‘Together is where we save lives’: A messaging guide for California advocates working to reduce injuries and fatalities from firearms

Introduction 

Is there more violent crime in the United States than there was a year ago? Less? What about in your local area? A 2023 survey from Gallup found that Americans are confused about these questions, and perceptions of violent crime often do not align with the data.¹ And that’s just when it comes to the big picture. Add in nuances around violence involving firearms, and misunderstandings soar. For example, many people across the political spectrum are unaware that more than half of firearm deaths in the U.S. are suicides.²

In 2024, the U.S. Surgeon General declared injury and death from firearms a public health crisis, which highlighted the critical and ongoing need for solutions to the crisis grounded in principles of community action and systems change. California advocates are already at the forefront of leading community-organizing efforts to move the needle on firearm injury and death, using a range of interventions from school-based and restorative practices to trauma-responsive care to cognitive behavioral therapy. This guide is intended for advocates; it aims to give them a roadmap for using the news to lift up those solutions and amplify messages from the communities most affected by the problem, so that the narrative around efforts to prevent firearm injury and death is as robust as prevention, intervention, and healing work happening around the state. 

News coverage matters because it not only affects the public’s knowledge about violence and its causes, but also shapes how audiences understand potential solutions.^3,4,5 Right now, stories about community-led efforts to prevent firearm-related injuries and deaths aren’t the ones we see and hear the most frequently. Instead, news about firearm deaths and injuries tends to focus squarely on mass shootings. Mass shootings are undoubtedly tragic — and on the rise — but comprise only a small fraction of firearm-involved deaths and injuries in this country.  

When the news does spotlight day-to-day incidents involving firearms, mainstream outlets often struggle to tell stories about the causes of and solutions to firearm violence and firearm suicide in ways that can help readers and viewers understand larger patterns and truths about what it takes to make communities safer. Instead, news stories often focus on street-level assaults and homicides, and overrepresent Black and Brown communities as perpetrators of violence. News about firearms also tends to prioritize the perspectives of law enforcement, while the voices of people most directly impacted by violence or firearm suicide are largely absent, as are discussions of community-led solutions. 

From decades of research, including our own, we know that these patterns may keep audiences from understanding the true prevalence of issues like firearm suicide and domestic violence involving firearms in their communities; deflect attention from systemic and structural inequities like racism and poverty; reinforce the underrepresentation of Black and Brown communities as expert voices and leaders of change; and obscure the possibility of approaches to preventing violence and promoting healing that go beyond criminal justice responses.⁶ What’s more, the news shapes policy agendas.^7,8,9 So, when community-led efforts to reduce injury and death from firearms aren’t part of the public conversation, it’s harder for the people leading those efforts to ensure that voters, funders, potential community partners, and others are aware of and engaged in their work.

On the other hand, when community members and spokespeople from community-led efforts are the key sources for news stories — not just reacting to, but creating news proactively — then they can broaden the understanding of firearm violence prevention by expanding who speaks about it and what they say. Community members can, for example:

• challenge harmful stereotypes or narratives about their communities;
• draw attention to equity and justice concerns relating to policing;
• point out that community-led violence prevention advocates report that they are often held to higher standards than law enforcement when it comes to reporting positive outcomes; or
• call on the media to investigate community-based solutions with the same intensity and focus with which they investigate problems.

How, then, can people working to prevent injury and death from firearms create effective messaging? How can they communicate such complex issues when many different stories emerge from the data? For instance, while California has the strongest laws in the country and a lower rate of deaths due to firearms per capita than most states, firearm deaths have dramatically increased in the last few years, mirroring national trends.

That’s precisely what we hope this guide will do. Advocates can use it to help shape news narratives to reflect an important truth: that no matter who we are or where we live, we all want to reduce the public health problem of injury and death from firearms — and everyone can play a role in keeping people safe. 

With support from this guide, California advocates can engage in media advocacy: the strategic use of mass media to communicate with policymakers, thought leaders, and the voting public about efforts to prevent injury and death from firearms, support people affected by violence, and promote healing.¹⁰ We hope the tactics outlined here will help advocates to better align their organizing and messaging efforts so that policies and programs to reduce violence and promote healing — as well as the narrative surrounding them — reinforce one another. That’s a key step toward helping move us faster and further toward a world in which safety is the norm.

