Är gräset grönare på andra sidan? En kvalitativ innehållsanalys av hur debattartiklar framställer konsekvenser av en legalisering av cannabis
Sammanfattning: The purpose of this study is to examine how debate articles in Swedish newspapers manufacture the consequences of legalizing cannabis, in two different time periods, 2005 to 2010 and 2015 to 2020. The study is based on a qualitative content analysis of 59 debate articles from five different Swedish newspapers. 26 debate articles represented the first period and 33 debate articles represented the later period. The results have been analyzed through theory and concepts; social constructivism, labeling theory, and social bond theory and previous research. The results of the study showed that the debate regarding the legalization of cannabis or not were mostly the same during these two different time periods. Even though they had different time periods they wanted the same outcome, they argued on the basis of various debates. The first time period debated on the basis of a medical purpose while the later period wanted to reduce gang crime and violence. Despite that, we examine two different time periods we could find similarities and differences in the debates. Cannabis advocates believe that the legalization of cannabis could lead to a decrease in gang violence which would relieve policemen´s duties. The opponents of legalization worry that fully allowing cannabis on the market would not solve the drug problems but rather make the problems worse. One supposes that the legalization would lead to more social acceptance and normalizethe use of cannabis which could raise the number of users an early age.
HÄR KAN DU HÄMTA UPPSATSEN I FULLTEXT. (följ länken till nästa sida)