Reforms and Media Depictions of the Death Penalty in Malaysia
Malaysia has retained the death penalty for violent crimes and some nonviolent drug offenses. Major news dailies, controlled by political parties in the ruling coalition, have helped justify this stance in the past. This situation changed over 22 months when a new coalition, which campaigned on abol...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Otros Autores: | ; ; ; |
| Tipo de documento: | Electrónico Artículo |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
2024
|
| En: |
International criminal justice review
Año: 2024, Volumen: 34, Número: 4, Páginas: 351-369 |
| Acceso en línea: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Journals Online & Print: | Gargar...
|
| Verificar disponibilidad: | HBZ Gateway |
| Palabras clave: |
| Sumario: | Malaysia has retained the death penalty for violent crimes and some nonviolent drug offenses. Major news dailies, controlled by political parties in the ruling coalition, have helped justify this stance in the past. This situation changed over 22 months when a new coalition, which campaigned on abolishing capital punishment, took office and sparked renewed public discussion on this issue. Depictions of the death penalty debate were analyzed by conducting a content analysis of two major English-language newspapers, The Star and New Straits Times. Our findings suggest that The Star provided more international coverage and the New Straits Times prioritized domestic coverage. While both outlets provided comprehensive, and sometimes, critical coverage of executions elsewhere, they downplayed the fact that Malaysia engages in the same practice. There was no evidence to indicate that they were pushing an agenda as neither took a formal position on the issue. Content to transmit the differing views on the subject, neither functioned as forums to air nor shaped policy positions. This posture was possibly shaped by preconceived notions of what their readership wants and/or self-censorship—a legacy of past subjugation that will hopefully change when press freedom is perceived as a right, not a privilege. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1556-3855 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/10575677231200447 |