Who is this guide for? 

This guide is for advocates who are working to help reduce injuries and deaths from firearms in their community and want to become better, more confident communicators on the subject. Because this issue affects people from many different walks of life, we hope it is equally useful to advocates from varying backgrounds. Maybe you are a veteran, and your primary concern is about firearm suicide. Perhaps you are a responsible gun owner whose main goal is to support local efforts to keep your loved ones safe. Maybe you have never handled a firearm, but you have seen the ripple effect of trauma that results when they are misused. You might engage in advocacy as a researcher or simply as a concerned community member who is becoming more active in this work. Your neighborhood could be urban or rural, racially homogenous or ethnically diverse. Further, you might be focused on a very specific issue area, like domestic violence, self-harm, or community violence.

We aimed to create a resource that is flexible enough to address communication challenges that span location and demographics — and that you can refine and tailor to your community and needs because you are the expert on your own background and experience, and know the challenges and needs in your own community. As you read this guide, think of it as a foundation — one that will equip you with research-based lessons and communication guidance that you can adapt based on your local context and specific social change goals. Using this foundation, you will be able to create messages and media pitches that help to advance those goals. You will also be able to anticipate roadblocks and plan ways around them.

Still wondering? Frequently asked questions — and answers to help you decide

Here are some frequently asked questions that might help you decide if this is the right resource for you: 

Using this guide to craft messages and communication

We’ve designed the guide so that you can read its sections in any order, picking out what’s most useful to you. We hope it allows you to:

• Focus on one goal at a time. Addressing a problem this big demands investments in time, energy, and resources that can take a very long time. This guide is designed to support advocates and organizers working to advance a variety of smaller, incremental changes at the community level, as well as bigger overall objectives. 
• Frame prevention, intervention, and healing in the context of racial equity and community-led action in messaging and communication.  
• Focus on using the news to reach decision-makers (that is, anyone who has the power to create change in institutions, systems, and communities), as well as those who can influence them. 

People are inundated with messages about firearms every day. As with many issue areas, audiences can be resistant to messages and ideas they aren’t familiar with. In other words, you may have to repeat yourself, or reframe problematic messages and repeat the reframes! 

However, our hope is that, combined with training and practice, this guide will help community groups develop strategies and practices to make stories about community-led success the norm rather than the exception. 

A few other things to keep in mind

If this is the guide for you, keep a few core assumptions in mind as you use it. 

A word about language ….

We have some specific terms we use — and avoid — in talking about reducing injury and death from firearms. 

How we wrote this guide

BMSG’s process for understanding and reframing narratives is iterative and grounded in our expertise in the field. For this project, we built upon what we have learned working with communities and studying media narratives over 30 years and gathered data in multiple ways, including through media analyses, systematic reviews of advocacy materials and existing public opinion polling, and interviews and listening sessions designed to center the experiences of those who are most deeply involved in prevention work. Any unattributed quotations in this guide come from those interviews or from conversations we had at meetings and conferences; they are unattributed to protect the anonymity of participants. 

An important part of our research included message testing. We partnered with Lake Research Partners (LRP), a polling firm with deep experience in and knowledge of messaging around firearms and firearm policies, to develop and test messages about community-led approaches to preventing injury and death from firearms. 

To learn more about what we did, see our methods. 

A word from our funders

In the wake of the tragic mass shooting in San Bernardino in 2015, community leaders and funders across California came together to recognize the urgent need for a collective response to the growing firearm violence epidemic. From these efforts, the Hope and Heal Fund emerged as the first and only fund solely dedicated to reducing firearm injuries and trauma in California.

Since its launch in December 2016, the Hope and Heal Fund has invested over $7 million in identifying, supporting, and scaling best practices and strategic solutions to reduce all forms of firearm injuries, including suicide, domestic violence, and community violence. Our mission is to lift up and support local community efforts to reduce violence and push innovative strategies with a systems change approach, ensuring our systems are more equitable and responsive to addressing firearm violence and suicide.

Since 2017, our collaboration with Berkeley Media Studies Group has focused on transforming the media narrative around firearm violence and suicide, ensuring that communities receive authentic, resonant messages that highlight and support local solutions.

