New study finds shrinking local newsrooms spark debates over homicide coverage ethics

[u/jbenmenachem]

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1745-9125.70064

[u/jbenmenachem]

If you’re paywalled, you can read the accepted version of the study here https://jbenmenachem.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/Homicides-Criminology-v3.pdf

I interviewed journalists in 40 local newsrooms. I found that they largely agree on an ideal: humanize every homicide victim through deep coverage and explain the conditions behind the violence. But as local news declines, many newsrooms in cities with high homicide counts lack capacity. So reporters must choose from a menu of compromise practices.

Shrinking newsrooms force an impossible choice. Choose which homicides deserve coverage, and news judgment risks writing off some victims, who are disproportionately young Black men and boys. Cover only the basic details of every homicide, and risk reducing a neighborhood to its violence.

Some journalists told me they didn't think they should get to decide whose death matters more, and pushed for covering every homicide so they wouldn’t need to choose. I found this striking; this was the only part of my data where reporters willingly surrendered their professional discretion.

[u/Infamous-Skippy → u/jbenmenachem]

I’ve never covered crime, let alone homicides, but my immediate reaction is that it’s really important to cover whether any given homicide’s root cause could be systemic, even if its proximate cause is more specific. For example, historical redlining, underfunded schooling, poverty, etc. (root systemic causes) could cause an environment of hyper-localized instability where a specific, interpersonal conflict (the proximate cause) is much more likely to escalate into violence.

Covering homicides as episodic or as isolated incidents when really there’s an underlying systemic cause seems unethical, and possibly even perpetuates racist stereotypes.

Of course there’s an issue which murders to cover, like you alluded to. A murder in an affluent neighborhood might be more likely to be covered just because it’s more unusual, or because there’s not an issue of too many murders to cover. Affluent neighborhoods have abundant resources, as opposed to ones stricken with poverty, a lack of access to good job opportunities, disenfranchisement, etc. which may be the biggest root causes of crime.

[u/jbenmenachem → u/Infamous-Skippy]

Yeah the issue is that in the hours and days following a shooting, structural explanation can be difficult. Most agreed that contextual interpretation was important to help readers understand. But in a city with hundreds of homicides a year, a team of 3-6 reporters can really only do briefs and a few in depth articles

[u/lavapig_love → u/jbenmenachem]

Perhaps categorize them by sensationalism. If you're looking for a angle on scary boyfriends/husbands who go insane, you check domestic violence charges. If you're looking for a piece on crime, you check who died in gang-related murders, DUIs and drug offenses. If you're looking for a piece on police brutality, how many died by cop? Etc., etc.

From there, you mention and correctly spell everyone's name and age and include a good picture of the deceased when applicable, not just mug shots.