Popular Culture Association in the South

Popular Culture Association in the South

The NFL’s “Violence Against Women Problem”: Media Framing and The Perpetuation of Domestic Abuse Author(s): Chris B. Geyerman Source: Studies in Popular Culture, Vol. 38, No. 2 (SPRING 2016), pp. 99-124 Published by: Popular Culture Association in the South Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44259601 Accessed: 25-04-2019 21:28 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide

range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and

facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at

Terms and Conditions of Use

Popular Culture Association in the South is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studies in Popular Culture

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

The NFL’s “Violence Against Women Problem”: Media Framing and The Perpetuation of Domestic Abuse

Chris B. Geyerman

During the 2014 season, the National Football League (NFL) experienced a “domestic violence crisis” when a series of highly publicized cases figured prominently in the landscape of American popular culture, the most notable of which stemmed from an incident that occurred seven months before the season began, in the early hours of February 15, 2014. Upon returning from a Valentine’s Day celebration with friends, in an elevator at the Revel Casino Hotel in Atlantic City, New Jersey, Baltimore Raven’s running back Ray Rice and his then-fiancée, now wife, Janay Palmer1 were involved in a verbal altercation when Palmer reached for Rice’s cell phone and he spit at her and then punched her in the head, rendering her unconscious. Months later, when the incident was the center of a media firestorm, Terry O’Neill, President of the National Organization for Women, would proclaim that “The NFL has lost its way. It doesn’t have a Ray Rice problem; it has a violence against women problem” (O’Keeffe). In itself, the event was sadly unremarkable.

A woman is beaten in the U.S. every nine seconds; each year, more than 4.5 million women are subjected to physical violence at the hands of their intimate partner. Intimate partner homicide is the leading cause of death among pregnant women; from 2001-2012 almost twice as many women were killed by current or former intimate male partners as soldiers were killed in Afghanistan. One in four women will be the victim of severe intimate partner violence during the course of their life; one in seven men will be the victim of severe intimate partner violence during the course of his life-and the list goes on (Vagianos). Domestic violence is, quite literally, epidemic.

However, the Ray Rice case was remarkable. In fact, it was so remarkable that when NBC News released its Year in Review: The

Top Stories of 2014, “Domestic Violence in the NFL” was number 8, and the Rice case was featured most prominently (Leitsinger). For one week in September 2014, the Rice case dominated the sports news

Spring 2016 99

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geyerman

and was featured in virtually every national newspaper and television news broadcast, such as CBS This Morning and the Today Show, to name just two. The Ray Rice case was the subject of great publicity for several key reasons. First, Rice was an all-pro running back for the Super Bowl champion Baltimore Ravens. When on February 1 5, 2014, both he and his fiancée Palmer were arrested and charged with “simple assault,” it made national news, especially in the sports media. Second, and more significant, on February 19, 2014, TMZ, the celebrity gossip and entertainment website, released video of Rice literally dragging the limp bodied, unconscious Palmer from the Atlantic City casino elevator in which the incident occurred. The sports media followed closely and reported the developments in the Ray Rice case from this point forward, and it played out in typical fashion: Rice’s indictment by an Atlantic City grand jury on a third degree assault charge on March 27, 2014; his and Palmer’s marriage the next day; Rice’s plea of not guilty on May 1, 2014; and his subsequent application to and acceptance in a “diversionary” program for first-time offenders, which meant that Rice would be clear of criminality after one year. Rice and his wife also met in person with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. Everything went as expected until on July 24, 2014 NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell announced a two-game suspension as punishment for Rice. Goodell was widely and almost universally criticized for his handling of the case, and the two-game suspension was viewed by most as, at best, woefully inadequate, and, at worst, misogynistic and tone deaf. Third, and without question most significant, on Monday, September 8, 2014, the day culminating week one of the 2014 NFL season, TMZ released another video, this time of surveillance footage from inside the Atlantic City casino elevator. It graphically portrayed the vicious blow to the head that rendered Palmer unconscious and Rice’s nonchalant response. Year in Review: The Top Stories of 2014 begins its description of domestic violence in the NFL with these words: “The NFL has struggled with the gravest scandal in its history. A video surfaced earlier this year of Baltimore running back Ray Rice punching and knocking out his then fiancée, now wife, and dragging her out of a hotel elevator” (Leitsinger). By the end of the day, the Baltimore Ravens terminated Rice’s contract, and he was suspended indefinitely from the NFL by Goodell. The Ray Rice domestic violence case was “the story of the moment,” and the media frenzy was on in full force.

Given the prominent and sensational nature of the Rice case, it comes as no surprise that domestic violence emerged as a more

100 Studies in Popular Culture 38.2

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

The NFL’s “Violence Against Women Problem”

visible social problem, and the increase in public scrutiny of domestic violence in the NFL was especially acute. Enter Greg Hardy, then all- pro defensive end for the Carolina Panthers, and Adrian Peterson, all- pro running back for the Minnesota Vikings.2

Hardy played in Carolina’s 2014 season opener on September 7, 2014, despite having been arrested for assault and communicating threats on May 13, 2014, after allegedly beating and threatening to kill his girlfriend, Nicole Holder. Hardy was found guilty by a North Carolina judge that July, but when, on appeal, Holder failed to appear in court, North Carolina prosecutors dismissed charges. In the face of intense public criticism, fomented in large part by the release of the second Rice video, the Panthers deactivated Hardy on September 14, 2014, and the NFL placed him on the commissioner’s exempt list.3 Hardy played no more in the 2014 season. In April 2015, during the off-season, he was suspended for ten games by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and then was traded to the Dallas Cowboys. The suspension was reduced to four games in arbitration, and in game five of the 2015 NFL season, Hardy made his debut as a member of the Dallas Cowboys. Despite missing the first four games, Hardy finished the 2015 season with six sacks, second highest by the Cowboys, and he likely led the league in public controversy.

