Abstract
A discussion of the interplay between media and school shootings in the current hyper-mediated context, starting with a description of school shootings as ideal cases for the examination of mediatization, and exploring the specific ways in which media logic articulates itself in this case. The exploration focuses on news media content and framing of school rampages and concludes with critical reflections on the effects and continued relevancy of understanding school shootings as strongly mediatized events, both for their rhetorical importance and in terms of behavioral outcomes and policy developments.
Glenn W. Muschert, a sociologist of social problems, is Associate Professor in the Sociology, Criminology, and Social Justice Studies Programs at Miami University. Dr. Muschert earned a BS in International Area Studies from Drexel University in 1992, and a Sociology PhD in 2002 from the University of Colorado at Boulder. After serving a one-year appointment on Purdue University’s Law & Society faculty, he joined Miami University’s Criminology faculty in 2003, and was tenured/promoted in 2009. His research focuses on social control through surveillance and the sociological implications of mass media coverage of high profile crimes, such as school shootings and child abductions. His research has appeared in various venues in the fields of sociology, criminology, and media studies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The use of overlapping terms in this field can be confusing. Muschert (2007a) defines school shootings broadly as gun violence against persons taking place at schools, but also defines a number of subtypes: rampage/amok attacks, school invasions/mass murders taking place at schools, targeted attacks, terror attacks, and government attacks. Though targeted attacks where shooters specifically target one or more victims are among the most common, they receive less attention than rampage-type and school invasion-type attacks (which attract great attention). In most cases, the term “school shooting” refers to rampage attacks and mass murders, though there are exceptions. Since both the research and media coverage of school shootings focus on rampage and school invasion attacks, this chapter uses the term “school shootings” to refer to those attacks which appear more dominantly in media and research discourses, namely rampage and school invasions.
- 2.
There are, of course, other examples of highly mediatized events, including terror attacks and many acts of war. Similarly, though the destruction may be interpreted less as the effect of malice aforethought, there are similar mediatized qualities to the destruction conveyed in news accounts of large-scale transportation accidents, industrial accidents, and natural disasters.
- 3.
School shootings are an extremely rare form of violence and heavily mediated. There are other forms which may also share similarities. For example, serial killings, mass murders, terror attacks, and cannibalism may be similar in their mediatized qualities. Thus, there is a potential “ideal type” of phenomena which are exceedingly rare but also capture intense media attention. This suggests a rich area for potential future scholarly exploration.
- 4.
Of course, natural disasters (e.g., tsunami, earthquakes, floods, etc.) may also be experienced in a mass-mediatized fashion, especially so when they happen somewhere else. For example, people in California clearly have an experiential basis for understanding earthquakes but may not have experienced hurricanes, which typically happen elsewhere. The point here is to convey that the populace is almost entirely dependent upon mass media forms for information about school shootings, but relatively less so for other events which are more broadly experienced.
- 5.
It is worth point out, however, that the field of communication in crisis situations (as distinct from “crisis communication”) is a nascent one which is developing ad hoc in a variety of directions and concerning a variety of topics. Thus, the emergent discussion lacks a unifying theory or conceptual point of view. Studies in this emergent area draw on research related to societies of risk (Giddens 1990; Beck 1997; Bauman 2006; Furedi 2006), networked societies (Castells 2009; Urry 2007; Burgress and Green 2009), and the darker side of modern life with its qualities of mediated performance (Cottle 2009). See also the series “Global Crises and the Media” published by Peter Lang.
- 6.
Given the tragic nature of school shootings and the emotions evoked, such events may present opportunities for public figures. Of course, these figures also use such appearances as opportunities to engage in public relations and/or for personal or political gain.
- 7.
