My research on the 1960s civil rights movement found a key way protests influence politics is through media. I’m grateful that research was just published. One question, then & now, is does the news frame coverage more in terms of “rights” or “riots”? 1/
cambridge.org/core/journals/…
cambridge.org/core/journals/…
Consider, for example, these two headlines from protests in Reno last week: “Reno residents to join in nationwide protests against death of George Floyd” and ”D.A. files felony charges against 4 suspects in connection to Reno riot” 2/
One article highlights “a nationwide movement to protest the death of George Floyd, a black man who died while handcuffed and in police custody after a white officer kept his knee pressed into his neck for more than eight minutes.” 3/
The other article leads with four people “facing felony charges for their alleged involvement in vandalizing Reno City Hall and the police station during the riot last weekend…Officials said the defendants broke several windows that cost more than $14,000 each.” 4/
Protests are complex events. If 1,000 people protest peacefully and 20 ransack a store or five light a car on fire, what should a reporter focus on? Which visual will be most compelling on TV? What helps the audience best understand the underlying issues? 5/
Media often rely on official or police accounts for reporting. If there are clashes at a demonstration and police use excess force, will the coverage focus on protester-initiated violence? Police violence? Both? See this tweet for a ludicrous example. 6/
The simple model in the paper starts with activists who opt to engage in nonviolent or violent resistance. The state then responds with typical or excess force. (To be clear, the world is more complicated but this model helps us describe some common patterns.) 7/
In the model, the media then cover the protest and, depending on whether there is protester-initiated violence and/or police violence, the media narrative will tend to emphasize a “rights” narrative or a ”riots” narrative. 8/
My research and excellent work by other folks like Dan Gillion (see his new book) shows violence can have an amplifying effect on coverage. For example, in the 1960s, I found police or protester violence led to more prominent coverage in NYTimes. 9/ amazon.com/Loud-Minority-…
My research and excellent work by other folks like Dan Gillion (see his new book) shows violence can have an amplifying effect on coverage. For example, in the 1960s, I found police or protester violence led to more prominent coverage in NYTimes. 9/ amazon.com/Loud-Minority-…
However, I find a conditional effect of violence on whether coverage is sympathetic to protests. When protesters initiate violence, media focus on “riots.” When protesters use nonviolent tactics & police are violent, the model predicts coverage will focus on “rights” frames. 10/
Civil rights leaders understood this. They studied the press, “how it reacted, what made news & what did not. One thing was unambiguous: the greater the violence, the bigger the news, especially if it could be photographed or filmed.” See superb book The Race Beat for more. 11/
Birmingham was selected as a site for protests because the police chief was likely to engage in brutal repression. Protesters made themselves targets of repression for larger cause. See photo by Charles Moore of firefighters aiming high-pressure water hoses at demonstrators. 12/
Another iconic photo embodying the viciousness of segregation was taken by Bill Hudson during the Birmingham campaign. 13/
More recently, during #BlackLivesMatter protests in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this remarkable photo by Jonathan Bachman shows police in riot gear arresting Leisha Evans, a nurse. 14/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taking_a_…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taking_a_…
What does this mean for the current wave of protests? In demonstrations over the last week, excess or indiscriminate use of force by police has also been a widespread issue. See this disturbing video from Buffalo that has gotten a lot of attention. 15/
Lawyer Greg Doucette has compiled a twitter thread with videos from around the country documenting evidence of ~350 incidents of alleged excess force by police: 16/
Historian and @Princeton colleague @kevinkruse notes that in the past this kind of behavior by officers was sometimes called a “police riot.” See his thread, here: 17/
So, after the initial protest coverage focused heavily on vandalism, stores being ransacked and arson, how has protest coverage played out over the whole week? Has it been more “crime” or ”rights” focused? Does that even matter? 18/
In the 1960s, my research shows that media coverage mattered enormously because public opinion is heavily swayed by these different narratives toward a concern for “civil rights” or a concern about crime and riots (in this plot categorized as “social control.”) 19/
In short, protests influenced media and media moved public opinion. As public opinion shifted, so too did legislation in Congress and voting in presidential elections. 20/
In 1964, peaceful protests met with police violence helped drive passage of landmark civil rights legislation & a landslide presidential victory for Lyndon Johnson against Barry Goldwater's “law & order” campaign. 21/
I find in 1968 that demonstrations which included protester-initiated violence contributed to the civil rights coalition losing key states to law & order coalition. In other words, Humphrey, lead author of 1964 Civil Rights Act was beaten by Nixon champion of “law & order.” 22/
Today, are “rights” frames or “crime” frames more common in coverage? I looked at newspapers around the country and, as the model predicts, peaceful protests met by police violence are now one of leading stories. Here are front page headlines from multiple major papers. 23/
Public opinion also appears to be sympathetic to the protest movement. In one poll, “57% say the anger leading to protests is ‘fully justified.‘” 24/ washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/…
As @ThePlumLineGS notes, the mass public seems to be siding “with mostly peaceful protests registering profound and legitimate abhorrence at continued systemic racism and police violence, and demanding reform.” 25/ washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/…
Of course violence is not simply a tactic for strategic protesters or police to use to as part of a political campaign. Violence can result in injury and death of protesters and police. We’ve seen that already. 26/ theguardian.com/us-news/2020/j…
For an international movement trying to draw attention to the long history of racist and brutal policing, however, media coverage of widespread police violence is a very powerful tool for building a winning coalition for change. fin/
For another overview of the research focusing on some of the other results, see this thread:
