Download Media Framing of Celebrity Drug Overdoses: Positivity and Social Responsibility and more Lecture notes Celebrity in PDF only on Docsity!
Media’s Positive and Negative Frames in Reporting Celebrity Deaths From Illegal Drug Overdoses Versus Prescription Medication Overdoses By Michelle Wood Submitted to the William Allen White School of Journalism and Mass Communication and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science. ____________________________ Chairperson Mugur Geana, Assistant Professor _______________________________ John Broholm, Associate Professor _______________________________ Crystal Lumpkins, Assistant Professor Date Approved: November 14, 2011
ii The Thesis Committee for Michelle Wood certifies that this is the approved version of the following thesis: Media’s Positive and Negative Frames in Reporting Celebrity Deaths From Illegal Drug Overdoses Versus Prescription Medication Overdoses _______________________________ Mugur Geana, Assistant Professor Date Approved: November 14, 2011
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………. Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………...iii
- Literature Review…………………………………………………………………………………. - Why celebrities?................................................................................................................... - Why is this research important?........................................................................................... - Framing Theory……...……………………………………………………………....….... - Gatekeeping…….……………………………………………………………………….. - Social Responsibility…………………………………...……………………………….. - Celebrities……………………………………………………………………………….. - River Phoenix……………………………………………………………………. - Chris Farley……………………………………………………………………… - Brad Renfro……………………………………………………………………… - Anna Nicole Smith…………………………………………………………….… - Heath Ledger……………………………………………………………...……... - Brittany Murphy.………………………………………………………………....
- Research Questions………………………………………………………………………...…….
- Method………………………………………………………………………………………...… - Population……………………………………………………………………………….. - Sample………………………………………………………………………………...…
- Method of Analysis………………………………………………………………………
- Data Validation…………………………………………………………………………..
- Data Analysis……………………………………………………………………………. - Table 1…………………………………………………………………..………. - Table 2…………………………………………………………………..………. - Table 3…………………………………………………………………..………. v
- Results…………………………………………………………………………………………… - Table 4…………………………………………………………………..………. - Table 5…………………………………………………………………..………. - Table 6…………………………………………………………………..………. - Table 7…………………………………………………………………..………. - Table 8…………………………………………………………………..……….
- Discussion…………………………………………………………………………..…………… - Framing & Illegal Drugs………………………………………………………………… - Framing & Prescription Drugs…………………………………………………………... - Social Responsibility & Illegal Drugs……………………………………………...…… - Social Responsibility & Prescription Drugs…………………………………………….. - Celebrity Perception & Illegal Drugs………………………………………………...…. - Celebrity Perception & Prescription Drugs…...……………………………………...…. - Limitations……………………………………………………………………………….
- Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………….....
- Appendix A: Code Book…………………………………………………………………………
- Appendix B: Code Sheet…………………………………………………………………………
- References………………………………………………………………………………………..
Narcotics Control Board, 2008). The primary concern here is that young people will attempt to emulate celebrities’ behavior and engage in the risky behaviors of drug use and abuse. Additionally, people sometimes see celebrities as if they are friends or even family (Gibson, 2007; Kearl, 2011; Terry, 1999). With increasing media platforms for people to interact with celebrities, fans can now, more than ever before, feel a sense of intimacy with their idols. It is also ironic that, just as audiences come to know public figures and celebrities through media, the audience’s best outlet to mourn fallen stars is through media (Kitch, 2000). When a celebrity dies, media creates a community of collective mourning and provides an outlet to experience and share in the same grief many others feel (Gibson, 2007; Terry, 1999). In this way, media outlets become “national healers” (Kitch, 2000). The strangers that comprise these communities of mourning have common characteristics: “a powerful identification with a celebrity or world leader — someone they believe in, trust, or admire because of the work they do or simply because of who they are” (Gibson, 2007, p. 1). So when celebrities die, some individuals view the death as they would view the death of a friend (Kearl, 2011). Media feed off this phenomenon and create news headlines, stories, programs and products to earn a profit (Gibson, 2007; Signorile, 1999). In death “it is a commonplace to represent dead celebrities…through this ‘ordinary’ lens” (Thomas, 2008). Kitch (2000) contended that the best accolade media can provide when reporting on celebrity deaths is to make the celebrity “common,” therefore, connecting the celebrity directly to readers. Media uses narratives through which readers are given a consistent theme—a theme that the celebrities are “one of us” (Kitch, 2000, p. 171). Celebrities become characters that media use to create identities and memories. Furthermore, “American journalists use public figures to explain the national character, telling an instructive tale in which the lives
