"It finds broad consensus across the literature that mainstream news media outlets tend to make use of harmful tropes and stereotypes when reporting on cases of gender-based violence, and that this contributes to the normalization of violence and perpetuation of discriminatory gender norms and stereotypes. The key modalities considered in the scholarly literature relate to the visual and textual features of news stories, and the sourcing practices used by journalists. Studies highlight a tendency for mainstream news reporting to mirror and reinforce the dynamics that contribute to gender-based violence in the first place, such as victim blaming, decentring the responsibility of perpetrators, and deploying stigmatizing or sensationalizing language that draws upon harmful gender norms and stereotypes about women’s and girls’ ‘appropriate roles’. Overall, the effect of these reporting modalities is to direct the public’s attention towards the behaviour and actions of victims and to suggest that the transgression is in the violation of a gender norm, rather than in the exercise of violence.
Evidence from the scholarly literature also highlights that incidents of gender-based violence are largely reported as episodic events or independent incidents of crime, that such reports deploy language that blames the victim by suggesting that she violated established or expected gender norms and rules, and that the level of sensationalism or ‘shock value’ in the case determines its ‘newsworthiness’. Evidence also suggests that reporters still largely neglect to include inputs from gender-based violence, women’s rights or child protection experts.
Subsequent sections dig deeper into the evidence of the nexus between news media reporting of violence against girls and the normalization of that violence. This involves analysing some of the more common tropes and stereotypes that circulate in relation to victims and perpetrators, and providing illustrative examples of how these shape interpretations of gender-based violence and its victims. These tropes and stereotypes are also shaped by vectors of intersectional discrimination across regional contexts, and evidence highlights that media reports play a crucial role in reinforcing hierarchies by differentiating between ‘types’ of victims (where some victims matter, or matter more than others).
Significantly, from the age analysis perspective, evidence from media reports also indicates that there is often an ‘expiration date’ after which girl victims may not ‘count’ as children. Specifically, sexualization in news media coverage of cases of gender-based violence can function as a mechanism to portray adolescent girls as adult women, and thus to obscure not only the gender dimension but also age-based rights violations at play. Notably, while this review identifies a burgeoning literature analysing the dynamics of media reporting on gender-based violence against women and how these relate to the perpetuation of discriminatory gender norms and stereotypes, there is a concerning gap in similar scholarly literature analysing these dynamics in relation to girls. Specifically, while there is a rich body of literature that includes gender and intersectional analyses of media reporting of gender-based violence, research that centres the age-related lens and analysis alongside the gender lens is relatively thin or nascent.
The final section spotlights the range of existing frameworks and guidelines for promoting more gender- and age-sensitive as well as victim-/survivor-centred reporting. It notes that, while there is a relatively clear path forward in terms of what needs to be done to drive positive change, a pressing gap remains in how to incentivize and ensure uptake and implementation of these frameworks and strategies for more responsible reporting of GBV within and across media organizations and among media practitioners. This section leverages insights from stakeholders, as well as the literature, to flag additional ‘enablers’ that may be key to unlocking the potential within these existing frameworks. These include dynamics that may have more or less impact at scale, including the values and commitments of individual journalists, networks of feminist journalists and gender editors, the presence of strong feminist and women’s movements that mobilize civil society in response to cases of violence and push for greater accountability from the state and media organizations, and advocacy and engagement with local news organizations and media practitioners by international organizations. Reflecting on the evidence, the review concludes by suggesting that achieving the kinds of changes needed to enable more gender- and age-sensitive reporting will require a combination of formal and informal mechanisms, strategies, and long-term efforts and investments. These need to acknowledge that, even though gender norms and stereotypes are ‘sticky’ and take time to change, the vast sphere of influence of news reporting, and of the media more broadly, means that it presents a tremendous opportunity and entry point for catalysing positive changes in how gender-based violence against girls is represented, and thus how we as a society interpret and respond to it." (Overview, pages 7-8)