Mass Shootings and Gun Control in America: Whether Media Coverage and Social Movement Responses Matter

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to add to the scholarly conversation on the topic of gun control debate in the United States of America. Specifically, I looked at the themes of reporting on mass shootings within The New York Times over the last 25 years, broken down into three distinct timeframes. Those time frames are 1996-2000, 2009-2013, and 2019-2023. I also looked at how the NRA and Brady Campaign responded to mass shootings. The themes in the reporting by The New York Times on mass shootings evolved and changed throughout my study. In the beginning, there was a keen interest in large mass shooting events. As time went on my findings showed that there was more emotional appeal in their reporting. The coverage of mass shootings was very partisan. In my research, I found that the problem of mass shootings has not moved the gun control debate out of a stalemate in any meaningful way. However, I have uncovered some key framing tactics and emotional appeals that the two social movement organizations make when speaking publicly and to their members. Generally speaking, both sides of the argument value safety and liberty. Their expressions of those values are polar opposites, and their solution types are either individualistic(NRA) or collective(Brady Campaign). The NRA is a larger, more sophisticated, and at times secretive organization. The Brady Campaign is proactive and more public in its efforts to create change.