OBLIGATORISK FORSIDE
Prescribed front page
HJEMMEOPGAVER, PROJEKTER, SYNOPSER U/ MUNDTLIGT
FORSVAR
Home Assignments, Project Reports, Synopses without oral
defence
INSTITUT FOR ERHVERVSKOMMUNIKATION
Department of Business Communication
STUDIENUMMER
Student No.
HOLD NR.:
Class No.
Ex.: U02
FAGETS NAVN:
Course/Exam Title
170898 - Filip Gravgaard Jars
528730 - Louis James Hogg
International virksomhedskommunikation i engelsk og spansk
VEJLEDER:
Name of Supervisor
Antoinette Mary Fage-Butler
ANTAL
TYPEENHEDER I DIN
BESVARELSE
(ekskl. blanktegn):
Number of Characters
in your Assignment
(exclusive of blanks):
94.005
A Foucauldian discourse analysis of The New York Times’
portrayal of the Michael Brown and Eric Garner killings
Table of contents
Abstract (Filip & Louis) .......................................................................................................... 1
1. Introduction (Filip & Louis) ................................................................................................. 2
2. Literature Review (Filip) ..................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Theories (Filip) ............................................................................................................. 5
2.2 Previous empirical studies (Filip) .................................................................................... 7
3. Methodology (Filip)............................................................................................................ 8
3.1 Method (Filip) ............................................................................................................... 8
3.3 Data (Filip) ................................................................................................................... 9
4. Eric Garner analysis (Louis) ............................................................................................... 14
4.1 First three days (Louis) ................................................................................................. 14
4.2 Several days after (Louis) ............................................................................................. 18
4.3 Weeks and months after (Louis) .................................................................................... 23
4.4 Sub-conclusion (Louis)............................................................................................... 266
5. Michael Brown analysis (Filip) .......................................................................................... 27
5.1 First three days (Filip) .................................................................................................. 27
5.2 Several days after (Filip) .............................................................................................. 31
5.3 Weeks and months after (Filip) ..................................................................................... 34
5.4 Sub-conclusion (Filip).................................................................................................. 38
6. Discussion (Filip & Louis) ................................................................................................. 40
7. Conclusion (Filip & Louis) ................................................................................................ 44
8. Reference list ................................................................................................................... 46
Abstract
Given the history of the United States of America involving slavery, segregation and
racism, numerous theories have in recent history established how African Americans
often are stereotyped as criminals, drug users or menaces to society in newspapers,
broadcasts or reality television. This study analyses and compares the discourse
created over time by The New York Times on the two African American males of
Eric Garner and Michael Brown who were both killed by police. We will conclude
how one of the largest newspapers creates a discourse on a racially sensitive topic. To
accomplish this, we will use the first three steps of Carla Willig’s (2013) interpretation
of a Foucauldian Discourse Analysis, to analyse which discourses are created and
what they achieve. To see which discursive changes take place over time, we divide
the analysis into three time periods; “first three days”, “several days after” and “weeks
and months after”. In the analysis section, we establish three discourses that construct
the object neutrally, as a victim and as a criminal. We want to establish which
discourse is dominant when describing the discursive objects. The results of the
analysis show a deviation from previous theories as the discourse in all three time
periods in both analyses reveal a prevailing victim discourse. These results challenge
existing theories stating that the media often construct black males as criminals. We
recommend future research to investigate if the victim construction of black males is
becoming a new discourse in media other than The New York Times.
1
1. Introduction
In the summer of 2014 two African Americans were killed by police officers in two separate
incidents in the cities of New York and Ferguson. On July 17th of 2014 Eric Garner, 43, was killed
during an arrest, suspected of selling illegal cigarettes (Reuters 2015a). A video of the incident
showed an officer throwing his arm around the neck of Eric Garner, tackling him to the ground and
holding him in a chokehold. Garner is heard saying “I can’t breathe” several times (Goldstein and
Schweber 2014). Several weeks later, on August 9th, teenager Michael Brown was shot and killed in
the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson after an altercation with an officer (Reuters 2015a). The shooting
sparked outrage and protests in the African American community of Ferguson (Bosman and
Fitzsimmons 2014). In both of the incidents, the police officers in question were white (Robles and
Schmidt 2014: para. 1; Goodman and Baker 2014b: para. 1). These two cases are not unique and
other cases such as the shooting of Trayvon Martin in 2012 have contributed to feelings of injustice,
racial profiling and unequal treatment of African Americans by authorities (Blow 2012).
Furthermore, incidents like these are not new occurrences. Over two decades ago, in April of 1992,
severe riots broke out in Los Angeles following the acquittal of mostly white police officers who
were on trial for beating Rodney King, an African American man, an incident that was videotaped
(Jacobs 2000). This reveals how feelings of injustice felt by African Americans are not a new
phenomenon. Racial inequality is a subject with deep roots in American history (Boyer 2014), and
even after the civil rights movements of the 1960’s where the goal was racial equality, the subject is
still very relevant today (Feagin 2014). The killings of African Americans by police, often white
officers bring up feelings of unfairness, inequality and oppression in African American
communities (Vega and Eligon 2014). There are many instances of seemingly racist police
behaviour in the United States that lead to the deaths of African Americans. Even during the writing
of this report two other incidents made front page news, as a two black men were killed by police
(Reuters 2015b; Reuters 2015c), thus clearly underlining the relevance of this study.
The United States of America is founded upon the Declaration of Independence which states that:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by
their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of
Happiness.” (National Archives: para. 2). Nowhere is it stated that these rights only apply to people
of a certain race or colour, but to “all men”. When these words were written and the English were
being accused of oppression, slavery was still being practiced in the American colonies with slaves
2
being treated harshly. Many of the delegates behind the Constitution of the United States of
America owned slaves and an abolition of slaves by the new government would have caused great
opposition. Many did not see slaves as citizens of the United States, but as property owned by the
slave masters. Even free blacks were denied political and social equality. In the first decades of this
new country, many Northern States began to abolish slavery, but it would continue in the Southern
American States until the American Civil war in the 1860’s. Even after the slaves in the South were
freed, the mind-set of many whites towards blacks stayed the same – they were looked upon as
property of white people by natural right. Many new laws in Southern States ensured that African
Americans were not equal to whites. The fourteenth amendment of 1868 granted citizenship to all
people born within the United States and the fifteenth amendment of 1870 asserted that no citizen
could be denied the right to vote on account of their race or colour. However, these amendments did
not ensure social equality between whites and blacks and Jim Crow laws in the Southern states
continued the everyday segregation of races. These state laws continued until the 1954 landmark
Supreme Course case of Brown v. Board of Education which ruled racial segregation laws to be
unconstitutional as it violated the fourteenth amendment (Kluger 2011). During the following
decades, civil rights movements across the United States made important steps towards equality
between white Americans and African Americans through boycotts, sit-ins and protests. It was also
during this time that the American media began to cover the question of racial equality and
inequality between African Americans and white Americans (Martindale 1986).
The subject of racial equality is of enormous importance in the United States. As mentioned, the
very foundation of the country, the Declaration of Independence, clearly states that all men are
created equal. It is very remarkable that today, over 230 years later, the United States still
experience racial tensions such as the incidents of Rodney King, Michael Brown and Eric Garner
shows. It is also worrying how incidents like this might heighten mistrust in the police, especially
amongst African Americans, since trust in this institution is fundamental for the society to function
adequately (Hardin 1999). But what role do the American media play in all of this? How do they
portray these occurrences in contemporary America?
Therefore, in this thesis we aim to analyse and compare the discourse and any developments in this
regard, in two incidents of alleged police brutality on black males as portrayed by the largest digital
newspaper and the second largest printed newspaper in the United States (Fox 2013). Our research
3
question is the following: How do The New York Times’ discursive construction of the Garner
and Brown incidents compare over time?
We are interested in how one of the biggest newspapers in the United States portrays the victims in
our selected cases of alleged police brutality against black males. Which side does the newspaper
take, and does race play a part of how the victims are portrayed? We think it is interesting to
compare the two incidents, as they are very different in many ways. The Garner case took place in
New York and involves a middle-aged father, whereas the Brown incident involved a young man.
Both were unarmed. It is not only age that differentiates the two cases, location is also very
different. One took place in New York in a racially mixed area (Bloch et al. 2010), where African
Americans are a minority. The other case of police brutality took place in a St. Louis suburb,
Ferguson, which is largely populated by black people (The Editorial Board 2014).
Our thesis consists of data from the New York Times’ webpage. We have collected data on two
separate incidents of American law enforcement killing African American males; the Eric Garner
case which took place in New York City on July 17th, 2014 and the police shooting of Michael
Brown which happened on August 9th, 2014.
2. Literature Review
In the following segment, the literature used in the thesis, as well as the earlier theories relevant to
this thesis, will be presented and discussed. Firstly different theories presented in the literature will
be presented, before the results and findings of previous empirical studies will be revealed. Finally,
a connection will be drawn between earlier studies and the purpose of this thesis.
The portrayal of African Americans in American media is a subject that has been examined by
numerous studies (Dixon 2007; Dixon 2008a; Dixon 2008b; Dixon and Linz 2000; Martindale
1986; Oliver 2003; Entman 1992; Gilliam et al. 1996; Romer et al. 1998). Several of these studies
examine the connection between a stereotypical media portrayal of African Americans as criminals
and dangerous and what effect this has on the general public view on African Americans.
4
2.1 Theories
Stereotyping can be seen as a way of making sense of the unknown, according to Lippmann (1922)
who made the term famous in his book “Public Opinion”. People of a different race may all seem
the same through the eyes of a person of a dissimilar race or ethnicity. As a way of making sense of
the unknown, it is easy to group people with similar speech, behaviour or appearances together. It is
more comprehensible for an individual to categorize the unknown into groups rather than
acknowledging that all these individuals indeed are unique and have their own distinctive
personalities. As Walter Lippmann appropriately states: “For the most part we do not first see, and
then define, we define first and then see.” (1922: 81). According to Dyer (1977), the act of
stereotyping comprises of applying usually negative and exaggerated characteristics to individuals
who differ from us. Within this lies the notion of power, as the very process of stereotyping
evidently excludes certain individuals from society. This concept of inclusion and exclusion
inevitably creates a sensation of “Us” and “Them” and stereotyping therefore “reduces people to a
few, simple, essential characteristics, which are represented as fixed by Nature” (Hall 1997: 257).
In this way, individuals are grouped together based upon shared characteristics (as perceived by
others) which are often greatly exaggerated. Thus, the group is excluded through stereotyping, as
they are seen upon as being out of place and/or even dangerous. The act of stereotyping often
occurs in environments of large power inequalities, where the group in power excludes the
stereotyped groups. Hall (1997) argues that stereotyping is a way maintaining the social and
symbolic order. The racist stereotypes in America draw lines back to the slave history of the
country. African Americans were viewed upon as being naturally inferior to whites. This was the
God-given order of the universe and blacks were suppressed both politically and socially. Some of
the stereotypes that originate from the slave era can be found in film, as argued by Bogle (1973) these are toms, coons, mulattoes, mammies and bucks.
African Americans were also stereotyped in media, such as newspapers. Prior to the 1960’s,
newspapers had generally focused on a stereotypical coverage of African American as criminals
and entertainers (Martindale 1986). However, since this period it seems that the stereotypical and
racist depiction of African Americans has mellowed out. According to Campbell (1995:38) “no
striking evidence of intentional, blatant bigotry” was found in 40 hours of American local news and
hardly any examples of the “old-fashioned racism” that regards the white race as being superior to
5
blacks. Campbell (1995) also notes that many American journalists seem fairly sensitive to racial
matters and news agencies make sure to hire minorities as journalists. Even so, Campbell (1995)
points out the everyday racism still occur in the news coverage. A possible explanation for
“everyday racism” could be the following, put forward by Philomena Essed (1991: 285):
“Dominant group members usually lack sensitivity to racism in everyday life. They have little
understanding of the problem because they are not confronted, on a regular basis, with critical
views of race and ethnic relations”. This clearly shows that racism still exists on some level in the
news media and the most common portrayal of African Americans in newscasts is the criminal
stereotype incorporating violence, drugs and guns (Campbell 1995; Martindale 1986). The portrayal
of blacks as criminals could be the result of an ethnic blame discourse being carried out in the
media, where African Americans are depicted in roles that cause harm to whites (Romer et al.
1998). The ethnic blame discourse is a discourse accentuating the problems created by ethnic others
and blames them for these problems. These ethnic others are grouped together and the harmful
effects caused by their group is emphasised through the discourse; thus by focusing on problems
related to the members of this outgroup, fuels the belief that the values and interests of the outgroup
conflicts with those of the ingroup and thereby justifies blaming the outgroup for the problems
(Romer et al. 1998). This depiction of African Americans can create negative stereotypes of blacks
in the minds of people receiving the news and cause them to be viewed as a menace to society.
Nevertheless, in Campbell’s (1995) analysis of the news coverage of Martin Luther King holiday
celebrations, most news agencies portrayed racism as a problem of the past and marked the
celebrations as a reminder of King’s success, instead of focus on how racism is still visible in
America today and that the vision of Martin Luther King has not yet been fulfilled. The depicted
success of the Huxtable family in “The Cosby Show” and that of Oprah Winfrey, might suggest that
achievement and “the American dream” is indeed conceivable for African Americans, and may
bring forth the assumption that racism is a thing of the past. Furthermore, according to Oliver
(2003) African Americans are generally not found to be overrepresented in criminal roles in
fictional entertainment. However, the representation in news and reality entertainment is very
different. An analysis of this more realistic genre reveals that African American men are more
likely to be portrayed as criminal suspects than actual crime statistics suggests and the way in which
these men are depicted, imply that they are likely to be especially violent or menacing (Oliver
2003).
6
2.2 Previous empirical studies
Many studies have examined the media representation of ethnicities in the United States. A study of
the overrepresentation and underrepresentation of African Americans and Latinos as lawbreakers on
television news by Dixon and Linz (2000) revealed that African Americans and Latinos were more
likely than whites to appear as perpetrators. It also revealed that African Americans were
overrepresented as perpetrators compared to Latinos and whites and that white people were
generally overrepresented as officers of the law. This regular overrepresentation of African
American as criminal suspects on television news has also been concluded by other studies (Entman
1992; Gilliam et al. 1996; Romer et al. 1998). A study on the effects of racially misrepresenting law
breakers and defenders on television news by Dixon (2007: 288) suggests that news viewers who
were exposed to unidentified criminality will associate what they see with African Americans and
that unidentified officers will be perceived as positive figures and as being white and ultimately that
the “chronic activation via news exposure can maintain and reinforce stereotypes.”.
Overrepresentation of blacks as criminals in the news may cause this stereotype to be acknowledged
by viewers. The activation of this stereotype on a frequent basis may lead to an automatic use of the
stereotype over time (Devine 1989; Fiske and Taylor 1991; Higgins 2000). This was also
established by a study by Dixon (2008a), which recognised that news viewers were more likely to
link African Americans to violence and crime when exposed to this overrepresentation. The
exposure to network news has also been found to increase the endorsement of the black stereotypes,
such as seeing African Americans as threatening (Dixon 2008b).
Crime news in America’s cities portrayed an apparently endless parade of young black
men under arrest, on trial, or headed for prison; it did not take too long for the automatic,
barely conscious association of blacks with crime to become an assumption of urban life.
(Anderson 1995: 52)
Anderson here vividly portrays the apparent connection between African Americans and crime in
news stories in America. Even though these studies were made on television news, we feel that the
results they provide can also be transferred to printed news.
7
3. Methodology
This section will describe the method applied in this thesis and why it has been chosen.
Additionally, the data which the method will be deployed upon will be presented by describing our
reasons behind the selection of our data and how we have structured the data together. Finally two
tables will provide an overview of the data applied in this study.
3.1 Method
In our analysis of The New York Times’ portrayal of the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases, we
will be using Foucauldian discourse analysis. This will be done by applying the first three steps of
the discursive analysis described by Willig (2013). The following section contains an explanation of
Foucauldian discourse analysis and how we plan on utilising it.
Foucauldian discourse analysis is based upon theories by Michel Foucault, influenced by poststructuralism. It explores the connection between language and subjectivity and how this affects
psychological research (Willig 2013). It also focuses on power relationships that are conveyed
through the relationship between power and language and furthermore entails historical inquiry and
a subjectification, in which subjects are fabricated (Arribas-Ayllon and Walkerdine 2008). Thereby
a historical perspective can be applied and ways in which the different discourses have changed
over time may be explored, thus determining the impact it has had on historical subjectivities
(Willig 2013). In terms of power relations and social structures, prevailing discourses can legitimate
these constructions as a common sense and may be hard to challenge (Willig 2013). Foucauldian
discourse analysis also considers the relationship between discourses and institutions, and the
discourses are bound up with the institutional practices. Thereby the discourses in question
legitimise the institutions. The institutions however, also conversely support and verify the
discourses (Willig 2013).
In our analysis we have also used the Foucauldian term of “statement” that refers to the smallest
unit of discourse which together form a discourse. (Andersen 2003) Thus, discourses are a number
of statements that combined construct objects in a certain manner. Ultimately these constructions
display certain ways of portraying the world and being in the world (Willig 2013). As Foucault puts
it, a statement is “the part distinguished from the whole” and refers to statements as “The atom of
8
discourse.” (Foucault 1972: 80). These statements must be analysed to gain a picture of the
discourse at hand. Statements creates objects and these are discursive objects that are themselves
constructed, organised and identified by the statement that refer to them (Andersen 2003).
Willig (2013) has set out six stages in the analysis of discourse that help researchers analyse the
discourses used within texts, the subject positions they contain and which implications they may
have. Since our study consists of an analysis of the discursive construction of the object (which in
our case is a black man killed by white police), only the first three of Willig’s six steps are relevant
in this relation and these will now be covered.
The first stage consists of different ways in which the discursive objects are constructed. The focus
depends on the research question and in our case the focus lies on the discursive construction of the
object which is, as mentioned above, a black man killed by law enforcement. After identifying the
different discursive constructions of the object throughout the data, the second step switches the
focus to the differences between the discourses found. Even though there is only one object, it can
be discursively constructed in different ways. The third and final stage utilised in this thesis, takes a
more thorough view of the discursive contexts inside which the discursive constructions of the
object are being applied. Thus examining what might be gained from the discursive construction in
the manner found and at the specific point in the text, and how the construction relates to other
constructions created within the surrounding text.
3.3 Data
This section will explain which data we will be using in our study and why we have chosen these.
The analysis will examine the selected articles from The New York Times and describe where and
how these discursive constructions are used. The articles used in the analysis are divided into three
timeframes who all have their starting point on the day of the incident in question:

The first three days after the incident

Several days after the incident

Weeks and months after the incident
9
By using three different timeframes, we are able to see how the discursive construction of the object
evolves over the course of several months. When both cases have been analysed, we will compare
the two analyses and examine if any similarities occur in the discursive construction of the two
objects, namely Michael Brown and Eric Garner.
We have chosen to focus on online articles in our thesis, due to the easy availability of these
compared to printed articles, and since The New York Times is the largest digital newspaper in the
United States it was the obvious choice (Fox 2013).
Our data consist of news articles and articles by various news agencies, all published and edited by
The New York Times’ webpage. The news articles we have selected are sorted according to date.
The New York Times web page has a search function, which allows us to search their article
records and limit our search between two dates. With this tool we sorted the articles of each case of
alleged police brutality giving us a timeframe from the date of the occurrences to a couple of
months after, making it easier for us to compare any development in the discourses used. This
timeframe helps us to obtain a more nuanced image of the incident, since one might argue that the
media coverage in the first three days could be affected by the immediate shock of the event,
whereas the reporting might be more reflective or distorted as time passes. A paper by Chen et al.
(2007: 237) regarding an aging theory for events, states that: “an event can be said to have a life
cycle with the stages of birth, growth, decay, and death. In other words, an event fades away when
few documents report or discuss it”. This life cycle corresponds well with our chosen time periods,
as the following paragraph reveals.
The first time period consists of articles from the first three days, commencing on the day of the
incident, thereby covering the immediate reaction to the incident. This period corresponds with the
birth stage of the event life cycle. The first period is followed by the second time period referred to
as “several days after” which examines articles from the fourth day and until 10 days after the day
of the incident, thus analysing articles that are published a short time after the immediate reactions,
but while the incident is still fresh in memory. These articles lie within the growth stage. Finally,
the third time period is called “weeks and months after” and as the name suggests covers articles
published weeks and even months after the occurrence of the incident. This last time period is less
confined than the previous two and contains articles from two weeks after the incident and until
10
over four months after, in the case of Eric Garner. This time period is further from the incident than
the others and thus is part of the last two stages in the life cycle of an event, namely decay and
death, which is also evident since it proved harder for us to find articles in this time period, than in
earlier periods.
The following two pages consist of two tables of the articles used in the Michael Brown case and
Eric Garner case respectively. This gives a good overview of all the articles by showing article
name, date, number of words and in which time period it lies. Furthermore, the articles are
organised together within their respective time periods.
11
Michael Brown articles
Article name
Missouri Crowd After Shooting: 'Kill the
Police'
Grief and Protests Follow Shooting of a
Teenager
Missouri Teen Shot Dead by Police Had
Assaulted Officer: Police
Lawyer: Teenager 'Executed' by Missouri
Police
Frustration in Ferguson
Autopsy Shows Michael Brown Was
Struck at Least 6 Times
Key Figures in the Ferguson, Missouri,
Shooting
Shooting Accounts Differ as Holder
Schedules Visit to Ferguson
Michael Brown Spent Last Weeks
Grappling With Problems and Promise
Michael Brown Called 'Little Kid in Big
Body'
Michael Brown Never Faced Serious
Felony Charge, St. Louis Official’s
Lawyer Says
Article date
August 9, 2014
No. of words
614
Time period
First three days
August 10, 2014
1,161
First three days
August 10, 2014
347
First three days
August 11, 2014
138
First three days
August 17, 2014
August 17, 2014
760
1,983
Several days after
Several days after
August 18, 2014
1,359
Several days after
August 19, 2014
1,637
Several days after
August 24, 2014
1,514
Weeks and months after
August 24, 2014
1,056
Weeks and months after
September 3,
2014
601
Weeks and months after
12
Eric Garner articles
Article name
Article date
Staten Island Man Dies After Police Try
July 17, 2014
to Arrest Him
Man’s Death After Chokehold Raises
July 18, 2014
Old Issue for the Police
Man, Allegedly Selling Untaxed
July 18, 2014
Cigarettes, Dies After Chokehold by
NYC Police
Mayor Says NYC Man's Arrest, Death
July 18, 2014
'Troubling'
Officer in Fatal NY Arrest Stripped of
July 19, 2014
Gun, Badge
Death of a Man in Custody Adds Fuel
July 20, 2014
to a Dispute Over a Policing Strategy
Medical Workers Face Scrutiny After
July 21, 2014
Man’s Death in Police Custody.
Friends: Man in NYC Chokehold Case
July 21, 2014
'Gentle Giant'.
At Harlem Rally, Calls for Action in
August 2, 2014
Chokehold Case
Grand Jury in Chokehold Death of Eric December 2, 2014
Garner Could Vote This Week on
Charges
Wave of Protests After Grand Jury
December 3, 2014
Doesn’t Indict Officer in Eric Garner
Chokehold Case
13
No. of words
132
Time period
First three days
1,175
First three days
396
First three days
763
First three days
799
First three days
954
Several days after
957
Several days after
715
Several days after
511
Weeks and months after
603
Weeks and months after
1,316
Weeks and months after
4. Eric Garner analysis
In our analysis of The New York Times’ portrayal of the police killings of Michael Brown and Eric
Garner, we will commence by analysing all the relevant articles from the first few days after the
Garner incident, before separately analysing the two remaining time periods and finally concluding
the discourse on Garner and any evolution with regard to the discourses that become evident. This
method and procedure will also be applied to the Michael Brown incident.
4.1 First three days
This time-period consists of five articles from July 17th to July 19th, 2014.
In this and the following timeframes, the articles construct Garner in three different ways. The three
discursive constructions are a neutral construction of Garner, one where he is constructed as a
criminal and finally a construction of him as a victim. As the analysis will reveal, the latter of the
aforementioned constructions is the most heavily used. The following section will bring forth the
actual statements, used to form these discursive constructions.
In every headline in the timeframe specific articles, except one, the word “man” or “Staten Island
man” is the first key words describing Eric Garner (Goldstein and Schweber 2014: para. 2; Reuters
2014b: para. 1; The Associated Press 2014d: para. 1; The New York times 2014: para. 1). The
words “man” and “Staten Island man” are very neutral in describing Garner, as they are very
impersonal. The repetition of “man” appears in all of the articles. By using “man”, information on
his race or other attention-grabbing facts is not included. Thus, The New York Times maintains a
neutral discourse in their headlines. The New York Times also mention his age, call him “Mr.
Garner” and “New York City man” The Associated Press 2014e: para. 1 and 2: Goldstein and
Schweber 2014: para. 8). These all add to the neutral and superficial discursive construction of Eric
Garner in the articles.
However, the abovementioned discursive construction of Garner is the least describing of him. His
size is brought up often by stating his height as “6 foot-3 inches”, his weight “350 pounds” or just a
reference that he was of a “formidable size”. A reference or description of Garner’s height or
weight appears in each of the five articles (Goldstein and Schweber 2014: para. 8; Reuters 2014b:
14
para. 3; The Associated Press 2014e: para. 3; The New York times 2014: para. 3; The Associated
Press 2014f: para. 7). As seen in this quote: “…the 6-foot-3, 350-pound Garner becoming irate and
refusing to be handcuffed” from The Associated Press (2014f: para. 7) and this “Mr. Garner
weighed well over 300 pounds, the police said” from The New York Times (2014: para. 3), the
articles put a lot of focus on creating a discursive construction of Garner as a large man. This draws
a connection to an overall discourse on our object as a bad person. When describing his
monumental height and weight, The New York Times make Garner appear as a threat to the Police
officer. Thus implicitly implying that the much smaller police officer had every reason to react the
way he did, as a means of self-defence. The discourse constructed of Garner as a bad person or a
criminal is a reoccurrence, which will be elaborated in the following paragraph.
It is not only the sheer size of Eric Garner described in the articles, which helps create the discourse
of him as a public enemy. The fact, that it is mentioned continuously in the articles that Eric Garner
is a seasoned offender of the law, is a more obvious brick in the building of this particular
discourse. The following two statements symbolise the pattern found in the rest of the articles, when
addressing the “criminal discourse”: “He had been arrested more than 30 times, often accused of
selling loose cigarettes bought outside the state, a common hustle designed to avoid state and city
tobacco taxes” (Goldstein and Schweber 2014: para. 15), “Since 2009, he was arrested nine
different times for selling such cigarettes” (The Associated Press 2014e: para. 10). These quotations
clearly emphasise the fact that Garner is known by the police, and has been selling cigarettes
illegally for some time. These constructions of our discursive object are making him appear as a
vicious criminal with no respect to the law or its enforcers.
As a final addition to the “criminal Garner” discourse, there is the appearance of statements
implying that Garner, in some way or another, resisted arrest. The following words from the articles
show how The New York Times describe the manner of how Garner was reacting in the video:
“Mr. Garner reacted with exasperation” (Goldstein and Schweber 2014: para. 18), “…clearly irate
Garner…” (The Associated Press 2014e: para. 11), “Mr. Garner chafed at the scrutiny by the
police,” also found in the Goldstein and Schweber article (2014: para. 15).
While the construction of Garner as a criminal is quite apparent, it is not the construction that takes
up the most space in the article statements. The final construction is one where Garner is portrayed
15
as being a victim. Through the analysis of the statements, we made the discovery of four different
victim statements on Garner, which all contribute to the overall discourse. The four statements will
be presented in the next paragraphs.
The initial portrayal of the four-part-construction of our discursive object as a victim is him as a
family-man. In Reuters (2014b), and Goldstein and Schweber’s (2014) articles, statements construct
Garner as a father of six. The Associated Press (2014f: para. 20) even reports that Garner is a
grandfather of two. Goldstein and Schweber (2014: para. 26) report that a supposed cousin of Eric
Garner had told them: “The family is very, very sad. We’re in shock. Why did they have to grab him
like that?”. Even the Mayor of New York City, Bill de Blasio had a similar reaction: “"It was very
troubling," […]"I watched it the same way a family member would watch it, and it was very sad to
watch."” (The Associated Press 2014e: para. 5). These statements construct Garner as familiar and
not a criminal who was deservedly treated. To conclude this part-construction of Garner as a family
man, it was also included in an article by The Associated Press (2014f: para. 10) that Garner’s
widow, Esaw, was seen crying at a Harlem rally.
The second and third of four statements contributing to the overall victim discourse, is Garner as an
unhealthy and harmless person. In three of the five articles within this timeframe, his bad health or
illnesses is mentioned in some way or another. It is clear in the following statements that Garner
had various illnesses: “that he was asthmatic, diabetic and suffered from sleep apnea” (Reuters
2014b: para. 4), “friends said, had several health issues: diabetes, sleep apnea, and asthma so
severe that he had to quit his job as a horticulturist [...] He wheezed when he talked and could not
walk a block without resting” (Goldstein and Schweber 2014: para. 8) and "Before they even
grabbed him, he told them he wasn't feeling good” (The Associated Press 2014e: para. 9). This adds
to the victim discourse, as the police force should protect the weak in a society. Garner is indeed
portrayed as being weak despite his size, thus being victimised. Alongside the construction of him
as weak, statements considering him as harmless also appears, this is seen in three of the five
articles. The following are statements that help establish the discursive object as harmless: “was
sitting with Garner and discussing weekend plans before the confrontation with police. Garner had
just broken up a fight between two other men” (The Associated Press 2014e: para. 8), ““a gentle
giant,” who was known for breaking up fights.” (Goldstein and Schweber 2014: para. 24) and “a
16
large but unarmed man” (Goldstein and Schweber 2014: para. 9). When combining these two
discourses, it is indirectly implied that Garner was both unable and unwilling to hurt anybody.
The fourth and final contributing to the prevailing image of Garner as a victim is how The New
York Times creates statements describing the interaction between Garner and law enforcement. By