of the famous express the values of ‘everyone’” (Kitch, 2000, p. 172). In reporting about celebrity deaths, “it has also been argued that mediated mourning can be useful in giving people knowledge of the rules about when and how it is appropriate to express grief” (Thomas, 2008, p. 370). The celebrities in this research were chosen because all were prominent figures in Hollywood, each one of them with a solid fan base. River Phoenix, Chris Farley and Brad Renfro all died as a result from using illegal drugs, while the deaths of Anna Nicole Smith, Heath Ledger and Brittany Murphy were caused by prescription medications. With the exception of Phoenix who died outside a nightclub, the others died within the comfort of their apartment, home or hotel room. Another factor relating the actors and actresses is that all the deaths were ruled accidental. Phoenix’s death came as a surprise to many because of his previously clean-cut image. Farley struggled with drug addiction and had sought treatment 17 different times (Nashawaty, 1998); Renfro had a history with drug addiction, beginning at age 15. However, circumstances leading up to Ledger’s, Smith’s and Murphy’s deaths were slightly different. Ledger used his prescriptions to treat insomnia, depression and anxiety. Smith and Murphy suffered from flu-like symptoms in the days before their deaths, which led to their use of prescription medications. Why is this research important? Although the media sometimes reports on celebrities’ drug habits, “the fondness celebrities have long had for cocaine, prescription painkillers and other dangerous substances goes largely unreported until someone ends up in rehab or dies of an overdose” (Goodman, 2008). This research aimed to find out when media does report on celebrity deaths from drugs,
reporting such things rather than believe the celebrity they idolize is a drug addict (Goodman, 2008). Los Angeles Times blogger Elizabeth Snead said she attempted to write about Renfro’s inebriated behavior at a classy Hollywood party, but that portion of her article was edited out of the newspaper she worked for at the time (Goodman, 2008). Pinsky claims that, not only media keep quiet on celebrity drug and prescription drug use during their lives, but they are even more reluctant to report about such use after the celebrity’s death (Goodman, 2008). This research was not a call for media to become increasingly open about celebrity drug culture, but an exploration of how selected media report about celebrity deaths from illicit drug and prescription drug overdoses. The goal was to define how these mediums frame the deaths and the celebrities’ perceptions, whether positively or negatively and if media employed socially responsible frames in educating the public about the dangers of illicit and prescription drugs. Framing Theory Framing theory is an “idea that people use sets of expectations to make sense of their social world and media contribute to those expectations” (Baran & Davis, 2009, p. 282). Erving Goffman first introduced the framing concept in 1959 (Goffman, 1959) and further developed this research throughout the 1960s and 1970s (Goffman, 1974). In the 1970s and early 1980s, the framing theory became more widely accepted as a legitimate way to look at how individuals make sense of their social world. It states that individuals create frames based on their involvement and experience with events, particularly social events, and choose aspects of their perceived reality to make sense of their world (Druckman, 2001; Entman, 1993; Entman, 2007; Goffman, 1974; Shoemaker & Reese, 1991). This was not an attempt to decipher the structure of
social life, but the “structure of experience individuals have at any moment of their social lives” (Goffman, 1974, p. 13). Furthermore, this theory applies to mass media because media has a large impact on the construction of reality due to its ability to “spin” stories. However, people still construct meaning for themselves based on preexisting experiences (Scheufele, 1999). Primary frameworks are those that people employ when they see an event and apply a framework, or several frameworks, to interpret that event. In other words, primary frameworks give meaning to things that would otherwise be meaningless (Gamson, et. al., 1992; Goffman, 1974; Scheufele, 1999; Tuchman, 1978). Furthermore, studies have shown that framing influences the way audiences find meaning in news events, particularly ongoing coverage of events (Ryan, Carragee & Meinhofer, 2001; Valkenburg & Semetko, 1999). The ongoing coverage of celebrity deaths fits this description because in all the studied celebrities, investigations and toxicology tests occurred after their deaths. Motive and intent are also additional factors that help users choose which framework to apply to a situation or event. Additionally, primary frameworks not only help people describe social events, but constitute the central elements of particular social groups’ cultures (Gamson, 1989; Goffman, 1974). The frame of the activity is people’s “understanding of what it is that is going on, individuals fit their actions to this understanding and ordinarily find that the ongoing world supports this fitting” (Goffman, 1974, p. 247). Goffman (1979) extended his theory that frames influence what audiences see, hear and think to the field of mass media through his study of advertisements. He posited that women in advertisements reinforced how women are framed in daily life (Goffman, 1979). As the theory was adapted to journalism (Tuchman, 1978; Gitlin, 1980), such research revealed that news stories “reinforce socially accepted and expected ways of seeing the social world” (Baran &