For example, a May 24, 1998, article in the New York Times described the Springfield, Oregon, shooter as having a mixture of psychological troubles and unbridled rage: “Kip Kinkel’s parents had worried about his temper since he was a little boy. They sent him to a psychiatrist and taught him at home for a time. In recent months, they thought that their work and concern were making a difference and that Kip, at 15, was turning around. But the teen-ager, who is accused of killing his parents and two of his schoolmates in Springfield, Ore., never made a secret of his angry heart.”
- 8.
However, perhaps in the case of victims the opposite is true. That is, the youthfulness of most victims in school rampages serves as a marker of their innocence, and therefore absolves them from any potential allegations that they may have in some way contributed to the underlying grievances which may have motivated the attack. This is in contrast to the direct statements made by many school shooters that they had been treated unfairly in the past.
- 9.
School shooters deliberately undertake their attacks on a public stage, with a dramatic schema that requires a cast and setting. The shooters and their victims play the lead roles in the drama, and the setting is the school. As journalists relate the stories of school shootings, they may rely on dramaturgical allusions (Goffman 1956; Harrington et al. 2011). Thus, the suggestion that school shootings carry dramatic overtones is apt in both senses of the word in that dramatic specifies both things which are sudden and striking, but also those things which pertain to theater and performance.
- 10.
The discrepancy between the low probability of school shootings and a comparatively noteworthy fear of such attacks is often discussed (Muschert 2007a). In the North American context, this imbalance has manifested itself in the form of accelerated institution of punitive policies, which at times may be ineffective or inappropriate to the verifiable threats observed in school environments (Muschert et al. 2013; Muschert and Peguero 2010).
- 11.
The issue of spatial framing discussed at the outset of this subsection is distinct from the problem definition mentioned here. The former (Muschert and Carr 2006) refers to the application of a spatial media frame which focuses the discourse at a certain geographic scope of concern, whether individual, community, regional, national, or international. The latter refers to the problem frame applied, which is a way to understand how the problem may be typically seen. In this case, Spencer (2011) argues that school violence was previously construed as an urban problem, while in the recent decades the problem frame has migrated to the suburbs, regardless of which spatial frame may be applied in news media reportage of specific cases.
- 12.
As mentioned earlier, the emergence of cross-national findings related to discourse about school shootings is a relatively untapped area. Most studies have focused on set of shootings within individual countries, notably the U.S. cases (Muschert 2007b, 2009), Canadian cases (Eglin and Hester 2003; Howells 2012), German cases (Müller et al. 2012), and Finnish cases (e.g., Sumiala and Tikka 2011). It is only recently that scholars have begun social scientifically to investigate some international distinctions, although this area of the field is rich for breaking new ground. Much of this international work has involved researchers in Finland and the United States (e.g., see Sumiala and Tikka 2011; Kiilakoski and Oksanen 2011).
- 13.
Especially in the North American contexts.
- 14.
Note that the community- and school-level factors mentioned here refer to the levels of causes which may contribute to school shootings (see Muschert 2007a; Henry 2000, for discussion), which are distinct from the spatial frames or problem frames which might appear in the discourse (discussed earlier).
- 15.
One can assume that the security industry benefits financially from the problem framing we observe in the discourse about school violence. Although beyond the scope of this chapter, a rich area for future investigation involves clarifying the relationship between media frames and financial interests. In short, the question is whether media reportage of extreme cases makes for good promotion of security goods and services.
References
Altheide, D. L. (2002). Creating fear: News and the construction of crisis. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Bauman, Z. (2006). Liquid fear. Cambridge: Polity.
Beck, U. (1997). The reinvention of politics: Rethinking modernity in the global social order. Cambridge: Polity.
Birkland, T. A., & Lawrence, R. G. (2009). Media framing and policy change after Columbine. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(10), 1405–1425.
Burgress, J., & Green, J. (2009). YouTube: Online video and participatory culture. Cambridge: Polity.
Burns, R., & Crawford, C. (1999). School shootings, the media, and public fear: Ingredients for moral panic. Crime, Law, and Social Change, 32(2), 147–168.
Castells, M. (2009). Communication power. New York: Oxford University Press.
