Fans are powerful, and if they feel their club has done something morally wrong, they can make a big difference. Whether they helped bring down Jose Mourinho at Manchester United or marched against their club owners at Chelsea, fan protests are not just about making noise and booing – they can have real influence.

For many sports fans, their team is not just a hobby or a source of entertainment – it is a part of their identity that shapes the way they think about themselves and the world around them. This is why they can become passionate activists for their teams and players. Unlike collecting ivory, fandom is often a deep-rooted passion that can’t be replaced by another pastime – and this can make it especially difficult for people to walk away from a club when there are moral concerns.

During the Civil Rights Movement, Black fans turned their love for sports into a powerful tool of nonviolent protest. They boycotted pro teams that segregated stadium seating, pressured local leaders to integrate teams and public services, and spread the word about their boycotts through black press and pickets. Black journalists like Jim Hall, Marcel Hopson and Marion Jackson encouraged fans to use their passion for sport to fight for social change.

As fan activism continues to grow, newsrooms must be prepared to report these stories in a way that can promote positive outcomes and minimize negative impacts. To this end, we examined how different approaches to reporting on fan protests might affect people’s perceptions of the credibility of a story. We found that stories that humanized the teenager whose death sparked a protest led Democrats and those with Democrat-leaning views to perceive a story as more credible, while stories that dehumanized the teenager led Republicans and those with Republican-leaning views to perceive a news story as less credible.