allow most audience members to make balanced assessments of a situation. Some researchers contend that journalists do not fully understand framing so they often allow media manipulators to impose dominant frames in the news (Entman, 1989; Entman, 1993; Entman & Rojecki, 1993; Scheufele, 1999). Furthermore, frames can be so powerful that they may guide public opinion (Entman, 1993). As a way to identify frames, researchers need to look at the interpretive commentary, such as metaphors, catchphrases or other symbolic devices, that surround news rather than focus on news content alone (Gamson, 1989; Matthes, 2009). Several powerful institutions can effectively influence and structure news coverage and are able to advocate frames that reinforce existing social values. Both inside and outside factors influence media’s content. Studies (Scheufele, 1999; Shoemaker & Reese, 1996; Tuchman,
- list factors that may potentially influence the way journalists frame issues. This list includes “social norms and values, organizational pressures and constraints, pressures of interest groups, journalistic routines, and ideological or political orientations of journalists” (Scheufele, 1999). Frames call attention to certain aspects, while simultaneously directing attention away from other aspects. The exclusion of frames is just as significant as the inclusion of frames in media (Entman, 1993; Gamson, 1989). Framing studies also take salience into consideration. Salience is the act of making information more prominent, noticeable, meaningful or memorable in order to enhance the probability that the receivers of a message will process it and remember it (Entman, 1993; Scheufele, 1999). Frames “introduce or raise salience or apparent importance of certain ideas, activating schemas that encourage target audiences to think, feel, and decide in a particular way” (Entman, 2007, p. 164). Frames in articles about celebrity deaths from illegal drugs and
prescription medication overdoses could potentially shape the way audiences feel not only about the drugs but about the celebrities’ perception, as well. Furthermore, Iyengar (1991) showed that news media have the ability to frame questions of responsibility, which lead audiences to determine the causes of social problems and the solutions to such problems. Social and cultural norms are just some of the influences over the way news media frame issues. When reporting on social issues, however, “the media tend to portray society as fundamentally sound, attributing most social problems to irresponsible or unfortunate individuals” (Kim, Carvalho & Davis, 2010, p. 564). Discussions on responsibility in media have two main viewpoints. The first view states that social problems are caused largely by individuals and thus, change efforts are concentrated on the individuals with the problematic behavior (Kim et al., 2010). The other view states that social problems primarily stem from social and environmental factors and reform efforts aim at changes in government policies and business practices (Kim et al, 2010). Kim and Willis (2007) found this claim to be true in news coverage concerning obesity. The media focused on the individuals’ problems rather than mentioning the obesity as a societal problem because concentrating on the individual fit the strong individualism so present in American culture (Kim & Willis, 2007). Although this study focuses on drugs rather than obesity, the same principles are applicable. One study (Fan, 1996) found that, when writing about drugs, media’s discussion fell into five main topics: “1) politics including legislation, 2) legal issues including drug users’ problems with the law, 3) the drug supply including both production and sales, 4) social problems including discussion of drugs as being harmful to society, and 5) problems for individuals rather than to society at large” (Fan, 1996, p. 1414). Fan’s study concluded that a correlation between drug coverage in the media was a major influence on public opinion that drugs were the
began to look at the different factors and levels of analysis that influence gatekeepers, such as routines or practices of communication work, organization and social institution hierarchies, and social systems. Additionally, Nisbett and Ross (1980) coined the cognitive approach to gatekeeping, which stated that humans are more likely to remember vivid information than pallid information. Consequently, vivid information is more likely to make it through the gates. Additionally, news items that deviate from societal or cultural norms are more likely to pass through the gates (Shoemaker & Reese, 2009). In this research, these news items included the illegal drugs and prescription medication overdoses. Celebrities and other prominent public figures are outside the mundane social reality of most people, so this topic is interesting to gatekeepers, thus, the reason for the development of tabloids and gossip columns (Shoemaker & Reese, 2009). Although celebrities may exist outside the social reality of most people, media helps connect celebrities’ reality with the audiences—it is through media that the public can transcend its own reality and enter celebrities’ realities. This topic transcends the notion that only newsworthy events become news items because “if people are prominent enough, however, even routine activities can leap tall gates and result in an astonishing number of news items” (Shoemaker & Reese, 2009, p. 25), such as overdose deaths of celebrities. The way this information is framed by the selected media sources is not only telling of how media create meaning for the audience through positive or negative frames but also what positive or negative information made it through the gates, in order to shape this meaning.
