Narratives of Native American Women and Tribal Courts: the Framing of the <i>Violence Against Women Act of 2013</i> in Mainstream, Native American, and Tribal Press Coverage

Abstract

The Violence Against Women Act is a legislation created to expand more legal rights and services to survivors of domestic violence or intimate partner violence. Frame analysis was used to examine the coverage of the Violence Against Women Act of 2013 in three genres of press media: mainstream press, Native American press, and tribal press. Based on the media frames produced in the three media genres, the legislation was presented as more of a conflicting or controversial issue in mainstream press through the use of the conflict frame and the "Indian as other" frame. But all news coverage also presented two emergent frames -the tribal sovereignty frame and the women's rights frame -that explained the importance of expanding tribal sovereignty in order to protect Native American women on reservations. The news coverage of VAWA 2013 in all press genres also included perspectives from federal and state governmental sources as well as perspectives from tribal governments, Native American organizations, and social service agencies. This report concludes by discussing the implications of the media frames and occupational source use in terms of the three media genres.ii

An intersectional analysis of newspaper portrayals of the 2013 reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.

“…Consistent with previous media analyses (Berns, 2004;C. F. Bullock, 2007;Sangster, 2016), structural solutions did not receive as much attention as law enforcement.…”

Safety for American Indian Women

“…Because the media significantly impacts worldview, it is crucial to evaluate the media's influence on the social construction of perceptions about people and policies. In a study on the impact of media on perceptions of Title IX, Sangster (2016) found that some media outlets argued that the added provision of Title IX into the passage of VAWA 2013 created special privileges for AI/NA people because the existing act already encompassed all people. This framing of the issue as an "extra" provision allocated for AI/NA people was a partisan issue drawn between Democrats and Republicans, signifying the social constructions surrounding oppression, intersectionality, and who is entitled to protection under the law.…”

“…The reasons why these cases are not prosecuted are multitudinous, such as ambiguity about jurisdiction among tribal governments and which guarantees tribal courts must extend to defendants, such as legal representation (Gross, 2016). Additionally, there is a social construction of AI/NA people as "other," in both personal and governmental framing, wherein AI/NA people are painted as incapable of upholding laws or even unable to understand the law and AI/NA women are considered meek or passive (Sangster, 2016). These biases used in mainstream media and in government forums may also contribute to prosecutors choosing to not prosecute non-tribal members of violent crimes against AI/NA women (Sangster, 2016).…”

“…Additionally, there is a social construction of AI/NA people as "other," in both personal and governmental framing, wherein AI/NA people are painted as incapable of upholding laws or even unable to understand the law and AI/NA women are considered meek or passive (Sangster, 2016). These biases used in mainstream media and in government forums may also contribute to prosecutors choosing to not prosecute non-tribal members of violent crimes against AI/NA women (Sangster, 2016). Continued unwillingness to formally prosecute non-tribal members of violent crimes against women perpetuates long-standing structural oppression against AI/NA women.…”

“…This analysis addresses how shifting socially constructed norms of gender, gender-based violence, and feminism are relevant to this policy's outcomes as well as implicit and explicit objectives. The analysis also addresses culturally-related concepts such as: marginalization, wherein AI/NA people have historically been treated as a peripheral group (Dunbar-Ortiz, 2014); "otherness," which is similar to marginalization but AI/NA cultural practices are considered inferior to western-inspired approaches (Sangster, 2016); colonization, which is the continued attempt to co-opt ways of knowing and doing of indigenous people and supplant it with western-inspired ways (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999); and indigenous goals of empowerment and interdependence, which promote working together and understanding the importance of all persons to exist and thrive (Chino & Debruyn, 2006). Finally, this analysis focuses on the values that define the problems addressed by this policy and how these values can be used to evaluate policy outcomes.…”