Like Hardy, Adrian Peterson played in week one of the 2014 NFL season. Unlike Hardy and Rice, Peterson was not suspended for domestic violence against a woman. Rather, Peterson was placed on the commissioner’s exempt list after being indicted on September 12, 2014, by a Texas grand jury on felony charges of reckless or negligent injury to a child after beating his four-year-old son with a “switch.” TMZ posted on its website photographs of the bloody wounds on the boy’s legs, back, and genital area, and Peterson’s 2014 NFL season was over. Peterson avoided jail time by reaching a plea agreement in which he pled “no-contest” to the lesser charge of “recklessly assaulting” the child. Peterson was subsequently cleared to play during the 2015 NFL season, in which he led the Vikings to the playoffs and the NFL in rushing, with 1485 yards on 327 carries, scoring 1 1 touchdowns and being selected to the Pro Bowl.

Because they involve famous people and generate such publicity, the Ray Rice, Greg Hardy, and Adrian Peterson cases provide especially visible examples of public discourse on domestic violence. An analysis of sports media representations of these cases can be used to explicate the dominant media frames employed, giving particular attention to the attributions for

Spring 2016 101

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geyerman

domestic violence. Through this approach, this study contributes to research on media coverage of domestic violence in general (e.g., Gillespie et al.; Rothman et al.; Nettieton; McManus and Dorfman; Berns, Framing the Victim )4 and on domestic violence in world sports in particular (e.g., Dabbs; Enck-Wanzer; McDonald; “Out of Bounds”; Welch).

Frame Analysis, Media Framing, and Attribution Theory

The analysis following is based on a close reading of media reports of domestic violence in the NFL from February 2014 to November 2015. There is no question that the Rice case, because of the graphic video footage, serves as the most significant motivating factor in the increased concern about domestic violence in the NFL. In fact, the Rice case is most often referred to in media reports of other NFL domestic violence cases, including those of Hardy and Peterson. In this sense, the Rice case serves as the context for the media reporting of the cases that have (and likely will) follow. For example, on ESPN Radio’s The Dan Le Batard Show, which airs Monday through Friday from 10am to 1pm EST, Le Batard and co-host Jon “Stugotz” Weiner on November 1 1, 2015 engaged in a discussion about the unrepentant Greg Hardy and whether he was the most disliked person in sports. During the course of the November 11, 2015, discussion, Stugotz wondered aloud if Hardy’s refusal to act contrite causes people to view Hardy differently than Rice, who is “out there in the community saying the right things, he’s showing contrition, he’s doing the right things.” Le Batard countered with “no, but we still have a video of him knocking his wife … his fiancée unconscious in an elevator, and that speaks louder than any of it, and he’s not in the league anymore.” Because the Rice case occupies a central place in current public discourse on domestic violence in the NFL, it functions as the primary reference and point of departure in this analysis.

Framing analysis in communication and media studies can be traced initially to the work of Gregory Bateson and Erving Gofïman. At its most basic, framing analysis posits that communication “sources,” especially media sources, present information and “facts” in specific ways that simultaneously encourage the making of particular meanings and discourage or even preclude the conceptual possibility of others. In Bateson’s words, frames are both inclusive and exclusive:

just as “the frame around a picture says ‘Attend to what is within and do not attend to what is outside,’” the (discursive) frames of media

102 Studies in Popular Culture 38.2

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

The NFL’s “Violence Against Women Problem”

events direct attention to that which is framed as it is framed, not to potential alternative framings, and the perception of the picture-in this

case domestic violence in the media coverage of the Rice, Hardy, and Peterson cases – is “positively enhanced” (187). In short, to employ framing analysis as a method is to examine “the organization of experience” as it is “governed” by “subjective involvement” in social events thus experienced (Goffman 10-11). With respect to social problems like domestic violence, “by identifying what the problem is about and what its causes are, a frame at least implies, if not stated outright, what should be done to solve it” (Berns, Framing the Victim 8). Thus, media frames function as a form of “cultural pedagogy” (Kellner 9), and framing analysis focuses on the explication of those cultural lessons.

In the absence of experience, meaning is derived via some form of mediated communication, and the mass media here figure most prominently. To explicate how domestic violence is represented in the media framing of the Rice, Hardy, and Peterson cases, basic premises of attribution theory are used because this theory is concerned with “trying to make sense of others’ behavior” (Fogler, Poole, and Stutman 52). The behavior of others, according to attribution theory, is made sense of by attributing their actions to dispositional factors and situational factors. According to Fogler, Poole, and Stutman, dispositional attributions are causes for behavior that are seen as “arising from the individual,” whereas situational attributions are seen

as “stemming from external forces” (52). Dispositional and situational attributions that characterize dominant media framing of these cases (re)constitutes an understanding of domestic violence in which blame is to varying degrees dispersed from the NFL and the perpetrators.

Media Framing of Domestic Violence in the NFL

The media representations of domestic violence around the Rice, Hardy, and Peterson cases are marked by the emergence of two distinct frames. First, media coverage of these cases framed domestic violence as an NFL problem. In so doing, the media coverage of these cases diverted attention away from domestic violence as a widespread social problem and set up a dynamic which allowed the NFL to attribute its domestic violence problem to ignorance and reposition itself as part of the solution. Second, because domestic violence, by definition, involves persons in a relationship, it should come as no surprise that media coverage of these cases of domestic violence is framed

Spring 2016 103

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geyerman

by referencing the nature of the relationship between the perpetrator and victim. Specifically, media reporting on these cases framed the relationship between the principles at the time of the incidents as one marked by an interpersonal bond. The analysis demonstrates that, taken together, these media framings of domestic violence in the NFL serve two critical functions. First, they mollify both the NFL and the three perpetrators by reducing their culpability for these violent acts; second, they constitute conditions for redemption that invoke a patriarchal value structure which promotes an understanding grounded in American identity.

Frame One: Domestic Violence is an NFL Problem

As indicated by the epigraph and the fact that NBC News named “Domestic in the NFL” a top story for 2014, the sports and national media in its coverage of the Rice, Hardy, and Peterson cases recurrently

framed domestic violence as a problem especially prevalent in the NFL. The framing of domestic violence as an NFL problem did indeed focus public attention to its occurrence and subsequent handing by the NFL. More important, it also set off a dynamic that allowed the NFL to employ rhetorical strategies by using a series of dispositional and situational attributions that blame the problem on its own ignorance and on society at large. The rhetorical strategies used by the NFL in its response to the media framing of domestic violence as an NFL problem allowed the NFL to reposition itself as part of a solution to the problem. This repositioning resulted in large part from two themes that characterize this frame: the competence of NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and the NFL’s newfound recognition that domestic violence is a complex and pervasive social problem.