Through this partnership, we have taken significant steps to understand and influence public narratives around firearm violence by evaluating news coverage, conducting deep listening sessions with community leaders, overseeing public opinion polling, and synthesizing our findings into actionable strategies.

That collaboration led to the message guide you’re reading now. Our goal is to enhance the media skills and increase the capacity of community leaders, so they can effectively tell their own stories and highlight the unique solutions that work in their communities. As you engage with this resource, we invite you to see it as part of a broader vision for a safer, healthier California — one where all communities have the tools they need to prevent firearm violence before it starts.

This guide is a reflection of our commitment to collaboration, innovation, and narrative change in the fight to end firearm violence, and we are honored to partner with BMSG in this critical work.

How does the news frame messages about firearms? 

An important step for effective communication is understanding the context in which they are received: Messages about firearms are never shared in a vacuum. Their meaning comes not only from what the sender intends but also from how the receiver integrates the new information with what they already know and believe. It’s helpful, then, to understand the background against which audiences form their opinions about firearms and what to do about them. This section of the guide explains how audiences’ existing knowledge come together with the information environment (like news coverage) to influence how they interpret messages about firearms and firearm access. With this in mind, you can anticipate potential roadblocks, plan for how to correct misinformation, and identify strategic communication opportunities.

What do people believe about firearms? 

There are no blank slates when it comes to communicating about firearms. The ideas that people already hold in their minds affect how they perceive efforts to prevent or address injury and death from firearms. It only takes a few cues, like a word or a phrase, to activate preconceived — and often unconscious — notions about an issue. For example, consider terms like “firearm safety” or “gun safety.” What ideas do these terms activate for you? Some people might think about legislation, policies, and programs that government and community actors should lead — a mindset about shared accountability. For others, like many of the firearm owners we worked with, it might spur thoughts about personal responsibility, like individual actions to safely store and use firearms. 

Many groups have studied the beliefs and values that people hold that help them understand firearms and access to firearms. Broadly, research shows that:

• Americans are deeply concerned about violence involving firearms, and particularly about mass shootings.^21,22,23
• Americans are divided in their opinions about whether firearms keep people safer or make them more vulnerable.^23,24
• Many people support solutions that can prevent injury and death from firearms. However, people are deeply divided in their thinking about federal firearm legislation, with many believing that federal policy efforts are ineffective at best.^23,24
• Although no group is a monolith, audiences do tend to report differing opinions based on various demographic and social factors such as race, gender, firearm ownership status, political affiliation, or level of education. For example, beliefs about the lethality of firearms are also closely tied to where a person lives: Our research in California with Lake Research Partners shows that people in rural areas are less likely to believe that the presence of — and access to — firearms highly increase the risk of death in domestic violence incidents or suicide attempts. 

Additionally, Americans understand different kinds of violence and harm involving firearms in markedly different ways:

Firearms and community violence: Research on community violence has focused on “gang violence,” youth-related crime, and the criminal justice system — and indeed, in our research with Lake Research Partners, respondents regularly associated firearms with gang violence. Media depictions of boys and men of color are distorted and paint them as criminals,²⁵ bolstering public support for punitive solutions.²⁶ However, over time, public opinion has shifted toward rehabilitation, prevention, and reintegration within the criminal justice system.

Firearms and domestic violence: Our research with Lake Research Partners revealed that many people in California are unaware of the true magnitude of domestic violence involving firearms — 4 out of 10 people polled, for example, incorrectly believed firearms were only rarely or never used in domestic violence situations. However, when people are aware of the connections between domestic violence and firearms, research shows very high levels of support among the general public and firearm owners for policies to remove firearms from those accused or convicted of domestic violence.²⁷ However, these views vary across gender: Women may see firearm removal in the context of domestic violence as a way to prevent any further harm, while men view it as punishment for using firearms inappropriately.²⁸

Firearms and suicide: The relationship between access to firearms and suicide has historically been poorly understood, despite ample data connecting the two.^2,29,30 Most people see suicide as a matter of individual behavior, unconnected to firearm access:^31,32,33 Our research with Lake Research Partners, for example, found that respondents regularly associated the term “firearm suicide” with mental health.

