In 2018, the Indian Supreme Court overturned Section 377 of the Penal Code which criminalized consensual homosexual sex between adults. This study examines the Indian media’s framing of this repeal, the sources quoted and the prominence given to the issue. Findings reveal that the human/civil rights frame was most common; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) sources were most prominent, and the issue was covered prominently in most major media outlets.
A brief timeline of the legal battle against Section 377. (2018, September6). The Indian Express.
2.
Al BasetZ. (2012). Section 377 and the myth of heterosexuality. Jindal Global Law Review, 4(1), 89–387.
3.
AndsagerJ. (2000). How interest groups attempt to shape public opinion with competing news frames. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 577–592. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900007700308
4.
BachettaP. (1999). When the (Hindu) nation exiles its queers. Social Text, 17(4), 141–166.
5.
BakshiK.SenP. (2012). India’s queer expressions on-screen: The aftermath of the reading down of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. New Cinemas: Journal of Contemporary Film, 10(2-3), 167–183.
BarnhurstK. (2003). Queer political news: Election-year coverage of the lesbian and gay communities on National Public Radio, 1992-2000. Journalism, 4(1), 5–28.
8.
BaunachD. (2011). Decomposing trends in attitudes toward gay marriage, 1988–2006. Social Science Quarterly, 92(2), 346–363.
BennettW.LawrenceR.LivingstonS. (2007). When the press fails: Political power and the news media from Iraq to Katrina. University of Chicago Press.
11.
BisenK. (2018, September7). Section 377: India sees the light, in all its glory. The Statesman.
12.
BlankenburgW. (1992). The utility of anonymous attribution. Newspaper Research Journal, 13(1/2), 10–23.
13.
BorahK. (2018). Engaging with the law: Decriminalisation of homosexuality and the Johar judgement. Space and Culture, India, 6(3), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.20896/saci.v6i3.400
14.
BorahP. (2018). Engaging with the law: Decriminalisation of homosexuality and the Johar Judgement, 2018. Space and Culture, India, 6(3), 5–22.
15.
ChandraP. (2009). Will the Supreme court’s judgement on Section 377 affect mental healthcare for LGBT groups?Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, 6(4), 200–201.
16.
CookT. (2005). The functions of the press in a democracy. In The Press (pp. 115–119). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17.
ColistraR.JohnsonC. B. (2019). Framing the legalization of marriage for same-sex couples: An examination of news coverage surrounding the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision. Journal of Homosexuality, 68(1), 88–111.
18.
ConradP.MarkensS. (2001). Constructing the “gay gene” in the news: Optimism and skepticism in the U.S. and British press. Health, 5(3), 373–400.
19.
DimitrovaD.StrömbäckJ. (2005). Mission accomplished? Framing of the Iraq War in the elite newspapers in Sweden and the United States. Gazette (Leiden, Netherlands), 67(5), 399–417.
20.
DimitrovaD.StrömbäckJ. (2009). Look who’s talking: Use of sources in newspaper coverage in Sweden and the United States. Journalism Practice, 3(1), 75–91.
21.
DrèzeJ.SenA. (2013). An uncertain glory: India and its contradictions. Princeton University Press.
22.
DruckmanJ. (2001). The implications of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior, 23(3), 225–256.
23.
DuffyM.WilliamsA. (2011). Use of unnamed sources drops from peak in 1960s and 1970s. Newspaper Research Journal, 32(4), 6–21.
24.
EaglyA.ChaikenS. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Harcourt, Brace & Jovanovich.
25.
EntmanR. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.
26.
EntmanR. (2004). Projects of power: Framing news, public opinion, and U.S. foreign policy. University of Chicago Press.
GamsonW. (1995). Hiroshima, the holocaust, and the politics of exclusion. American Sociological Review, 60, 1–20.
29.
GamsonW.ModiglianiA. (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95(1), 1–37.
30.
GitlinT. (1980). The whole world is watching: Mass media in the making & unmaking of the new left. University of California Press.
GuptaA. (2006). Section 377 and the dignity of Indian homosexuals. Economic and Political Weekly, 41(46), 4815–4823.
36.
HallinD.ManciniP. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge University Press.
37.
HamdyN.GomaaE. H. (2012). Framing the Egyptian uprising in Arabic language newspapers and social media. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 195–211.
38.
HanE.O’MahoneyJ. (2014). British colonialism and the criminalization of homosexuality. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 27(2), 268–288.
39.
HerdtG. (1996). Introduction: Third sexes and third gender. In HerdtG. (Ed.), Third sex third gender: Beyond sexual dimorphism in culture and history (pp. 21–81). Zone Books.
40.
It all began in 1533 with Henry VIII. (2018, September8). Economic Times.
41.
It felt like the word lesbian was bad. (2018, September11). New Indian Express.
42.
JohnsonT. (2012). Equality, morality, and the impact of media framing: Explaining opposition to same-sex marriage and civil unions. Politics and Policy, 40(6), 1053–1080.
43.
KianE.AndersonE.ShipkaD. (2015). ‘I am happy to start the conversation’: Examining sport media framing of Jason Collins’ coming out and playing in the NBA. Sexualities, 18(5–6), 618–640.
44.