looking at the statements in the timeframe relevant articles, interaction between the police officers
and Garner is described too. For example, three of the articles state that Garner says “I can’t
breathe!” (The Associated Press 2014e: para. 3; The Associated Press 2014f: para. 19; Reuters
2014b: para. 8). This statement may paint a picture that Garner was almost begging for mercy to
which the police fail to respond which makes them appear vicious and leaves Garner looking like
the victim. In the articles by The Associated Press (2014e; 2014f), and Goldstein and Schweber
(2014) there are statements, similar to the following: “Garner denies selling anything. He says he
was minding his own business moments after having stopped a street fight between others” (Reuters
2014b: para. 5). In the video shot at the scene of the incident, the articles report that Garner was
adamant being innocent, and minding his own business, before the police accosted him. As reported
by The Associated Press (2014e: para. 9), the camera operator, who was also Garner’s friend said:
“They could've just hopped out on the guys who were fighting, but they didn't bother to ask. They
just jumped straight on him.”. Through this statement as well as statements referring to how he had
just broken up a fight and was minding his own business, the discourse of him as the victim of
police brutality becomes clearer. This statement helps put the police officers in a villain role:
“Verbally de-escalating confrontations with suspects should be an officer's primary objective” (The
Associated Press 2014e: para. 13). This was quoted by an “expert”, making it more trustworthy for
the reader. The final statement to be presented in this paragraph cements the victim role that The
New York Times articles clearly favours constructing Garner in, within this timeframe. The
Goldstein and Schweber (2014: para. 15) article reports that in 2007 Garner filed a complaint aimed
at the police, accusing them of conducting a cavity search on the street. The same article states that
Garner wanted to take all of the accusations of him breaking the law to court and that he was
prepared to fight for his innocence to be proven. He clearly felt victimised by the police force which
is reflected in the statements in The New York Times articles.
In the very first article that was published on the death of Eric Garner, The New York Times (2014:
para. 3) report in their article that “It was not immediately clear why Mr. Garner was being
17
arrested”. This is symptomatic of the dominant discourse created, namely the victim discourse.
This is the case throughout the time period, as most of the articles question how violently and
swiftly the police officers reacted. The articles all put emphasis on Garner as the victim and include
fewer statements portraying him as a criminal.
The neutral discourse of Eric Garner, where he is referred to as a “man”, “Mr. Garner” or simply
“Staten Island man” is a contributing factor to the story not blowing up too early. The situation, a
black man getting killed by a white police officer, is a very sensitive topic especially as of lately
(Richardson 2015). This is also a good argument for why The New York Times have refrained from
including the race of Garner, as it could lead to creating a continuous negative connection between
criminals and black males in media.
The discursive construction of Garner as a criminal helps achieve some degree of trustworthiness,
as the newspaper seems to report the story from various angles. They create a discourse of Garner
as a seasoned offender whose physical appearance would seem intimidating to anyone who did not
know him. This leaves it up to the reader to decide the innocence of Garner.
In contrast to the construction of Garner as a victim is the criminal discourse. The fact that he was
constructed as a bad guy who is illegally selling cigarettes, may also be angled differently. A
discourse of Garner as a family father may possibly assist in an assumption that Garner was selling
cigarettes to provide for his family. Therefore, it may also be argued that he sold cigarettes illegally,
to feed his children and support his family which creates yet another opportunity for the reader to
decide who the bad guy is. Further adding doubt to the readers perception of Garner’s criminal
discourse, is the fact that the statements portray him as being weak and harmless. This discourse
makes the decision of who to support, much more favoured towards Garner.
4.2 Several days after
This time period consists of three articles from July 20th to July 21st, 2014.
In the second part of the analysis, Eric Garner is continuously referred to as “Mr. Garner” in both
the Goodman and Yee (2014: para. 2) and Mueller (2014a: para. 3) articles. This is a cornerstone
statement helping the maintenance of a neutral discourse throughout the articles. Denoting Eric
18
Garner as “Mr. Garner” is also a manner of politeness. In the article by The Associated Press
(2014g), the main statement used neutrally to refer to our discursive object is “Garner”. The articles
by Goodman and Yee, and The Associated Press both make a short mention of the age of Garner
(The Associated Press 2014g: para. 5; Goodman and Yee 2014: para 2). By simply stating the age
of the discursive object, they do not add any information that can change the discourse on Garner.
This is why it is categorised as being neutral.
Although the discourse of Eric Garner in the antagonist role is evident, it is not the most dominant
of discourses as was the case in the previous analysis. However, it is still existent and examples of
criminal constructions in this time period will be clarified in the subsequent part of the analysis.
The following statement from Goldman and Yee’s article (2014: para. 2) gives a more describing
picture of Garner and the New York Police Department’s strained past: “The cigarette seller and
the police were far from strangers”. The article (Goodman and Yee 2014: para. 2) refers to Garner
as the cigarette seller who was not a stranger to the police. There is a pattern of statements that are
similar throughout the three articles in this time period. This statement from The Associated Press
(2014g: para. 1): “a persistent face of the small-time crime of selling loose, untaxed cigarettes”,
alongside this statement “Officers from the 120th Precinct were trying to arrest Mr. Garner for
selling loose cigarettes, but he complained angrily that they were harassing him” (Mueller 2014a:
para. 5), emphasise that The New York Times still include the construction of Garner as a man with
a tense relationship with his local precinct and a criminal. In the last statement, they describe Garner
“complaining angrily”, which assists the creation of our discursive object as a criminal.
Garner is, for the first time, described as being “black” in the Goodman and Yee (2014) article.
Theoretically, black men are to some degree widely portrayed negatively in American media
(Campbell 1995; Martindale 1986). This statement is more neutral, perhaps leaning towards the
victim discourse. This is because the statement deals with the combustible relationship between
authorities and minorities.
Yet again, as the case was in the previous time period, Garner’s sheer size is also used to connote
him as an imposing person. This is evident in the following quote “The video shows an officer
putting his arm around the 6-foot-3, 350-pound Garner's neck” (The Associated Press 2014g: para.
7) and in the statement by Mueller (2014a: para. 19) “Mr. Garner’s size — he weighed 350 pounds
— complicated the response by both medical workers and the police”. The latter also states that his
19
weight was a contributing factor to the difficulty of the situation. This might take the responsibility
away from the police and medical staff and put the blame Garner’s health issues instead. The final
statement on this discourse, once again cements Garner as a criminal: “…time and time again,
arresting him for selling untaxed cigarettes at a price far below what local deli owners could offer”
(Goodman and Yee 2014: para. 2) as he cuts the profits of local businesses by selling the cigarettes
illegally. It is clear that Garner’s history with law enforcement is used in statements within the
articles, but not to the same extent as in the previous time period. The previous period had multiple
statements, including detailed information about Garner’s previous convictions, which were only
briefly touched upon in this part. Only in the article by The Associated Press (2014g) is the number
of times he has been arrested mentioned. It seems the articles have become increasingly focused on
his personality, rather than his criminal ways.
The distinctions between the construction of our discursive object as a victim increases in this time
period. Once again, the first of three statements constructing the victim discourse refers to Eric
Garner as “the family man”.
The following statement includes all previous known facts about the family of our discursive object
but has now been added personal information about his son, who is starting college, and the long
marriage shared by him and his wife: “Garner[...] had a son starting college, five other children
and two grandchildren, and a quarter-century-long relationship with his wife, Esaw.” (The
Associated Press 2014g: para. 5). The following quote, also from The Associated press, emphasises
Garner as a father of six: (2014g: para. 2) “leaving the married father of six dead and police tactics
under scrutiny”. Being a father and a husband is something numerous people can relate to and may
therefore establish a connection and sympathy that would be present if Garner had no family.
Garner’s family relations were only found described in one of the articles, but quotes and
observations from friends and local business people is what really defines the construction of
Garner within the victim discourse.
The articles by Goodman and Yee (2014) and The Associated Press (2014g) are both heavily made
up of statements by Garner’s friends, describing him as harmless. This is a reoccurring discourse
from the previous time period, which in this discourse is substantiated even more.
“He never caused any harm to anybody, unlike a lot of people around here” was according to
20
Goodman and Yee (2014: para. 20) stated by a local business owner. This article also describes the
way in which the police considered Garner a criminal as being “devastatingly ironic”. This really
constructs him as a man of good intentions. In The Associated Press article (2014g: para. 3), a
friend reportedly said the following: "That's the ironic part about it. He's the most gentle of
everybody over there". This statement is very similar to the way Goodman and Yee (2014) describe
Garner’s relationship to the police. Garner is repeatedly referred to as a peacemaker: “Garner often
defused the tensions” (The Associated Press 2014g: para. 15), “He was always trying to keep the
peace" (The Associated Press 2014g: para. 16), and, “he had been trying to break up a fight shortly
before his confrontation” and “he had been a bright spot, a peacemaker” (Goodman and Yee 2014:
para. 7 and 21). His role as a neighbourhood peacemaker and friendly person is a discourse created
in two of the three articles. Good people are seldom considered criminals or villains, and this
discourse construction seems to prove that.
Statements on Garner’s physique and health issues do not only create a criminal discourse, it also
aids the creation of the victim discourse. His physical size seemingly creates a criminal discourse of
Garner. This is not the case in this time period and is especially evident in the articles by Goodman
and Yee (2014), and The Associated Press (2014g) articles. This statement from Goodman and Yee
(2014: para. 7): “with his size alone could — and often did — quell disputes”, not only contributes
to his discourse as a peacemaker but also describes how he used his size to do good deeds. He did
not use his size to harm other locals, rather the opposite. This is additionally exemplified in the
following statements: “a congenial giant with a generous gesture or a calming word”, ”whose
friends called him "Big E" and "Teddy Bear,"”) and “Staten Island's biggest godfather […] His last
penny was your last penny” (The Associated Press 2014g: para. 2, 5 and 14), which all occur in an
article containing a headline that mentions how his friends indeed considered him a gentle giant.
The large frame of “Teddy Bear” has resulted in health issues, which assists to create a discourse of
him as a helpless victim. “Garner had suffered for years from asthma, sometimes wheezing when he
talked, friends and relatives said. He walked slowly on sore feet, sometimes untying his shoes to
relieve the pressure” (The Associated Press 2014g: para. 8) is the only statement in the articles
creating this particular discourse. Compared to the previous time period, this period does not feature
multiple statements concerning Garner’s health.
21
However, this time period does contain many statements regarding the police and medical staff
interaction with Garner, and these statements all have Garner in the victim role. This is the third and
final discourse contributing to the overall victim discourse. Both of the following statements
describe the chokehold, and the violence used by the police: “an officer putting his arm around […]
Garner's neck as Garner was taken to the ground and his face was pushed into the sidewalk. Before
losing consciousness, he was heard to yell repeatedly, "I can't breathe!"” (The Associated Press
2014g: para. 8) and “The officer who appeared to use the chokehold, a banned tactic” (Mueller
2014a: para. 3). The latter even describes how chokeholds are a banned tactic, which makes the
police look very bad compared to Garner. The brutality of the police is not the only statement