The way we discuss firearms and related violence shapes how audiences understand the problem and what to do about it. Communication problems can arise when the messages we develop don’t take into account our audience’s thoughts and experiences. 

One of the most deeply rooted mindsets, or ideologies, in American society is individualism, which emphasizes personal choices and resolve. The idea is that if you work hard, you will succeed, and conversely if you fail, it’s your own fault.³⁴ For most people, individualism is the starting point for any conversation about how to solve a problem. If no alternative is offered, many people’s minds will go there first. Rugged individualism is so deeply ingrained in dominant culture that often people will focus only on personal choices and failings — and ignore how systems, institutions, or social norms affect what happens — even when they see evidence that there might be other factors to consider.³⁴

Conversations about firearms often reinforce this individualistic ideology in part because firearms themselves are so closely tied to ideas about self-protection, self-reliance, and what it means to be an American. To quote one prevention expert we spoke with, “There’s a mythology around firearms — that has grown from the marketing — about this mythical white man who is the sort of creator of the country, the pioneer spirit.” 

When it comes to firearms, the focus on individuals often prevents people from being able to envision what communities or institutions can and should do to be part of solving the problem. Additionally, important pieces of context — like structural racism and the extent to which safety is not distributed equally — are less visible and, therefore, harder to name and address. As one interviewee observed, most current conversations about firearms don't illustrate that related patterns in injury and death have “been passed down from enslavement and colonization,” obscuring “the historical ways that [violence] has been passed down to us.”

What are news (or story) frames? 

One of the reasons we’re interested in understanding dominant cultural beliefs surrounding firearms is because they influence how people interpret news coverage. At the same time, news coverage shapes people’s perspectives on firearms. 

Journalists’ decisions about what issues to cover and how to portray or frame them affect the public’s understanding of the world around us. Thorough reporting can raise the profile of an issue like firearms, while problems not covered by the news media are often neglected and remain largely outside public discourse and policy debate.^7,8,9 News frames also influence whose perspectives are seen as credible and valuable, and which solutions are elevated or ignored.^3,4 

We typically observe two types of framing in news coverage, sometimes on their own but often together.^35,36

Portrait framing (sometimes called “episodic framing”) centers on an individual person or a particular incident of violence. Portrait stories reinforce the default frame, which holds individuals responsible both for creating the problem and solving it. This approach makes it harder for audiences to see and imagine broader, systemic solutions that can make everyone safer. It can also make violence feel inevitable since portrait stories typically don’t include language about solutions. Most news stories are portrait frames.

Landscape framing (sometimes called “thematic framing”), on the other hand, illustrates the broader context (or “landscape”) in which individual incidents occur. Landscape stories can help audiences see the systems and structures that increase the risks of firearm injuries and deaths, along with system-level interventions that could prevent or reduce harm. Stories that include people but also bring the landscape into view help expand the conversation about who is responsible for causing — and solving — problems. Stories that embed portraits within wider landscapes help shift an audience’s focus solely from personal culpability to bigger questions about community, institutional, and government accountability.

What are news frames about firearms?

When we look at frames in news coverage, we can learn what the public might know or not know about firearms and firearm-related injuries and deaths, particularly if the news is their main source of information. News framing can be particularly powerful when it comes to issues related to firearms,^37,38,39 in part because research shows that the more media depicting violence a person consumes, the more likely they are to believe the world to be a dangerous place, react from fear, and support punitive policies.⁴⁰ According to one interviewee, news about firearms acts like a “background feeder telling us it's dangerous out there.”

As part of the process of developing this guide, BMSG explored how community violence involving firearms, domestic violence involving firearms, and firearm suicide were framed in California news coverage. Our first analysis explored the content of California print news and photographs from 2017. Our second report focused on the volume of print news published in California from 2020-2021. In addition, this second analysis explored how firearm injuries and deaths caused by police — a key element to be considered in any conversation about violence for many communities — appeared in the news.⁴¹

Patterns across all news about firearms 

Overall, our analyses showed that across issues:

• News was driven by distinct incidents (“portrait framing”). Stories focused narrowly on isolated, high-profile incidents of crime and violence and frequently highlighted the emotional and physical impacts on individual victims and their families. 
• The criminal justice system dominated the news in the sources quoted. Stories relied on quotes from police and other representatives of the criminal justice system. 
• Solutions — including community-led solutions — were absent. The emphasis on individual incidents made it harder to show what schools, faith communities, businesses, advocates, and community groups were doing to prevent injury and deaths from firearms. When they appeared, solutions, and responsibility for putting them in place, were frequently situated within the criminal justice system, such as arrests, trials, or police investigations.

Patterns in news about community firearm violence

• Community-level violence and police shootings dominated the coverage of firearm violence, and coverage increased over time.
• Stories about community violence occasionally quoted people with lived experience, like victims of firearm injuries and family and friends of victims. 
• Many stories about community violence involving firearms included language that framed people involved in violence as menacing, threatening, or beyond help — a typical article called people accused of community violence with firearms “criminals and crazies.”⁴²
• An analysis of photos that accompany news stories showed that people of color, particularly men, were overwhelmingly portrayed as perpetrators of community violence. In contrast, white individuals, primarily male-identified people, appeared in photos often as police or other representatives of the criminal justice system.

Patterns in news about domestic violence involving firearms

• Stories about domestic violence involving firearms didn't appear as often as stories about community violence, though the coverage did increase over time. 
• Stories about domestic violence involving firearms were unique in that advocacy group members, mental health professionals, and researchers were quoted to expand the frame to provide additional context. 
• Coverage emphasized individual choices in stories about domestic violence by reinforcing blame and stigma of victims or casting doubt on survivors’ stories. 
• In news about domestic violence and firearms, all photos of alleged perpetrators were men, and the majority were men of color. Most victims of domestic abuse whose photos appeared in the news were female, and half of the victims pictured were women of color.

Patterns in news about firearm suicide

• Stories about firearm suicide appeared far less frequently than coverage of any other issue we studied, though the overall amount of coverage did increase over time.
• Stories about firearm suicide were more likely than stories about other issues to “expand the frame” to describe contextual factors, such as income inequality or limited access to mental health care.
• Stories about firearm suicide more often included quotes from researchers or mental health providers than did stories about other issues we studied. 

Although there are well-documented recommendations for reporting on suicide that advise against sharing graphic details about the incident, our analysis showed that fully one-fifth of articles about suicide included extremely explicit details about the circumstances of the death.

Your turn:

Identifying frames

What are some of the dominant news frames around firearms — and harm from firearms — in your community? 

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm your answers.

How can we reframe? 

Reporters are always looking for a compelling story, and those often start with a portrait frame. Advocates want to provide compelling messages about community-led work that tells a story while expanding the frame to include the landscape that holds that story's outcome. 

Shifting deeply entrenched ideologies, particularly about an issue as politically fraught and personally meaningful as firearms, is challenging. Fortunately, framing techniques can help. We can leverage them by: 

• Grounding our communication work in overall strategies focused on changing systems rather than on punishing people, and centering communities too often left out of the frame. 
• “Pulling back the lens” to show the landscape in which violence occurs, the community-led solutions that are possible, and the values that ground prevention, treatment, and healing efforts.
• Expanding the media narrative by pitching articles and telling stories about issues that are too often left out, like prevention efforts, healing, and community innovation. 
• Developing and delivering messages that keep the focus on community-led efforts to prevent violence, support survivors, promote healing, and center the people closest to the the problems, and the solutions.
• Bringing new voices to the foreground of the media conversation, and ensuring they have the support they need to speak — and keep speaking — as leaders, agents of change, and experts.

In summary

There are no blank slates when it comes to firearms. Americans have many deeply held beliefs, some of them contradictory, and many rooted in rugged individualism and personal responsibility. These mindsets can make it harder to see the promise of community-led solutions, or to explore the realities of systemic racial inequities, since they focus so narrowly on individual behavior change and culpability. 

Most stories about firearms are framed like portraits that reinforce disconnection from systems and communities by focusing on the details of specific incidents of injury and death from firearms. Fortunately, there are many ways to expand media frames to illustrate the landscape in which violence and suicide occur, center community action around prevention and healing, and center racial equity.