Goodell had been the subject of public criticism for the two- game suspension he handed down to Ray Rice on July 24, 2014, but criticism was nothing new to Goodell. Since assuming his role as NFL Commissioner in September 2006, Goodell had become known as the “law and order” commissioner for his no-nonsense attitude and

handing down harsh penalties for player and team misconduct. Yet when the video was released of Rice punching Palmer in the head and knocking her out, the public criticism (and scrutiny) of Goodell reached heretofore unseen heights. The criticism of Goodell centered on his handling of the Ray Rice case and his refusal to deal proactively with NFL problems, instead dealing with them only as a reaction to public-opinion pressure. Also, it was primarily concerned with the

104 Studies in Popular Culture 38.2

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

The NFL’s “Violence Against Women Problem”

three themes of demanding his resignation, questioning his competence

regarding when he first saw the video of Rice punching Palmer in the head, and deciding to extend Ray’s suspension indefinitely following the release of that video.

The speculation over Goodell’s reign as NFL Commissioner was widespread, and it became the subject of debate by former NFL players and coaches, many of whom are current NFL analysts, and interested members of the public. For example, ESPN published an article that stated Goodell was “called into question . . . [by] former NFL players, an owner, a league sponsor and a leading U.S. legislator” (“Roddy White”), a story in the Washington Post indicated that “in fact, those in and around the NFL community have begun scrutinizing Goodell’s priorities and, in some cases, calling for his job” (Babb and Maske), and the International Business Times reported that “Fire Roger Goodell” was trending on Twitter (Price). One of the most important and far-reaching criticisms of Goodell came from the National Organization for Women (NOW), which on September 10, 2014, issued a statement calling for Goodell’s resignation (Armour and “NOW Wants”). According to the release, the president of NOW, Terry O’Neill stated: “The NFL has lost its way. It doesn’t have a Ray Rice problem; it has a domestic violence problem …. The only workable solution is for Roger Goodell to resign” (“NOW Wants”). As the story was transformed from one about domestic violence to the survival of Goodell as NFL Commissioner, in which, ironically, NOW played a critical role, it soon became apparent that Goodell would weather the storm and retain his job. On the same day that NOW issued its press release, USA Today published a story that opened with these words: “The desk pounding cries for Roger Goodell’s head are a waste of breath. He is not quitting and the NFL owners, money flooding their houses like a melting Arctic island, are not firing him” (Whicker).

Even though it became apparent Goodell would retain his job, his credibility was nonetheless the subject of criticism, particularly regarding when he actually viewed the video of Rice punching Palmer. The speculation was that he had seen the video, and ESPN, com published a September 28, 2014 story that leads with “A law enforcement official says he sent a video of Ray Rice punching his then-fiancée to an NFL executive five months ago, while league officials have insisted they didn’t see the violent images until this week” (“Report: Rice Video”). Goodell, of course, denied seeing the video before September 8, 2014 but said in an interview with

Spring 2016 105

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geyerman

USA Today that “when he did, he found it ‘sickening’” (Brennan). Regardless of whether Goodell had seen the video before Monday of that week, the media attention given to the issue functioned to keep Rice as a perpetrator of domestic violence in the background and serves as another example of how the media framing of domestic violence often obscures the perpetuator’s responsibility.

When Rice did become the focus of attention in this frame, it was

the result of Goodell increasing his initial two-game suspension to an indefinite suspension because the latter was consistent with the “new domestic violence policy” (Brennan). Goodell was widely criticized for increasing Rice’s punishment on the grounds that because Rice already had been punished for his assault on Palmer with a two-game suspension, the increase to an indefinite suspension was arbitrary and unjust, nothing more than a “PR stunt” to placate public outcry. Former U.S. District Judge Barbara S. Jones, who heard Rice’s appeal in November 2014, agreed. She overturned Rice’s suspension on the grounds that Goodell ‘s indefinite suspension was “an abuse of discretion . . . and arbitrary” (“Ray Rice Wins Appeal”). The decision made Rice a free agent, eligible to sign with any NFL team. Regardless of whether one thinks he should have been eligible to play in the NFL during the 2015 season or that Goodell over-stepped his authority, the focus on the suspension of Rice from the NFL further diverted attention away from him as the perpetuator of violence against women,

this time in an alternative persona of the abuser, i.e., Rice the football player..

During the height of media attention on Goodell, he gave an interview that was aired on CBS This Morning. In the post-script to the interview, which was televised an hour later, Goodell was “asked what he learned from his pre-discipline meeting with Ray Rice and his wife, Janay. ‘He [Ray] indicated what he and Janay are doing as a couple to try to address their issues,’ Goodell said. ‘It’s a very difficult issue for families. What I’m learning about this whole issue of domestic violence is that it’s very complicated. Very difficult on families. There are victims, there are family members that are impacted by this’” (Florio).The net result of the media attention around the competence of Roger Goodell was that the problem was transformed from a private, family problem between Rice and Palmer to a public problem about the future of Goodell as commissioner (and, by extension, the NFL) and Ray Rice the football player. When Goodell was asked what he learned from his pre-discipline meeting (June 16, 2014) with Rice and Palmer, he referred to “victims” and “families” in the plural, a

106 Studies in Popular Culture 38.2

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

The NFL’s “Violence Against Women Problem”

rhetorical strategy used widely by the NFL and the sports media to emphasize that domestic violence is a permeating social problem.

Domestic violence, previously illustrated by the statistics, is indeed a widespread, common, and thus permeating social problem, so it comes as no surprise that incidents of domestic violence occur among NFL players. By employing a rhetorical strategy that attributes domestic violence in the NFL to the fact that it is a permeating social problem, the NFL and sports media function to attribute the problem of domestic violence outside the culture of the NFL and reposition the NFL as part of the solution. “Human violence” is an anti-feminist frame that removes gender from the problem of domestic violence by assigning culpability to both men and women (i.e., domestic violence is not a male or female problem, but rather a human problem), and the result is that women are held as partially responsible for the abuse they

endure (Berns, Framing the Victim 106). In much the same way, the “domestic violence as permeating social problem” rhetorical strategy in the Rice, Hardy, and Peterson cases functions to remove the NFL from the problem (i.e., domestic violence is not an NFL problem, but rather a socio-cultural problem). The result is that domestic violence is deinstitutionalized as an NFL problem, and thus this rhetoric functions as a sort of implicit rebuttal to claims, like the one advanced by NOW president Terry O’Neill, that the NFL “doesn’t have a Ray Rice problem; it has a domestic violence problem” (“NOW Wants”). The strategy of situating domestic violence as a permeating social problem came from the NFL itself, those critical of the league and Goodell, and those reporting on the Rice, Hardy, and Peterson cases.

The focusing of attention on domestic violence as a permeating social problem was a strategy employed by the NFL office even before the release of the second video, in the construction of the letter

Goodell sent to all 32 NFL teams, which was published in USA Today on August 28, 2014. In the letter, Goodell outlines the actions he has directed to “reinforce and enhance” NFL policies with respect to domestic violence. In describing the fifth directive, he writes “Fifth, we recognize that domestic violence and sexual assault are broad social issues, affecting millions of people” (“Roger Goodell’s Letter”). By using this rhetorical strategy, which extends domestic violence into the larger social system, Goodell situates domestic violence as not intrinsically germane to the NFL, thus “deinstitutionalizing” the problem from the NFL per se. Because this strategy functions to reject the individuation of the NFL as a specific site of domestic violence, it comes as no surprise that it is widely employed by league officials

Spring 2016 107

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geyerman

and apologists. However, the strategy is also unwittingly employed by others, even when they are criticizing the NFL.

Describing domestic violence as a permeating social problem is evident in Phil Taylor’s “The Brutal Truth,” which was published in the September 1 5, 20 14 issue of Sports Illustrated, the cover of which features a grainy security camera photo of Rice and Palmer entering the elevator. The overall tone of the story is critical of Goodell and the NFL’s handling of the Rice case, noting that it should not have taken the release of the video in which Rice knocks out Palmer for

Goodell and the league to take more serious action. Nevertheless, when Taylor describes the effects of that video, he writes “The video was so shocking, so brutal and so repulsive that it intensified the reaction of Johnson and countless others, who have suffered, directly or indirectly, from the scourge of domestic violence” (Taylor). When Taylor uses the phrase “countless others,” the implication is clear: the pain associated with domestic violence extends well beyond the confines of the NFL. Even in his criticism of the NFL, Taylor frames the problem of domestic violence so that the league is a place, one among many, where the ills of the larger society are played out.

In responding to the fallout from its handling of the Rice case, the NFL announced the implementation of new policies and practices with respect to domestic violence. On September 15, 2014 – one week to the day after the release of the second Rice video – ESPN, com published a report about one such development. On the surface, the report titled “NFL Hires Domestic Violence Advisors” is short and simple. Running just seven brief paragraphs and less than one printed page, it simply describes the “three experts in domestic violence [that] will serve as senior advisers to the league” (para 1). The important part of the report for this analysis is the description of the domestic violence advisors hired by the NFL, which reads as follows: “Friel was the head of the Sex Crimes Prosecution Unit in the New York

County District Attorney’s Office for more than a decade. Randel is the co-founder of No More, a campaign against domestic violence and sexual assault. Smith is the former executive director of the National

Coalition Against Domestic Violence.” By adhering to the journalistic convention of listing the credentials of experts, the report’s author clearly situates domestic violence as a problem exceeding the borders of the NFL. This rhetorical strategy, coupled with the Boston Globe headline “Roger Goodell Admits Mistake, Toughens NFL’s Domestic Violence Policy,” in which Goodell ‘s letter to all NFL teams states that “I did’t get it right” (Fendrich), implicitly exonerates Goodell and

108 Studies in Popular Culture 38.2

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

The NFL’s “Violence Against Women Problem”

the NFL from responsibility precisely because they did not understand the depth and complexity of the problem of domestic violence. With the newfound knowledge that domestic violence is such a complex social problem, the “tougher policies” represent progress toward solving the problem. In short, the narrative gives the NFL a pass based on ignorance of the domestic violence problem, despite the fact that domestic violence cases in the NFL were by no means a new phenomenon (“Out of Bounds” 1048-65; Dabbs 167-99).

The prevalence of domestic violence in society at large is also a major theme in the media reports of Peterson’s child abuse. Almost from the moment he was indicted, Peterson’s legal team, led by Russell “Rusty” Harden, a Texas attorney with an established track record of winning favorable verdicts for athletes, employed the strategy of attributing Peterson’s actions to the situational factor that he was disciplined in the same manner as a child. The media ran with it, from USA Today to CBS News to Time Magazine. One typical example is from the Los Angeles Times, which quotes Peterson from the first public remarks since his arrest: “I have to live with the fact that when I disciplined my son the way I was disciplined as a child, I caused an injury that I never intended or thought would happen …. My goal is always to teach my son right from wrong and that’s what I tried to do that day” (Schilken). This strategy serves two important functions in terms of media framing of domestic violence in the NFL. First, it situates domestic violence as outside the confines of the NFL and relocates it in Peterson’s upbringing. Second, because this strategy implies that he did not know any better than to beat a four- year-old with a switch, it at least partially exonerates Peterson from responsibility for his own intentional actions and suggests that he is a loving parent concerned with teaching his child right from wrong and developing a productive father/son relationship. In addition to framing domestic violence as an NFL problem, the media’s coverage of the Rice, Hardy, and Peterson cases employed another dominant frame by focusing on domestic violence as a relational problem.

Frame Two: Domestic Violence is a Relational Problem

One of the most dominant frames employed by the media in its coverage of domestic violence focuses on the nature of the relationship between those involved. In this frame, domestic violence as a social problem is concealed, the victims (Palmer and Holder) in the Rice and Hardy cases are held as at least in part responsible, and the role

Spring 2016 109

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geyerman

of perpetrators is minimized and obscured. In this frame Peterson is represented as a loving father who unintentionally harmed his son. In its reporting on these incidents, the media framing of the relationship between abuser and abused implies specific meanings about the nature of perpetrators of domestic violence and about the role that men and women play in incidents of abuse.

Through a series of dispositional attributions, some made even by her, Janay Palmer is represented in the media as responsible for the violence she endured at the hands of her soon-to-be husband, Rice.

This phenomenon is nothing new. For example, Nettleton (139) has suggested women’s magazines place the responsibility for preventing domestic violence on the women. Similarly, Berns has suggested that as the problem of domestic violence is “degendered,” the blame for domestic violence is “gendered” and as a result “places the burden of responsibility [for domestic violence] on women” (“Degendering the Problem” 278). In short, the victim of domestic violence is at once blamed for “provoking the abuse and held responsible for ending abuse” (Berns, Framing the Victim 3), and the media framing of Palmer was no exception.

On the day of the incident it was reported widely that both Palmer

and Rice were arrested after they “struck each other with their hands” and were each charged with “simple assault” (“Key Events”). The mere fact that Palmer was also arrested and charged establishes her as at least partially to blame for the incident, and this trend continued throughout the media coverage of this case. For example, on Friday, July 25, 2014, on the daily ESPN television program First Take, sports analyst Stephen A. Smith made comments while discussing the Rice case that implied women can “provoke” domestic abuse. Smith was, of course, criticized widely, and on Monday, July 28, 2014, Time Magazine reported that he had apologized and “retracted statements that implied women can provoke domestic violence” (Dockterman). Perhaps the most blatant example of Bern’s notion of “degendering” domestic violence and “gendering” the blame unfolded on Friday, May 23, 2014, when the Ravens held a press conference with Rice and Palmer appearing together. During the press conference, Rice apologized for “the situation my wife and I were in” (“Key Events”; Maine); Palmer apologized for “my role in the incident,” and following the press conference the Ravens tweeted “Janay Rice says she deeply regrets the role that she played the night of the incident” (Taylor). Palmer continued along this path of self-blaming right through her exclusive November 5, 2014, interview with ESPN’s

110 Studies in Popular Culture 38.2

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

The NFL’s “Violence Against Women Problem”

Jemele Hill, which, incidentally, took place at the home of Janet Rice, the assailant’s mother. Palmer described herself as that day as “annoyed” (Rice) because she was not going to get the Valentine’s Day celebration she had wanted – just the two of them – as Rice had made plans with friends. In recalling the moments prior to the incident,

Palmer said, “As we were arguing, he [Rice] was on his phone and not looking at me. I went to reach for his phone, and when he grabbed it back, he spit at me and I slapped him” (Rice). Later in the interview, Palmer recalled the May 23, 2014, press conference with these words: “Looking out over the media, I became angry …. When it was my turn to speak, I said I regretted my role in the incident …. I’m not saying that what Ray did wasn’t wrong …. It’s been made clear to him that it was wrong. But at the same time, who am I to put my hands

on somebody?” (Rice). These media representations clearly illustrate the gender dynamics described by Bern. The problem is degendered here via situational attribution: when Rice apologizes and thus accepts responsibility only for being “in a situation” with his wife – as if the situation were already there, independent of them – the incident is clearly seen as emanating from something external to Rice. By choosing to not include content that situates responsibility for Rice’s actions solely on him, the blame for the violence is “gendered” here via dispositional attribution: when Palmer apologizes for “the role she played in the incident,” which ultimately emanated from her being “annoyed” because Valentine’s Day did not go as she desired, the cause for the incident is clearly established as arising from “within” Palmer, in the form of stereotypical feminine “annoyance.”

The media framing, in addition to situating much of the blame on Palmer and thus degendering the problem of domestic violence, at least partially exonerates Rice, primarily through dispositional attributions characterizing him as a basically good guy who just made one terrible mistake that was not indicative of his underlying character, as well as situational attributions that suggest alcohol consumption and his upbringing were in part responsible. For example, on February 2 1 , 20 14,

just six days after Rice knocked Palmer unconscious, it was reported in the media that “Baltimore Ravens Head Coach John Harbaugh speaks at the NFL [scouting] combine about Rice’s arrest: ‘There are a lot of facts and a process that has to be worked through in anything like this. There are a lot of question marks. But Ray’s character, you guys know his character. So you start with that’” (“Key Events”). Then, on March 27, 2014, when Rice was indicted by an Atlantic County grand jury for aggravated assault in the third degree and charges against Palmer

Spring 2016 111

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geyerman

were dropped, the Ravens issued the following statement: “This is part of the due process for Ray. We know there is more to Ray Rice than this one incident” (“Key Events”). Dispositional and situational attributions that in part exonerate Rice were also made by the victim. In her exclusive interview with ESPN’s Jámele Hill (Rice), Palmer tells her story of the incident. During the course of telling her story, Palmer notes that “we were drunk and tired,” “Ray never knew his father because he was murdered when Ray was just a year old,” “since Ray didn’t have a father growing up, getting close to my father meant a lot to him,” Ray “asked my dad” before proposing marriage, “Ray accepted responsibility from the moment we left the police station,” and

that “This came out of nowhere. Nothing like this had ever happened before. I knew it wasn’t him.”

The media framing of the relationship between Hardy and Holder was much different than between Rice and Palmer. Whereas

Rice and Palmer were characterized as essentially a couple devoted to working through their shared problem, Hardy and Holder were characterized as estranged, with Holder pressing assault charges, resulting in Hardy’s conviction by a judge. Nonetheless, the media framing of this relationship is characterized by attributions assigned to their relationship and to Holder which function to animate their relationship, place at least partial blame on Holder, and objectify and sexualize Holder.