Chyi, H. I., & McCombs, M. (2004). Media salience and the process of framing: Coverage of the Columbine school shootings. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(1), 22–35.
Cottle, S. (2009). Global crisis reporting. Journalism in the global age. New York: Peter Lang.
Couldry, N. (2008). Mediatization or mediation? Alternative understandings of the emergent space of digital storytelling. New Media Society, 10, 373–391.
Eglin, P., & Hester, S. (2003). The Montreal massacre: A story of membership categorization analysis. Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
Fox, C., & Harding, D. J. (2005). School shootings as organizational deviance. Sociology of Education, 78(1), 69–97.
Frymer, B. (2009). The media spectacle of Columbine: Alienated youth as an object of fear. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(10), 1387–1404.
Furedi, F. (2006). Culture of fear revisited: Risk-taking and the morality of low expectation (4th ed.). London: Continuum.
Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity.
Giroux, H. (2009). Youth in a suspect society. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Goffman, E. (1956). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Haider-Markel, D. P., & Joslyn, M. R. (2001). Gun policy, opinion, tragedy, and blame attribution: The conditional influence of issue frames. Journal of Politics, 63(2), 520–543.
Harrington, C. L., Reece, H., & Muschert, G. W. (2011). Setting, speaking, and framing in the news discourse of elected executions: A play in three acts. Fast Capitalism, 8(2). Retrieved November 7, 2012 from http://www.uta.edu/huma/agger/fastcapitalism/8_2/Harrington8_2.html.
Henry, S. (2000). What is school violence? An integrated definition. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 567, 16–29.
Hjarvard, S. (2008). The mediatization of society: A theory of the media as agents of social and cultural change. Nordicom Review, 29(2), 105–134.
Howells, S. (2012). Making headlines: A quarter century of the media’s characterization of Canadian school shootings. In G. W. Muschert & J. Sumiala (Eds.), School shootings: Mediatized violence in a global age. Bingley, UK: Emerald.
Kiilakoski, T., & Oksanen, A. (2011). Soundtrack of the school shootings: Cultural script, music and male rage. Young: Nordic Journal of Youth Research, 19(3), 247–269.
Klein, J. (2005). Teaching her a lesson: Media misses boy’s rage relating to girls in school shootings. Crime, Media, Culture, 1(1), 90–97.
Klein, J. (2006). Cultural capital and high school bullies. Men and Masculinities, 9(1), 53–75.
Kupchik, A. (2010). Homeroom security: School discipline in an age of fear. New York: New York University Press.
Larkin, R. W. (2007). Comprehending Columbine. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Larkin, R. W. (2009). The Columbine legacy: Rampage shootings as political acts. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(9), 1309–1326.
Lawrence, R. G. (2001). Defining events: Problem definition in the media arena. In R. P. Hart & B. H. Sparrow (Eds.), Politics, discourse, and American society: New agendas (pp. 91–110). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Lawrence, R. G., & Birkland, T. A. (2004). Guns, Hollywood, and school safety: Case studies of school shootings. Social Science Quarterly, 85(5), 1193–1207.
Lindgren, S. (2011). YouTube gunmen? Mapping participatory media discourse on school shooting videos. Media, Culture & Society, 33(1), 123–136.
Müller, M. G., Seizov, O., & Wiencek, F. (2012). Amok visuals: Analyzing visual media coverage of amok school shootings—a novel iconographic approach. In G. W. Muschert & J. Sumiala (Eds.), School shootings: Mediatized violence in a global age. Bingley, UK: Emerald.
Muschert, G. W. (2007a). Research in school shootings. Sociology Compass, 1(1), 60–80.
Muschert, G. W. (2007b). The Columbine victims and the myth of the juvenile superpredator. Youth Violence & Juvenile Justice, 5(4), 351–366.
Muschert, G. W. (2009). Frame-changing in the media coverage of a school shooting: The rise of Columbine as a national concern. The Social Science Journal, 46(1), 164–170.
