MEDIA COVERAGE
One of the largest disparities in public treatment of missing and murdered Canadian Aboriginal women is the role of the media. Differences in methods and amount of reporting for non Aboriginal and Aboriginal showcase that the dominant ideology still relegates the Aboriginal population to the margins. Using the work of scholars Yasmin Jiwani and Kristen Gilchrist we will examine how Canadian media has treated Aboriginal missing and murdered women and the devastating effects of the lack of media representation.
I. History
Yasmin Jiwani, a professor in Communications at Concordia University, writes about media portrayals of Aboriginal women as historically constructed and ultimately destructive in the pursuit of justice for missing and murdered women. In her article ‘Symbolic and Discursive Violence in Media Representations of Aboriginal and Missing Women’ Jiwani analyses seven years of press coverage on Aboriginal women by the Globe and Mail. She argues that stereotypes put forth by Canadian media are ongoing historical constructions that can be tied to early colonial attitudes. Representations of Aboriginal women became negative as the need for securing white settlement became more important. It became crucial to eliminate Aboriginal claims to land and to dismantle matriarchal power dynamics. The dual representation of Aboriginal women became divided between the “Indian princess” or the “squaw.” The princess was an Aboriginal woman who was capable of being rescued by the white man, while the squaw was a “‘primitive’ woman relegated to servicing the sexual needs to white settlers.”[1] This association with prostitution continues to be a stereotype in news reporting and public perception today. This devalued status marks Aboriginal women as unworthy victims when they are affected by crime. Jiwani argues that violence template that exists around coverage of Aboriginal women has led to the entrenched victim status. She makes an important point that reporting of cases of missing/murdered Aboriginal women s often suggests a causal link between intimate and structural forms of violence.[2]
II. Inequalities in Reporting
At the core of the problem with Canadian media’s treatment of missing/murdered Aboriginal women is the issue of misrepresentation and othering. Kristen Gilchrist provides a tangible comparison in her article, “NEWSWORTHY” VICTIMS? Exploring differences in Canadian local press coverage of missing/murdered Aboriginal and White women.” Gilchrist examines the cases of three Aboriginal and three Caucasian women, all of whom went missing in the same bracket of time and who came from similar socio-economic backgrounds. First she addresses what is “newsworthy” in current Western society and how that construction has destructive effects on how cases of missing/murdered Aboriginal women are handled. She states that one of the most important determining factors in whether a story will be newsworthy is its “spatial and cultural proximity”[3]to the reader. She argues that the binary construction of white women versus Aboriginal women creates a relationship that is dependent on Aboriginal subjugation. Gilchrist says that if a missing/murdered Aboriginal woman is deemed to be leading a “high-risk” lifestyle, she is held partially responsible for the crime committed against her. This constructs the othering of Aboriginal women. Gilchrist writes, “This discourse blames women and obscures the unequal social conditions which governed and shaped “choices” made under these circumstances.”[4] This othering sends the signal to the general public that the crimes against Aboriginal do not matter, particularly if they are “high-risk.” Additionally, Gilchrist argues that this stereotype is extended to all Aboriginal women.
Gilchrist’s analysis of this phenomenon sometimes referred to as Missing White Women Syndrome is a comparative study between media coverage of victims. She discusses the cases of Daleen Bosse, Melanie Geddes and Amber Redman, all Aboriginal women who disappeared from Saskatchewan, and Ardeth Wood, Alicia Ross and Jennifer Teague, who were white and disappeared from Ontario. Using the Canadian Newstand database, she conducted an investigation into the types of articles and amount of coverage per case. Her conclusion was that despite being from similar socio-economic backgrounds, the Aboriginal women received three and a half times less coverage than the white women.[5] Perhaps even more alarming is differentiations in the style of content of the articles. For the white women, personal anecdotes were given, first names were used and adjectives such as “beautiful,” “gifted” and “devout” were common. The news reportage situated the crime as in our neighbourhood, making it spatially and emotionally relatable to the reader. In comparison, articles about Aboriginal women placed the crimes as happening in their communities. Gilchrist found that the women were “relegated to the periphery of the page and, by extension, of reader’s consciousness.”[6] To add to Gilchrist’s study and comparisons of these women, we would like to add that as of December 2014, there are Wikipedia articles on all the white women, and none on the Aboriginal women.