Reporting for Sports Illustrated on Friday, September 12, 2014 – at the height of the media frenzy fomented by the Rice case – in a story questioning whether Hardy would be allowed to play in that Sunday’s game, Wertheim and Kaplan write that “Even during the heights of their coupling-when, for instance, Holder flew to Hawaii to accompany Hardy to the Pro Bowl-their relationship was volatile by any measure.” Two critical points can be drawn from Wertheim and Kaplan’s language. First, by attributing the quality of volatility to the relationship between Hardy and Holder, the relationship is reified and thus assumes a state of thingness. The implication is clear: both Hardy and Holder were caught up in a volatile relationship with its own agency, rather than Hardy being a volatile and abusive man. Second, by writing that Holder flew with Hardy to the Pro Bowl, the implication is that she chose not to end the volatility and, by extension,

the abuse and is thus in part to blame for what she experienced at the hands of Hardy. This attribution implicitly placed on Holder manifested itself in Rolling Stone’s February 25, 20 1 5, story on Hardy

just after the case against him was dismissed. In the story, Kenneth

112 Studies in Popular Culture 38.2

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

The NFL’s “Violence Against Women Problem”

Arthur writes, “Regardless of his actual guilt, Hardy’s association with a violent incident is enough to warrant a suspension, given the league’s supposed deviation from a laissez-faire attitude regarding domestic violence.” With these words, Arthur at once both casts doubt on Hardy’s guilt and, by stating “his association with a violent incident,” subverts his agency in choosing to beat and threaten to kill Holder. Although the content of media frame here is much different than with Rice and Palmer, the form is essentially the same. To use Bern’s framework, the problem is degendered when the relationship is reified (i.e., it is the relationship, not Hardy, that is volatile), and the

blame is gendered when the implication is that Holder shares in the responsibility for her abuse – Hardy was merely “associated with the incident” (“Degendering the Problem” 262).

Despite the fact that Hardy and his victim, Holder, were represented

as not continuing their relationship, even after he was convicted of beating, threatening to kill, and throwing her into a futon on which sat several loaded assault rifles, the media nonetheless referred to them as a couple. In reporting on the July 2014 trial finding of Hardy’s guilt for assaulting and threatening to kill Holder, The Charlotte Observer published a story that, incredibly, included these lines: “Even in court, Hardy and Holder made a striking pair. He wore a black suit and Pantheresque blue-and-black tie. She came to court in a stylish black dress with towering high heels” (Gordon, Person, and Jones). By referring to them as “a striking pair,” many of the dynamics

discussed above that place blame on Holder come into play. More insidious is the objectification and sexualization of Holder. Whereas a men’s suit signifies the attribute of occupational success, high heels, especially “towering” high heels, function as an ingrained cultural signifier which attributes to the wearer the desire to be more sexually attractive by creating the illusion of “longer legs.” Women’s heeled shoes “have obvious sexual aspects: display, the tilting of the body when high heels are worn so as to emphasize the breasts and other sexual characteristics, forcing the woman to walk in a certain way. This sexual aspect of the shoe is found in the Cinderella story, where the prince discovers Cinderella by putting a glass slipper on her foot” (Berger 256). Thus, the implication is that Holder desired to appear sexually attractive at the criminal trial of the man convicted of beating and threatening to kill her. By so describing Hardy and Holder, the authors invoke a patriarchal world view and value structure.

The media framing of the relationship between Peterson and his son is marked by two critical elements. First, Peterson is characterized

Spring 2016 113

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geyerman

as a man intending his son no harm. For example, in reporting on Peterson’s first public remarks after being arrested and indicted on child abuse charges, the Los Angeles Times published a story that quoted Peterson as writing “I am not a perfect parent, but I am, without

a doubt, not a child abuser

and did not intend to cause him any injury. No one can understand the hurt that I feel for my son and for the harm I caused him” (Schilken). Since Peterson issued his statement in writing, it prevented the author from framing the incident in any other way – for instance by focusing

on what he had learned about child abuse as a social problem – and the implied dispositional attribution applied here to Peterson is that, because he “has to live” with the fact, regrets causing injury to his son,

and in trying to teach his son “right from wrong” was well intentioned.

Second, Peterson is characterized as loving his son. In reporting on the November 2014 plea bargain that reduced his crime from a felony to a misdemeanor, Eric Prisbell and Brent Schrotenboer of USA Today write “‘I truly regret this incident,’ Peterson said outside the courthouse. ‘I stand here and take full responsibility for my actions. I love my son more than any one of you could even imagine. I am looking forward to and I am anxious to continue my relationship with my child. “‘ In addition to attributing to Peterson the quality of parental love, the choice he made to beat his child with a switch is hidden in the

vague language of “regretting the incident” and taking responsibility for “his actions.”

The media frame of domestic violence as a relational problem, especially in the Rice and Hardy cases, is consistent with previous research on attributions regarding causality in spouse abuse. Overholser and Moll found that perpetuators tend to “attribute their violent behavior to external causes” whereas “victims often attribute

the abuse to defects within themselves or situational factors affecting their spouses” (107). As illustrated previously, the media frame of domestic violence as a relational problem is constructed in much the same way. The problem of domestic violence in the NFL is degendered and the blame is gendered (Berns, “Degendering the Problem” 262) when the media framing disperses blame from the perpetrators to the “situation” and attributes the actions of the victims – often tacitly – as contributing in some way to the causes and perpetuation of their own abuse.

While the Rice, Hardy, and Peterson cases were playing out, one of the more persistent themes, in print, sports radio, and sports televi- sion, dealt with whether and when they should get a second chance.

114 Studies in Popular Culture 38.2

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

The NFL’s “Violence Against Women Problem”

The overwhelming consensus has been that they should get a second chance, once they have paid for their sins. Almost all sports media commentary has espoused this attitude, most often on the grounds that

ours is a society of second chances.