Social Responsibility Social responsibility theory of the press states that media has an obligation to benefit society. The theory contends that media should be self-regulating, possess high standards for and maintain professionalism, objectivity, truth, and accuracy. It also states that media should portray diversity of the cultures it represents (Coleman, 2009; Pitner, 2009). Social responsibility of the press developed when influential publishers became unpopular with the public. Although the media had codes of ethics, the public still remained suspicious of media’s agenda. During World War II, Henry Luce, the publisher of Time and Life magazines, asked Robert Hutchins, president at the University of Chicago, to gather a commission to investigate the appropriate function of media in democracies (McQuail, 2002; Rivers et al., 1980). Four years later in 1947, the Hutchins Commission, formally called the Commission on Freedom of the Press, released its final report called A Free and Responsible Press. It stated that the press had an obligation to consider society’s needs when making journalistic decisions. It proposed that media embrace social responsibility as a means to increase its standards, provide the public with the information it needs as to govern themselves and to serve as a watchdog for the government (McQuail, 2002; Siebert et al., 1963). Journalists and news organizations apply ethical standards in helping them determine their definition of social responsibility. The American Society of Newspaper Editors had its Code of Ethics since the beginning of the 20th^ century; this Code was adapted for use by journalists in 1926. The most recent revision of the Code of Ethics for the Society of Professional Journalists was adopted in 1996. However, corporate social responsibility does not seem to adequately counterpart the sole foundation of businesses: to make a profit (Gerald, 1963). Media moved from trying to educate and inform the public to basing news content
Stimulant prescription drugs like Ritalin and Adderall, commonly used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and increase energy and concentration levels, fit into the stimulant category where illicit drugs like cocaine and methamphetamine also reside (Compton & Volkow, 2006). Other prescription drugs, such as hydrocodone and oxycodone, commonly prescribed to help relieve pain, are classified in the opioids category, along with heroin (Compton & Volkow, 2006). This means that the same risks for “abuse and addiction to non-prescription drugs apply to prescription drug abuse” (Compton & Volkow, 2006). Furthermore, media participate in defining what the public considers “drugs” because it focuses on illicit drugs, such as cocaine, heroin, and ecstasy, as the drugs contributing the most to the “drug problem,” while rarely mentioning alcohol and tobacco as part of the problem (Murji, 1998). Therefore, the media conditions “public attitudes about the ‘drug problem’ and what the response to it should be” (Murji, 1998). Although the commercial model—an alternative media approach that focuses on the audience’s ability to filter, interpret, deconstruct and reconstruct messages, and morph these messages into something different than the original message producer’s meaning (Morley, 1995)—has not been applied to media reports about drugs, it has been used in studies of drug prevention (Dorn, Murji, & South, 1992). In a later study, Murji contends “that prevention messages and campaigns are resisted by the audience, or may even increase audience interest in experimenting with the very drugs that they are being warned about and against” (Murji, 1998). Medias’ social responsibility becomes increasingly important in this respect because it is their duty to report on the potentially harmful effects and risks of taking illicit or prescription medication in news articles rather than solely in anti-drug campaigns. The National Institute on Drug Abuse conducted the “Monitoring the Future Survey” (2006) and concluded that “illicit street drugs such as ‘ecstasy’…and cocaine are decreasing in
popularity, where as the nonmedical use of certain prescription drugs is on the rise” (Friedman, 2006). One reason for the decrease in illicit drug use is due to negative media attention focused on these illegal drugs (Friedman, 2006). However, a reason for the increase in non-medical use of prescription drugs results from the inundation of prescription medication advertisements in newspapers, magazines, television and the Internet (Friedman, 2006). These advertisements make prescription medications a normal part of everyday life and the negative side effects are usually written in the fine print in newspaper and magazine ads or read quickly on television or radio ads, thus a significant dissociation between the prominence of benefits and the obscurity of potential adverse reactions. Considering the above, media should serve the public by addressing the potential for both types of drugs to have harmful effects on users. Celebrities River Phoenix The eldest child of bohemian parents John Lee Bottom and Arlyn Dunetz and named after the river of life in Hermann Hesse’s book Siddhartha , River Jude Bottom was born on August 23, 1970 in Madras, Oregon. At age two, River’s parents moved to South America and joined the Children of God, a religious cult (imdb.com; Associated Press, 1993; Mydans, 1993; Turner, 1993; BBC, 2003; A&E Television Networks, 2008). After seeing a news article in which Children of God’s founder wore elaborate jewels and was shrouded in black garments and surrounded by beautiful women, the Bottoms moved back to the United States in 1977 (Turner, 1993). The Bottoms changed their last name to Phoenix to symbolize rebirth (Associated Press, 1993; Turner, 1993). By this time, the family had added four more children: son Joaquin and daughters Rain, Liberty and Summer.