What’s the change you want to make? 

Communicating effectively helps us get where we want to go. But you can’t figure out what you are going to say until you decide what you want to do. Language is important, but it’s not first. Messaging is never first: it flows from the specific policies, cultural shifts, or programs you want to see, not the other way around. 

To be persuasive, messages must be rooted in the change you’re seeking — and communicated against the backdrop of the world around us. For example, when it comes to talking about strategies to reduce injury and death from firearms, you may find yourself being asked to assuage doubts about a recent incident of violence. That might change the words you use or how you respond to questions from a reporter or a funder, but it likely won’t change your overall strategy for the change you want to see in your community. 

BMSG's tried-and-true approach is to use the Layers of Strategy, which helps advocates think through the components of a communications strategy. To develop your overall strategy, determine:

1. What is the problem you want to solve, and how do you want to solve it? 
2. Who has the power to make that change and what should they do? 
3. Who can you mobilize to exert pressure and advocate for your cause? What’s the next step they can take to be part of the solution? 

The answers to these questions will determine not only what actions you take, but also how you communicate about them. 

What is the problem you want to solve, and how do you want to solve it? 

If you are reading this guide, you almost certainly want to prevent violence, but naming “violence prevention” as your aim is too broad. The more specific your goal is, the better. 

Sometimes when people hear the words “communication” or “media,” the first thing they think about is raising awareness about their issue. That’s understandable, especially since when it comes to firearms, many people aren’t aware of how common certain kinds of death and injury are. Our work with Lake Research Partners, for example, showed that many Californians are surprised by the frequency with which firearms are used in suicide or in incidents of domestic violence. But what happens once your audience is more aware of the problem? What do you want them to do with that information? 

To develop your strategy, consider:

• What type of firearm injuries or harm are you focused on? 
• What are the root causes or context for those forms of injuries or harm ? 
• Are there examples of where and how your proposed solution has been successful?
• How does your solution benefit people who have been directly harmed — and how could it benefit people who haven’t been directly impacted by firearm violence or suicide?

These kinds of questions are key to engaging your audience (be it community residents, funders, opinion leaders, members of a school board, etc.) in a specific solution or set of solutions and driving real, sustained change.

Promising practices that can help ground overall strategy

The good news is that people are hungry for solutions that go beyond legislation or increasing police responses. We’ve worked with colleagues and experts to identify and explore community-led work happening around California. In the process, we realized that, although different communities are pursuing various areas of work tailored to their unique contexts and needs, many strategies are rooted in shared core approaches — what we call “promising practices” — because, as one expert noted, there “isn’t one magic solution for safety.” Among the solutions communities are pursuing to reduce injury and death in California are:

Whatever solution you seek (whether it’s one of these, or something else that’s grounded in your community’s needs and strengths) remember:

In other words, think big, but remember that even the most transformative changes tend to happen one step at a time. While many solutions can make a message appealing to many people, when there are too many different options being weighed at the same time, audiences may become torn about what solutions to prioritize. This produces a “formula for inaction,” making it harder to mobilize people. As Lake Research Partners President and political strategist Celinda Lake has said, “You can have it all, but not all at once.”

Your turn:

Naming problems & solutions

• What's the problem?
• What's the solution?
• Why is this a good approach?

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm your answers.

Who has the power to make change? What should they do? 

No matter how carefully you’ve considered your problem and solution or how precise you’ve been in crafting your message, it won’t lead to change unless it is tailored to and reaches the right people: the person or people with the ability to make change (also called your audience). Your key audience could be large or small; it depends on what you want to accomplish, who has decision-making power, and whose voices would be helpful in agitating for change. 

Zeroing in on specific groups makes your work more efficient because you don’t have to educate everyone about why your approach is worthwhile. Instead, your goal might be to persuade a few key decision-makers. From our message testing work, we learned that Californians want their state and federal elected officials and local officials and community leaders to take action to reduce injuries and deaths from firearms. 

With that in mind, ask yourself: “Who is, or should be, responsible for making the change I want to see at the local level?” Think about funders, local policymakers, and decision-making bodies (like Boards of Directors or Chambers of Commerce). Be as specific as you can about identifying and naming the person or people with the ability to make change. Think about questions like: 

• Is your main audience a person or a group of people? 
• What is your relationship with them? 
• What motivates that audience to act? 
• What tactics might be most effective to reach your audience?

