"Det blir fällande dom i Hovrätten grabbar" : En fallstudie om Dagens Nyheters och Expressens rapportering kring våldtäktsfallet med de två så kallade Stureplansprofilerna

Sammanfattning: In our case study we investigate how media chose to illuminate the process of court proceedings concerning a one specific rape case in Sweden during the spring and autumn 2007. For our study we have chosen to investigate two Swedish daily newspapers, one known to be a serious morning newspaper, Dagens Nyheter, and the other an evening tabloid newspaper Expressen. We would like to see whether the reports of the trial diverge and if that is, how they differ. The rape took place in Stockholm’s posh area named Stureplan in March 2007. The two men 21 and 25 years old, accused for the crime were acquitted after the first instance. The appeal was lodged to the second instance where they were convicted for rape. We find it interesting to find out whether media considered the men innocent and gave an objective view after the first trial or if media judged the men nevertheless. To find out how the media wrote about the men we used a qualitative content analysis. We looked for characteristics in the newspapers, those being for example, who get to talk? What did they say? How are the people involved described, trustworthy? Using the theory of Media Logic we have drawn conclusions of why media has chosen to report as they did. Our conclusion is that both newspapers are very similar in their coverage of the rape. They also almost solely took the woman’s, victim’s part by letting her communicate her opinion and emotions to the general public during the entire process. What we found interesting was that Expressen almost used texts that were subjective while Dagens Nyheter reported about the case in the same way, but in their newsarticles. The media furthermore show a feeling of victory when the men are ordered guilty of the rape. The media legitimize their earlier preferential treatment for the woman by the announcement “we were right all the time” and the Swedish judicial system had made a mistake.