Comparison of British National Newspaper Coverage of Homicide Committed by Perpetrators with and Without Mental Illness

Abstract

Objective: Adverse newspaper reporting of mental illness and in particular, violence committed by a mentally ill person, is thought to contribute to stigma. However, violent events are also considered highly newsworthy by journalists. The aim of this study was to compare the likelihood of newspaper reporting for convicted perpetrators of homicide with and without a history of contact with mental health services.

Method: A 12 month (April 2000-March 2001) cohort of 577 homicide perpetrators with and without a history of contact with mental health services in England and Wales was examined. These cases were identified by the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Homicide by People with Mental Illness. By examining 12 national newspapers, we compared the likelihood of reporting homicide perpetrators with and without mental illness.

Results: Under half (228 cases, 40%) of the homicide perpetrators were reported in at least one of the study newspapers. Under a fifth (94 cases, 16%) of perpetrators had a history of contact with mental health services and such previous contact did not increase the likelihood of newspaper reporting (odds ratio 1.0 (0.6–1.6)).

Conclusions: Previous contact with mental health services did not influence the newsworthiness of a homicide perpetrator. The stigmatizing effect of reporting homicide by perpetrators with mental illness may relate more to the quality of reporting rather than selective over-reporting.

Keywords

homicide mental illness media stigma newspaper reporting

Population surveys in a number of countries demonstrate the widespread belief that those with a serious mental illness are unpredictable and violent [1–2] and that those committing particularly horrendous crimes are likely to be mentally ill [1,3]. Whilst there is a clear correlation between violent crime, including homicide, and mental illness [4–6], the population attributable risk posed by mentally ill people is low [7] and appears to be largely mediated by comorbid substance abuse and by socio-economic deprivation [8,9]. Indeed the vast majority of those with a mental illness are never violent and are more likely to be the victims of violent crime [10].

Research has consistently shown the media to have an influential role in shaping, predominantly negative, attitudes towards people with mental illness [11–13]. This negativity has been identified in factual and fictitious forms of media [13–15] in many countries around the world [16–18]. Western children's television programmes, especially animated cartoons, for example, contain numerous references to mental illness and frequently portray the mentally ill as criminals, figures of fun, derision or fear with virtually no positive attributes [19–20]. Whilst some argue that these depictions represent journalistic error, or exaggeration in the cause of a good story, others argue that these representations are merely reflections of the ‘commonsense’ view of mental illness shared by both the public and journalists as members of the public [21–22]. Increased television consumption has been found to be associated with the desire for social distance from people with a mental illness, particularly schizophrenia [23], whilst violence-related issues have been identified as the dominant focus of newspaper articles associated with mental illness [24–26]. It has therefore been argued that repeated exposure through the media to negative images of mental illness results in a distorted understanding of the relationship between mental illness and violence and introduces and reinforces stigmatizing beliefs and behaviours regarding people with a mental illness [11–13,22].

Previous studies have found consistent patterns in the selection of homicides for reporting in the media. Rarer and more sensational forms of homicide involving multiple victims, female victims, very young or very old victims, are all over-reported compared to more common homicides involving male victims in their twenties and thirties [27–28]. We are aware of only one study examining the media depiction of mentally ill homicide perpetrators [29]. This New Zealand-based study, contrary to expectation, did not find that the print media differentiated mentally ill homicide offenders found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) from convicted homicide offenders who were not mentally ill. There have been no studies of homicide reporting in the print media that have explored the influence of perpetrator mental illness in general on the likelihood of newspaper reporting. Consequently, the question of whether the media selectively over-report homicides by people with mental illness has not previously been addressed. This cohort study, carried out as part of the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Homicide by People with Mental Illness (NCI) [30], aims to determine whether homicide perpetrators with mental illness are reported in British national newspapers more frequently and/or differently from homicide perpetrators who were not mentally ill. This paper will report the likelihood of homicide reporting, comparing perpetrators with and without prior contact with mental health services as a proxy for mental illness.

Method

Design

A retrospective cohort design was used to explore the relationship between perpetrator mental illness and the likelihood of newspaper reporting of homicide. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate the association between previous contact with mental health services and the likelihood of newspaper reporting, adjusting for potentially confounding variables known from earlier studies [27,31–33] to influence the likelihood of newspaper reporting.

Total homicide sample

Demographic and criminal data for all people convicted of homicide (murder, manslaughter or infanticide) in England and Wales between 1 April 2000 and 31 March 2001 were obtained from the Homicide Index at the Home Office, which is the government department responsible for criminal justice matters in England and Wales. The Index contains comprehensive information on all known perpetrators of homicide; including demographic and offence details, sentencing and outcome in court. Psychiatric reports, prepared pre-trial, were then sought on all homicide perpetrators predominantly from court files, but also directly from their authors. From these, details regarding the perpetrator's social and clinical history and mental state at the time of the offence were extracted.

In order to identify those perpetrators with a history of contact with mental health services, identifying details (i.e. name (including aliases), date of birth, date of offence and address) on each perpetrator were submitted to the main hospital and community trust providing mental health services to people resident in the perpetrator's district of residence and adjacent districts. If the perpetrator's address was not known, identifying details were sent to all trusts within the police force area in which the perpetrator had been charged. In those cases where the trust confirmed any previous clinical contact with mental health services, a questionnaire was sent to the supervising clinician responsible for the perpetrator's care. An earlier assessment of the accuracy of this methodology has shown that 95% of patients in contact with mental health services are detected [34].

Newspaper article selection

Articles were sought from six national daily British newspapers and their Sunday sister-publications selected for high circulation rates and broad perspective. The newspapers selected included four popular newspapers, the Sun/News of the World and the Mirror/Sunday Mirror, four middle market papers, the Daily Mail/Mail on Sunday and the Daily Express/Sunday Express and four quality papers, the Guardian/the Observer and The Times/Sunday Times. A homicide article was defined as: ‘a distinct piece of journalism about a crime or missing person which is or will become recorded by the police as a homicide’ [27]. Homicide articles were considered valid if they mentioned one or more of the study homicide perpetrators and were published within two years of the index offence.

Articles were identified from the online database LexisNexis, using the keywords murder, homicide, and manslaughter. To ensure optimal ascertainment a further search was undertaken using perpetrator name for the period of two years from the date of the homicide.

Validity of article selection process

In order to ascertain the validity of the article selection process, the results of a manual search of The Times newspaper, undertaken using microfilm newspaper records and a search using LexisNexis were compared over a one-month timeframe external to the study period (August 2005). Of the total of 26 clearly relevant articles identified manually, LexisNexis identified 25 (96% detection rate) using a keyword search.

Definition of mental disorder

Homicide articles were compared according to the presence of mental disorder using the following definitions: clinical history (a lifetime diagnosis of mental disorder, based on information from psychiatric reports and questionnaires); previous care (contact with mental health services, both lifetime and in the 12 months before the offence, based on questionnaire data), and mental illness at the time of the offence (i.e. symptoms of mood disorder or psychosis at the time of the offence, based on psychiatric reports). As no significant differences were found in the likelihood of newspaper reporting for any of the above definitions, the definition of mental disorder employed in this paper is ‘previous care’. In addition to the above definition, convictions of ‘manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility’ and ‘commitment by the court to a psychiatric institution’ were explored as potential confounders. According to the UK Homicide Act (1957) section 2(1), a conviction of murder may be reduced to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility where the offender is found to suffer from an ‘abnormality of mind that substantially impairs his mental responsibility for his acts’.

Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics were calculated for the total homicide cohort and for the newspaper articles. Perpetrators with and without a history of contact with mental health services were compared using the chi-square test of independence. Reported and unreported homicide perpetrators were compared according to demographic, clinical and criminological variables using the chi-square test of independence and reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) where appropriate. Missing cases (i.e. items that were not responded to or received an ‘unknown’ response from the psychiatric report or questionnaire) were removed from the analysis of that item; the denominator in all estimates is therefore the number of valid cases for each item. Statistical significance was set at 5%. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons on the grounds of minimizing the likelihood of a type II error and avoiding missing potentially important associations [35].

Multivariate logistic regression was performed to estimate the association between previous contact with mental health services and the likelihood of newspaper reporting, adjusted for potentially confounding covariates, including victim gender, number of victims (single or multiple), victim age group, method of homicide, convicted offence (murder, manslaughter contrary to common law, manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility, infanticide, unfit to plead or not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI)), court disposal (prison or hospital order with or without restriction), and relationship between perpetrator and victim (stranger or known). Covariates were selected where there was evidence of an increased likelihood of newspaper reporting on univariate analysis or where there was evidence from previous studies of increased likelihood of reporting.

Results

Total homicide sample

Over the 12-month period from April 2000, the NCI was notified of 577 perpetrators convicted of homicide in England and Wales. These perpetrators were responsible for 491 unique crimes involving 569 victims. Multiple perpetrators were involved in 62 crimes (13%) and 16 crimes (3%) involved more than one victim. At least one psychiatric report was identified for 284 of the 577 convicted perpetrators (49%).

The majority of perpetrators were male (89%). Their median age was 27 years (range: 14–76 years; Table 1). Almost a quarter of perpetrators were from a black or minority ethnic (BME) group, 19% were married at the time of the offence and 14% were in paid employment. The most common method of homicide was with a sharp instrument (190 cases, 33%), followed by hitting and/or kicking (77 cases, 13%), the use of a blunt instrument (66 cases, 11%), strangulation (51 cases, 9%) and shooting (34 cases, 6%).

Table 1.

