The media’s coverage of mass public shootings in America: fifty years of newsworthiness

This study uses a media distortion analysis to examine the New York Times coverage of mass public shooting incidents occurring in the United States from 1966 to 2016. A comparison between media coverage and actual incidents is used to identify the characteristics influencing the newsworthiness of mass public shootings. This work expands the breadth and depth of media and mass public shooting research, strengthening the validity of previous findings, and identifying new characteristics influencing newsworthiness. Findings indicate significant predictors of newsworthiness include higher casualties and injuries, as well as perpetrators that are young, Middle Eastern, and ideologically motivated. School shootings are more likely to receive any coverage, and all non-workplace shootings receive salient levels of coverage. An incident is also more likely to receive any coverage if a combination of weapons is used. These findings have important implications for public knowledge and perceptions of mass public shootings.     

Regulatory Jurisdiction and the WTO

The WTO is not explicitly concerned with the problem of regulatoryjurisdiction in connection with prudential regulation (as opposedto industrial policy regulation). However, as the WTO has addressedincreasingly complex regulatory barriers to trade, it has developedseveral devices that have the implicit effect of allocatingregulatory jurisdiction among states.This article reviews afew illustrative cases in WTO law, including Helms–Burton,Shrimp, and Gambling. This review suggests how these cases maybe understood as dealing with allocation of regulatory jurisdiction.Negative integration rules such as national treatment or proportionalitymay serve as devices applied by tribunals for allocation ofregulatory authority. The WTO has very limited rules of positiveintegration—whereby states either harmonize regulationor agree on more specific allocations of regulatory authority,such as mutual recognition. However, it has developed a modestdegree of capacity to engage in positive regulation, or to referto positive integration rules developed in other contexts, suchas Codex Alimentarius. Finally, this article examines theoreticalbases for allocating and reallocating regulatory jurisdictionin order to establish a framework by which to analyse the roleof the WTO in this context.     

Sailing Alone: Teenage Autonomy and Regimes of Childhood

Should society intervene to prevent the risky behavior of precocious teenagers even if it would be impermissible to intervene with adults who engage in the same risky behavior? The problem is well illustrated by the legal case of the 13-year-old Dutch girl Laura Dekker, who set out in 2009 to become the youngest person ever to sail around the world alone, succeeding in January 2012. In this paper we use her case as a point of entry for discussing the fundamental question of how to demarcate childhood from adulthood. After summarizing the case, we identify a ??demarcation dilemma?? that frames much of the public and expert debate. On the one hand, it seems morally imperative ??to treat like alike??, which means that both children and adults should be allowed to undertake all actions for which they have the relevant competences. On the other hand, requiring proportional treatment of children and adults seems to neglect the special nature of childhood as a distinct stage in life that ends at a specific age. We introduce the notion of a ??regime of childhood?? to deal with this problem. This regime includes several dimensions, including the limited liability for children, the supervisory responsibilities of parents, the role of age-based thresholds, and the overarching purpose of childhood as a context for developing autonomy. We argue that, all things considered, there are good reasons not to shift to a regime that offers individual children the option of qualifying for adulthood on the basis of age-neutral criteria.     

Associations between Parent and Child Reports Of Interparental Conflict/Violence And Child Difficulties in A Family Mediation Setting*

We examined the association between parents’ (N = 52 mothers and 52 fathers) and children's (N = 27) reports of interparental conflict and child difficulties in a family mediation setting. Parents’ reports of conflict were moderately associated with children's reports of exposure to parental conflict, but only fathers’ reports of conflict were associated with children's reports of negative responses to parent conflict. While mothers and fathers agreed on their child's difficulties, only mothers’, not fathers’, report of child difficulties were moderately related to child reports of child difficulties. Mothers’ and fathers’ reports of conflict generally were not strongly associated with reports of child difficulties. In contrast to parent reports, children's reports of exposure to parents’ conflict were moderately and significantly related to self‐reported child difficulties and moderately related to parents’ reports of child academic difficulties. The magnitude of the association between the child's report of interparental conflict and self‐report of difficulties was stronger than the association between parent report of conflict and parent report of child difficulties, suggesting that parents may not fully understand their child's exposure to parent conflict/violence or the problems their child is experiencing.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Family law stakeholders prioritize the creation of parenting arrangements that are in the best interest of the child; however, it is unclear how to gather information about the child and the child's perspective in order to inform such arrangements.
• The study results suggest that parents may not agree with each other or with the child about important family issues, such as parent conflict and child difficulties. For example, parents may not fully understand their child's exposure to parental conflict/violence when in the midst of custody negotiations.
• More research is needed to determine the best method for gathering information about the child during custody proceedings. In the meantime, it is important to gather information from multiple sources and to consider the agreement and differences across such sources of information.