Trends in Organized Crime

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 24–41 | Cite as

Framing organized crime and entrepreneurs’ reactions in Mexico: variations in the International Press



This paper presents a study on framing theory and entrepreneurs’ strategic responses in a narcoterrorism context. We obtain our results using a sequential explanatory mixed-method research design of international news, which aims to identify and analyze the themes that the international press covers in relation to narcoterrorism and to study entrepreneurs’ strategic responses to narcoterrorism as covered in news reports. Our quantitative content analysis (QCA) results show differences among journalists’ news stories using conflict, economic and morality frames in Mexico, the United States (US) and the European Union (EU). Our thematic analysis results present explanatory accounts for entrepreneurs’ selection of acquiescence, avoidance, defiance and manipulation tactics as strategic responses in a narcoterrorism context. Our contribution comprises explanatory accounts of frame theory’s effects on entrepreneurs and specific examples of their strategic responses to narcoterrorism.


Framing Media effects Entrepreneurs Narcoterrorism Strategic responses 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

This work was supported by the Department of Department of Intercultural Communication and Management (ICM) at Copenhagen Business School (CBS) under grant ICM HoDD, and it was co-sponsored by CBS’s Competitive Platform and the Political Communication Laboratory (LACOP) at the Faculty of Political Science and Public Administration at Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León.

Ethical approval

None of the studies cited in this article makes use of human participants or animals.

Conflict of Interest

Jacobo Ramirez has received research grants from the Department of Department of Intercultural Communication and Management (ICM) at Copenhagen Business School (CBS) under grant ICM HoDD and was co-sponsored by CBS’ Competitive Platform. Author Carlos Muñiz received research grant from the Policy Communication Laboratory at the Faculty of Political Science and Public Administration at Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León. Jacobo Ramirez declares that he has no conflict of interest. Carlos Muñiz declares that he has no conflict of interest.