Comparison of perpetrators with and without previous contact with mental health services

	Total (n = 577) n (%, 95%CI)	Contact (n = 94) n (%, 95%CI)	No contact (n = 483) n (%, 95%CI)
Perpetrator characteristics
Male	514 (89, 87–92)	80 (85, 78–92)	434 (90, 87–93)
Female	63 (11, 8–14)	14 (15, 8–22)	49 (10, 8–13)
Age (mean, range)*	27 (14–76)	35 (17–76)	28 (14–17)
Age group
<16	9 (2, 1–3)	0	9 (2, 1–3)
16–20	133 (23, 20–27)	6 (6, 1–11)	127 (26, 22–30)
21–25	123 (21, 18–25)	15 (16, 9–23)	108 (22, 19–26)
26–30	96 (17, 14–20)	20 (21, 13–30)	76 (16, 13–19)
31–35	81 (14, 11–17)	14 (15, 8–22)	67 (14, 11–17)
36–45	80 (14, 11–17)	23 (25, 16–33)	57 (12, 9–15)
>45	55 (10, 7–12)	16 (17, 9–25)	39 (8, 6–11)
Black and minority ethnic*	141 (24, 21–28)	10 (11, 4–17)	131 (27, 23–31)
Married/co-habiting	108 (19, 16–22)	24 (26, 17–34)	84 (17, 14–21)
Employed	83 (14, 12–17)	14 (15, 8–22)	69 (14, 11–17)
Victim characteristics
Male	402 (70, 66–73)	61 (65, 55–75)	341 (71, 67–75)
Female	175 (30, 27–34)	33 (35, 26–45)	142 (29, 25–34)
Age (mean, range)	32 (0–89)	35 (0–87)	33 (0–89)
Age group
<1	36 (6, 4–8)	4 (4, 0–8)	32 (7, 4–9)
1–10	15 (3, 1–4)	3 (3, 0–7)	12 (3, 2–4)
11–20	72 (13, 10–15)	13 (14, 7–21)	59 (12, 9–15)
21–30	130 (23, 19–26)	18 (19, 11–27)	112 (23, 19–27)
31–40	158 (27, 24–31)	25 (27, 18–36)	133 (28, 24–32)
41–50	86 (15, 12–18)	15 (16, 9–23)	71 (15, 12–18)
>50	80 (14, 11–17)	16 (17, 9–25)	64 (13, 10–16)
multiple victims	16 (3, 1–4)	2 (2, 0–5)	14 (3, 1–4)
Stranger homicide	84 (15, 12–17)	8 (9, 3–14)	76 (16, 13–19)
Perpetrator-victim gender
Male-male	361 (63, 59–67)	51 (54, 44–64)	310 (64, 60–69)
Female-male	41 (7, 5–9)	10 (11, 4–17)	31 (6, 4–9)
Male-female	153 (27, 23–30)	29 (31, 22–40)	124 (26, 22–30)
Female-female	22 (4, 3–5)	4 (4, 2–8)	18 (4, 2–5)
Court outcome
Murder	282 (49, 45–53)	56 (60, 50–70)	226 (47, 42–51)
Manslaughter section 2 (diminished responsibility)^†*	19 (3, 2–5)	8 (9, 3–14)	11 (2, 1–4)
Manslaughter contrary to common law	267 (46, 42–50)	28 (30, 21–39)	239 (50, 45–54)
Infanticide	5 (1, 0–2)	1 (1, 0–3)	4 (1, 0–2)
Unfit to plead	3 (1, 0–1)	0	3 (1, 0–1)
NGRI^‡	1 (0.2, 0–0.5)	1 (1, 0–3)	0
Psychiatric report*	284 (49, 45–53)	71 (76, 67–84)	213 (44, 40–49)

^†Manslaughter section 2 (diminished responsibility) combined with infanticide, unfit to plead and NGRI. ^‡Not guilty by reason of insanity. *p < 0.05.

Under a fifth (94 cases, 16%) of perpetrators had been in previous contact with mental health services including 58 (10%) within the 12 months prior to the offence (as ascertained by the receipt of a questionnaire from the perpetrator's treating clinican). Over a fifth (119 cases, 21%) were described in their psychiatric reports as being mentally ill at the time of the offence and 22% (127 cases) had been diagnosed with a lifetime history of mental illness. Five percent (30 cases) of perpetrators had a lifetime primary diagnosis of schizophrenia, 5% (27 cases) of affective disorder (bipolar affective disorder or depression), 5% (29 cases) of personality disorder, 5% (28 cases) of alcohol dependence and 3% (17 cases) of drug dependence. Five per cent (28 cases) of perpetrators had a mental health-related court outcome (manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility; infanticide; unfit to plead or NGRI) and 5% (30 cases) were committed to psychiatric hospital under a hospital order with or without restriction (this is a form of compulsory detention under section 37 of the Mental Health Act 1983 (England and Wales) for individuals who have committed a serious crime and who have a severe mental illness).

As rates of reporting were similar for all definitions of mental illness (data not shown, but available from the author on request), the definition of mental illness used here is ‘previous contact with mental health services’. The characteristics of perpetrators with and without previous contact with mental health services are compared in Table 1. Perpetrators with a history of contact with mental health services differed from those without such a history in several ways: they were older, were more likely to have been convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility, and were more likely to have been assessed for a court psychiatric report. They were also less likely to be from a BME group.

Identified newspaper articles

From the twelve target newspapers, 2735 relevant articles were identified. Of these articles, 2062 (75%) pertained to homicide perpetrators in the study population. Of the 577 homicide perpetrators, 228 were reported in one or more of the study newspapers, a reporting rate of 40%. A further 72 articles pertained to 16 of the 26 cases of homicide-suicide (a reporting rate of 62%). The remaining 601 articles related to cases that either did not result in a conviction of homicide or had not done so within two years of the date of offence. The remainder of this paper will focus on newspaper reporting relating only to the 577 homicide perpetrators.