Also remember that audiences have different starting places for how they understand different issues involving firearms. For example, our message testing showed that: 

• Most Californians associate community violence involving firearms with “gang violence.” 
• Many Californians are less aware that domestic violence involving firearms is a significant problem. 
• Firearm suicide tends to make people think about mental health problems and solutions rather than issues related to firearm access. 

These are just a few examples of the specific nuances that affect how audiences understand different types of violence, harm, and trauma involving firearms, and each one could have a significant impact on how your message is understood. You know your issue — and your audience — best: Keep these kinds of unique framing challenges in mind as you consider your audience and build your strategy.

Example: Domestic violence involving firearms 

For example, imagine you want to engage local leaders around a policy relating to domestic violence and firearms. You know that your audience may not be as aware of the true prevalence of the problem — and potentially less likely to believe that taking action is critical. As you build your overall strategy, start planning for how you will illustrate the depth and urgency of the problem in a way that’s most meaningful to your audience — for example, by using local data or stories.

Your turn:

Identifying your main audience

• Who is the audience you want to reach?
• What do you want them to do?

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm your answers.

Who can be mobilized to influence your main audience? 

We often hear, “Violence affects everyone,” which means that almost any group you can think of could be mobilized to apply pressure to your audience. Who has the power to influence your main audience? You can think of this group as potential allies. 

To make each potential group’s role more concrete, ask yourself what each could do. What role could different groups play, either in a visible, outward-facing way, or in terms of providing background assistance that could help move the work forward? What role do members of these groups want to play?

Here are a few prompts to get your brainstorm started:

• People who own firearms could …
• People who live with firearm owners could … 
• Medical professionals could …. 
• Legal professionals could … 
• Faith community leaders could … 
• School officials could …
• Funders could … 
• Youth could … 

You will know your ask to potential allies is specific enough if you can answer the five Ws listed below (though you won’t necessarily need to include all five in every message):

• Who should take action? 
• What should they do? (e.g. sign a petition, attend a community meeting, deliver testimony at a council meeting, etc.)
• When should they do it? (Is there a specific date and time? A particular season or awareness month or week that would make the action more newsworthy?)
• Where will it happen? 
• Why is this the right approach?

Here again, consider the specific frames or beliefs about your issue area that your allies might hold and how those might affect what you say and how you say it. What specific framing issues — like stigma against people involved or misinformation about the prevalence or cause of the problem — might affect them, and how can you plan for them? 

Your overall strategy will guide how you communicate about the work you’re doing and why it matters. To make the work more tangible, put the pieces together.

Your turn:

Identifying potential allies

• Who are your allies?
• What should they do?
• By when?
• Why?

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm your answers.

Example: Addressing community violence involving firearms 

For example, imagine that after meeting with local leaders, community members, researchers, and others, you determine that in your community, prevention programs, treatment centers, and violence intervention sites are unequally distributed — and many of the communities impacted have the fewest sites available with resources to support promising practices that keep people safe. When your group investigates how decisions are made about where to situate these sites, you learn that there’s very little data available about the neighborhoods most impacted. There’s some data available at the county level, and even some data at the city level — but the people closest to the work know that differences by blocks, streets, and neighborhoods won’t be captured by that data. 

A community member tells you about a promising practice — community-led data collection to document firearm injuries and fatalities, as well as the absence of healing, prevention, and support sites. During community listening sessions, this emerges as a strategy that people are excited about and believe will make a difference. What’s your overall strategy for helping your community get the data it needs to make life saving decisions?

Your turn:

Putting it all together

• What's the problem?
• What's the solution? And why is this a good approach?
• Who is your main audience, and what could they do?
• Who are potential allies, and what could they do?

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm your answers.

In summary

Message is never first — it flows from your overall strategy. Your overall strategy is fluid, but essentially it describes the change we want to see in the world and how we think it will happen. To develop your overall strategy, consider questions like: 

• What problem do you want to solve, and how?
• Who has the power to make change, and what should they do?
• Who needs to be mobilized to effect change, and how?

