The Violence Against Women Criminology Essay

Gillespies, Richards, Givens and Smith sought out to uncover if the media, with its strong presence in influencing ones perception on certain social concerns, enclose stories of femicide within the context of domestic violence because minimal research has been carried out to examine femicide within the framework of “violence” against women. These four theorize their research in a deductive fashion; they understood the way that the news media worked and that this same media can choose to structure domestic violence in a way that could provide evidence to show the important ramifications on manipulating society’s perception on domestic violence, as well as, solutions and public responsibility.

From 226 cases, they match up to 113 newspaper articles that defined murder as domestic violence contrasted with the other 113 cases that had no exposure defining the femicide as domestic violence through applied research. This study was intended to expand our awareness concerning the media’s depiction of femicide and the media’s strong grip on the conception of violence against women as a social dilemma.

The level at which the researchers collected data was on the micro level. Women were the “case” in this research study; they were the victims of violence. Also the news reports on women as victims in domestic violence cases were measured. The population of interest was media frames from North Carolina spanning a six year period assessing 113 cases that classified the femicide as domestic violence to 113 cases that did not. This sampling is not seen to be representative of the population. The researchers only contrasted media frames in North Carolina, no other states. The rate or likelihood of domestic violence differs upon the region, victim’s age, income and if it is reported. Based on that this research study has only been conducted from inside the walls of North Carolina, it cannot be fully representative of the population and the other 49 states.

The researchers used purposive sampling and simple random while conducting their study. The purposive sampling is the 113 cases that fit the specific criteria of those cases of femicide from North Carolina spanning a six-year period that contained at least one news article defining the femicide as domestic violence. The other 113 cases that were contrasted were selected at random. The sampling ensured diversity. The state was chose purposively and the cases were chosen randomly. The design of this experiment comes from secondary analysis, the concern was for the behavior arising among specific group of people, and this behavior is domestic violence against women.

The participants stayed the same but the setting change. The study purposely examines the use of frames in media reporting of femicide stories. the media routinely utilize neighbors who may not know the victim and/or perpetrator particularly well, rather than close friends or family members, as sources in instances of domestic violence. The new research question by Gillespies, Richards, Givens and Smith was based on prior research of the representation of femicide in the news and its use of frames used in media coverage making the data quantitative.

There are five media frames specifically associated with domestic violence, which include (1) focusing on the behavior of the victim, including blaming the victim or excusing the perpetrator; (2) normalizing the event as commonplace; (3) suggesting the incident was an isolated event; (4) indicating the victim and/or perpetrator are somehow different from the norm; and (5) asserting that domestic violence perpetrators are “disordered” and should be easily identifiable.

The researchers examined the validity of these existing by examining the components of additional media frames-the sources used, language and word choice, and the context of the incident-in a sample of North Carolina newspaper stories. This research study used the time dimension of trend logical study for articles that present the femicide as domestic violence and those that do not. The researchers used reports, within a six year time span, from newspapers to carry out their study 2002-2007.

The basic sign of this study meets the three criteria for establishing causality. The negative correlations of the study are four things; the more the media chooses to do these four things the more the issue will be swept under the rug. Most news sources underutilize those with an educated opinion and informed background in the problem of domestic violence, and then journalists habitually shun victim advocates and academics for trepidation of bias. Journalists’ word choice or speech also manipulates the framing of domestic violence; Word assortment in both the title/headline and all through an article can potentially sway the general public’s understanding of an incident and the partakers involved. As is often the case with intimate violent behavior, the relationship amid victim and offender is highly multifaceted and turbulent.

The number one issue connected with intimate partner homicide is previous accounts of domestic violence. Sorry to say, all too often information pertaining to a couple’s history is either gone astray or downgraded to the end of an article. For temporal order the change media has to structure domestic violence in a way that will provide evidence to show the important corollary of society’s perception on domestic violence, and solutions to fix this problem also to note that this is not personal but the public’s responsibility because in many cases the media fail to notice the occasion to use their power to portray femicide as an issue worthy of public outrage and intensified policy development.

Gillespies, Richards, Givens and Smith eliminated other rival hypothesis the findings may be influenced by the social climate and level of activism in the state from which the data were derived. The North Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCCADV) may create higher levels of awareness in North Carolina than domestic violence groups in other states by reaching out to local media outlets and law enforcement agencies. The interpretations presented here cannot be wholly free from potential researcher bias. However, to minimize that potential one specific threat to internal validity was selection bias because the study relied heavily on previous research to guide coding and ensuing interpretations of the results.

The concepts in the study were femicide, frame analysis and mass media. The index used 7 composed frames were identified while only 4had been identified in previous research. : (1) A commonplace frame, (2) an isolated incident frame, (3) a frame that blames the criminal justice system, and (4) a victim blaming frame. (5) a frame blaming perpetrator loss of control or moral breakdown, and (6) a frame that minimized the femicide by focusing on a crisis in the lives of the victim/perpetrator(7) a domestic violence as a broader social problem frame.

The results of the study are externally valid if there is more awarnees to domestic violence and it is brought to the light then e that research in this area will continue to encourage meaningful partnerships between researchers, advocates, and the media and that best case practices for reporting on violence against women will be developed and disseminated on a national level. A specific threat to external validity is sample selectivity. First, it is essential to think about that the findings may be subjective by the social climate and level of activism in the state from which the data were derived. The North Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCCADV) may create higher levels of awareness in North Carolina than domestic violence groups in other states by reaching out to local media outlets and law enforcement agencies. It is reasonable to suggest that the prevalence of DV defined articles framing the femicide within the context of a broader social problem (about 25% within DV defined articles and about 12% of the overall sample) may be influenced by the partnership that has developed between the NCCADV, law enforcement, and the media. Therefore, the findings reported here may not be generalizable to other states.