Likelihood of reporting

Mental disorder

Univariate analysis showed previous contact with mental health services was not associated with an increased likelihood of newspaper reporting, with 39% of those with and 39% of those without previous contact with mental health services reported in newspapers (Table 2).

Table 2.

Likelihood of reporting by perpetrator and clinical characteristics

	Total sample (n = 577) n (%, 95%CI)	Reported (n = 228) n (%, 95%CI)	Not reported (n = 349) n (%, 95%CI)	% reported (reported/total sample)	Likelihood of being reported (OR, 95%CI)
Male	514 (89, 87–92)	204 (90, 86–94)	310 (89, 86–92)	39.7	0.9 (0.6–1.6)^†
Age: median (range)	27 (14–76)	26 (15–74)	29 (14–76)	N/A
Age group
<16	9 (2, 1–3)	2 (1, 0–2)	7 (2, 1–4)	22.0	0.4 (0.1–2.2)
16–20	133 (23, 20–27)	61 (27, 21–33)	72 (21, 16–25)	45.9	1.3 (0.8–2.1)
21–25	123 (21, 18–25)	49 (22, 16–27)	74 (21, 17–26)	39.8	1.0
26–30	96 (17, 14–20)	27 (12, 8–16)	69 (20, 16–24)	28.1	0.6 (0.3–1.0)
31–35	81 (14, 11–17)	31 (14, 9–18)	50 (14, 11–18)	38.3	0.9 (0.5–1.7)
36–45	80 (14, 11–17)	34 (15, 10–20)	46 (13, 10–17)	42.5	1.1 (0.6–2.0)
>45	50 (10, 7–12)	24 (11, 7–15)	31 (9, 6–12)	43.6	1.2 (0.6–2.2)
Married	108 (19, 16–22)	65 (29, 23–34)	43 (12, 9–16)	60.2	1.0 (0.6–1.5)^‡
Employed	83 (20, 17–23)	29 (21, 16–26)	54 (16, 12–19)	34.9	0.8 (0.8–1.3)^§
Black and minority ethnic	141 (24, 11–28)	59 (26, 20–32)	82 (24, 19–28)	41.8	1.1 (0.8–1.7)^¶
Method of homicide
Sharp instrument	190 (33, 29–37)	53 (23, 18–29)	137 (39, 34–44)	27.9	1.0
Hitting/kicking	77 (13, 11–16)	34 (15, 10–20)	43 (12, 9–16)	42.9	2.0 (1.1–3.5)
Blunt instrument	66 (11, 9–14)	26 (11, 7–16)	40 (11, 8–15)	39.4	1.7 (0.9–3.0)
Strangulation	51 (9, 7–11)	28 (12, 8–17)	23 (7, 4–9)	54.9	3.1 (1.7–6.0)
Shooting	34 (6, 4–8)	19 (8, 5–12)	15 (4, 2–6)	55.9	3.3 (1.6–6.9)
Other	160 (28, 24–31)	69 (30, 24–36)	91 (26, 22–31)	43.1	2.0 (1.3–3.1)
Outcome in court
Murder	282 (49, 45–53)	134 (59, 52–65)	148 (42, 37–48)	47.5	2.2 (1.5–3.1)
Manslaughter contrary to common law	267 (46, 42–50)	79 (35, 28–65)	188 (54, 47–59)	29.6	1.0
Manslaughter section 2 (diminished responsibility)	19 (3, 2–5)	10 (4, 2–7)	9 (3, 1–4)	52.6	2.7 (1.2–6.0)
Other (infanticide, unfit to plead)	9 (2, 1–3)	5 (2, 0–4)	4 (1, 0–2)	55.6	2.9 (0.8–11.4)
Court disposal
Prison	547 (95, 93–97)	215 (94, 91–97)	332 (95, 93–97)	39.3	1.0
Hospital order	30 (5, 3–7)	13 (6, 3–9)	17 (5, 3–7)	43.3	1.2 (0.6–2.5)
Contact with services	94 (16, 13–19)	37 (16, 11–21)	57 (16, 13–20)	39.4	1.0 (0.6–1.6)

^†Compared to female perpetrators. ^‡Compared to married perpetrators. ^§Compared to employed perpetrators. ^¶Compared to white perpetrators.

Perpetrator characteristics

A comparison of the characteristics of reported and unreported homicide perpetrators revealed few differences (Table 2). Perpetrators convicted of murder or manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility were associated with a higher likelihood of newspaper reporting than perpetrators convicted of manslaughter contrary to common law. Perpetrators who used hitting and/or kicking, shooting, strangulation or other, rarer methods of homicide, were also significantly more likely to be reported than those who used a sharp instrument, which was the most common method. Despite the high rate of reporting for manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility, commitment to a psychiatric hospital did not predict reporting when compared with those perpetrators who were given a prison sentence.