emphasising Garner’s victim role. A second video surfaced days after the death of Garner, showing
very passive medical workers on the crime scene. This is also reflected in the articles. Especially the
article by Mueller (2014a), which had a particular focus on the scrutiny faced by medical workers
days after the incident that ended in Garner’s death. From Goodman and Yee’s article (2014: para.
4) the reaction of the medical staff was described as the following: “emergency medical workers
doing little more than feeling for a pulse before lifting Mr. Garner’s body onto a gurney”. Another
article elaborates on the incident by stating: “The emergency medical workers appear to act without
urgency or intensity in assessing Mr. Garner as he lay on the sidewalk” (Mueller 2014a: para. 7),
“It was like she either didn’t want to be there, which is hard to understand, or police basically told
her to just let him alone,” (Mueller 2014a: para. 10) and “surrounded by a large group of police
officers, the emergency medical worker may have taken her cue from the officers and skipped
critical steps” (Mueller 2014a: para 14). The expert comments that The New York Times have
chosen to include in the article, are very critical of the medical staff and how they cooperated with
the police. This sheds a bad light on the authorities, and puts Garner in the victim role. It mentions
how he was treated unfairly, even in a state of unconsciousness.
The discourse of Garner as a criminal is the second discourse described in the analysis. The articles
of this time period do include statements describing him as a previous felon battling multiple cases
(The Associated Press 2014g), but not to the same degree as the previous time period. This may be
a result of the increasing public outrage and media focus, as The New York Times may be trying
not to fuel this combustible situation.
Garner’s race was mentioned for the first time, and as explained it can quickly be understood as
22
having a negative connotation. The reality is that, Garner being called black can be argued to have a
positive connotation. The articles from several days after the incident clearly show another pattern,
which were not seen in the articles from the first three days. The focus is more on uncovering how
Garner was as a person, by asking around the neighbourhood where he sold cigarettes. The quotes
from the various residents, friends and business owners were widely positive. This achieves a
creation of Garner as a man with good intentions as well as a family man. A new video surfaced,
showing medical staff failing to treat Garner according to an expert on the field. Reporting this
furthermore adds to the image of Garner as a victim, thus putting the involved authorities in a bad
spot.
4.3 Weeks and months after
The third and final time period in the Eric Garner case consists of articles from August 2nd to
December 3rd, 2014.
The articles from this time period deal with the tension leading up to the decision of the murder
indictment, which was faced by the white police officer Daniel Pantaleo. The last article from
December 3rd describes the aftermath of the decision to decline the indictment.
As the case was in the two previous time periods, the neutral discourse created in the articles will be
addressed firstly. Once again, “Mr. Garner” and “Eric Garner” are used throughout all three articles
to refer to our discursive object as neutrally as possible. In the headlines of both Goodman and
Baker (2014a; 2014b) articles, “Eric Garner” is used to create a neutral discourse from the outset, a
discourse which is partly maintained throughout. In the Mueller (2014b) article and the Goodman
and Baker (2014b) article the keyword “man” is also used often. As the word “man” only states the
gender and that he is not a child, it is quite neutral. His age “43” is also mentioned in Mueller
(2014b) and Goodman and Baker (2014b), this does not however, provoke any positive or negative
signals as it only mentions his age.
As in the previous two time periods, Garner was also constructed as a criminal by the statements in
the articles. This criminal discourse of Garner has been the second most noticeable in the previous
two time periods. In this period time, the statements commenting on Garner’s previous felony
record or him resisting arrest are almost non-existent. Although two statements on this subject can
23
be seen in Goodman and Baker’s (2014b: para. 3) article: “Mr. Garner, who was being arrested for
allegedly selling loose cigarettes” and “Mr. Garner, who was first approached for selling loose
cigarettes on a sidewalk near the Staten Island Ferry” (Goodman and Baker 2014a: para. 8). The
first statement even uses the word “allegedly” about him selling cigarettes, which may introduce
doubt into the equation, thus questioning whether or not Garner was selling cigarettes illegally at
the time. An important note is that Garner’s size is not directly mentioned in any of the articles.
As previously described, African American males have a history of being constructed as criminals
and wrongdoers in media (Campbell 1995; Martindale 1986). In this period, the articles contain
more statements than previously referring to Garner’s race. In this statement: “The death of Mr.
Garner, who was black” (Goodman and Baker 2014a: para. 2), Garner’s race is mentioned, but is
not a subject matter in Mueller’s (2014b) article. However, the race-related statements creating a
surprising “victim” discourse. Race will make up the first statement that will help establish the
“victim” discourse.
For example, in the first paragraph of Goodman and Baker’s (2014b: para. 1) article: “…the
criminal case against a white New York police officer whose chokehold on an unarmed black man
led to the man’s death” is a powerful statement. This emphasises the “victim” discourse, as it puts
the word “unarmed” before “black”. Stating that the officer was white also puts emphasis on race
and the fact that this is a case of racial nature. Also from the article by Goodman and Baker (2014b:
para. 4): “The decision came barely a week after a grand jury found no criminality in the actions of
another white police officer, Darren Wilson, who shot and killed Michael Brown, an unarmed 18year-old black man”. This statement puts the Garner case in perspective by focusing on the races of
the involved parties in the Michael Brown case. Referencing to the other case may give the
impression that the Garner case was not unique. It gives the impression that after the grand jury had
declined the indictment of the police officer, race is used as a means of creating Garner as a victim.
The discourse previously created on Garner as a family man, continues in these articles. As a
reaction to the declined indictment Garner’s widow is quoted as saying: “He’s still feeding his kids
[…] and my husband is six feet under and I’m looking for a way to feed my kids now.” (Goodman
and Baker 2014b: para. 15). This indeed succeeds at creating a discourse, where Eric Garner and his
family are the victims. The following statement from Goodman and Baker (2014a: para. 19) puts
Garner and his family in the victim role, while the slowly operating grand jury is put in a bad light:
24
“Mr. Sharpton, who has been advising Mr. Garner’s family, questioned why it was taking so long
for the grand jury to complete its work.”. Mueller included another statement by Mr. Sharpton,
which appeals much wider by saying that it is a case of police brutality and not a case with racial
roots (Mueller 2014b).
Members of Garner’s family were not the only ones to call for justice. The public opinion is also
reflected in the statements throughout the articles. This statement from Goodman and Baker (2014a:
para. 2): “Protesters on Saturday outside the 120th Precinct station house on Staten Island after a
march that began at a memorial for Eric Garner” as well as this ”many expressed their outrage
with some of the last words Mr. Garner uttered before being wrestled to the ground: “This stops
today,” people chanted. “I can’t breathe,” others shouted” (Goodman and Baker 2014b: para. 6)
creates the feeling that many people were outraged by the decision. This will not only add to the
victim discourse, but also help encourage readers to take a stance, as many others have.
Finally, statements criticising the police strategy and their actions discursively help create Garner as
the victim. All articles contain statements creating a negative discourse on the fact that the
chokehold used to take down Garner is illegal, and has been since 1993 (Mueller 2014b; Goodman
and Baker 2014a, 2014b). The chokehold tactic was not the only thing questioned is the statements,
also the general policing strategy in New York came under fire: “as prompted accusations of police
brutality. It has also raised questions about the department’s “broken windows” style of policing,
which puts a focus on quality-of-life crimes.” (Mueller 2014b: para. 10).
This analysis has proven to contain different statements compared to the previous two periods. For
the first time we see race-related statements obviously constructing Garner as the victim. This helps
take emphasis away from him being a big and scary black man, and thus makes him a possible
victim of a race-related police brutality case. Without a mention of his imposing size, the article will
achieve the perception of Garner as less threatening. The mention of public rallying for justice, also
makes is seem like he is innocent and has fallen victim to police brutality. Furthermore, Garner’s
widow stated how her husband is now unable to take care of his kids while the police officer is able
to take care of his (Goodman and Baker 2014b). This provokes a feeling of injustice.
25
4.4 Sub-conclusion
The application of the Foucauldian Discourse Analysis to the eleven New York Times articles on
the Eric Garner case have proven a specific pattern of how the statements create discourses and
what these discourses achieve has revealed itself over the course of the analysis.
Firstly, the discourse labelled as neutral is created by the same statements throughout the three time
periods. This discourse is barely noticeable, but it is included as a sort of middle ground between
the criminal and victim discourse, thus completing the whole spectre. The neutral discourse does
not become significantly less or more obvious during the course of the time periods.
However, the constructed discourse of Garner as a criminal does undergo certain changes. The
statements in the first two time periods create much the same discourse. They both put emphasis on
the imposing size of Garner by describing his height and weight. This statement is almost nonexistent in the last period, which partly helps diminish the criminal construction seen in earlier
statements. This statement is not the only one changing over time in this discourse. The statements
describing Garner’s past felonies and habit of illegally selling cigarettes is also less used in the final
part of the timeframe. Describing Garner’s race can also negatively influence the discourse by
polarising him from the police officer. Statements on his race are very little, and in the first time
period not seen at all. Although race-related statements are mentioned in the two last periods, they
only construct him as the criminal in the second time period. The last time period includes a racerelated statement that constructs Garner as a victim, rather than a criminal.
Additionally, Garner was a father of six and a grandfather of two; this is seen in statements
throughout the two first time periods. Including these statements in an article, makes Garner seem
more relatable and more innocent. They may suggest that he was trying to provide for his family,
thus partially justifying him of selling the illegal cigarettes. However, in the last time period it is not
mentioned how many children he has, instead quotes from his widow and family spokesperson are
used. Several days after the incident, within the second period, Garner is constructed as a victim by
many statements quoted to be said by his friends and Staten Island locals. They all seem to
remember him fondly and construct him as a gentle giant who was also a peacekeeper in the
neighbourhood. His size also brought different health issues such as asthma and sleep apnea.
Statements referring to this are primarily found in statements in the first two articles. All of the time
periods contain a statement dealing with the chokehold tactic used by police to apprehend Garner,
26
and they all mention the illegality of it. This truly contributes to the overall victim discourse. Even
though his death was ruled a homicide, the indictment of the police officer was declined by the
grand jury, which sparked a public outrage. The outrage was a reaction to the death of Garner in the
first to time periods, while the statements in the final period were a reaction to the officer not being
prosecuted for using a banned police tactic.
It is evident that all of the time periods have a dominant construction of Garner as the victim in this
case. The other discourses do not contain enough potent statements for ultimately creating a
dominant neutral or criminal discourse on Garner.
5. Michael Brown analysis
The following section contains a discursive analysis of The New York Times’ portrayal of the
shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri on August 9th, 2014. As previously mentioned,
the analysis is divided into three time periods which will be analysed in a chronological manner.
The analysis will be followed by a brief sub-conclusion.
5.1 First three days
The articles from the first three days cover a time period of three days, from August 9th until August
11th, 2014. Four articles have been chosen for this section. As was the case in the analysis of Eric
Garner, three discursive constructions become evident when analysing these four articles:

A neutral discursive construction of the object

A discursive construction of the object as a criminal

A discursive construction of the object as a victim
The following sections will examine how these discursive constructions are visualised in the articles
in question. In all of the time periods, the three discourses will be analysed in the same order as
listed above.
In all of the four articles, the discursive object is referred to as “Michael Brown” (Bosman and
Fitzsimmons 2014: para. 2; The Associated Press 2014a: para. 2; Reuters 2014a: para. 2; The
27
Associated Press 2014b: para. 2) or “Brown” (The Associated Press 2014a: para. 2; Reuters 2014a:
para, 2; The Associated Press 2014b: para. 3). One of the articles refers to the object as “Mr.
Brown” as well (Bosman and Fitzsimmons 2014: para. 2). This is a very neutral discursive portrayal
of the object by The New York Times as it is very impersonal and in the case of “Mr. Brown”
seems very formal.
Subsequently, another discourse becomes apparent as three of the articles from the first three days
mention that Michael Brown had “struggled” with (Bosman and Fitzsimmons 2014: para. 4; The
Associated Press 2014a: para. 2) or even “physically assaulted” (Bosman and Fitzsimmons 2014:
para. 11; Reuters 2014a: para. 2) the police officer who ended up shooting him. This gives a
different picture of the object and creates another discourse of Michael Brown as being the culprit.
The article from Bosman and Fitzsimmons (2014: para. 4) remarks that: “he had assaulted a police
officer and the two had struggled over the officer’s gun inside his patrol car”. This description
portrays Michael Brown as a villain and adds to the discursive construction of him as a criminal.
The one article that does not mention the struggle is the only article from August 9th, so the reason
why it is not mentioned herein is because the information had not yet been released to the public, as
the article states that the police department gave no reason for the shooting (The Associated Press
2014b: para. 6). Thus, this article only includes the discursive construction of the object as a victim.
In one of the articles, it is written that: “the shooting death of a black teenager […] was started by a
fight between the victim and an officer” (Reuters 2014a: para. 1). It is very interesting to notice,
how this quote directly refers to Brown as a “victim”, even in a statement where he is portrayed
criminally, as the person who started the whole incident.
Furthermore, in all of the four articles in this time period, the first mention of the object, Michael
Brown, refers to him as a “teenager” (Bosman and Fitzsimmons 2014; The Associated Press
2014a), a “Missouri teen”, (Reuters 2014a), and a “black teenager” (The Associated Press 2014b:
para. 1), of which all, except the “black teenager”, are in the headlines. All of the articles also
mention his age (Bosman and Fitzsimmons 2014; The Associated Press 2014a; Reuters 2014a; The
Associated Press 2014b). Referring to Michael Brown as a teenager puts emphasis on his young age
and creates a discourse of the object as a victim. The use of these words in the headlines of three of
the four articles quickly establishes this discourse in the articles. In the article by Bosman and
28
Fitzsimmons (2014: para. 2) another reference to his young age is also made by calling him “the
youth”.
The first reference to the object outside of the headlines in all of the articles mention Michael
Brown as a “black teenager” (Bosman and Fitzsimmons 2014: para. 1; The Associated Press 2014a:
para. 1; Reuters 2014a: para. 1; The Associated Press 2014b: para. 1) which continues the discourse
of the object as a victim, but now also adds his racial background to the statements. All of these are
within the first statements of all the articles so the apparent discourse is quickly established. By
referring to Michael Brown as black again signals a discourse of the object as a victim, but now also
in a larger scale of racial inequality of African Americans. All of the four articles refer to Brown as
being “black” within the first statement of the text (Bosman and Fitzsimmons 2014: para. 1; The
Associated Press 2014a: para. 1; Reuters 2014a: para. 1; The Associated Press 2014b: para. 1).
Two of the articles refer to the Brown as “unarmed” (Bosman and Fitzsimmons 2014: para. 1; The
Associated Press 2014a: para. 1) which again underlines the discursive construction of the object as
a victim. Indeed all four of the articles refer to Brown as being “unarmed” at least once (Bosman
and Fitzsimmons 2014; The Associated Press 2014a; Reuters 2014a; The Associated Press 2014b).
There are also other statements from the article emphasising the victimization of the object, such as
the two following quotes stating that Michael Brown “was a good child getting ready to go to
college and was visiting his grandmother when the incident took place.” (Reuters 2014a: para. 8)
and that “he didn’t bother nobody” (Reuters 2014a: para 9). Another quote from the grandmother
of Brown, where she states how he “never even got into a fight” (The Associated Press 2014b:
para. 12) adds to the picture of a calm young man, who would not seem likely to be someone
deserving to be shot, thereby accentuating the victim discourse of the object. This discourse
continues as three of the four articles write how Brown was getting ready to attend college (Bosman
and Fitzsimmons 2014; Reuters 2014a; The Associated Press 2014b) and one article also refers to
how Brown had “graduated high school and was looking forward to the future” (The Associated
Press 2014b: para. 11). A quote from the lawyer of the parents of Brown takes it even further,
saying that Brown was “executed in broad daylight.” (The Associated Press 2014a: para. 1). In the
article by Bosman and Fitzsimmons (2014: para. 10) this trenchant rhetoric is also apparent as the
president of the N.A.A.C.P. (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) in St.
Louis County, Esther Haywood, states that: “we are hurt to hear that yet another teenaged boy has
29
been slaughtered by law enforcement, especially in light of the recent death of Eric Garner in New
York, who was killed for selling cigarettes”. These quotations and the references to Michael
Brown’s future again emphasise the discourse of him as a victim whose life has been destroyed by
the actions of a police officer. The quote by Esther Haywood also mentions the Eric Garner
incident, thus showing that the Brown case is not an isolated event and adds to the victim discourse.
Three of the four articles also clearly mention the public reaction within the city of Ferguson to the
shooting, which the following quotes reveals: “the fatal shooting […] sent hundreds of angry
residents out of their apartments” (The Associated Press 2014b: para. 1), “The shooting […]
sparked anger in a St. Louis community” (Reuters 2014a: para. 1) and “The killing of the youth,
Michael Brown, 18, ignited protest [...] Hundreds of people gathered at the scene of the shooting to
question the police and to light candles for Mr. Brown” (Bosman and Fitzsimmons 2014: para. 2).
This clearly shows that many people in the area were outraged by the shooting, which adds to the
victim discourse and furthermore encourages people to take a stance in the incident, as was the case
in the Eric Garner event.
When examining these articles it quickly becomes clear that the discursive construction of Michael
Brown as a victim is the most heavily used. Especially since the first statements outside of the
headlines in all four articles uses the discursive construction of him as a victim by calling him either
a “black teenager” (The Associated Press 2014b: para. 1; Reuters 2014a: para. 1) or an “unarmed
black teenager” (The Associated Press 2014a: para. 1; Bosman and Fitzsimmons 2014: para. 1).
Referring to the object as black instantly draws a connection to other occurrences of blacks being
killed or brutalized by law enforcement, such as the cases of Trayvon Martin and Rodney King.
Additionally, all of the articles refer to him as being a teenager. Many people naturally react with a
higher degree of contempt when children or young people are killed than they would with adults.
Teenagers may be seen as an age group not yet fully developed and entirely comprehensible of their
actions. Moreover, using all these words such as “unarmed”, “teenager” and “black” together with
the descriptions of Brown’s calm nature and bright future plans add up to a discursive construction
of the object as a victim in the matter.
As showed, three of the four articles do have a discursive construction of Brown as a villain or a
criminal, but these are not as greatly used as the other discourses. Furthermore, the use of the
30
neutral discursive construction of the object is only used after the victim discourse has been utilised.
This is the case in all of the articles and causes this discourse to seem secondary to the victim
discourse.
5.2 Several days after
The analysis in this section consists of four articles from August 17th until August 19th. This period
will follow the same pattern as the previous time period.
A neutral discursive construction of the object is seen in all of the four articles, where the object is
referred to as “Michael Brown” (Blow 2014: para. 1; The Associated Press 2014c: para. 1; Robles
and Schmidt 2014: para. 2; Robles and Bosman 2014: para. 1), “Brown” (Blow 2014: para. 6; The
Associated Press 2014c: para. 3) or more formally “Mr. Brown” (Robles and Schmidt 2014: para. 2;
Robles and Bosman 2014: para. 2). The object is also referred to as a “man” in two of the four
articles (Blow 2014: para. 1; Robles and Bosman 2014: para. 20), where the article by Blow only
once refers to him in this manner and the article by Robles and Bosman refers to this way three
times. Referring to the object in this way leaves out information of his young age, race or other
factors that might create a different discursive construction. This construction is evident throughout
the four articles, but seem secondary since all the articles start out by referring to the object in a
manner that constructs him as being a victim in the case and since only one of the four articles refer
to the object as “man” more than once.
By the time these articles were released, new information had surfaced about Michael Brown
robbing a convenience store prior to the shooting, which adds to the discursive construction of the
discursive object as a criminal. This is evident throughout the four articles, as it is mentioned that he
was “stealing cigars” (Blow 2014: para. 6) or “cigarillos” (Robles and Schmidt 2014: para. 16) in
a “strong-arm” robbery (The Associated Press 2014c: para. 4) and that “a videotape shows he stole
from a liquor store” (Robles and Bosman 2014: para. 29). The article from The Associated Press
(2014c) that describes how Brown was a suspect in a “strong-arm” robbery of a convenience store
before the shooting, clearly constructs the object as a criminal. However, the following statement
from the article saying that: “Brown may have made mistakes, but didn’t deserve to be shot” (The
associated Press 2014c: para. 4) seems to level out or even overcome the negative discourse and
again adds to the victim discourse. One of the articles first mentions how Brown “stole from a
31
liquor store” (Robles and Bosman 2014: para. 29) and furthermore how he soon after had a
physical struggle with the police officer that “left the officer with a swollen face” (Robles and
Bosman 2014: para, 31). Further down, the same article writes that Brown “physically assaulted the
police officer” (Robles and Bosman 2014: para, 36) and “struggled over the officer’s weapon”
(Robles and Bosman 2014: para, 37). All these keywords such as “stole”, “struggle”, “swollen face”
and “physically assaulted” form a criminalized discursive construction of the object, where he had
violated several laws and had literally attacked an enforcer of the law. The article continues the
criminal discourse when they refer to him as “a big man at 6-foot-4 and 292 pounds”, however this
criminal discourse is quickly followed by a description of him as “quiet and shy, a homebody who
lived with his grandmother.” (Robles and Bosman 2014: para. 33) thus once more seemingly
disarming the negativity of the criminal discourse. Referring to him as a “big man” takes away the
before mentioned immaturity applied to him by calling him a “teenager” and replaces it with a
notion of a full-grown man that is perfectly capable (especially when his height and weight is
included) of defending and standing up for himself. Nevertheless, the description of him that
follows does take the edge off the criminal discourse by portraying him as an innocent and careful
individual, who would not seem likely to be anything but a victim in the matter. The article by
Robles and Schmidt (2014: para. 10) also refers to how the autopsy “found evidence of marijuana
in Mr. Brown’s system.”, thus implying that Brown taken drugs prior to the shooting and draws a
connection to the stereotypical media portrayal of blacks in relation to drugs (Campbell 1995;
Martindale 1986).
In the article by Blow (2014: para. 1) Brown is also referred to as a “gentle giant” by his family and
by his police chief as “a gentle, quiet man” and “a gentleman”. Even though the word “giant” might
be seen as part of negative discursive construction, as if the person is of superhuman size and
strength, it is disarmed by the word “gentle” that precedes it, giving an impression of a large teddybear like figure rather than a monster. The description of the object from the police chief further
underlines this when he is once again referred to as being “gentle”, “quiet” and even a “gentleman”.
Michael Brown’s formidable size is similarly referred to in the article by The Associated Press
(2014c: para. 3) where his height and weight also is mentioned. However, once again this seemingly
negative discursive construction is dismantled by the word “quiet” and “gentle” that comes before
the description of his figure.
32
Additionally, in the first statement of the articles from this time period, Michael Brown is
mentioned as “teenager” in three of them (Blow 2014: para. 1; Robles and Bosman 2014: para. 1;
Robles and Schmidt 2014: para. 1) and as “18-year-old” in the last (The Associated Press 2014c:
para. 1). The noting of his age in all of the articles once again emphasises his young age and
incorporates the victim discourse into the articles. In three of the articles the object is furthermore
referred to as “unarmed” (Blow 2014: para. 1; Robles and Bosman 2014: para. 1; The Associated
Press 2014c: para. 1). Referring to the object as being unarmed strongly underlines the discourse of
Michael Brown as a victim. The use of these words within the first statements of the articles quickly
establishes the discourse of the object as a victim in the case. Since the opening statement is
obviously read first in the articles, the victim discourse is the first discourse the reader is exposed to
which may cause it to leave a stronger impression than if a discourse of the object as a criminal
came first.
Moreover, two of the four articles refer to Michael Brown as “black” (Robles and Bosman 2014:
para. 1; Robles and Schmidt 2014: para. 1) which adds to the victim discourse as it is an attentiongrapping keyword and in circumstances such as this draws connection to the racial tensions that
African Americans face in the United States (Vega and Eligon 2014). This is furthermore
emphasised as one of the articles writes: “the shooting death of a black teenager by a white police
officer” (Robles and Schmidt 2014: para. 1) which clearly underlines the races of both parties thus
adding to the racial tension in America. One of the articles also includes a statement from Michael
Brown’s grandmother, saying that he was “looking forward to getting on with his life” (The
Associated Press 2014c: para. 5). As with the articles in the “first three days”, this statement
accentuates how Michael Brown had his whole life ahead of him and how this was suddenly taken
