Lesson 2.2: Media Effects & Public Attitudes
In this topic, you will examine how sustained negative media coverage impacts public perceptions of feminist, queer, and trans movements. You'll consider how media frames these groups – as dangerous, illegitimate, or foreign – and how such narratives contribute to hostility, marginalisation, funding difficulties, or policy backlash. This topic also highlights how selective visibility and misrepresentation affect the legitimacy and safety of queer, feminist, and trans movements.
2. How framing produces hostility
Media stories about gender and sexuality are rarely neutral. The selection of words, images, and ‘experts’ determines not only what is said but who is seen as credible. ‘Anti-gender’ discourses thrive on a set of recurring strategies.
| Drawing on framing theory (e.g. Lecheler & de Vreese 2019) and cultural studies perspectives (e.g. Stuart Hall’s representation theory), common strategies in ‘anti-gender’ media discourses could be categorised as: |
|
These framing techniques, as contemporary media scholars note, construct preferred interpretations that guide audiences toward emotional and moral judgments, fear, scepticism, or outrage, rather than critical understanding. Once circulated repeatedly, such frames help define who is seen as a threat and who is worthy of protection (Entman, 2010; Lecheler & de Vreese, 2019; Wodak, 2021).
Across the RESIST Project’s case studies, participants repeatedly described the media as a key amplifier of everyday hostility, with the media not simply informing audiences, but shaping environments of exclusion and fear.