Named and Shamed: International Advocacy and Public Support for Repressive Leaders

Abstract

Do international naming and shaming campaigns reduce public support for repressive leaders? International advocacy can provide domestic audiences with new information about human rights abuses and shift perspectives about repression. When effective, these tactics reduce repression by marring a leader’s reputation with the public. Recent research has begun to analyze this causal pathway but has yet to consider the impact of international advocacy on support for repressive leaders across different groups. I argue that the impact of advocacy on individual support for repressive leaders varies with individuals’ relationship to repression victims, identification with repressive leaders, and trust in campaign sources. Using a representative survey experiment in the United States, I find that naming and shaming increases opposition to repressive leaders among those who view victims as non-threatening and those who do not share a party with the leader. Of concern, advocacy results in a backlash effect among other demographics.