Standfirst:
In 2023, four US news media outlets gave disproportionately high coverage to rare homicidal events perpetrated by strangers, including mass and school shootings, yet covered disproportionately few of the more common types of firearm violence, such as domestic violence. We call for responsible media coverage of firearm incidents to realign reporting to reality.
Main text:
Firearms are a major health and safety risk to people living in the US. In 2021, over 48,000 Americans lost their lives to firearms. Yet, firearm research has historically been de-prioritized and underfunded compared to other leading causes of death1. In 2020, US lawmakers allocated federal funds specifically to firearm research for the first time in over 20 years2. The move towards better funding firearm research is promising, but resources remain limited, and research continues to search for solutions to end firearm violence.
A public health approach has been shown to contribute actionable and effective strategies to preventing public health issues, including motor vehicle accidents and firearm injury3. The science of public health uses data and research to identify and reduce risk factors (or promote protective factors) for the entire population. In the context of firearms, a public health approach uses evidence-based policies and programs to reduce risk and prevent firearm-related harms for everyone.
However, there are many different types of risks associated with firearms – from homicidal mass shootings to children playing with and unintentionally firing a loaded gun. Accurately and reliably disseminating information on the prevalence of various firearm-related risks is the first step in a public health approach to firearm injury prevention. Understanding and widely communicating which firearm-related risks are most common is critical for directing resources and research efforts towards reducing the harms that affect the largest number of people.
Mainstream national news media is a key shared source of information about health and safety risks for people across the US, especially when the harm is not usually experienced directly, such as being injured and dying by a firearm. The idea that we rely on mainstream news as a window into society, bridging the gap between the world outside and the picture of the world inside our heads4, is not a new one. It lies at the heart of the seminal theories of cultivation5 and agenda setting6 theory. While the theories have different emphasizes, for example cultivation theory focuses on television, the core argument is the same: mainstream media shapes public perception and priorities. There is a large body of empirical support for cultivation theory’s claim that people who spend more time consuming media come to see the world through the same lens as the media5. Similarly, a wealth of evidence supports (first-level) agenda setting theory’s argument that the more we are exposed to news stories on a specific issues, the more we: 1) are aware of them; 2) come to perceive them as salient; and 3) are likely to prioritize them6. The types of firearm incidents the news media choose to report, and the frequency with which they do so, therefore plays a critical role in generating widespread public attention; including shaping perceptions, influencing behaviors, and setting the national agenda on which firearm-related risks are most salient and in need of prioritization7.
Biased media reporting
Despite the powerful role of mainstream news media in communicating health risks, previous research has identified large and systematic biases in media reporting, creating a disconnect between reporting and reality8. Mainstream media typically overrepresent uncommon yet ‘newsworthy’ events, such as terrorist attacks, yet minimize common risks to public health, such as smoking. Although there is no equivalent evidence on the national coverage of firearm incidents in mainstream news media, initial evidence based on local news outlets points towards biased reporting towards multiple victim events and incidents involving children9.
In a non-peer-reviewed study10, we analysed national coverage of firearm incidents in mainstream US news media in 2023 (14,688 news reports) and compared them to the actual frequency of firearm-related causes of death (e.g., homicide, suicide) and incident characteristics (e.g., mass shootings, domestic violence). We sampled from CNN, Fox News, The Guardian, and the New York Times with the aim of identifying generalizable patterns across the political ideological spectrum, irrespective of news medium (i.e., television news vs news articles). We acknowledge that possible sampling biases remain as these four media outlets may not reflect the full breadth of US news reporting.
Nevertheless, we found that firearm-related risks were consistently misrepresented by mainstream news media – irrespective of news media outlet and medium10. The news media consistently overrepresented homicide: accounting for around 76.2% to 97.7% of news reports compared to 38.7% of actual firearm deaths10. There was also a stark discrepancy between media coverage of particular types of firearm incidents and their actual frequency (Figure 1). Most news reports covered mass shootings (55.3% to 76.2%), despite accounting for only 4.0% of firearm deaths and 7.5% of firearm injuries. School incidents – typically school mass shootings – were also drastically overrepresented the news by around 10-fold. Domestic violence and drive-by shootings, on the other hand, which accounted for the highest share of firearm-related deaths and injuries, were underrepresented in the news, only accounting for less than 6% of news reports.