away from him and thereby clearly marks a victim discourse. This discourse is very evident
throughout the articles and the article by Blow (2014: para. 9) states how the family of Brown and
their attorney call his death “a brutal assassination of his person in broad daylight”. By using such
strong words as “assassination”, the family and attorney attempt to further the notion of his
innocence and the wrongfulness of the actions by the police officer involved in the shooting. The
public opinion in the region is also revealed in one of the articles in this time period, which is
apparent in the following quote: “There have been passionate but peaceful protests” (Blow 2014:
para. 2).
33
When analysing this time period, it once more becomes evident that the discursive construction of
Brown as a victim is the most prevailing in the articles. This discourse is the first discourse to be
put forward in three of the four articles (Blow 2014; The Associated Press 2014c; Robles and
Schmidt 2014) and quickly follows a short neutral discursive construction of the object in the last
article (Robles and Bosman 2014). Two of the articles refer to his racial background (Robles and
Bosman 2014; Robles and Schmidt 2014) and the last two have no mentioning of this throughout
the text (Blow 2014; The Associated Press 2014c). This is a significant drop from the first time
period, where all of the articles mentioned his race. Two of the articles refer to the object as a
“man” instead of a “teenager”. The article by Blow (2014) only refer to him in this manner once
and since the object is referred to as a “teenager” or by his young age in this article and two others
(Robles and Schmidt 2014; The Associated Press 2014c) much more frequently, the more neutral
“man” is absorbed by the victim discourse. However, the criminal and neutral discourse are more
prevailing than the previous time period, which is especially visible in the article by Robles and
Bosman (2014) that contains a heavier criminal discursive construction of Michael Brown than the
other articles. This article differs itself from the three other articles by using the neutral keyword of
“man” more often than “teenager” and by having utilising the discursive construction of the object
as a criminal more than the other articles in this time period as well as the previous. The article does
however contain the victim discourse in the opening statement and therefore does not completely
employ the criminal discourse.
Overall this time period is mainly dominated by the victim discourse but the criminal discourse is
nevertheless more apparent than the first time period, which may be due to the previously
mentioned fact that since the last time period, the police have released footage allegedly showing
Michael Brown robbing a convenience store prior to the shooting.
5.3 Weeks and months after
This time period consists of three articles from the August 24th to September 3rd, 2014.
All of the three articles refer to the object in a neutral manner as “Michael Brown” (Fernandez
2014: para. 1) of which two are in the headline (The Associated Press 2014d; Eligon 2014). Two of
the articles refer to him as “Michael Brown Jr.” (The Associated Press 2014d: para. 1; Eligon 2014:
para. 1), two as “Mr. Brown” (Fernandez 2014: para. 2; Eligon 2014: para. 1) and one simply as
34
“Brown” (The Associated Press 2014d: para. 2) throughout the articles. This is a very neutral
discursive construction of the object, since it does not contain any facts about him that would grab
the attention of the reader, such as race, age, etc.
In the article by Fernandez (2014: para. 3), it is described how a security-camera “appeared to show
Mr. Brown stealing a box of small cigarettes”. This clearly gives an impression that the object was
not an innocent person, but a criminal – however, the inclusion of the word “appeared” works
against this, as it introduces doubt into the assumption of Brown stealing from the convenience
store, leaving the impression that it might not have been Michael Brown stealing the cigarettes. This
is also the case in the article by The Associated Press (2014d: para. 13) where it is mentioned that
the police have released a video of “an alleged theft showing Brown snatch some cigars”. In this
example, the word “alleged” introduces doubt into the statement. This might leave people to believe
that he was not the person who stole the cigars or cigarettes and thereby also giving doubt to the
whole criminal discourse, whereas the victim discourse is stated more as a certain. In the same
article the height and weight of the object is stated, but again this is quickly followed by a positive
description of Brown as a person “with a gentle, joking manner” (The Associated Press 2014d:
para 5), by which the previous mentioning of his large stature is turned positive.
The third article by Eligon (2014: para. 5) describes how Michael Brown “dabbled in drugs and
alcohol”, had taken to rapping which lyrics were vulgar and how he had gotten into “at least” one
brawl with a neighbour. These descriptions of the object clearly form part of a discursive
construction of him as a criminal, by referring to how he had tried drugs and alcohol, even though
drugs are illegal and that he is under the legal drinking age. This shows that he had already broken
the law previously, thereby diminishing the view of him as an innocent victim in the matter while
also adding to the stereotypical image of blacks in regards to drugs (Campbell 1995; Martindale
1986). The same article had earlier mentioned how he had started to embrace Christianity, but as the
before mentioned statement describes how he produced vulgar rap lyrics, one might argue that this
contradicts this Christian depiction of him. Furthermore, by stating that he had gotten into “at least”
one fight with his neighbour, emphasising the criminal discourse and thereby giving the impression
that he might be a person who solves problems through physical violence and gives extra credibility
to the description by the police of how “Mr. Brown hit the officer and scuffled with him over his
weapon, leading to his being shot” (Eligon 2014: para. 7). This is additionally underlined as a
35
friend of Michael Brown, Brandon Lewis, later in the article says that he remembers Brown getting
into a fight (Eligon 2014). This proves that Michael Brown has been in at least two previous fights,
thereby dismissing any possible assumptions that it might only have been an isolated incidence. All
this sows doubt about the discursive construction of him as a victim and that he might be the one to
blame for how badly the incident turned out. It also contradicts a quote from the first time period,
where the grandmother of Michael Brown says that “My grandson never even got into a fight” (The
Associated Press 2014b: para. 12).
The final discursive construction in which our object is portrayed as a victim quickly becomes
evident in this time period. The first statement in the article by Fernandez (2014: para. 1) refers to
the discursive object as “Michael Brown, the unarmed black teenager shot and killed by a white
police officer”. This statement starts out with a neutral discursive construction by referring to the
object as “Michael Brown” but quickly turns to a victim discourse by using the keywords
“unarmed”, “black” and “teenager”. The referral to him being unarmed clearly creates a victim
discourse as he may be seen as a person who was unable to cause any harm or to defend himself.
Calling him a “teenager” once again, as with the articles in previous time periods, points out his
young age and together with the word “unarmed” creates an image of him as a young defenceless
victim. The statement also refers to his race, furthermore adding to the victim discourse, especially
as it is also mentioned that he was killed by a white officer, thus drawing lines to the racial
problems in America. Thereafter the statement continues to describe how Michael Brown has not
had any serious juvenile felony cases filed against his person. This additionally emphasises a strong
discursive construction of the object as a victim in the matter, within the first statement of the
article.
The headline in the article by The Associated Press (2014d) states “Michael Brown called ‘little kid
in big body’” and thereby quickly establishes a discursive construction of the object as a victim, by
referring to him only being a kid even though he was rather large. Thereafter the article describes in
their first statement, how Brown was eager to start college, hereby immediately establishing a
victim discourse by referring to how his bright future was taken away from him. The subsequent
statement continues this discourse by stating how he “he’ll be mourned at his funeral, more than
two weeks after his fatal shooting by a white police officer” (The Associated Press 2014d: para. 1).
This time the race of the object is not revealed, only the race of the officer. However, people
36
familiar with the case will already know the race of Brown and by stating the racial background of
the officer connections are quickly drawn to similar cases of African Americans killed by white
police officers. Especially since the article also states how Brown became “an instant symbol of
racial injustice” (The Associated Press 2014d: para. 2). This article also refers to Michael Brown as
an “18-year-old” (The Associated Press 2014d: para. 4) and “a young man” (The Associated Press
2014d: para. 5), thus a victim discourse is attained by focusing on him being an adolescent (The
Associated Press 2014d). Additionally, the article contains many positive descriptions of the object,
such as stating that he had a “gentle, joking manner” (The Associated Press 2014d: para. 5) and
how he was “kind-hearted” (The Associated Press 2014d: para. 8), “quiet” (The Associated Press
2014d: para. 17), “funny, silly” (The Associated Press 2014d: para. 16) and once more stating how
exited he was about his future. Together, all these descriptions of him add up to an image of a calm
and kind individual, furthermore emphasising the discursive construction of Michael Brown as a
victim.
The last article (Eligon 2014) begins by mentioning a short story, about how Michael Brown saw an
angel in the grey clouds after a storm, running from Satan into the face of God. Later, it is described
how he told he parents that “Now I believe” (Eligon 2014: para. 3). This adds religion into the
matter and shows how the object had started to embrace Christianity as the article also mentions
how he had begun speaking seriously about religion and the Bible. Portraying the object in this
manner, as a Christian, give an image of a person who would not do harm to anyone since this
would be going against the religion. Thereby a victim discourse is created and since the United
States is home to many Christians, a portrayal of him as such might cause sympathy from Christians
across the country. Furthermore, the article in question also refers to the object as a “black
teenager” and hereby further emphasises the victim discourse by referring to his young age and
racial background (Eligon 2014). This attention on race is additionally visible when the article
mentions how he was killed by a white police officer, thus putting focus on the racial tensions that
exist in America. All of the three articles in this time period refer to the racial background of the
incident in one way or another (Fernandez 2014; The Associated Press 2014d; Eligon 2014). Every
article also mentions that Brown was unarmed (Fernandez 2014; The Associated Press 2014d;
Eligon 2014), however the article by Eligon (2014) only mention this in a correction at the very
bottom of the article. Throughout the article by Eligon (2014) the object is portrayed in a way that
ultimately forms a discursive construction. The article talks about him being a “reserved young
37
man” who had no criminal record and no involvement with any gangs (Eligon 2014: para. 10). All
these descriptions of him form a picture of him as a young innocent victim in the incident.
In this time period, the discursive construction of the object as a victim continues in all of the three
articles. However, the criminal discourse has become more prevalent than earlier, and especially the
article by Eligon (2014) constructs this discourse more prevailingly than the others. This does not
however, mean that this article purely utilise this discursive construction, as it also contains the
victim discourse, but compared to the other articles it is obvious that the discursive construction of
Brown as a criminal is stronger in said article. The criminal discursive construction in the other two
articles (Fernandez 2014; The Associated Press 2014d) is put forward alongside the words
“alleged” and “appeared” and are therefore not an as powerful construction as the article by Eligon
(2014), which does not use any of these words. Furthermore, the focus on race continues in this
time period and the race of either Michael Brown or the police officer is mentioned in all of the
articles, once again contributing to the concept of this incident being part of the greater problem of
racial injustice in America. The young age of the Brown is also mentioned in all of the articles
within this time period and in other ways constructing him as a victim by describing his calm
personality and how he had no criminal record (Fernandez 2014; Eligon 2014; The Associated Press
2014d). All this creates a strong discursive construction of Michael Brown as a victim in the
shooting. The neutral discourses within this time period are all references to the object simply as
“Michael Brown”, “Michael Brown Jr.”, “Brown” or “Mr. Brown” and are used throughout the
articles (Fernandez 2014; Eligon 2014; The Associated Press 2014d).
5.4 Sub-conclusion
When looking at all of the three time periods, the object of Michael Brown is predominantly
portrayed by The New York Times within a discourse of him as a victim in the shooting. In the first
time period three of the four articles have a criminal discourse of the object, meaning that one
article only portrays Michael Brown as a victim. This stands out, since all of the other articles in the
last two time periods contain all of the discourses. The criminal discourse in the other three articles
all revolve around how Brown was suspected of being in a physical altercation with the police
officer before he was shot. As the article in question is from the first time period, one might argue
that this could be due to the early shock and outrage experienced in the early days, before more
information was released about what actually happened, especially regarding the whereabouts of
38
Brown prior to the shooting. As we move forward through time the articles indeed begin to utilise
the discursive construction of the object as a criminal at an increasing rate. This is noticeable as one
of the three articles in the second time period contains a much heavier criminal discourse than the
other two from the same time period, even though all the articles in this time period has more focus
on the criminal discourse than the first time period. This could be explained by the fact that the
information regarding the suspected robbery by Michael Brown was released within the second
time period. Indeed, all of the four articles within this time period mention this. As we continue into
the last time period, the criminal discourse becomes even more prevalent than earlier, and one of the
three articles from this time period portrays the object in this manner more prevailingly than the
others, since it describes Brown’s use of alcohol and drugs, how he had begun to write vulgar rap
lyrics, and that he had been in at least two earlier fights. All of the three articles from the last time
period mention how Brown is a suspect in a robbery of a convenience store, before his
confrontation with the police officer who ended up shooting him. This clearly shows that the release
of this information by the police marked a sudden increase in the criminal discourse of the object
within the articles published by The New York Times.
The analysis has also shown that all of the articles do use a neutral discursive construction of the