Victim characteristics

Victim characteristics had a greater influence on reporting patterns than perpetrator characteristics (Table 3). Cases with multiple victims were particularly newsworthy compared to single victim homicides. Male victims were under-reported. Crimes involving a male perpetrator and female victim were more likely to be reported than other perpetrator-victim gender combinations. Infant victims under one year of age were the most likely of any age group to be reported, when compared to the most prevalent age group (31–40 years). Stranger homicides were reported with similar frequency to cases in which the perpetrator and victim were acquainted.

Table 3.

Likelihood of reporting by victim and offence characteristics

	Total sample (n = 577) n (%, 95%CI)	Reported (n = 228) n (%, 95%CI)	Not reported (n = 349) n (%, 95%CI)	% reported (reported/total sample)	Likelihood of being reported (OR, 95%CI)
Male^†	402 (70, 66–73)	140 (61, 55–68)	262 (75, 71–80)	34.8	0.5 (1.4–0.8)
Age: median (range)^†	32 (0–89)	29 (0–88)		80.0
Age group
<1	36 (6, 4–8)	22 (10, 6–14)	14 (4, 2–6)	61.1	3.6 (1.7–7.6)
1–10	15 (3, 1–4)	8 (4, 1–6)	7 (2, 1–4)	53.3	2.6 (0.9–7.6)
11–20	72 (13, 9–15)	35 (15, 11–20)	37 (11, 7–14)	48.6	2.2 (1.2–3.8)
21–30	130 (23, 19–26)	54 (24, 18–29)	76 (22, 17–26)	41.5	1.6 (1.0–2.6)
31–40	158 (27, 24–31)	48 (21, 16–26)	110 (32, 27–36)	30.4	1.0
41–50	86 (15, 12–18)	24 (11,7—15)	62 (18, 14–22)	27.9	0.9 (0.5–1.6)
>50	80 (14, 11–17)	37 (16, 11–21)	43 (12, 9–16)	46.3	2.0 (1.1–3.4)
Multiple victims	16 (3, 1–4)	12 (5, 2–8)	4 (1, 0–2)	80.0	4.8 (1.5–14.9)^‡
Perpetrator-victim relationship ^†
Family member	77 (13, 11–16)	34 (15, 10–20)	43 (12, 9–16)	44.2	1.3 (0.8–2.0)^§
Spouse/partner	101 (18, 14–21)	40 (18, 13–23)	61 (18, 14–22)	39.6	1.0 (0.6–1.6)^§
Stranger	84 (15, 12–17)	33 (15, 10–19)	51 (15, 11–18)	39.2	1.0 (0.6–1.6)^§
Perpetrator-victim gender ^†
Male-male	361 (63, 59–67)	127 (56, 49–62)	234 (67, 62–72)	35.2	1.0
Female-male	41 (7, 5–9)	13 (6, 3–9)	28 (8, 5–11)	31.7	0.9 (1.3–2.7)
Male-female	153 (27, 23–30)	77 (34, 28–40)	76 (22, 17–26)	50.3	1.9 (1.3–2.7)
Female-female	22 (4, 2–5)	11 (5, 2–8)	11 (3, 1–5)	50.0	2.3 (0.9–5.9)

^†Treating all cases as single victim cases, as multiple victim case gender and age data incomplete. ^‡Compared to single victims. ^§Compared to other victims.

Predictors of reporting (multivariate analysis)

When entered into a multivariate model only one mental illness-related variable, a conviction of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility, predicted newspaper reporting. In total, five variables were significantly predictive of newspaper reporting (Table 4). Three of these variables were victim-related (female victim, multiple victims and victim aged less than one year or aged 11–20 years). The other variables were a conviction of murder or manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility and the use of particular methods of homicide (blunt instrument, hitting/kicking, shooting, strangulation or other rare methods, including causing to fall, poisoning, suffocation, and arson).

Table 4.

Predictors of reporting

	OR (95%CI)	p value
Contact with mental health services	1.0 (0.6–1.6)	0.8
Female victim	1.7 (1.1–2.7)	0.01
Multiple victims	5.3 (1.6–17.9)	0.007
Victim age group		0.001
<1 year	3.7 (1.6–8.8)	0.003
1–10 years	2.8 (0.9–8.9)	0.07
11–20 years	2.7 (1.5–5.1)	0.002
21–30 years	1.6 (0.9–2.7)	0.1
31–40 years	1.0
41–50 years	0.7 (0.4–1.3)	0.3
>50 years	1.7 (1.0–3.1)	0.07
Method of homicide		0.001
Sharp instrument	1.0
Kicking/hitting	3.8 (2.0–7.1)	0.00
Blunt instrument	2.1 (1.1–4.0)	0.02
Strangulation	2.2 (1.1–4.6)	0.03
Shooting	2.9 (1.3–6.3)	0.01
Other	1.7 (1.1–2.6)	0.02
Outcome in court		<0.001
Manslaughter contrary to common law)	1.0
Murder	2.6 (1.7–4.0)	<0.001
Manslaughter section 2 (diminished responsibility)	2.8 (1.2–6.8)	0.02

Discussion

This study compared the likelihood of British national newspaper reporting of convicted homicide perpetrators with and without a history of contact with mental health services. During the 12-month study period, 577 convicted homicide perpetrators were notified to the NCI. Of these, almost two fifths (228 cases, 39%) were reported in at least one of the study newspapers. Similar rates of newspaper reporting have been seen in previous UK [27] and international studies [31–32], although a study of Italian newspapers found a higher proportion of homicide reporting at 54% [36]. A history of contact with mental health services was not found to be associated with an increased likelihood of newspaper reporting of homicide. Overall, victim characteristics were found to be more important in predicting newspaper reporting than perpetrator characteristics. A court outcome of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility was the only measure of mental disorder found to be predictive of reporting. No other study has previously addressed the newsworthiness of mental illness in relation to homicide in this manner.

