“We can do better. We can be better”: counter-narratives in true crime podcasts on domestic violence

IF 1.1 2区 文学 Q3 COMMUNICATION
Kelli S. Boling
{"title":"“We can do better. We can be better”: counter-narratives in true crime podcasts on domestic violence","authors":"Kelli S. Boling","doi":"10.1080/15295036.2023.2265982","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTThrough three qualitative interviews with journalists who have produced and hosted true crime podcasts about domestic violence cases, this study examines the reciprocal interactions hosts can have with domestic violence survivors in their audiences. Also of significance is how these journalist-podcasters are working with their audience members to present counter-narratives that challenge the traditional media practice of silencing survivors, victims, and their loved ones. Building upon the interviews, a textual analysis of 43 episodes demonstrates how journalist-podcasters foreground stories of victims and advocacy for societal change to offer audiences a counter-narrative. In doing so, they generate awareness while simultaneously empowering victims to seek assistance and shed the stigma of shame that is prevalent in our society. These findings demonstrate the power of a reciprocal relationship between media producers and their audiences, specifically related to crime media coverage. This study demonstrates how true crime podcasters leverage audio storytelling to educate listeners and encourage systemic and societal change for survivors of domestic violence.KEYWORDS: True crimeadvocacycounter-narrativespodcastsdomestic violence Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 In this study, the term “victim” is used to identify someone who was killed or presumed killed during a domestic violence incident, and “survivor” is used to identify someone who experienced a domestic violence incident and lived. Other terms such as “victims’ families” and “victim-blaming” refer to both victims and/or survivors interchangeably.2 In this study, I use the term “host” and “producer” interchangeably. While those jobs have distinct duties, the podcasters I spoke to were hosts that crossed the producer line and had regular, significant input into production decisions. I also use the term “producer” as “someone who produces/makes a product,” not in specific reference to the job title. Additional informationNotes on contributorsKelli S. BolingKelli S. Boling (Ph.D., University of South Carolina) is an Assistant Professor in the College of Journalism and Mass Communications at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Her research focuses on audience reception and representation in the media, especially genre-specific media and traditionally marginalized audiences based on gender or race.","PeriodicalId":47123,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies in Media Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Studies in Media Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15295036.2023.2265982","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACTThrough three qualitative interviews with journalists who have produced and hosted true crime podcasts about domestic violence cases, this study examines the reciprocal interactions hosts can have with domestic violence survivors in their audiences. Also of significance is how these journalist-podcasters are working with their audience members to present counter-narratives that challenge the traditional media practice of silencing survivors, victims, and their loved ones. Building upon the interviews, a textual analysis of 43 episodes demonstrates how journalist-podcasters foreground stories of victims and advocacy for societal change to offer audiences a counter-narrative. In doing so, they generate awareness while simultaneously empowering victims to seek assistance and shed the stigma of shame that is prevalent in our society. These findings demonstrate the power of a reciprocal relationship between media producers and their audiences, specifically related to crime media coverage. This study demonstrates how true crime podcasters leverage audio storytelling to educate listeners and encourage systemic and societal change for survivors of domestic violence.KEYWORDS: True crimeadvocacycounter-narrativespodcastsdomestic violence Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 In this study, the term “victim” is used to identify someone who was killed or presumed killed during a domestic violence incident, and “survivor” is used to identify someone who experienced a domestic violence incident and lived. Other terms such as “victims’ families” and “victim-blaming” refer to both victims and/or survivors interchangeably.2 In this study, I use the term “host” and “producer” interchangeably. While those jobs have distinct duties, the podcasters I spoke to were hosts that crossed the producer line and had regular, significant input into production decisions. I also use the term “producer” as “someone who produces/makes a product,” not in specific reference to the job title. Additional informationNotes on contributorsKelli S. BolingKelli S. Boling (Ph.D., University of South Carolina) is an Assistant Professor in the College of Journalism and Mass Communications at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Her research focuses on audience reception and representation in the media, especially genre-specific media and traditionally marginalized audiences based on gender or race.
“我们可以做得更好。我们可以做得更好”:真实犯罪播客中关于家庭暴力的反叙事
摘要本研究通过对制作和主持家庭暴力案件真实犯罪播客的记者进行三次定性访谈,探讨主持人与受众中家庭暴力幸存者之间的互动关系。同样重要的是,这些记者兼播客如何与听众合作,提出反叙事,挑战传统媒体让幸存者、受害者及其亲人沉默的做法。在采访的基础上,对43集的文本分析展示了记者播客如何突出受害者的故事和倡导社会变革,为观众提供一个相反的叙述。在这样做的过程中,他们提高了认识,同时赋予受害者寻求援助的能力,并摆脱了我们社会中普遍存在的耻辱的耻辱。这些发现证明了媒体生产者和受众之间互惠关系的力量,特别是与犯罪媒体报道有关。这项研究展示了真正的犯罪播客如何利用音频讲故事来教育听众,并鼓励家庭暴力幸存者进行系统和社会变革。关键词:真实犯罪倡导反叙事播客家庭暴力披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。注1在本研究中,“受害者”一词指在家庭暴力事件中被杀或推定被杀的人,而“幸存者”则指经历过家庭暴力事件并活了下来的人。其他术语如“受害者家属”和“指责受害者”可交替指受害者和/或幸存者在本研究中,我交替使用“宿主”和“生产者”这两个术语。虽然这些工作有不同的职责,但我采访的播客主持人都是跨越制作人界限的主持人,他们对制作决策有定期的、重要的投入。我也用“制作人”这个词来指代“生产/制作产品的人”,而不是专门指工作头衔。作者简介:kelli S. Boling(博士,南卡罗来纳大学)是内布拉斯加大学林肯分校新闻与大众传播学院的助理教授。她的研究重点是受众在媒体中的接受和表现,特别是特定类型的媒体和基于性别或种族的传统边缘化受众。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Critical Studies in Media Communication (CSMC) is a peer-reviewed publication of the National Communication Association. CSMC publishes original scholarship in mediated and mass communication from a cultural studies and/or critical perspective. It particularly welcomes submissions that enrich debates among various critical traditions, methodological and analytical approaches, and theoretical standpoints. CSMC takes an inclusive view of media and welcomes scholarship on topics such as • media audiences • representations • institutions • digital technologies • social media • gaming • professional practices and ethics • production studies • media history • political economy. CSMC publishes scholarship about media audiences, representations, institutions, technologies, and professional practices. It includes work in history, political economy, critical philosophy, race and feminist theorizing, rhetorical and media criticism, and literary theory. It takes an inclusive view of media, including newspapers, magazines and other forms of print, cable, radio, television, film, and new media technologies such as the Internet.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信