object, which might be seen as an attempt by The New York Times to be objective in the matter.
However, as the other two discourses are very apparent throughout the analysed articles, this
objectivity has seemingly failed. However, one could argue that having both a criminal and a victim
discourse in an article helps keep the article objective by examining the incident from both views.
Nevertheless, since most of the articles have a heavier usage of the victim discourse, the overall
depiction of Michael Brown ultimately turns in favour of the victim discourse. All of the articles
across the three time periods refer to his young age, some by directly mentioning his age and others
by calling him young or a teenager. More than half of the articles mention the future plans of Brown
and how he was getting ready for college after completing high school. Furthermore, a majority of
the text have descriptions of Brown’s personality, referring to him as a gentle, calm and quiet
person. Finally, all but one article mention that he was unarmed during the shooting. Bringing all
this together, a picture emerges of a calm and quit teenage boy, who had his whole future ahead of
him, but had this destroyed as he was shot dead by police, even though he was unarmed. Drawing
on all these factors, the victim discourse is substantial within the articles. Adding to this is the
notion of race. In the first time period, all of the articles refer to Michael Brown as being black,
39
thereby adding fuel to the fire in regards to the racial tensions across the United States from the very
beginning, as connections are quickly drawn to other cases of African Americans killed or
brutalised by police (Blow 2012). This continues as half of the articles in the second time period,
and all of the articles in the third refer to the racial question by either stating Michael Brown’s race,
or the race of the police officer.
Overall, the victim discourse of Michael Brown is the discourse that leaves the greatest imprint.
Even though the articles contain a neutral discourse as well as a discourse of Brown as a criminal
that actually increases over time, the victim discourse is so penetrative throughout most of the
articles, that it overcomes the criminal discourse and leaves the strongest mark.
6. Discussion
We will compare our findings to the theories and conclude if any similarities occur. Furthermore,
the discussion will draw references to theories regarding the criminalisation of African Americans
in the media and to earlier studies describing how African Americans are viewed and criminalized
by the media.
The results of our analyses prove to be quite similar in terms of which discourses are created of the
respective objects, and how these evolved over time. The first time period in the Garner case does
not include statements regarding race, whereas Michael Brown is mentioned as a black teenager
throughout the articles. Both articles create a dominant victim discourse in the first time period. In
the second time period, several days later, we still see an overall prevailing victim discourse.
However, in the Garner analysis there are less statements referring to him as a criminal, as a new
video at the crime scene surfaced, displaying Garner in a more victimised situation. The criminal
discourse in the Brown articles take a turn in the other direction, as he is portrayed more criminal
than before. The slight shift was a result of a new surveillance video surfacing showing him
allegedly robbing a convenience store. In this time period, we also see the first statement referring
to Garner’s race. The final time period of the analysis, almost sees a slight in shift dominant
discourse in the Brown case, and an increasingly dominant victim discourse in the Garner case. The
discourse of Michael Brown follows the signs of the previous timeframe, and shifts to a less central
40
victim discourse. This is not the case in the Garner analysis, as the final timeframe contains a
minimal number of statements creating the criminal discourse.
In the Eric Garner case, there is a dominant discourse of him as the victim throughout the time
periods. The less dominant discourses are the neutral and the criminal discourse, with the latter
being almost non-existing in the last timeframe. This change of discourse may be the result of
Garner having a previous criminal record, but turning out to be very liked and respected in his
community. He was also a father, grandfather and husband. The fact that the whole episode is
recorded on video, answers many questions that could otherwise have been left unanswered. The
video shows police officers seemingly overreacting to a nonviolent Garner. Furthermore, the death
was ruled a homicide by forensics, and the fact that Garner is discursively constructed as a likeable
person, are all factors that may have contributed to the general victim discourse set throughout the
time periods. Constructing Garner too negatively from the beginning may be dangerous, as race is a
sensitive issue in America, and the media have previously had a reputation of mainly constructing
discourses of black males as criminals (Martindale 1986).
Over time, the Michael Brown case evolves and grows in a different manner than the Eric Garner
case. In the first time period Brown is a constructed as an innocent teenager. Several days after the
incident, footage of him robbing a convenience store surfaces, and the discourse instantly takes a
turn for the worse. The results show, that statements constructing Brown as a criminal are much
more heavily featured in the last time period. However, and this is crucial to mention, the victim
discourse is still overall dominant. The fact that the discourse on Brown ended up being more
criminalised towards the end can have a variety of explanations. The surveillance footage revealed
that Brown may not have been as innocent as first supposed. It was discovered that he also wrote
rap songs with explicit content, alongside the fact that he was suspected of scuffling with the
officer, which all may have added to the change in discourse. Considering, what happened in the
time leading up to Brown’s death was told by a police officer and not documented on video, may
have proved to be vital in how the media unfolds the creation of discourse and the media coverage.
Furthermore, the statements in the articles contained many interviews with locals, prosecutors and
family of the victims. They all speak highly of the discursive objects, which make up one of the
major statements backing the victim discourse. We also noted the lack of statements from families
41
of the police officers and their supporters that might have described them in a different light. The
negative statements on either Garner or Brown are almost solely from evidences such as the
surveillance photos, Garner’s previous crimes and the size of our discursive objects.
Even though The New York Times create a discourse that portray the discursive objects as either a
victim, a criminal or in a neutral manner, race-related statements do not contribute to the creation of
the criminal discourse. This is a fact in our analysis, as the statements including race contain
additional words that construct the objects as victims, as shown in the analysis. Existing theories on
black male stereotypes in media might have suggested otherwise (Campbell 1995; Martindale
1986). They state how African-Americans are stereotyped as violent or users of drugs and alcohol.
The statements in our chosen articles from The New York Times reflect the somewhat opposite of
what these theories have proven. In the case of Brown, there is only one article containing
dominantly statements on this negative stereotype (Eligon 2014). In the Garner case the criminal
discourses do exist, but are never prevailing. However, the theories are decades old and the
American society has been in constant change since the theories were published. America now has a
black president; however this does not equal a society without racism. President Barack Obama
commented on the recent rise in police killings of black people, by stating how racism is deeply
rooted in the American society (Boyer 2014). Furthermore, Obama believes that racism can be
abolished completely but notes how this will take a long time and also refers to the 1950’s and how
much change has occurred since then (Boyer 2014). When the country’s leader, Obama, says that
racism is not dead, there might be some truth to it. Nevertheless, the results of our analysis suggests
that The New York Times construct black males as victims in society rather than the negative
stereotype often seen on African Americans. We can therefore conclude the same as Campbell
(1995: 38), that there is “no striking evidence of intentional, blatant bigotry” in our chosen articles.
The results of the Michael Brown analysis construct him mostly as a victim until the surveillance
video is released. Hereafter, the discourse changes according to the evidence in the case.
Hall’s basic concept of stereotyping (Hall 1997) describes how stereotyping thrives in places
containing large differences in power. It may begin by the group in power (such as police officers)
excluding the minority (such as black males) from society, thus creating an “Us” versus “Them”
situation. The police officers may have a stereotyped image of black males as dangerous, and the
black males know that they are perceived as a threat. In response, the black males may create a
42
stereotype on police officers of them only targeting black people due to their perceived threat of
them. This can create a vicious circle, where both parties exclude each other from their society, thus
eliminating the possibility of finding a mutual solution to problems created by stereotyping, thereby
leaving the American courts and juries to decide who is wrong and right, which may ultimately
cause them to be influenced by the stereotyping and the discourses created by media.
Previous empirical studies (Devine 1989; Fiske and Taylor 1991; Higgins 2000) prove that an
overrepresentation of black males as lawbreakers in media may lead to a manifestation of it as a
general stereotype. In our analysis, we saw a general overrepresentation of the victim discourse
throughout our articles. This relates to Campbell’s (1995) theory which describes how journalists
have become increasingly sensitive to racial matters. If further research confirms that a victim
discourse of black males are a general theme in American popular media we should, based on the
previous research, see an increased connection to black males as victims in society rather than
menaces to society. This may ultimately lead to positive changes for the black community. The
victim discourse may stop the stereotyping of black males as threatening, thus possibly changing
their perceived differences by others, including police officers.
Additionally, if the overrepresentation of black males in news coverage and media shift to a more
neutral representation, a change may be seen. According to previous empirical studies (Devine
1989; Fiske and Taylor 1991; Higgins 2000) the media’s representation of black males are a key to
eliminating the criminalisation and racism. According to the results of our research, The New York
Times show signs of trying to neutralise the criminal stereotype fixed on black males by
overcompensating with positive discourses. There is definitely a pattern in how they refer to black
males in our chosen incidents; whether or not this is intentional, is yet to be proven. They do not
however, utilise negative stereotypes to create criminalised discourses of our discursive objects. If
one of the largest newspapers in the United States continues constructing a balanced or perhaps
even a victim discourse on African Americans, they could help lay the foundation for a new image
of the stereotypical black male in America.
43
7. Conclusion
The aim of this project is to analyse and compare two different incidents of police brutality on black
males in America. The two incidents took place in the summer of 2014 within weeks of each other
and were the Eric Garner incident in New York City and the Michael Brown incident in the St.
Louis suburb of Ferguson. By having analysed and compared how The New York Times has
created a discourse of the two men and the development of the discourses over time, we have the
necessary information to answer the research question.
Our two-section analysis shows an evolving discourse in both cases of police brutality. The analysis
of Eric Garner portrays him as a victim throughout the time periods. He is referred to as an
unhealthy, harmless and peacekeeping family father. The discourse evolves once a second video
surface, showing lack of treatment for Garner, while he was in a state of unconsciousness. This
takes focus away from his criminal past and imposing size and is clearly shown within the last time
period. Here we see a much more one-sided picture of the case. In regards to the Michael Brown
case, the same victim discourse was evident from the outset and almost throughout. One particular
article in the last time period included a higher number of statements constructing him as criminal
than earlier. In the Brown case, there was no video tapings of what actually occurred at the crime
scene. The only footage released was of him and a friend allegedly robbing a local store. This may
be what triggered the more negative evolution of the discourse. Overall, we saw a lack of statements
taking the sides of the police officers. There were many family member and friends saying positive
things about both our discursive objects, thus giving a slight feeling of an overrepresentation of the
victim discourse, which ultimately put police and medical staff in bad positions.
However, a possible side effect may occur by overusing the victim discourse, as African Americans
may ultimately lose trust in law enforcement, since these articles seem to confirm the notion that
black people are innocently killed by white police officers. It may also have the effect of white
police officers being afraid to act accordingly to the law in racial situations, as they might fear any
repercussions that may arise if they misjudge such a situation. In this way, the prevailing discursive
construction of the objects as victims by The New York Times may actually worsen the racial
situation in America.
44
The division of the analyses into time periods made is easier to conclude which factors can change a
discourse. We were able to measure how the discourse created on Brown slowly changed after the
release of evidence portraying him more as a criminal, than in the previous time periods. In the case
of Garner, the transition was not as stark, but still existent. The time periods utilised proved
efficient in our analysis, as they provide the reader with a clear and transparent structure, which also
helps highlighting when and where the exact changes in discourse occur.
A possible weakness in our research might be that some of our articles are from news agencies such
as The Associated Press, but have been edited by journalists from The New York Times. We do not
know and have not investigated how much The New York times have actually edited them. At
worst, if the original texts from the news agencies are left unaltered by The New York Times, some
of the statements we have used in our analysis may prove invalid, since The New York Times have
not contributed to the discourse. However, we still believe that as long as the articles are published
on the webpage of The New York Times and they claim to have edited the article themselves, the
trustworthiness of our research stays intact.
The interesting question that arises from our results is if overcompensating positive discourse of
black males in the media to avoid seeming racist is a new strategy by popular media in the United
States. Thus, future research may investigate if other American newspapers or popular media also
construct a dominant victim discourse, rather than the criminal discourse that black males tend to
take in news and reality entertainment.
45
8. Reference list