In this study, multiple, female and younger victims; method of homicide (blunt instrument, hitting and/or kicking, shooting, strangulation and other rare methods), and a court outcome of murder or manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility were the only variables found to be predictive of homicide reporting. These findings are similar to previous studies emphasizing the ‘newsworthiness’ of such homicides. Journalists’ news values, although not universal and likely to vary between cultures, are also influenced by sensational and bad news stories. Some homicides may be considered to have greater shock value because they are particularly tragic, involve a prominent or ‘respectable’ citizen or a particularly vulnerable victim [33]. Journalists are, after all, trained to focus on rare and sensational events that attract broader readership interest and, thus, increased newspaper sales.

The failure to detect any significant influence of perpetrator mental illness on the choice of homicides for newspaper reporting in this study was surprising in the light of previous observations on the newsworthiness of homicide and widespread opinion that homicide by people with mental illness is given excessive prominence by the press [37]. There are a number of possible explanations for the lack of observed effect. Firstly, that the rare contribution of people with mental illness to homicide is not an important news value for journalists except in extreme cases, or at times of raised awareness within the community, e.g. to coincide with the publication of a public inquiry into a homicide by a person with a mental illness. Indeed, mental illness in itself is described by journalists as not being a ‘subject worthy of reporting it its own right’ [38]. Secondly, that the editorial decision to publish is based on other characteristics of the homicide, particularly if information on mental illness is not known or suspected by the journalist. Thirdly, even where a mental illness connection is identified, it may not be reportable because of limitations on the freedom of journalists to report certain aspects of the crime until at least the time of the trial. By the time the mental illness angle to the story can be reported, interest in the story may have waned in favour of more topical stories. A fourth consideration is whether the adoption of guidelines for the reporting of mental illness has reduced the likelihood of mental illness-related homicides being reported.

Codes of practice and guidelines for journalists are available in the UK, Australia and other countries to promote more informative, accurate and balanced portrayals of mental illness [39–42]. Historically, however, the uptake and impact on either reporting styles or on stigmatization of mental illness is unclear and evidence suggests limited awareness of reporting guidelines amongst journalists in the UK [43]. Nonetheless, the results of this study concur with other studies of the Australian media [16,44] in particular, which suggest there has been a decline in the prevalence of reporting of crime and violence in association with mental illness, and indicate that media strategies have been successful in changing discourses about mental illness [44].

Finally, the perceived stigmatizing effect of newspaper reporting of homicide by people with mental illness may have its foundations in the manner in which mental illness is reported rather than selective over-reporting. There is no doubt that where mental illness is reported it is frequently done so in a stigmatizing fashion [11–12]. Negative articles that perpetuate the stereotype of violence and mental illness are more memorable than neutral or good-news stories. Furthermore, stigmatizing media reports will be particularly obvious and memorable to those individuals (e.g. patients, their families and mental health care providers) who are already feeling stigmatized or particularly aware of the problem of stigma. Such observation bias may explain the prevalent opinion amongst these groups that homicide perpetrators with mental illness are over-represented in the media.

Limitations

Although this study utilized a single electronic database (LexisNexis) to search for relevant newspaper articles, thus allowing a systematic approach to locating and searching news stories, there are some limitations to using LexisNexis that should be highlighted. Firstly, it is likely that occasional articles did not contain one of the three keywords; however, a comparison of the search results of a manual check of one month of The Times newspaper with the LexisNexis electronic record of the same period yielded almost identical results. Secondly, as Greer and colleagues [45] have argued, a huge drawback of online searchable databases is that ‘they strip stories of much of their textual and visual meaning’, allowing the news to ‘become decontextualised and disconnected from defining images and surrounding stories’ [45, p.6]. Thus we are unable to understand the full and subtle meaning in any given news story.

In addition, clinical data used in this study relied upon the non-research-based opinions of mental health professionals, which may have been biased by their awareness of outcome. Another limitation is that the study may not be generalizable to other countries and their newspaper reporting systems; however, it did have the advantage of examining newspaper reporting of all perpetrators of homicide in England and Wales in the study period. The demographic, clinical and criminological characteristics of this sample also show it to be similar to other recent British cohorts of homicide perpetrators [30] and allows for comparison with those of other countries. Finally, by examining a single year it is possible our results could be biased if particularly sensational homicides occurred in that year.

