Media Framing of Products Liability Lawsuits and the Social Production of Legal Knowledge

近年来，关于产品责任诉讼和美国侵权法体系的合理性和公平性的政治辩论一直很激烈。 批评者指责说，侵权索赔，原告的胜利，以及大量的惩罚性赔偿金在过去二十年中“飙升”，给国家带来了巨大的经济和社会代价。 梅的社会科学家回应说，这种批评是基于不具代表性的轶事和“恐怖故事”，掩盖了实际法律的实践的模式和影响。 学者们认为，侵权改革明显具有政治吸引力的主要原因是，财力雄厚的侵权改革倡导者对修辞的有效操纵，特别是大众新闻媒体的偏见报道。本项目包括对涉及产品责任的两个案例研究--麦当劳咖啡诉讼和烟草业诉讼的二十年遗产--的媒体框架进行内容分析。 此外，该项目还将确定20年来新闻中产品责任诉讼报道的共同要素，并研究媒体产生的轶事、图标和来源如何融入国会关于侵权改革的辩论。 虽然实证的重点是新媒体的报道，该项目的主要目标是分析实用法律的知识的社会生产。 工作的假设是，大众媒体产生了现代社会的法律和关于法律的公共知识的重要组成部分。这种知识反过来又极有可能影响公众舆论和关于侵权行为改革必要性的政治辩论以及日常的法律的实践。 本研究采用一般的“框架”方法。 分析集中在框架活动的三个具体方面：1）“新闻价值”的必要性，即选择和呈现个性化、细分化、戏剧化和规范化的文化消费的新闻; 2）在法律的纠纷呈现中强调个人责任的特定文化规范的认可;三是选用专家语录、轶事轶事、社会科学资料等多种权威资料作为故事情节。 研究设计测试的影响和影响，这些框架装置在生产的新闻故事侵权法的做法。 这项研究将增进我们对美国侵权改革的当代辩论的理解，并有助于对当代社会中法律本身的生产、再生产和转变进行社会法律分析。

A heated political debate has raged in recent years over the rationality and fairness of products liability litigation and of the U.S. tort law system generally. Critics charge that tort claims, plaintiff victories, and large punitive damages awards have "skyrocketed" in the last two decades at great economic and social cost to the nation. May social scientists have responded that such criticisms are grounded in unrepresentative anecdotes and "horror stories" that obscure the patterns and implications of actual legal practice. The primary reason for the apparent political appeal of tort reform, scholars argue, is the effective manipulation of rhetoric by well financed tort reform advocates and, especially, biased reporting in the mass news media.This project consists of conducting a content analysis of media framing of two case studies involving products liability-the McDonald's coffee lawsuit, and the two-decade legacy of lawsuits against the tobacco industry. Additionally, the project will identify common elements of products liability lawsuit coverage in the news over a twenty-year period as well as study how media-generated anecdotes, icons, and sources have figured into congressional debates about tort reform.This research contributes to the scholarly enterprise by systematically examining media coverage of product liability lawsuits. While the empirical focus is on new media coverage, the project's primary objective is to analyze the social production of practical legal knowledge. The working assumption is that the mass media generate a significant portion of public knowledge both of and about law in modern society. This knowledge in turn is highly likely to influence public opinion and political debates regarding the need for tort reform as well as routine legal practice. The research utilizes a general "framing" methodology. Analysis focuses on three specific dimensions of framing activity: 1) the imperative of "newsworthiness," which selects and presents news in ways that are personalized, morselized, dramatized, and normalized for cultural consumption; 2) the privileging of particular cultural norms emphasizing individual responsibility in the presentation of legal disputes; and 3) the selection of various types of authoritative data for story lines, including quotes by experts, anecdotes, and social science data. The research design tests for the influence and implications of these framing devices in the production of news stories about tort law practice. This research will enhance our understanding of contemporary debates over tort reform in the U.S. and contribute to socio-legal analysis regarding the production, reproduction, and transformation of law itself in contemporary society.