex relationships that exist between HBCUs and their collegiate sporting teams continues to be understudied. This study uses a Black Liberatory Fantasy lens to analyze tweets posted by HBCU students, alumni, and media members from 2013 to 2020. A thematic content analysis of tweets discovered five (5) emergent themes that highlight the unique contributions of the HBCU sporting space: (1) shifting HBCU narratives, (2) the communal culture of HBCU sport, (3) the HBCU sporting sanctuary, (4) enrichment within the HBCU sporting space, and 5) the Black Oppressive Nightmare. Implications of this study highlight institutionally and culturally-specific approaches towards marketing, fan experience, and broader social discourse.

Answering the Question on a ‘Racial Reckoning’: Resistance and Persistence in US Sporting Representations

“…For instance, Sayvon JL. Foster’s (2024) thematic analysis of tweets among HBCU fans, alumni, and media captures the use of the social media platform to simultaneous position the HBCU community as a sanctuary while calling out oppression. Another article explores activism by college athletes; one of the most interesting findings in this study is the inclination to “call-in” versus “call-out” – a willingness to engage rather than simply condemn (Feder et al, 2024).…”