Clinical and research implications

The stigma generated by the repeated association in the press between violence and mental illness is considered to be highly damaging to self-esteem and reputation [38]. Furthermore, it is considered to contribute to discrimination, to worsen mental health status and discourage people from seeking help for fear of discrimination [46–47]. The results of this study suggest that in the UK, perpetrator mental illness per se is rarely a primary reason for newspaper story selection in cases of homicide. The victims and circumstances of the crime itself were the primary stimulus to reporting, whilst the mental illness ‘angle’ was secondary. Unfortunately, it is not clear how this fits with observed patterns of reporting of mental illness-related issues in general.

Consequently, this study serves to dissect the reporting of homicide by people with mental illness into three separate issues. First, there is the issue of article selection. Second, there is the manner in which an article is reported, and third, there is the issue of audience perception. This paper suggests that over-selection is not the major issue in the stigmatizing reporting of mental illness-related homicide. Future publications will address differences in the prominence and framing of newspaper articles relating to homicide perpetrators with and without mental illness.

Ethical approval

The NCI received Multi Centre Research Ethics Committee (MREC) approval on 1 October 1996 and is registered under the Data Protection Act. The NCI also obtained exemption under Section 251 of the NHS Act 2006 (originally enacted under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2001), enabling access to confidential and identifiable information without informed consent in the interest of improving patient care.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We thank the other members of the research team: Kirtsen Windfuhr, Alyson Williams, Harriet Bickley, Jimmy Burns, Isabelle Hunt, Rebecca Lowe, Philip Stones, Pauline Turnbull, Pooja Saini, David While, Kelly Hadfield and Huma Daud. We acknowledge the help of health authorities and trust contacts and consultant psychiatrists for completing the questionnaires. We also acknowledge the help of Philip Roscoe and Timothy Shaw in the data extraction process.

Declaration of interest: This work was supported by the NCI, which is funded by the National Patient Safety Agency. The study was carried out as part of the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Homicide by People with Mental Illness (NCI). Louis Appleby is the National Clinical Director for Health and Criminal Justice for England. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

References

1. Appleby

Wessely

. Public attitudes to mental illness: the influence of the Hungerford massacre. Med Sci Law 1998; 28: 291–295.

2. Angermeyer

Dietrich

. Public beliefs about and attitudes towards people with mental illness: a review of population studies. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2006; 113:163–179.

3. Steadman

Cocozza

. Selective reporting and the public's misperceptions about the criminally insane. Public Opin Q 1977; 41:523–533.

4. Walsh

Buchanan

Fahy

. Violence and schizophrenia: examining the evidence. Br J Psychiatry 2002; 180:490–495.

5. Shaw

Hunt

Flynn

. Rates of mental disorder in people convicted of homicide: a national clinical survey. Br J Psychiatry 2006; 188:143–147.

6. Fazel

Gulati

Linsell

Geddes

Grann

. Schizophrenia and violence: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med 2009; 6 (8):e1000120. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.100120.

7. Fazel

Grann

. The population impact of severe mental illness on violent crime. Am J Psychiatry 2006; 163:1397–1403.

8. Wallace

Mullen

Burgess

Palmer

Ruschena

Browne

. Serious criminal offending and mental disorder. Case linkage study. B J Psych 1998; 172:477–484.

9. Elbogen

Johnson

. The intricate link between violence and mental disorder: results from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2009; 66:152–161.

10.

10. Choe

Teplin

Abram

. Perpetration of violence, violent victimization, and severe mental illness: balancing public health concerns. Psychiatr Serv 2008; 59:153–164.

11.

11. Wahl

. Mass media images of mental illness: a review of the literature. J Community Psychol 1992; 20:343–352.

12.

12. Coverdale

Nairn

Claasen

. Depictions of mental illness in print media: a prospective national sample. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 2002; 36:697–700.

13.

13. Philo

. Media and mental distress. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, 1996.

14.

14. Wilson

Nairn

Coverdale

Panapa

. Mental illness depictions in prime-time drama: identifying the discursive resources. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 1999; 33:232–239.

15.

15. Dietrich

Heider

Matschinger

Angermeyer

. Influence of newspaper reporting on adolescents’ attitudes toward people with mental illness. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2006; 41:318–322.

16.

16. Francis

Pirkis

Blood

. The portrayal of mental health and illness in Australian non-fiction. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 2004; 38:541–546.

17.

17. Matas

el-Guebaly

Harper

Green

Peterkin

. Mental illness and the media: Part II. Content analysis of press coverage of mental health topics. Can J Psychiatry 1986; 31:431–433.

18.

18. Huang

Priebe

. Media coverage of mental health care in the UK, USA and Australia. Psychiatr Bull 2003; 27:331–333.

19.

19. Wilson

Nairn

Coverdale

Panapa

. How mental illness is portrayed in children's television: a prospective study. Br J Psychiatry 2000; 176:440–443.

20.

20. Wahl

. Depictions of mental illness in children's media. J Ment Health 2003; 12:249–258.

21.

21. Rapley

McCarthy

McHoul

. Mentality or morality? Membership categorization, multiple meanings and mass murder. Br J Soc Psychol 2003; 42:427–444.

22.

22. Nairn

Coverdale

. ‘Breakfast and then death’: imputations of madness in print media depiction of a mass killing. Aust J Comm 2006; 33:143–161.

