The Pennsylvania State University
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SCHREYER HONORS COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE EQUIVALENCY FRAMES IN THE #METOO ERA: DO THEY MATTER? JENNIFER CASTOE SPRING 2020 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for baccalaureate degrees in Digital and Print Journalism and Political Science with honors in Political Science Reviewed and approved* by the following: Eric Plutzer Professor of Political Science and Sociology Thesis Supervisor Michael Berkman Professor of Political Science Honors Adviser * Electronic approvals are on file i ABSTRACT The #MeToo movement sparked a national conversation about sexual harassment and assault in the United States, including about which language should be used when engaging in this conversation. Women’s rights and sexual violence advocacy groups, before and especially since the birth of the #MeToo movement, have provided guidelines on recommended language use for sexual violence stories. This thesis includes a content analysis of the terms that are used in the coverage of ten events within the first year of the #MeToo movement by seven national media outlets, four of which lean liberal and three lean conservative, and labels those terms according to the advocacy groups’ recommendations. The seven media outlets altogether used recommended terms roughly 75% of the time, and the liberal media used recommended terms more often than the conservative media, suggesting that ideological bias could influence how reporters write about sexual harassment and assault. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................... v Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 1 Chapter 2 Literature Review ........................................................................................ 3 Types of Media Framing .................................................................................................. 3 Effects of Media Framing ................................................................................................ 4 What are advocacy groups saying? .................................................................................. 7 1. The victim of the sexual abuse (Ex: woman, accuser, victim) ............................. 8 2. The perpetrator of the abuse (Ex: the chief executive, last name, abuser) ........... 9 3. The victim’s account (Ex: said, accused, came forward) ..................................... 10 4. The statement of the sexual abuse (Ex: accusation, claim, allegation) ................ 10 5. The sexual abuse (Ex: sexual harassment, misconduct, abuse) ............................ 11 6. The action upon the victim (Ex: harassed, abused, raped) ................................... 12 Evidence for these arguments .......................................................................................... 14 What are journalism institutions saying? ......................................................................... 15 Chapter 3 Theory and Hypotheses ............................................................................... 17 Chapter 4 Methodology and Operationalization .......................................................... 19 Operationalization for Each Category of Terms .............................................................. 21 Operationalization of Term Labelling .............................................................................. 24 Chapter 5 ...................................................................................................................... 26 Results and Analysis .................................................................................................... 26 Removing the Subjective Labels ...................................................................................... 28 Which categories performed better than others? .............................................................. 31 Incorporating the Recommendations of Journalistic Institutions ..................................... 33 Breakdown by Publication ............................................................................................... 36 Analyzing “Accuser” ....................................................................................................... 39 Chapter 6 Discussion ................................................................................................... 44 Appendix A Resources for Content Analysis ............................................................. 47 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................ 55 iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Percentage of Codable Explicitly/Probably Recommended Terms by Advocacy Organizations, by Ideology ........................................................................................ 26 Figure 2. 95% Confidence Test Results for Percentages of Explicitly and Probably Not Recommended Terms by Advocacy Organizations, by Ideology ............................. 28 Figure 3. Percentage of Codable Explicitly Recommended Terms by Advocacy Organizations, by Ideology ..................................................................................... 29 Figure 4. 95% Confidence Test Results for Percentages of Explicitly Not Recommended Terms by Advocacy Organizations, by Ideology ...................................................... 30 Figure 5. Percentage of Codable Explicitly/Probably Recommended Terms by Advocacy Organizations, by Category of Term ......................................................................... 31 Figure 6. Percentage of Codable Explicitly/Probably Recommended Terms by Advocacy Organizations and Journalistic Institutions, by Ideology .......................................... 34 Figure 7. Percentage of Codable Explicitly/Probably Recommended Terms by Advocacy Organizations, by Publication .................................................................................... 37 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Explicitly Recommended and Not Recommended Terms by Advocacy Organizations………………………………………………………………………..12 Table 2. Percentage of All Explicitly/Probably Recommended Terms by Advocacy Organizations, by Ideology ........................................................................................ 27 Table 3. Percentage of All Explicitly Recommended Terms by Advocacy Organizations, by Ideology ........................................................................................ 30 Table 4. Percentage of All Explicitly/Probably Recommended Terms by Advocacy Organizations, by Category of Term ......................................................................... 32 Table 5 . Percentage of All Probably/Explicitly Recommended Terms for Only Advocacy Organizations and Both Advocacy Organizations and Journalistic Institutions, by Ideology…………………………………………………………….35 Table 6. Percentage of All Explicitly/Probably Recommended Terms by Advocacy Organizations, by Publication .................................................................................... 38 Table 7. Percentage of "Not Recommended" Terms if "Accuser" was Unanimously Labelled as "Not Recommended" or All Terms and Codable Terms, by Ideology ... 40 Table 8. Percentage of "Not Recommended" Terms if "Accuser" was Unanimously Labelled as "Not Recommended" for All Terms and Codable Terms, by Publication ............................................................................................................ 41 Table 9. Timeframe Within Which #MeToo Events Were Selected for Content Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 47 Table 10. Print Articles and Cable Segments Chosen for Content Analysis .................... 47 v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I want to thank my mom and sister for supporting me throughout the thesis process and for bearing with me through my various stress management techniques. Thank you to my advisors, Dr. Eric Plutzer and Dr. Michael Berkman, for challenging me to perform at my highest capabilities, to my peers for encouraging me to explore this topic, and finally, to my friends for always lending an ear and understanding the demands of not only the thesis process, but everything happening in conjunction. 1 Chapter 1 Introduction The #MeToo movement is profound in many ways. An entire population of women, it seems, found a voice. Corporate human resource departments changed how they respond to and work to prevent workplace sexual harassment. Abusers were and continue to be held accountable after years of predatory behavior without consequence. A national dialogue erupted over to what extent abusers should be held accountable. Another change, one perhaps not as obvious, was a shift in how we talk, and write, about sexual abuse and the implications of our word choice. Vox journalist Constance Grady captured the core of this shift in her 2017 article. She writes: As I spend more and more time writing about the sexual violence that undergirds American culture, our vocabulary for this kind of violence has begun to seem profoundly impoverished. I’ve started to feel that I am using a language that wants to make it as difficult as possible to describe