III. Implications of Media Treatment
Both Jiwani and Gilchrist prove that the media is not isolated from other institutions that dictate how these crimes are addressed, both by the public and by law enforcement. Gilchrist argues that “when newsmakers cease to report certain types of crimes it creates the impression that they are no longer a cause for concern.”[7] Gilchrist worries that the hyper visibility of white victims means that Aboriginal victims could seem to offenders to be easier targets for violence.[8]She also points out that the more media attention given to a case, the more likely the police investigation is to be well funded and quickly mobilized. Jiwani says that these media representations of missing and murdered Aboriginal women enable the Canadian state to maintain its position of limited involvement in the issue.[9] Her argument that structural and intimate violence are conflated in news reporting of Aboriginal issues suggests that the media sources present the notion that in some way Aboriginal women are to blame for the crimes committed against them. The stereotypes of Aboriginal identity such as “princess” versus “squaw,” as well as the assumptions of criminality and conflations of intimate and structural violence paint a picture of women who are not deserving of the same media attention and public action as women in other Canadian communities. Jiwani and Gilchrist’s analysis of media attention to missing and murdered Aboriginal women show both a vast inequality in amount of coverage, as well as difference in the style of treatment. These sociological issues of media treatment create a justification for the Canadian state in their continued ignorance of these crimes.
[1] Jiwani, Yasmin. “Symbolic and Discursive Violence in Media Representations of Aboriginal Missing and Murdered Women.” Violence in Hostile Contexts E-Book (2009), 4.
[2] Ibid., 6.
[3] Gilchrist, Kristen. “‘Newsworthy’ Victims?Exploring differences in Canadian local press coverage of missing/murdered Aboriginal and White women.” Feminist Media Studies. (2010): 2.
[4] Ibid., 4.
[5] Ibid., 11.
[6] Ibid., 9.
[7] Ibid., 14.
[8] Ibid., 14.
[9] Jiwani, Yasmin. “Symbolic and Discursive Violence in Media Representations of Aboriginal Missing and Murdered Women.” Violence in Hostile Contexts E-Book (2009), 1.
One of the largest disparities in public treatment of missing and murdered Canadian Aboriginal women is the role of the media. Differences in methods and amount of reporting for non Aboriginal and Aboriginal showcase that the dominant ideology still relegates the Aboriginal population to the margins. Using the work of scholars Yasmin Jiwani and Kristen Gilchrist we will examine how Canadian media has treated Aboriginal missing and murdered women and the devastating effects of the lack of media representation.
I. History
Yasmin Jiwani, a professor in Communications at Concordia University, writes about media portrayals of Aboriginal women as historically constructed and ultimately destructive in the pursuit of justice for missing and murdered women. In her article ‘Symbolic and Discursive Violence in Media Representations of Aboriginal and Missing Women’ Jiwani analyses seven years of press coverage on Aboriginal women by the Globe and Mail. She argues that stereotypes put forth by Canadian media are ongoing historical constructions that can be tied to early colonial attitudes. Representations of Aboriginal women became negative as the need for securing white settlement became more important. It became crucial to eliminate Aboriginal claims to land and to dismantle matriarchal power dynamics. The dual representation of Aboriginal women became divided between the “Indian princess” or the “squaw.” The princess was an Aboriginal woman who was capable of being rescued by the white man, while the squaw was a “‘primitive’ woman relegated to servicing the sexual needs to white settlers.”[1] This association with prostitution continues to be a stereotype in news reporting and public perception today. This devalued status marks Aboriginal women as unworthy victims when they are affected by crime. Jiwani argues that violence template that exists around coverage of Aboriginal women has led to the entrenched victim status. She makes an important point that reporting of cases of missing/murdered Aboriginal women s often suggests a causal link between intimate and structural forms of violence.[2]
II. Inequalities in Reporting
At the core of the problem with Canadian media’s treatment of missing/murdered Aboriginal women is the issue of misrepresentation and othering. Kristen Gilchrist provides a tangible comparison in her article, “NEWSWORTHY” VICTIMS? Exploring differences in Canadian local press coverage of missing/murdered Aboriginal and White women.” Gilchrist examines the cases of three Aboriginal and three Caucasian women, all of whom went missing in the same bracket of time and who came from similar socio-economic backgrounds. First she addresses what is “newsworthy” in current Western society and how that construction has destructive effects on how cases of missing/murdered Aboriginal women are handled. She states that one of the most important determining factors in whether a story will be newsworthy is its “spatial and cultural proximity”[3]to the reader. She argues that the binary construction of white women versus Aboriginal women creates a relationship that is dependent on Aboriginal subjugation. Gilchrist says that if a missing/murdered Aboriginal woman is deemed to be leading a “high-risk” lifestyle, she is held partially responsible for the crime committed against her. This constructs the othering of Aboriginal women. Gilchrist writes, “This discourse blames women and obscures the unequal social conditions which governed and shaped “choices” made under these circumstances.”[4] This othering sends the signal to the general public that the crimes against Aboriginal do not matter, particularly if they are “high-risk.” Additionally, Gilchrist argues that this stereotype is extended to all Aboriginal women.