Searching the American Soul: The Rhetoric of Second Chances and the Perpetuation of Domestic Violence

There is little question that redemption is endemic to American national identity. Ernest Lee Tuveson, in his 1968 classic Redeemer Nation, demonstrates that redemption is rooted in America’s origins and explains the American belief in its role as preordained to make the world a better place. Wilfred M. McClay takes Tuveson’s notion of redemption, which “flowered . . . particularly with regard to the nation’s external relations and foreign policy” and notes that the “logic of redemption is just as applicable, if not more so, to individuals as well as nations.” McClay’s notion here is consistent with Ross Poole, who in Nation and Identity writes that the nation is an “imagined community” and a “form of identity” (12-13). In The Redemptive Self: Stories Americans Live By , Dan P. McAdams illustrates both the rootedness of redemption in the American experience and its expression as a form of identity in individual stories, noting that “sources” for stories of redemption “come from family experiences, music, schooling . . . heritage, ideas about literature and art, current events, the media, and everyday talk” (19). A central characteristic of redemption is that, in order to be redeemed, one must rise from a fall of some sort and emerge as a better person. Rice, Hardy, and Peterson each suffered a fall from the grace of NFL stardom when they were arrested for domestic violence, and in order to achieve atonement (i.e., redemption), each man must meet certain conditions, the most important of which is the public display of contrition. Rice and Peterson have publicly displayed contrition, and the sports media is replete with reports that each is deserving of a second chance, whereas Hardy has remained steadfastly unrepentant, even taunting, and is represented in the media as less deserving. The rhetoric of second chances enveloping the Rice, Hardy and Peterson cases thus displays the dynamic between American identity and the “conditionality of secular salvation” (i.e., redemption) (Geyerman 61-63). That dynamic can be seen in the reasons given as to why and to what extent each man deserves a second chance, and those reasons are grounded in a patriarchal value structure and originate from the idea of hegemonic

Spring 2016 115

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geyerman

masculinity (i.e., a culturally preferred form of masculinity which values and naturalizes stereotypical masculine traits that operate in the realm of the mundane so as to subordinate and marginalize the feminine and alternative forms of masculinity). Nick Trujillo identifies distinguishing features of hegemonic masculinity as physical force and control, occupational achievement, familial patriarchy, frontiersmanship, and heterosexuality (1). Sports-mediated second chance rhetoric in the Rice, Hardy, and Peterson cases illustrates where, in each case, hegemonic masculinity is naturalized.

Occupational achievement and familial patriarchy in particular are featured prominently in the sports-mediated call for Rice’s second chance. One of the more typical displays of patriarchy naturalizing hegemonic masculinity through occupational achievement and familial patriarchy played out in the media around the Ravens’ 2014 home opener versus the Pittsburgh Steelers, their archrival. In reporting on events around the game, one of the main story lines was how many female Ravens’ fans demonstrated their support for Rice by wearing his #27 Ravens jersey. When interviewed, most of them indicated they supported Rice for two reasons: first, they believed that he was unjustly penalized when released by the Ravens and suspended indefinitely from NFL; second, most felt the situation with Ray and Janay was a personal matter (i.e., private) and not properly the province of public discourse. In perhaps the most telling example, Laken Litman of USA Today published a story the day after the game about three women who publicly supported Ray Rice – two of them victims of abuse at the hands of their intimate male partners. The story begins with these words: “LaTonya Jones is a survivor. The first time her husband hit her, she got out of that relationship immediately. She was strong for her kids, she said. But that isn’t keeping her from wearing her Ray Rice jersey. ‘I’m keeping my jersey,’ she said. ‘I’m not going to trade it in …. I don’t agree with how they went from a two-game suspension to ending this man’s career,’ Jones said. ‘This is someone’s livelihood. He has a family …. they should not have took that man’s job away …. We shouldn’t be involved in their personal life” (Litman). The story includes the testimony of another survivor, Robin Manahan, who is the proud owner of four Ray Rice jerseys, one which she wears in an accompanying photo. Manahan is quoted as saying she “absolutely 100% supports] him” as an “awesome guy” and “upstanding guy” and that he “should not have lost his job.” Finally, the third woman, Maria Priovolikos, who “doesn’t own a Ray Rice jersey …. but if she did would have worn it” because he is

116 Studies in Popular Culture 38.2

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

The NFL’s “Violence Against Women Problem”

“such a sweet guy. He never said no when I asked for pictures or an autograph or anything.” As the story concludes, Priovolikos is quoted as saying, “They’re both to blame . . . she put her hands on him . . . I don’t think what he did was right, but you know what, it happens every day. They were drunk. They’re both to blame.” The sports media also featured Rice’s endorsement for a second chance from

A Call To Men , a national organization that advocates men ending domestic abuse. In ESPN’s report on the development, senior writer and expert NFL analyst Adam Schefter quotes the organization’s co- founders as saying, “We have been around a lot of abusive men, but our experience with Ray has been tremendously positive …. We feel strongly about him having the opportunity of having a second chance. He’s deserving of it.” Schefter’s report “was consequently aggregated by sites including The Sporting News, nj.com [the e-version of the Star-Ledger, the largest circulated newspaper in New Jersey and also the state where Rice played college football at Rutgers], Bleacher Report and The Christian Science Monitor” (Starchan). Then, two days later, the co-founders of A Call To Men issued a public apology for the endorsement, noting that “male entitlement played a role in our decision to not consult those most impacted” and that they were “irresponsible” when they “characterized Rice’s actions as a ‘mistake.’” They added that “domestic violence is not a mistake. Men’s violence against women is a choice rooted in patriarchy and sexism, used to gain power and control over another person” (Starchan). Not surprisingly, this story never became part of the Ray Rice narrative, and the sports media push for his second chance continues.