LaursenB.TrappL. (2021). Experts or advocates: Shifting roles of central sources used by journalists in news stories?Journalism Practice, 15(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2019.1695537
LiX.LiuX. (2010). Framing and coverage of same-sex marriage in U.S. newspapers. Howard Journal of Communication, 21(1), 72–91.
47.
LieblerC.SchwartzJ.HarperT. (2009). Queer tales of morality: The press, same-sex marriage, and hegemonic framing. Journal of Communication, 59(4), 653–675.
48.
MalikV. (2013). Section 377 of IPC quit India: The tension between the human rights of LGBT and normative values. International Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 3(2), Article 144.
49.
ManningP. (2001). News and news sources: A critical introduction. SAGE.
50.
MindichD. (1998). Just the facts: How “objectivity” came to define American journalism. New York University Press.
51.
MisraG. (2009). Decriminalising homosexuality in India. Reproductive Health Matters, 17(34), 20–28.
52.
MudgalV. (2011). Rural coverage in the Hindi and English dailies. Economic and Political Weekly, 46(35), 92–97.
PalmerJ. (2001). Spinning into control: News values and source strategies. Social Science Quarterly, 82(3), 583–601. https://doi.org/10.1111/0038-4941.00044
55.
PanP. L.MengJ.ZhouS. (2010). Morality or equality? Ideological framing in news coverage of gay marriage. Social Science Journal, 47(3), 630–645.
56.
PanZ.KosickiG. (2005). Framing and the understanding of citizenship. In DunwoodyS.BackerL.McLeodD.KosickiG. (Eds.), The evolution of key mass communication concepts (pp. 165–204). Hampton Press.
PeletzM. (2006). Transgenderism and gender pluralism in Southeast Asia since early modern times. Current Anthropology, 47, 309–340. https://doi.org/10.1086/498947
59.
PengZ. (2008). Framing the anti-war protests in the global village: A comparative study of newspaper coverage in three countries. International Communication Gazette, 70(5), 361–377.
PriceV.NirL.CappellaJ. N. (2005). Framing public discussion of gay civil unions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 69(2), 179–212.
62.
RamasubbanR. (2008). Political intersections between HIV/AIDS, sexuality and human rights: a history of resistance to the anti-sodomy law in India. Global Public Health, 3(S2), 22–38.
63.
RaoS. (2009). Glocalization of Indian journalism. Journalism Studies, 10(4), 474–488.
64.
RaoS. (2014). Covering rape in shame culture: Journalism ethics in India’s new television news media. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 29(3), 153–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/08900523.2014.918497
SchallhornC.HempelA. (2017). Media coverage of Thomas Hitzlsperger’s coming-out in German newspapers. Journalism Studies, 18(9), 1187–1205.
70.
SchneiderB. (2012). Sourcing homelessness: How journalists use sources to frame homelessness. Journalism, 13(1), 71–86.
71.
Section 377: Impact will be felt beyond India. (2018, September8). Economic Times.
72.
SemetkoH. A.ValkenburgP. M. (2000). Framing European politics: A content analysis of press and television news. Journal of communication, 50(2), 93–109.
73.
ShahD.WattsM.DomkeD.FanD. (2002). News framing and cueing of issue regimes: Explaining Clinton’s public approval in spite of scandal. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66(3), 339–370. https://doi.org/10.1086/341396
74.
ShandilyaK. (2017). (In) visibilities: Homosexuality and Muslim identity in India after Section 377. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 42(2), 459–484.
75.
SharmaA. (2008). Section 377: No jurisprudential basis. Economic and Political Weekly, 43(46), 12–14.
76.
ShenF. (2004). Effects of news frames and schemas on individuals’ issue interpretations and attitudes. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(2), 400–416.
77.
ShoemakerP.ReeseS. (2013). Mediating the message in the 21st century: A media sociology perspective (3rd ed.). Longman.
78.
SinhaM. (1995). Colonial masculinity: The “manly” Englishman and the “effeminate” Bengali in the late nineteenth century. Manchester University Press.
79.
SjovaagH. (2015). Hard news/soft news. In CarlsonM.LewisS. (Eds.), Boundaries of journalism: Professionalism, practices and participation (pp. 101–117). Routledge.
80.
SmithR. (2007). Impact of unnamed sources on credibility not certain. Newspaper Research Journal, 28(3), 8–19.
81.
SonwalkarP. (2002). “Murdochization” of the Indian press: From by-line to bottom-line. Media, Culture & Society, 24, 821–834.
82.
SrivastavaS. (2004). Introduction: Semen, history, desire and theory. In SrivastavaS. (Ed.), Sexual sites, seminal attitudes: Sexualities, masculinities and culture in South Asia (pp. 11–48). SAGE.
83.
StrandC. (2012). Homophobia as a barrier to comprehensive media coverage of the Ugandan anti-homosexual bill. Journal of Homosexuality, 59(4), 564–579.
84.
SwansonD.SmithD. (1993). War in the global village: A seven-country comparison of television news coverage of the beginning of the Gulf War. In DentonR.Jr. (Ed.), The media and the Persian Gulf War (pp. 56–74). Praeger.
85.
TewksburyD.ScheufeleD. (2009). News framing theory and research. In BryantJ.OliverM. B. (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 17–33). Routledge.