Figure 1. Actual versus news media reported frequency of firearm incidents in 2023.
Bars are ordered from left to right by largest to smallest percentage share of media news reports. Actual frequency of occurrence defined according to the Gun Violence Archive. Media news reports represent the total percentage share of coverage for each incident characteristic averaged across four mainstream news outlets: CNN, Fox News, New York Times, and The Guardian.
Why it matters
These systematic biases in mainstream news media coverage that overrepresent rare homicidal events that are perpetrated by strangers, such as hate crimes and mass shootings, while minimizing the relatively more frequent events of firearm injury and death, such as domestic violence and suicide, create a disconnect between perception and reality. They also divert attention and resources away from the more common and pervasive firearm-related risks. This is reflected in the allocation of federal funding patterns. In the fiscal year of 2023, around $30 million federal dollars funded firearm research. Half of which was awarded to firearm research involving children (with $5 million to schools specifically) and yet only $2 million was allocated to domestic violence. This bias in the allocation of funding mirrors media reporting biases, rather than the actual prevalence of firearm incidents.
Media reporting has also been shown to influence people’s behavior. The overrepresentation of sensational yet low probability events in the media, including mass shootings, has previously been linked to heightened safety concerns and increased rates of firearm ownership and carriage for self-defense11. Indeed, increasing numbers of Americans are choosing to own firearms for protection, even though owning a firearm increases the risk of being injured and dying by a firearm, particularly for the more common types of risks of firearm suicide and domestic violence12.
Disproportionate media coverage of mass shootings not only drives public concern and firearm purchasing but has also been shown to motivate similar ancillary events, especially in the school context. While reasons driving imitation processes are unclear, it has been speculated that people are lured by the ‘sheer thrill’ of making the headlines13. The reporting biases we found in mainstream news media outlets may both indirectly and directly stoke public fear and enable copycat behavior by disproportionately and sensationally covering mass and school shootings.
The role of media ownership
There are multiple different factors leading up to the decision to select any given news story14. Since journalists and editors work within wider organizational, economic, and social systems, many of the influences at play are bigger than themselves. One important factor, that has been shown to drive news reporting decisions, is media ownership15. The characteristics of any organization’s ownership structure affect its aims and behaviors – and media companies are no different. It matters whether a media company is privately versus publicly owned, corporate versus independent, for-profit versus non-profit, and large and national versus small and local14. For example, large for-profit corporations are especially incentivized to make money through quick “clicks”, sales, and subscriptions, and popular sensational content, such as coverage of mass shootings, is an easy way to quickly attract mainstream attention and secure a bigger audience. With only six major corporations now controlling 90% of US media, and an average of two-and-a-half of local newspapers closing a week in 2023, the US media landscape is becoming more vulnerable to reporting biases because, increasingly, only a handful of voices and for-profit media companies dominate the media landscape.
Responsibly re-aligning reporting to reality
The importance of careful media reporting has long been recognized in suicide prevention – with health agencies, including the World Health Organization, issuing guidance on responsible media reporting. But, despite calls for action, similar caution has not yet been applied to firearm incidents13.
We propose the following five main recommendations to help ensure that firearm-related risks are accurately, proportionately, and responsibly communicated.
National data systems for monitoring firearm-related risks: Accurate and up-to-date epidemiological information on the prevalence of the intent of firearm injuries and deaths (e.g., assault versus self-directed), and the characteristics of the incidents in which they occur (e.g., domestic violence versus gang-involved shootings), is needed to effectively implement a public health approach; monitoring the changing scope and nature of firearm-related risks, and better informing the public and relevant professionals.
Communication of common firearm-related risks: We urge researchers to engage with journalists, editors, and policymakers to orient themselves to the data and raise awareness around the more common firearm-related risks to the public, whilst also considering the risks associated with covering certain firearm-related risks, such as firearm suicide (see below). Meanwhile, we encourage journalists and editors to actively overcome the current biases in media coverage to convey those common – yet comparatively neglected – firearm-related risks to the public10. For example, firearm homicide was most likely to occur in domestic violence situations in 2023, and having a firearm in the home increases the risk of suicide.
Communication of uncommon firearm-related risks: Previous journalistic recommendations have emphasized the importance of context for grounding data. When covering rare firearm incidents, such as mass shootings, school shootings, and hate crimes, we suggest that news media company policies, editors, and journalists provide wider contextual information on the epidemiology of firearm-related risks in order to emphasize that these events are uncommon.
