When words also protect: the role of the media in combating gender-based violence

The commemoration of 25 November, International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, is a grim reminder of the global persistence of violence against women and girls simply because they are women and girls. Based on biological differences between bodies, unequal roles, stereotypes and behaviours have historically been constructed to sustain a patriarchal social system. This structure not only reproduces inequalities, but also sustains multiple forms of violence that affect women, girls and other vulnerable identities on a daily basis.

The role that communication can play as a tool to end this violence has been the subject of scientific and social debate for more than twenty years. The maxim that ‘what is not talked about does not exist’ is well known, as true as the one that states that ‘how it is told is how it is understood’. This is the power of the agenda: the media make us start thinking and talking about an issue when they start talking about it. And then there is what is known as ‘framing theory’: the choice of words and approaches conditions public perception. It is not the same to talk about an ‘avalanche of migrants’, an expression that suggests risk and excess, as it is to refer to a ‘group of people’ or even to provide a specific figure. The facts do not change: what changes is their social interpretation.

It was feminist movements that drove this social and political awareness, which was then taken up by the media and institutions.

The same thing happens in the area of violence against women—despite institutional and socially accepted terms, I tend to use the plural forms ‘violence against women’ and ‘sexist violence.’ Until the media began reporting on it, it seemed as if it did not exist. You might know a neighbour who perhaps... But it was not perceived as a social problem. Its gradual introduction into the media agenda gave it public visibility and contributed to its dimension and prioritisation as a social problem. I say ‘contributed’ because, as Esperanza Bosch and Victoria A. Ferrer or Ana de Miguel explain, it was the feminist movements that drove this social and political awareness, which was later joined by the media and institutions.

In a second stage, once Comprehensive Law 1/2004 on Comprehensive Protection Measures against Gender Violence had been enacted, the media gradually adopted a different perspective. From tragic events, crimes of passion and crime reports, they moved towards approaches that denounced these attacks as violations of human rights.

Communicative ethics

It is a two-stage process: first, talking about it because, if we do not name it, it (seems to) not exist. And secondly, talking about it properly (which is why we work from the paradigm of communicative ethics).

Communication has the immense power to shape social perceptions of social phenomena. Therefore, if when we refer to gender-based violence we only illustrate it with photographs of middle-aged women with physical signs of violence (bruises, blood, etc.), we may create the misconception that gender-based violence is the set of physical assaults that occur to women in that age group. Or, if when we write about sexist murders, we only do so when the aggressor is or has been the partner of the murdered woman, we may lead people to believe that gender-based violence has to do with the emotional sphere.

As María Isabel Menéndez, Professor of Audiovisual Communication at the University of Burgos, points out, ‘the media's ability to influence the way the world is perceived by prescribing the position from which it is appropriate to observe social reality influences social functioning’.

In fact, this has already happened in areas such as institutional campaigns for the prevention of violence, and there has been no shortage of reflection on the effects of the political and communicative construction of gender-based violence and its effects on the adolescent population. ‘The overrepresentation of physical violence that we have described in institutional advertising can lead many women who suffer psychological harassment to understand their problem as milder or less serious, and therefore not consider it abuse or seek help,’ reflected researcher Diana Fernández-Romero of Rey Juan Carlos University.

And if violence is the set of physical assaults to which middle-aged women are subjected in emotional-partner environments, what are those discomforts that occur in couples of other ages? How do we refer to sexual assaults in public environments? What are all those other things that happen to us women?

In 1999, following the murder of Ana Orantes, the first manual in Spain was published on how to approach gender violence in journalism in order to generate social benefit and avoid stereotypes 

When we talk about communicating violence responsibly or ethically, we are implicitly referring to the transformative potential of communication, both in terms of raising awareness and promoting understanding (aggression is complex due to its multidimensional and intersectional nature) and in terms of sensitising the public to reject it.

Aware of this capacity, more than twenty-five years ago, the first document was drawn up on how to address this issue journalistically with the aim of generating social benefit and avoiding the stereotypes that had arisen in its coverage: How to treat violence well: style guide for the media (Andalusian Institute for Women, 1999).

Before this, sexist attacks did not appear in the media, and when they did, it was in passionate and gloomy terms and with content that delved into morbid details and moral judgements. The murder of Ana Orantes in 1997, after she appeared on television to describe the life of abuse she had been subjected to, caused an impasse in the media ecosystem of the time. The ten-point guide was only the first in a series of steps taken by the media and professionals to establish the idea that communication could be a powerful ally in eradicating this violence.

Manuals and recommendations

One of the latest compilations in this area, Ethical Treatment of Gender Violence in the Media (2024), covers 48 ethical and professional documents published between 1999 and 2022 in Spain, as well as a selection of academic texts on the subject and a representative repertoire of materials from the international context. These materials, which take the form of lists of recommendations, decalogues or brief style manuals, include clear, operational and agile (realistic) recommendations for practising transformative journalism that contributes to eradicating violence through knowledge and social awareness. In addition, an evaluation process based on indicators is proposed to facilitate the necessary prior reflection to bring news content on violence against women into line with existing ethical standards.

Some of the recommendations found in these documents are: to name violence correctly and explain its gender-based origins; to categorise it as a violation of human rights and an attack on the dignity and integrity of women; not to harass victims and their relatives in order to obtain statements in the heat of the moment; to respect the privacy of victims and their families in graphic and audiovisual materials; give priority to expert or institutional sources, never neighbours or non-specialists; provide figures on the prevalence and magnitude of the problem; and always include the 016 number along with a warning that it leaves no trace on the bill but does appear in the call log on mobile devices.

If we had to recommend one, the one we found most up-to-date and comprehensive (which is what happens when you arrive last and are guided by feminist journalism), would be Contar sin legitimar. Violencias machistas en los medios de comunicación (Telling without legitimising. Sexist violence in the media), produced by Pikara Magazine.

This does not detract from any of the previous ones, as each one, whether pioneering or innovative, contributes its own grain of sand, but this is undoubtedly a comprehensive, thorough and truly focused resource on avoiding the revictimisation to which victims are sometimes still subjected by the media.

The well-intentioned publication of style guides is not enough if it is not accompanied by effective specialised training both in newsrooms and in university classrooms

And why, after 25 years of manuals, does inadequate coverage of gender-based violence persist? There is no shortage of materials or time, so one would expect the media ecosystem to have cleaned up its act enough to produce journalistic discourse that complies with the ethical and professional standards that have been agreed upon in recent years. However, despite improvements, evidence shows that a significant number of news stories continue to simplify the approach to gender-based violence as emotional violence, romanticise violence or minimise it.

Deep and calm reflection is required to understand the various causes of this media reality. Although paper accepts everything, the constant and well-intentioned publication of style manuals is not enough if it is not accompanied by effective specialised training in both professional newsrooms and university classrooms.

The lack of specific knowledge, the hyper-accelerated routines of today's journalism, and the absence of applied tools that allow for a pre-evaluation of news content in line with existing ethical consensus are three urgent areas to explore. These three elements constitute the fundamental (though not the only) pillars on which the structural change necessary to correctly address news of gender-based violence in the media must be based.