Rewriting the “dirty war”: State terrorism reinterpreted by the press in Argentina during the transition to democracy

Abstract

The Argentine press reinterpreted the period of dictatorial military rule (1976–1983) in terms of an interest in the continuity of democratic protections. La Voz del Interior, the newspaper of record in the provincial capital and second largest city of Cordoba, sought to censure, subordinate, and yet reintegrate the military within a democratic institutional ideology. This study uses discourse analysis to characterize 10 elements of a model of coverage of state‐sponsored terrorism: (1) perpetrators, (2) victims, (3) target population, (4) violence and violation, (5) motives or intentions of the perpetrators, (6) fear or terror among the populace, (7) outcomes or changes in the target population, (8) news sources, (9) remedies and projects, (10) and probable responses or appropriated uses by readers or the press. In 1985–1986, when the elected government sought to judge and castigate senior junta commanders, La Voz supported establishment continuity by legitimating societal actors, including the military, even though its members were perceived as having violated basic societal values.     

What Do Panel Studies Tell Us About a Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment? A Critique of the Literature

Objectives

We provide a critical review of empirical research on the deterrent effect of capital punishment that makes use of state and, in some instances, county-level, panel data.

Methods

We present the underlying behavioral model that presumably informs the specification of panel data regressions, outline the typical model specification employed, discuss current norms regarding “best-practice” in the analysis of panel data, and engage in a critical review.

Results

The connection between the theoretical reasoning underlying general deterrence and the regression models typically specified in this literature is tenuous. Many of the papers purporting to find strong effects of the death penalty on state-level murder rates suffer from basic methodological problems: weak instruments, questionable exclusion restrictions, failure to control for obvious factors, and incorrect calculation of standard errors which in turn has led to faulty statistical inference. The lack of variation in the key underlying explanatory variables and the heavy influence exerted by a few observations in state panel data regressions is a fundamental problem for all panel data studies of this question, leading to overwhelming model uncertainty.

Conclusions

We find the recent panel literature on whether there is a deterrent effect of the death penalty to be inconclusive as a whole, and in many cases uninformative. Moreover, we do not see additional methodological tools that are likely to overcome the multiple challenges that face researchers in this domain, including the weak informativeness of the data, a lack of theory on the mechanisms involved, and the likely presence of unobserved confounders.