"Quem ama não mata": uma análise da cobertura sobre feminicídio no Portal G1 RN
This monography aims to conduct an analysis of the journalistic coverage of three cases of femicide that occurred between 2014 and 2016, to identify whether there was a change in discourse after the enactment of Law Nº 13.104/15 (Femicide Law) in Brazil. Furthermore, the research discusses the me...
Na minha lista:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Outros Autores: | |
| Formato: | bachelorThesis |
| Idioma: | pt_BR |
| Publicado em: |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte
|
| Assuntos: | |
| Endereço do item: | https://repositorio.ufrn.br/handle/123456789/57008 |
| Tags: |
Adicionar Tag
Sem tags, seja o primeiro a adicionar uma tag!
|
| Resumo: | This monography aims to conduct an analysis of the journalistic coverage of three cases of femicide
that occurred between 2014 and 2016, to identify whether there was a change in discourse after the
enactment of Law Nº 13.104/15 (Femicide Law) in Brazil. Furthermore, the research discusses the
meanings created by the press when reporting femicides, based on the social construction of
women's image and power relations. The investigation started with a discussion on women's human
rights and the importance of the feminist movement in creating mechanisms to prevent violations of
their rights and violence against women. The theoretical foundation for the study consisted of
authors such as Hunt (2009), Bobbio (2004), Pires (2006), Flores (2009), Foucault (1990), Chauí
(2008), Traquina (2005), Wolf (1999), and Thurler (2017). Through Discourse Analysis (DA) as a
research method in the field of Journalism, three news articles was published on the G1 RN portal,
belonging to Grupo Globo, about the femicides referred to by the author as "Caso Iane Maria da
Silva" in 2014, "Caso Chacina de Itajá" in 2015, and "Caso Anna Lívia" in 2016. From this sample,
it was verified that the journalistic discourse related to femicide remained similar with
victim-blaming, lack of contextualization about the murders and notably, the non-use of the term
femicide in the journalistic texts of 2015 and 2016. As a result, the femicide coverage was found to
contain discursive formations with a sexist bias, reinforcing gender stereotypes and revictimizing
the victims. |
|---|