A comparative content analysis of newspaper coverage about extreme risk protection order policies in passing and non-passing US states.
A comparative content analysis of newspaper coverage about extreme risk protection order policies in passing and non-passing US states.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12889-022-13374-8
复制
发表时间：
2022-05-16
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Kravitz-Wirtz, Nicole
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Aubel, Amanda J.;Pallin, Rocco;Knoepke, Christopher E.;Wintemute, Garen J.;Kravitz-Wirtz, Nicole
关键词：
极端风险保护令（ERPO）法律是预防枪支暴力的工具（在19个州生效），通常在公众大规模枪击事件发生后颁布，当时媒体对枪支暴力的报道往往会激增。我们比较了2018年佛罗里达帕克兰大规模枪击事件后，通过和考虑但没有通过此类法律的州的新闻媒体对ERPO的框架。我们对2018年发表的244篇关于ERPO的报纸文章进行了内容分析，这些文章来自三个合格州（FL，VT，RI）和三个非合格州（PA，OH，CO）。衡量标准包括使用的语言、提到的利益攸关方和引用的科学证据。我们使用卡方检验来比较文章的比例与每一个措施的兴趣在通过与非通过状态。与报纸对非通过州的报道相比，关于通过州的ERPO的新闻文章更经常使用ERPO的官方政策名称（38%对23%，p = 0.03），使用限制性较低的语言，如“防止”来描述暂停枪支使用的过程。（15%对3%，p <0.01），提到枪支暴力预防倡导团体（41%对28%，p = 0.08），并参考ERPO研究（17%对7%，p = 0.03）。关于通过州的文章也更经常地明确指出，ERPO可以或可以阻止暴力事件（20%对6%，p <0.01）。将枪支暴力视为可预防的媒体信息，强调可识别的风险标志，并结合社区智慧利用数据，可能会支持ERPO政策的通过。随着越来越多的州考虑ERPO立法，特别是在得到贝蒂斯-哈里斯政府的支持的情况下，对这些拯救生命的政策的成功媒体框架的深入了解可以帮助塑造公众的理解和支持。在线版本包含补充材料，可通过10.1186/s12889-022-13374-8获得。
Extreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws are a tool for firearm violence prevention (in effect in 19 states), often enacted in the wake of a public mass shooting when media coverage of gun violence tends to spike. We compared news media framing of ERPOs in states that passed and those that considered but did not pass such laws after the 2018 mass shooting in Parkland, Florida. We conducted a content analysis of 244 newspaper articles about ERPOs, published in 2018, in three passing (FL, VT, RI) and three non-passing states (PA, OH, CO). Measures included language used, stakeholders mentioned, and scientific evidence cited. We use chi-square tests to compare the proportion of articles with each measure of interest in passing versus non-passing states. Compared to newspaper coverage of non-passing states, news articles about ERPOs in passing states more often used only official policy names for ERPOs (38% vs. 23%, p = .03), used less restrictive language such as “prevent” to describe the process of suspending firearm access (15% vs. 3%, p < .01), mentioned gun violence prevention advocacy groups (41% vs. 28%, p = .08), and referenced research on ERPOs (17% vs. 7%, p = .03). Articles about passing states also more often explicitly stated that a violent event was or could have been prevented by an ERPO (20% vs. 6%, p < .01). Media messaging that frames gun violence as preventable, emphasizes identifiable markers of risk, and draws on data in conjunction with community wisdom may support ERPO policy passage. As more states consider ERPO legislation, especially given endorsement by the Biden-Harris administration, deeper knowledge about successful media framing of these life-saving policies can help shape public understandings and support. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-13374-8.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1001/jamahealthforum.2021.0975
发表时间：
2021-06
期刊：
JAMA health forum
影响因子：
--
作者：
Kravitz-Wirtz N;Aubel AJ;Pallin R;Wintemute GJ
通讯作者：
Wintemute GJ
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
McGinty, Emma E.;Wolfson, Julia A.;Webster, Daniel W.
通讯作者：
Webster, Daniel W.
DOI：
10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x
发表时间：
1995-01-01
影响因子：
5.8
作者：
BENJAMINI, Y;HOCHBERG, Y
通讯作者：
HOCHBERG, Y
影响因子：
3.9
作者：
DeFoster, Ruth;Swalve, Natashia
通讯作者：
Swalve, Natashia
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Lankford, Adam;Madfis, Eric
通讯作者：
Madfis, Eric