Editorial guidance on how to report on firearm incidents: We believe that policymakers and reporters can learn from suicide prevention by issuing reporting guidelines that avoid fueling public fear and possible imitation. Similar editorial guidance may help to ensure that violent acts involving firearms (including those involving self-defense) are not be glorified in any way, and details of the event that would enable imitation should not be included in the news story, such as details around the method used to carry out the event. We echo previous calls13 for journalists to highlight the negative outcome of the perpetrators whilst also engaging more with the victims to ensure that their voices and needs are heard and are at the center of the story. Best journalistic practices on sensitive topics can also be embedded into the routine reporting of firearm incidents. For example, reporters should aim to use a range of experts as sources of information and, whenever appropriate, incorporate signposting to relevant resources and support services, including providing information on anonymous reporting systems and petitioning for Extreme Risk Protection Orders, which are a tool for reducing firearm-related harms by temporarily preventing at-risk individuals from purchasing and possessing firearms, so that concerns can be reported and acted upon.
Fund a diverse news media landscape: To overcome potential biases due to market dominance by a handful of large conglomerates and media vulnerability to reporting biases, more resources should be made available for local, non-profit, and independent news media companies. Policymakers should increase public funding for the news media and philanthropists should continue to support these valuable diverse and local voices that facilitate media coverage of the full spectrum of news stories involving firearms.
While preventable, firearm violence is one of the biggest public health challenges the US currently faces. National and local news media outlets could be an invaluable vehicle to help communicate the reality of firearm-related risks. Currently however, we show systematic reporting biases are causing rare, sensational events to dominant the news10, which may be stoking public fear, motivating more people to buy and carry guns, and misdirecting national resources. As we search for solutions to end firearm violence, we urge researchers to work with reporters and policymakers to re-orient them to the epidemiological data and call for editorial guidelines and a more diverse US media landscape to help encourage the responsible reporting of the full range of firearm incidents.
Footnotes
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
References
- 1.Stark DE & Shah NH Funding and Publication of Research on Gun Violence and Other Leading Causes of Death. JAMA 317, 84–85 (2017). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Subbaraman N United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year freeze. Nature 577, 12–12 (2019). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Patel J, Leach-Kemon K, Curry G, Naghavi M & Sridhar D Firearm injury—a preventable public health issue. The Lancet Public Health 7, e976–e982 (2022). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Lippmann W Public Opinion. (Routledge, 2017). [Google Scholar]
- 5.Gerbner G, Gross L, Morgan M & Signorielli N Living with television: The dynamics of the cultivation process. Perspectives on media effects 1986, 17–40 (1986). [Google Scholar]
- 6.McCombs M A Look at Agenda-setting: past, present and future. Journalism Studies 6, 543–557 (2005). [Google Scholar]
- 7.King G, Schneer B & White A How the news media activate public expression and influence national agendas. Science 358, 776–780 (2017). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Combs B & Slovic P Newspaper Coverage of Causes of Death. Journalism Quarterly 56, 837–849 (1979). [Google Scholar]
- 9.Kaufman EJ et al. Making the news: Victim characteristics associated with media reporting on firearm injury. Prev Med 141, 106275 (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Degli Esposti M, Hans Z, Thulin E, Hibbs E & Sokol RL Empirical evidence: The misrepresented reality of firearm-related risks. (2024) doi:osf.io/8jn4v. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Porfiri M, Sattanapalle RR, Nakayama S, Macinko J & Sipahi R Media coverage and firearm acquisition in the aftermath of a mass shooting. Nat Hum Behav (2019) doi: 10.1038/s41562-019-0636-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Wiebe DJ Homicide and suicide risks associated with firearms in the home: a national case-control study. Annals of emergency medicine 41, 771–782 (2003). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Kostinsky S, Bixler EO & Kettl PA Threats of School Violence in Pennsylvania After Media Coverage of the Columbine High School Massacre: Examining the Role of Imitation. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 155, 994–1001 (2001). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Shoemaker PJ & Reese SD Mediating the Message. (White Plains, NY: Longman, 1996). [Google Scholar]
- 15.Wagner MW & Collins TP Does ownership matter? The case of Rupert Murdoch’s purchase of the Wall Street Journal. Journalism Practice 8, 758–771 (2014). [Google Scholar]