23.

23. Angermeyer

Dietrich

Pott

Matschinger

. Media consumption and desire for social distance towards people with schizophrenia. Eur Psychiatry 2005; 20:246–250.

24.

24. Angermeyer

Schulze

. Reinforcing stereotypes: how the focus on forensic cases in news reporting may influence public attitudes towards the mentally ill. Int J Law Psychiatry 2001; 24:469–486.

25.

25. O'Connor

Casey

. What it says in the paper: an audit. Ir J Psychol Med 2001; 18:68–71.

26.

26. Philo

Secker

Platt

Henderson

McLaughlin

Burnside

. The impact of the mass media on public images of mental illness: media content and audience belief. Health Educ J 1994; 53:271–281.

27.

27. Peelo

Francis

Soothill

Pearson

Ackerley

. Newspaper reporting and the public construction of homicide. Br J Criminol 2004; 44:256–275.

28.

28. Soothill

Peelo

Pearson

Francis

. The reporting trajectories of top homicide cases in the media: a case study of The Times . Howard Law J 2004; 43:1–14.

29.

29. McKenna

Thom

Simpson

AIF

. Media coverage of homicide involving mentally disordered offenders: a matched comparison study. Int J Forensic Ment Health 2007; 6:57–63.

30.

30. Appleby

Shaw

Kapur

. Avoidable deaths, five year report of the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Homicide by People with Mental Illness. Centre for Suicide Prevention, University of Manchester, 2006. [Cited 12 Dec 2010.] Available from URL: http://www.medicine.manchester.ac.uk/psychiatry/research/suicide/prevention/nci/reports/avoidabledeathsfullreport.pdf.

31.

31. Johnstone

JWC

Hawkins

Michener

. Homicide reporting in Chicago dailies. Journal Q 1994; 71:860–872.

32.

32. Sorenson

Manz

Berk

. News media coverage and the epidemiology of homicide. Am J Public Health 1998; 88: 1510–1514.

33.

33. Pritchard

Hughes

. Patterns of deviance in crime news. J Commun 1997; 47:49–67.

34.

34. Appleby

Shaw

Amos

. Safer services: report of the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Homicide by People with Mental Illness. London: Stationery Office, 1999. [Cited 12 April 2011.] Available from URL http://www.medicine.manchester.ac.uk/mentalhealth/research/suicide/prevention/nci/reports/saferservices.pdf.

35.

35. Rothman

. No adjustments are needed for multiple comparisons. Epidemiology 1990; 1:43–46.

36.

36. Carpiniello

Girau

Orrù

. Mass-media, violence and mental illness. Evidence from some Italian newspapers. Epidemiol Psichiatr Soc 2007; 16:251–255.

37.

37. Taylor

Gunn

. Homicides by people with mental illness: myth and reality. Br J Psychiatry 1999; 174: 9–14.

38.

38. SHiFT. Mind over matter: improving media reporting of mental health. London, UK: SHiFT, National Institute for Mental Health, 2006. [Cited 13 Dec 2010.] Available from URL http://kc.csip.org.uk/viewresource.php?action=viewdocument&doc=98881&grp=584.

39.

39. Press Complaints Commission. Editor's code of practice. London, UK: Press Complaints Commission, 2006. [Cited 13 Dec 2010.] Available from URL http://www.pcc.org.uk/assets/111/Code_A4_version_2009.pdf.

40.

40. SHiFT. What's the story? Reporting mental health and suicide: a resource for journalists and editors. London, UK: Department of Health, 2008. [Cited 13 Dec 2010.] Available from URL http://www.shift.org.uk/mediahandbook.

41.

41. Mindframe Media. Reporting suicide and mental illness: a Mindframe resource for media professionals. Barton, ACT: Commonwealth Copyright Administration, 2009. [Cited 13 Dec 2010.] Available from URL http://www.mindframe-media.info/client_images/826717.pdf.

42.

42. National Union of Journalists Scotland (NUJ Scotland). The reporting of mental health and suicide by the media: a practical guide for journalists. Glasgow: NUJ Scotland, 2007. [Cited 12 Dec 2010.] Available from URL http://www.chooselife.net/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.asp?lID=2126&sID=2042.

43.

43. Mental Aftercare Association (MACA) Reporting mental illness: a survey of journalists’ attitudes to covering mental health stories. London, UK: MACA, 2004. [Cited 23 April 2010.] Available from URL http://www.maca.org.uk/temp/reportingspmentalspillnesshs1hs.pdf.

44.

44. Henson

Chapman

McLeod

Johnson

McGeechan

Hickie

. More us than them: positive depictions of mental illness on Australian television news. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 2009; 43: 554–560.

45.

45. Greer

Ferrell

Jewkes

. It's the image that matters: style, substance and critical scholarship. Crime Media Cult 2007; 3:5–10.

46.

46. Corrigan

. How stigma interferes with mental health care. Am Psychol 2004; 59:614–625.

47.

47. Barney

Griffiths

Jorm

Christensen

. Stigma about depression and its impact on help-seeking intentions. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 2006; 40:51–54.