Muschert, G. W. (2010). School shootings. In M. Herzog-Evans (Ed.), Transnational criminology manual (Vol. 2, pp. 73–89). Nijmegen, Netherlands: Wolf Legal.
Muschert, G. W., & Carr, D. (2006). Media salience and frame changing across events: Coverage of nine school shootings, 1997–2001. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 83(4), 747–766.
Muschert, G. W., Henry, S., Bracy, N., & Peguero, A. A. (Eds). (in press 2013). The Columbine effect. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
Muschert, G. W., & Peguero, A. A. (2010). The Columbine effect and school anti-violence policy. Research in Social Problems and Public Policy, 17, 117–148.
Muschert, G. W., & Ragnedda, M. (2010). Media and control of violence: Communication in school shootings. In W. Heitmeyer, H.-G. Haupt, S. Malthaner, & A. Kirschner (Eds.), Control of violence: Historical and international perspectives on violence in modern societies (pp. 345–361). New York: Springer.
Muschert, G. W., & Sumiala, J. (Eds.). (2012). School shootings: Mediatized violence in a global age. Bingley, UK: Emerald.
Scharrer, E., Wiedman, L. M., & Bissel, K. L. (2003). Pointing the finger of blame: News media coverage of popular-culture culpability. Journalism & Communication Monographs, 5(2), 49–98.
Schildkraut, J. (2012). The remote is controlled by the monster: Issues of mediatized violence and school shootings. In G. W. Muschert & J. Sumiala (Eds.), School shootings: Mediatized violence in a global age. Bingley, UK: Emerald.
Shepard, A. C. (1999). Covering the big one. American Journalism Review, 21(6), 22–29.
Shepard, A. C. (2003). Columbine school shooting: Live television coverage. In T. Rosenthal & A. S. Mitchell (Eds.), Thinking clearly: Cases in journalistic decision-making (pp. 57–81). New York: Columbia University Press.
Simpson, R., & Coté, R. (2006). Covering violence: A guide to ethical reporting about victims and trauma. New York: Columbia University Press.
Spencer, J. W. (2005). It’s not as simple as it seems: Ambiguous culpability and ambivalent affect in media representations of violent youth. Symbolic Interaction, 28(1), 47–65.
Spencer, J. W. (2011). The paradox of youth violence. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
Spencer, J. W., & Muschert, G. W. (2009). The contested meaning of the crosses at Columbine. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(10), 1371–1386.
Sullivan, M. L., & Guerette, R. T. (2003). The copycat factor: Mental illness, guns, and the shooting incident at Heritage High School, Rockdale County, Georgia. In M. H. Moore, C. V. Petrie, A. A. Braga, & B. L. McLaughlin (Eds.), Deadly lessons: Understanding (pp. 25–69). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Sumiala, J., & Tikka, M. (2010). “Web First” to death: The media logic of the school shootings in the era of uncertainty. Nordicom Review, 31(2), 17–29.
Sumiala, J., & Tikka, M. (2011). Reality on circulation: School shootings, ritualised communication, and the dark side of the sacred. ESSACHESS: Journal for Communication Studies, 4(8), 145–159.
Tankard, J. W., Jr. (2001). The empirical approach to the study of media framing. In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy Jr., & A. E. Grant (Eds.), Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world (pp. 95–106). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tonso, K. L. (2009). Violent masculinities as tropes for school shooters: The Montréal massacre, the Columbine attack, and rethinking schools. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(10), 1266–1285.
Urry, J. (2007). Mobilities. Cambridge: Polity.
Webber, J. A. (2003). Failure to hold: The politics of school violence. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Muschert, G.W. (2013). School Shootings as Mediatized Violence. In: Böckler, N., Seeger, T., Sitzer, P., Heitmeyer, W. (eds) School Shootings. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5526-4_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5526-4_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-5525-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-5526-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)