The military’s mental health crisis and the role of the media in communicating the problem

Abstract:In the past 20 years, the suicide rate among service members has increased, with more than 30,177 service members and veterans (Crawford & Lutz, 2021) who served during the global war on terror alone dying due to suicide, four times the number of troops lost in combat during the period (Kube, 2021). In the past five years, the suicide rate among active-duty service members has increased by 41% (Marquardt &Kaufman, 2021); suicide is the second-leading cause of death for service personnel in the United States military (Bryan et al., 2018). Military leaders, politicians, veterans’ organizations, and journalists have spent the past 15 years trying to understand what is behind these high suicide rates, and how best to intervene; yet little progress has been made (Bryan et al., 2018; Watkins et al., 2018). One avenue that has not been adequately explored is the role of the media in framing issues surrounding military mental health. Although the role of media framing has been explored for other health issues, there have been no studies focusing on military mental health. This dissertation sought to understand how media professionals who cover military suicide develop their stories and frame the problem in their coverage, as well as how a portion of their audience (retired service members) perceived the impact of this writing. Utilizing qualitative interviews with 21 journalists and veterans with data analyzed using a Grounded Theory framework, this study focused understanding not just the journalists who create stories, but also their audiences and their interpretation of media texts. Findings revealed that military journalists endeavored to highlight the systemic issues related to military mental health. However, they felt they were constrained by systemic limitations and constraints of military journalism as an industry, a point highlighted by both veteran and journalist respondents. Journalists and veteran respondents indicated in their interviews that they believe the media has the power to influence public perception of military mental health issues, although opinions on the extent of this power vary. The findings also indicated that while journalists and veterans could identify what constituted a good story, such as a focus on systemic issues with a human touch, the material realities and constraints of journalism as an industry often prevented these types of stories from always being told. When queried about how to enhance this power, especially when it comes to stories that can cause system change, respondents highlighted how economic considerations drive news coverage, affecting the type of stories pursued and the ability to cover certain issues, and that and there is a need for more veterans to be present in news coverage of military mental health, both as reporters and sources. Theoretical implications of these findings point towards the need to understand a new concept of institutional efficacy: the perception of the ability of institutions to address issues, which can be affected by the media and potentially lead to systemic changes around health problems. Practically, the implications of this work point towards the importance of humanity and empathetic coverage when crafting these stories, the use style guides for veteran communities, the need for more data driven stories, and increased coverage of minority service members and their mental health issues. Journalism education can potentially play a powerful role in this process.