Hardy is an enigma. When he was signed by the Dallas Cowboys and appeared in game five after serving his reduced suspension, he simply needed to show contrition and some modicum (even false) of humility, and the stage would be set for the sports media to construct a narrative that he deserves a second chance. However, Hardy could not stay out of his own way, and his tweets played a critical role. He became, perhaps, America’s most vilified athlete of 2015. Consider these headlines from sports news stories on Hardy’s exploits on Twitter since signing with the Cowboys: from CBS Sports, “Cowboys DE Greg Hardy Makes Tasteless Twin Towers Joke on Twitter”; from Fox News, “Cowboys’ Greg Hardy Slammed on Twitter Over 9/11 Related Joke”; from The Washington Post, “Greg Hardy Tweets Out ‘Regret 4 What Happened in Past’”; from dallasnews.com, “National Reaction to Greg Hardy Twitter Apology: ‘He’s Not Sorry’; ‘Crass Move’”; from foxsports.com, “Cowboys’ Greg Hardy Makes Bizarre Comment

Spring 2016 117

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geyerman

About Tom Brady’s Wife Gisele”; from USA Today, “Tom Brady on Greg Hardy’s Ridiculous Comments About His Wife: ‘I’m Focused on My Job”; from the Star-Telegram , “Cowboys Admonish Hardy After Comments on Brady’s Wife, Guns.” The vitriol toward Hardy during the season became so widespread that on November 12, 2015, during ESPN Radio’s Mike and Mike in the Morning, cohosts Mike Golic and Mike Greenberg were discussing Hardy, and Greenberg said “Do I think he’s [Hardy] a despicable human being? Yes, I do.” The absence of contrition makes it virtually impossible for the dominant media to situate Hardy as deserving a second chance, and, given Hardy’s refusal to express remorse for beating and threatening to kill Holder, it

is precisely this impossibility that reconstitutes the American sense of identity-rooted redemption.

Unlike Rice, who demonstrated contrition but has yet to get a second

chance to play in the NFL, and Hardy, who has been given a second chance to play but has demonstrated little if any contrition, Peterson has both expressed remorse and re-emerged as an NFL superstar. The sports media push for redemption is on, in full force. Even before the re-emerged as an NFL star, there were many calls for him to get a second chance. Before the season began, nfl.com published a story titled “Vikings A.R Feels the Love at ‘Adrian Peterson Day’” (Sessler). The story quotes Peterson’s coaches and teammates attributing to him the masculine qualities of being “extremely explosive” and having “electric foot speed.” Toward the end of the season the sports media redemption of Peterson began in earnest, and it was primarily centered

on familial patriarchy. During the telecast of the Vikings game against the Atlanta Falcons on Sunday, November 29, 201 5, Peterson rushed for

158 yards and two touchdowns, leading Minnesota to a 20-10 victory. Peterson scored a touchdown late in the fourth quarter with a 35-yard run to seal the win for the Vikings, whereupon the announcer referred

to him as “the great Adrian Peterson.” The sports media at the end of the 2015 NFL season launched a full-scale redemption campaign with respect to Peterson, and two of its most prominent media outlets were ESPN’s weekly program NFL Countdown and Sports Illustrated. On the January 10, 2016, telecast of NFL Countdown, just hours before Peterson’s Vikings were to play their first-round playoff game, the cast discussed Peterson’s child-abuse case and his return to the NFL.

During the course of the discussion, in which Peterson was basically represented as a wonderful human being, cast member Mike Ditka, the only man inducted into the Professional Football Hall of Fame as both a player and coach, said “My father whipped me a lot. And I thank

118 Studies in Popular Culture 38.2

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

The NFL’s “Violence Against Women Problem”

God every day that he did. He made me a better person

a problem with this and I’m not politically correct, so I can’t talk about

it” (“NFL Countdown”). The next day, when the January 1 1 issue of Sports Illustrated was released, the headline tease for the secondary cover story read “The Complicated Exile of Adrian Peterson.” The story, in its essence, describes him as a reformed and hence redeemed man, noting that “Peterson says that through counseling he learned other methods of discipline. He says he’ll never use a switch again,” and then quotes an expert as saying that when he admitted his mistake and changed how he parents, it represents “terrific progress” (Bishop 30). Predictably, because atonement for the “sin” of child abuse is founded essentially in familial patriarchy, the story resonates with many in the American public because becoming a “good” father confirms that part of American identity rooted in redemption.

Domestic violence in the NFL currently occupies a space of significance in popular culture, and rightly so. However, the NFL functions in a larger social system where the scales of justice are unbalanced, tilted by patriarchy in favor of men. Despite the fact that being arrested for domestic violence “is associated with less repeat offending” (U.S. Department of Justice), past research has found that more than 62% of “the most serious charges (aggravated batteries) were more likely to end without arrest . . . than with arrest” (Bourg and Stock 177). This problem is compounded and perhaps understood when considered in the context of research on domestic violence among members of law enforcement, which “suggests that family violence is two to four times higher in the law-enforcement community than in the general population” (Friedersdorf). Finally, as of May 2015, eight states still have laws that allow perpetrators of domestic violence to enter pre-trial diversion programs (Widgery), like the one then available in New Jersey that allowed Rice to escape being prosecuted and, eventually, even charged, thus wiping the slate clean. Social and political structures like those just described serve to marginalize victims of domestic abuse, and, in order to make meaningful progress regarding the social problem of domestic violence, they must be addressed. Until such time as violence from men directed at women

and children is no longer trivialized through its normalization – and in some cases even legitimation – in the socio-political system, that violence will continue, and perpetrators of domestic abuse will in all likelihood be both forgiven and forgotten.

Spring 2016 119

This content downloaded from 216.145.162.122 on Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:28:34 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Geyerman

Notes

1 . Janay Rice is referred to by her maiden name of Palmer so as to avoid confusion with her husband, Ray Rice.

  1. There were four high profile domestic violence cases in the NFL during this time. I omitted the case of Ray McDonald from my analysis because it assumed essentially the same form as the Rice and Hardy cases.
  2. For an explanation ot the commissioners exempt list, see Jason La Canfora’s “How the Exempt/Commissioner’s Permission List Works.”
  3. For more on media coverage of domestic violence, see Gillespie et al. 222-245; Rothman et al. 733-744; Nettieton 139-160; McManus and Dorfman 43-65; Berns, Framing the Victim.
  4. For more on domestic violence in sports and media coverage of domestic violence in sports, see Dabbs 167-199; Enck-Wanzer 1-18; McDonald 111-133; “Out of Bounds” 1048-1065; Welch 392-411.

The post Popular Culture Association in the South appeared first on Lion Essays.

 

“Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!”


Popular Culture Association in the South was first posted on April 25, 2019 at 9:40 pm.
©2019 "Lion Essays". Use of this feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this article in your feed reader, then the site is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact me at support@Lion Essays.com

"Get 15% discount on your first 3 orders with us"
Use the following coupon
FIRST15

Order Now