  1. Birns L, Sánchez A (2007) The Govt. & the Drug lords: Who Rules Mexico?, Council on Hemispheric Affairs, Scoop Independent News. Available via DIALOG. Cited 11 April 2007
  2. Brennan RL, Prediger DJ (1981) Coefficient Kappa: some uses, misuses, and alternatives. Educ Psychol Measure 41:687–699. doi: 10.1177/001316448104100307 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brinks DM (2003) Informal institutions and the rule of law: the judicial response to state killings in Buenos Aires and São Paulo in the 1990s. Comp Polit 36:1–19. doi: 10.2307/4150157 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Campbell H, Hansen T (2014) Is Narco‐Violence in Mexico terrorism? Bull Lat Am Res 33:158–173. doi: 10.1111/blar.12145 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Citrin J, Green DP, Muste C et al (1997) Public opinion toward immigration reform: the role of economic motivations. J Polit 59:858–881. doi: 10.2307/2998640 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. CNNExpansión (2010) Empresarios Proponen Decálogo Anticrimen [Businessmen Propose Anti-Crime Decalogue]. CNNExpansión, Negocios. Available via DIALOG. Cited 27 Aug. 2010
  7. Correa-Cabrera G (2012) The spectacle of drug violence: American public discourse, media, and border enforcement in the Texas-Tamaulipas border region during drug-war times. Norteamérica 7:199–220Google Scholar
  8. Creswell JW (2009) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches, 3rd edn. Solid Action on Globalization and Environment, Los Angeles, CalifGoogle Scholar
  9. Dulin AL, Patiño J (2014) The logic of cartel car bombings in México. Trends Organized Crime 17:271–289. doi: 10.1007/s12117-014-9230-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Durbin KJ (2013) International narco-terrorism and non-state actors: the drug cartel global threat. Global. Sec Stud 4:16–30Google Scholar
  11. Emmott R (2011) Analysis-Mexico risks losing large areas to drug gangs, Reuters Limited. Available via DIALOG. Cited 15 Feb. 2011
  12. Entman RM (1993) Framing: toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. J Commun 43:51–58. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Estrada J (2011) La Violencia ‘Cierra las Puertas’ de Centros Nocturnos en Monterrey’ [Violence ‘Closes the Doors’ to Night Clubs in Monterrey]. CNNMéxico. Available via DIALOG. Cited 27 Sept. 2011
  14. Estrin S, Prevezer M (2011) The role of informal institutions in corporate governance: Brazil, Russia, India, and China compared. Asia Pac J Manag 28:41–67. doi: 10.1007/s10490-010-9229-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. European Parliament (2005) Human Rights and Democracy clauses in the EU’s International agreements. Directorate General for External policies of the Union. Cited 20 May 2015
  16. European Commission (2013) Trade countries and region –Mexico. Cited 15 June 2015
  17. Eversman MH (2013) Harm reduction and illicit drugs in U.S. newspapers. J Drug Policy Anal 6. doi:  10.1515/jdpa-2012-0005
  18. Gioia DA, Corley KG, Hamilton AL (2013) Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: notes on the gioia methodology. Organ Res Methods 16:15–31. doi: 10.1177/1094428112452151 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gitlin T (2003) The whole world is watching, mass media in the making and unmaking of the New left. University Presses of California, Columbia, CAGoogle Scholar
  20. Hawley C (2007) Crime fears fuel demand for security in Mexico; cameras, alarms sprouting amid drug wars, abductions. US Today. Available via DIALOG. Cited 8 May 2007
  21. Hirschman AO (1970) Exit, voice, and loyalty: responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  22. Howie L (2007) The terrorism threat and managing workplaces. Disaster Prev Manag: An Int J 16:70–78. doi: 10.1108/09653560710729820 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. InstitutoNacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI) (2013) Encuestanacional De victimización Y percepciónsobreseguridadpública [National survey of victimization and perceptions of public safety]. (No. 364.101). Mexican National Institute for Statistics and Geography. INEGI, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  24. Joutsenvirta M, Vaara E (2009) Discursive (de) legitimation of a contested Finnish greenfield investment project in Latin America. Scand J Manag 25:85–96. doi: 10.1016/j.scaman.2008.11.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kim S, Carvalho JP, Davis AG et al (2011) The view of the border: news framing of the definition, causes, and solutions to illegal immigration. Mass Commun Soc 14:292–314. doi: 10.1080/15205431003743679 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lacasse K, Forster L (2012) The war next door: peace journalism in US local and distant newspapers’ coverage of Mexico. Media War Conflict 5:223–237. doi: 10.1177/1750635212447907 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Milenio (2012) Bares optan por cambiar su giro a restaurants [bars choose to change its business to restaurants]. Available via DIALOG. Cited 3 March 2012
  28. Miller Lana S (2011) Mexico drug war casualty: citizenry suffers post-traumatic stress. Christian Sci Monit. Available via DIALOG. Cited 3 Dec. 2011.
  29. Morris SD (2013) Drug trafficking, corruption, and violence in Mexico: mapping the linkages. Trends Organized Crime 16:195–220. doi: 10.1007/s12117-013-9191-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Naranjo E, Campos M (2011) Monitor Global de la Actividad Emprendedora, México 2011. GEM & Instituto para el Desarrollo Regional [Global Monitor of the Entrepreneurial Activity, Mexico 2011. GEM & Regional Development Institute]. Available via DIALOG. Cited December 2011
  31. Neuman WR, Juts MR, Crigler A et al (1992) Common knowledge. News and the construction of political meaning. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  32. O’Donnell G (1999) Horizontal accountability in new democracies. The self-restraining state: Power and accountability in new democracies. In: Schedler A, Diamond LJ, Plattner MF (eds) The self restraining state: power and accountability in new democracies. Lynne Rienner Publishers, London, pp 29–51Google Scholar
  33. Oliver C (1991) Strategic responses to institutional processes. Acad Manag Rev 16:145–179. doi: 10.5465/AMR.1991.4279002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Onwuegbuzie AJ, Combs JP (2010) Emergent data analysis techniques in mixed methods research: A synthesis. In Tashakkori A, Teddlie C (eds) SAGE Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. SAGE, pp 397–430Google Scholar
  35. Pache A, Santos F (2010) When worlds collide: the internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands. Acad Manag Rev 35:455–476. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2010.51142368 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pan Z, Kosicki G (1993) Framing analysis: an approach to news discourse. Polit Commun 10:55–75. doi: 10.1080/10584609.1993.9962963 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Parker SC (2009) The economics of entrepreneurship. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rodriguez O (2010) Monterrey, Mexico's modern city, succumbs nearly overnight to battle between cartels. Associated Press Newswires. Available via DIALOG. Cited 25 Nov. 2010
  39. Scott WR (2013) Institutions and organizations. Ideas, interests, and identities. Sage Publishing House, LondonGoogle Scholar
  40. Semetko H, Valkenburg P (2000) Framing European politics: a content analysis of press and television news. J Commun 50:93–109. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02843.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sherman C (2011) More vacationing Mexicans flying instead of driving over the border to Texas to avoid violence. Associated Press Newswires. Available via DIALOG. Cited 23 Aug. 2011
  42. Shirk DA (2010) Drug violence in Mexico: data and analysis from 2001–2009. Trends Organized Crime 13:167–174. doi: 10.1007/s12117-010-9096-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sutter CJ, Webb JW, Kistruck GM et al (2013) ‘Entrepreneurs’ responses to semi-formal illegitimate institutional arrangements. J Bus Ventur 28:743–758. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.03.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Talbot KI (2010) The international nexus between drugs and terror lessons in conflict and diplomacy. Unpublished Master, Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey. Available via DIALOG. Cited December 2000
  45. Tuchman G (1978) Making news: a study in the construction of reality. The Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. U.S. Trade Representative (2013) Mexico. Cited 20 May 2015
  47. U.S. Department of State (2013) Merida initiative. Cited 20 May 2015
  48. UniversalEl (2011) Zambrano pide a sociedad actuar contra violencia [Zambrano asks society to act against violence]. Grupo de Diarios América-GDA/El Universal/México. Available via DIALOG. Cited 8 March 2011
  49. Vaccaro A, Palazzo G (2015) Values against violence: institutional change in societies dominated by organized crime. Acad Manag J 58:1075–1101. doi: 10.5465/amj.2012.0865 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wall Street Journal Online (2010) Cemex Owner Lorenzo Zambrano on Fighting Mexico's Drug Violence. Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Available via DIALOG. Cited 14 Oct. 2010
  51. Whelan R (2012) Affluent Mexicans Flee to Texas --- Violence Across the Border Buoys Housing in Impoverished Cities. The Wall Street Journal, Available via DIALOG. Cited July 28 2012

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Copenhagen Business School (CBS)Department of Intercultural Communication and ManagementFrederiksbergDenmark
  2. 2.Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo LeónFaculty of Political Science and Public AdministrationMonterreyMexico

Personalised recommendations