Gilchrist’s analysis of this phenomenon sometimes referred to as Missing White Women Syndrome is a comparative study between media coverage of victims. She discusses the cases of Daleen Bosse, Melanie Geddes and Amber Redman, all Aboriginal women who disappeared from Saskatchewan, and Ardeth Wood, Alicia Ross and Jennifer Teague, who were white and disappeared from Ontario. Using the Canadian Newstand database, she conducted an investigation into the types of articles and amount of coverage per case. Her conclusion was that despite being from similar socio-economic backgrounds, the Aboriginal women received three and a half times less coverage than the white women.[5] Perhaps even more alarming is differentiations in the style of content of the articles. For the white women, personal anecdotes were given, first names were used and adjectives such as “beautiful,” “gifted” and “devout” were common. The news reportage situated the crime as in our neighbourhood, making it spatially and emotionally relatable to the reader. In comparison, articles about Aboriginal women placed the crimes as happening in their communities. Gilchrist found that the women were “relegated to the periphery of the page and, by extension, of reader’s consciousness.”[6] To add to Gilchrist’s study and comparisons of these women, we would like to add that as of December 2014, there are Wikipedia articles on all the white women, and none on the Aboriginal women.
III. Implications of Media Treatment
Both Jiwani and Gilchrist prove that the media is not isolated from other institutions that dictate how these crimes are addressed, both by the public and by law enforcement. Gilchrist argues that “when newsmakers cease to report certain types of crimes it creates the impression that they are no longer a cause for concern.”[7] Gilchrist worries that the hyper visibility of white victims means that Aboriginal victims could seem to offenders to be easier targets for violence.[8]She also points out that the more media attention given to a case, the more likely the police investigation is to be well funded and quickly mobilized. Jiwani says that these media representations of missing and murdered Aboriginal women enable the Canadian state to maintain its position of limited involvement in the issue.[9] Her argument that structural and intimate violence are conflated in news reporting of Aboriginal issues suggests that the media sources present the notion that in some way Aboriginal women are to blame for the crimes committed against them. The stereotypes of Aboriginal identity such as “princess” versus “squaw,” as well as the assumptions of criminality and conflations of intimate and structural violence paint a picture of women who are not deserving of the same media attention and public action as women in other Canadian communities. Jiwani and Gilchrist’s analysis of media attention to missing and murdered Aboriginal women show both a vast inequality in amount of coverage, as well as difference in the style of treatment. These sociological issues of media treatment create a justification for the Canadian state in their continued ignorance of these crimes.
[1] Jiwani, Yasmin. “Symbolic and Discursive Violence in Media Representations of Aboriginal Missing and Murdered Women.” Violence in Hostile Contexts E-Book (2009), 4.
[2] Ibid., 6.
[3] Gilchrist, Kristen. “‘Newsworthy’ Victims?Exploring differences in Canadian local press coverage of missing/murdered Aboriginal and White women.” Feminist Media Studies. (2010): 2.
[4] Ibid., 4.
[5] Ibid., 11.
[6] Ibid., 9.
[7] Ibid., 14.
[8] Ibid., 14.
[9] Jiwani, Yasmin. “Symbolic and Discursive Violence in Media Representations of Aboriginal Missing and Murdered Women.” Violence in Hostile Contexts E-Book (2009), 1.