Andersen, N. Å. (2003). Discursive Analytical Strategies: Understanding Foucault,
Koselleck, Laclau, Luhmann. Bristol: Policy Press.

Anderson, D. C. (1995). Crime and the politics of hysteria. New York: Random House.

Arribas-Ayllon, M., and Walkerdine, V. (2008) Foucauldian discourse analysis. In C. Willig
and W. Stainton-Rogers (eds) The Sage handbook of qualitative research in psychology.
London: Sage Publications, 91-108.

Bloch M., Carter S. and McLean A. (2010) Mapping The 2010 U.S. Census. The New York
Times, [online]. Available at: http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010/map [Accessed 3
May 2015]

Blow, C. M. (2012) The Curious Case of Trayvon Martin. The New York Times, [online]
16 August. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/17/opinion/blow-the-curiouscase-of-trayvon-martin.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Blow, C. M. (2014) Frustration in Ferguson. The New York Times, [online] 17 August.
Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/opinion/charles-m-blow-frustration-inferguson.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Bogle, D. (1973) Toms, Coons, Mulattoes, Mammies and Bucks: An Interpretative History
of Blacks in American Films. New York: Viking Press.

Bosman, J. and Fitzsimmons, E. G (2014) Grief and Protests Follow Shooting of a
Teenager. The New York Times, [online] 10 August. Available at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/us/police-say-mike-brown-was-killed-after-strugglefor-gun.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Boyer, D. (2014) Obama: Racism ‘deeply rooted’ in U.S. The Washington Times, [online] 7
December. Available at: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/7/obama-racismdeeply-rooted-in-us/ [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Campbell, C. P. (1995). Race, myth and the news. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. T., and Chen, M. C. (2007) An aging theory for event life-cycle
modeling. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics – Part A: Systems and
Humans, 37(2), 237-248.
46

Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled
components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5–18.

Dixon, T. L. (2007). Black criminals and White officers: The effects of racially
misrepresenting law breakers and law defenders on television news. Media Psychology,
10(2), 270-291.

Dixon, T. L. (2008a). Crime news and racialized beliefs: Understanding the relationship
between local news viewing and perceptions of African Americans and crime. Journal of
Communication, 58(1), 106-125.

Dixon, T. L. (2008b). Network news and racial beliefs: Exploring the connection between
national television news exposure and stereotypical perceptions of African Americans.
Journal of Communication, 58(2), 321-337.

Dixon, T. L., and Linz, D. (2000). Overrepresentation and underrepresentation of African
Americans and Latinos as lawbreakers on television news. Journal of communication, 50(2),
131-154.

Dyer, R. (1977) Gays and Film. London: British Film Institute.

Eligon, J. (2014) Michael Brown Spent Last Weeks Grappling With Problems and Promise.
The
New
York
Times,
[online]
24
August.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/25/us/michael-brown-spent-last-weeks-grappling-withlifes-mysteries.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Entman, R. (1992). Blacks in the news: Television, modern racism, and cultural change.
Journalism Quarterly, 69, 341–361.

Essed, P. (1991). Understanding everyday racism. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Feagin, J. R. (2014). Racist America: Roots, current realities, and future reparations. New
York: Routledge.

Fernandez, M. (2014) Michael Brown Never Faced Serious Felony Charge, St. Louis
Official’s Lawyer Says. The New York Times, [online] September 3. Available at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/04/us/michael-brown-never-faced-serious-felony-chargest-louis-officials-lawyer-says.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Fiske, S. T., and Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
47

Foucault, M. (1972) The Archaeology of Knowledge. London: Tavistock Publications

Fox, Z. (2013) Top 10 U.S. Newspapers Ranked by Digital Circulation. [online]. Available
at: http://mashable.com/2013/08/06/newspapers-digital-subscriptions/ [Accessed 3 May
2015]

Gilliam, F. D., Iyengar, S., Simon, A., and Wright, O. (1996). Crime in Black and White:
The violent, scary world of local news. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 1,
6–23.

Goldstein, J. and Schweber, N. (2014) Man’s Death After Chokehold Raises Old Issue for
the Police. The New York Times, [online] 18 July. Available at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/19/nyregion/staten-island-man-dies-after-he-is-put-inchokehold-during-arrest.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Goodman, J. D. and Baker, A. (2014a) Grand Jury in Chokehold Death of Eric Garner
Could Vote This Week on Charges. The New York Times, [online] 2 December. Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/03/nyregion/grand-jury-in-eric-garner-case-couldvote-on-charges-this-week.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Goodman, J. D. and Baker, A. (2014b) Wave of Protests After Grand Jury Doesn’t Indict
Officer in Eric Garner Chokehold Case. The New York Times, [online] 3 December.
Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/04/nyregion/grand-jury-said-to-bring-nocharges-in-staten-island-chokehold-death-of-eric-garner.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Goodman, J. D. and Yee, V. (2014) Death of a Man in Custody Adds Fuel to a Dispute Over
a Policing Strategy. The New York Times, [online] 20 July. Available at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/nyregion/death-of-a-man-in-custody-adds-fuel-to-adispute-over-a-policing-strategy.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Hall, S. (ed.) (1997) ‘The Spectacle of the Other’, in S. Hall (ed.) Representations: Cultural
representation are Signifying practices. London: Sage

Hardin, R. (1999). Do we want trust in government?. Democracy and trust, 22-41.

Higgins, E. T. (2000). Social cognition: Learning about what matters in the social world.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 3–39.

Jacobs, R. N. (2000). Race, media, and the crisis of civil society: From Watts to Rodney
King. Camridge: Cambridge University Press.
48

Kluger, R. (2011). Simple justice: The history of Brown v. Board of Education and Black
America's struggle for equality. New York: Vintage.

Lippmann, W. (1922) Public Opinion. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.

Martindale, C. (1986). The white press and black America (Vol. 97). New York: Praeger.

Mueller, B. (2014a) Medical Workers Face Scrutiny After Man’s Death in Police Custody.
The
New
York
Times,
[online]
21
July.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/22/nyregion/medical-workers-face-scrutiny-after-mansdeath-in-police-custody.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Mueller, B. (2014b) At Harlem Rally, Calls for Action in Chokehold Case. The New York
Times, [online] 2 August. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/nyregion/atharlem-rally-demanding-justice-in-chokehold-case.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

National Archives (n.d.) Declaration of Independence. [online]. Available at:
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html [Accessed 3 May
2015]

Oliver, M. B. (2003). African American men as “criminal and dangerous”: Implications of
media portrayals of crime on the “criminalization” of African American men. Journal of
African American Studies, 7(2), 3-18.

Reuters (2014a) Missouri Teen Shot Dead by Police Had Assaulted Officer: Police. The
New
York
Times,
[online]
10
August.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2014/08/10/us/10reuters-usa-missouri-shooting.html
[Accessed 3 May 2015]

Reuters (2014b) Man, Allegedly Selling Untaxed Cigarettes, Dies After Chokehold by NYC
Police.
The
New
York
Times,
[online]
18
July.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2014/07/18/us/18reuters-usa-new-york-chokehold.html
[Accessed 3 May 2015]

Reuters (2015a) Recent Events in Protests, Policing in United States. The New York Times,
[online] 12 March. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2015/03/12/us/12reutersusa-police-shooting-timeline.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Reuters (2015b) White South Carolina Policeman Charged With Murdering Black Man. The
New
York
Times,
[online]
7
April.
Available
at:
49
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2015/04/07/us/07reuters-usa-south-carolina-shooting.html
[Accessed 3 May 2015]

Reuters (2015c) Crowds Protest Death of Man After Arrest by Baltimore Police. The New
York
Times,
[online]
21
April.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2015/04/21/us/21reuters-usa-police-baltimore.html
[Accessed 3 May 2015]

Richardson, V. (2015) Police kill more whites than blacks, but minority deaths generate
more outrage. The Washington Times, [online] 21 April. Available at:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/21/police-kill-more-whites-than-blacksbut-minority-d/ [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Robles, F. and Bosman, J. (2014) Autopsy Shows Michael Brown Was Struck at Least 6
Times.
The
New
York
Times,
[online]
17
August.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/us/michael-brown-autopsy-shows-he-was-shot-atleast-6-times.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Robles, F. and Schmidt, M. S. (2014) Shooting Accounts Differ as Holder Schedules Visit to
Ferguson. The New York Times, [online] 19 August. Available at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/us/shooting-accounts-differ-as-holder-schedulesvisit.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Romer, D., Jamieson, K. H., and De Coteau, N. J. (1998). The treatment of persons of color
in local television news: Ethnic blame discourse or realistic group conflict. Communication
Research, 25, 268-305

The Associated Press (2014a) Lawyer: Teenager 'Executed' by Missouri Police. The New
York
Times,
[online]
11
August.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/08/11/us/ap-us-police-shooting-missouriattorney.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

The Associated Press (2014b) Missouri Crowd After Shooting: 'Kill the Police'. The New
York
Times,
[online]
9
August.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/08/09/us/ap-us-police-shooting-missouri.html?_r=0
[Accessed 3 May 2015]

The Associated Press (2014c) Key Figures in the Ferguson, Missouri, Shooting. The New
York
Times,
[online]
18
August.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/08/18/us/ap-us-police-shooting-missouri-keyfigures.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]
50

The Associated Press (2014d) Michael Brown Called 'Little Kid in Big Body', [online] 24
August. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/08/24/us/ap-us-policeshooting-brown-profile.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

The Associated Press (2014e) Mayor Says NYC Man's Arrest, Death 'Troubling'. The New
York
Times,
[online]
18
July.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/07/18/us/ap-us-arrest-struggle-death.html
[Accessed 3 May 2015]

The Associated Press (2014f) Officer in Fatal NY Arrest Stripped of Gun, Badge. The New
York
Times,
[online]
19
July.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/07/19/us/ap-us-arrest-struggle-death.html
[Accessed 3 May 2015]

The Associated Press (2014g) Friends: Man in NYC Chokehold Case 'Gentle Giant'. The
New
York
Times,
[online]
21
July.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/07/21/us/ap-us-arrest-struggle-death.html
[Accessed 3 May 2015]

The Editorial Board (2014) Racial History Behind the Ferguson Protests. The New York
Times,
[online]
12
August.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/13/opinion/racial-history-behind-the-fergusonprotests.html?_r=0 [Accessed 3 May 2015]

The New York Times (2014) Staten Island Man Dies After Police Try to Arrest Him. The
New
York
Times,
[online]
17
July.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/18/nyregion/staten-island-man-dies-after-police-try-toarrest-him.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Vega, T and Eligon, J. (2014) Deep Tensions Rise to Surface After Ferguson Shooting. The
New
York
Times,
[online]
16
August.
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/17/us/ferguson-mo-complex-racial-history-runs-deepmost-tensions-have-to-do-police-force.html [Accessed 3 May 2015]

Willig, C. (2013). Introducing qualitative research in psychology. Maidenhead: McGrawHill International.
51