What is your message strategy? 

Your overall strategy guides everything that you do, and media frames around firearm injuries and deaths can shape your audience’s “starting point” for conversations about safety and community-led approaches. But what about your message? How will you — or your messenger — frame the problem and solution, convey the values that matter, and convince your audience to act?

To develop your message strategy, think about: 

• Who needs to hear your message? 
• Who should convey your message? 
• What should they say? 

Who is the audience you want to reach through the media? 

Before you build your message, it is important to return to your overall strategy and map out who will hear it and who will deliver it. Remember that different groups will have different starting points for approaching this issue, which means that they may not interpret the same message in the same way. While you can’t know every audience member’s background and experience with violence involving firearms, you can anticipate some differences and keep those variations in mind when crafting your overall strategy.

Think about your audience and potential allies you want to reach. Your main audience for a local effort to reduce death or injury from firearms might mean:

• A funder 
• A local policymaker or group of policymakers (like the city council) 
• A local leader or group of local leaders (like the Chamber of Commerce) 
• The decision-making body for an institution (like a school board or the Board of Directors for a community-based organization)

Potential allies can influence your audience. Allies might include: 

• Voters or residents
• Community activists 
• Homeowners
• Business people 
• “The general public” 

Media is not an “audience.” Instead, the news media can be an important way to reach key audiences (particularly opinion leaders) — you decide whether that is the case or not as part of your media strategy.

Whoever your audiences are, they will receive messages about firearms against a backdrop of strong — but divided — attitudes about firearms. To learn more about attitudes toward community-led strategies for preventing death and injury from firearms, we worked with Lake Research Partners, a polling firm with deep experience in and knowledge of messaging around firearms and firearm policies, to develop and test messages about community-led approaches to preventing injury and death from firearms with a representative sample of California residents in 2022. We found: 

• Communities across the state had a high level of concern about death and injury from firearms: in fact, more than three-quarters of adults we polled statewide (77%) identified firearm violence and firearm suicide in their communities as a major cause for concern. 
• Perhaps because they started with such a high level of concern, we didn’t see big changes in people’s attitudes when presented with messaging about preventing firearm injuries and deaths. In fact, fewer than 1 in 10 adults shifted their views over the course of the survey. In other words, people already have fairly strong, preexisting beliefs about firearms and why they matter, against which all other messages and communication will be received. 
• Different communities also have very different “starting places” for what they believe about firearms — and what they think should be done to keep people safe. For example, we observed differences across political lines, with respondents who identified as Republican showing more support than Democrats for protecting the right to own firearms. 
• Across the board, people of color were more likely than white respondents to be concerned about the prevalence of injury and death from firearms both before and after hearing prevention messages. 
• Firearm ownership plays an important role in how messages about firearms are heard and understood: during message testing, we found that firearm owners were among those most likely to be swayed by messages supporting more strategies to fund prevention efforts. However, many firearm owners reported feeling excluded from or dismissed by the mainstream “violence movement.” As one owner observed, “I don’t like arguments with people who say ‘[firearm owners] don’t care about kids’ … I don’t even want to talk to [that person] anymore.” 

Of course, firearm owners are more diverse now than ever because during the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a large spike in firearm ownership, and demographics of first-time firearm owners changed to include more women of all ethnic backgrounds, Black adults, Asian and Pacific Islander communities, LGBTQIA+ communities, and others.^{18,21,22,43,44,45} Although people may own firearms for many reasons (like hunting, collecting, and connecting with family), for many firearm owners, self-protection looms large, particularly among communities of color that experience police surveillance.^46,47,48 While many firearm owners don’t trust federal policies,²¹ people of color who own firearms also question whether public safety systems will truly protect them in light of well-documented systemic racism. For example, one owner who is of Japanese and Chinese descent shared his belief that, in the height of the pandemic, “Asian Americans are realizing that you can't just call 911 and have the police save you.” 

Communication tip:

State shared goals

One way to bring firearm owners into a conversation about a shared goal of safety for families and communities is to acknowledge the many reasons people own firearms and how important they are in many communities.

For example, you might use phrases like:

• "We know firearms are important to many people for a lot of different reasons ..." or
• "People in this community own firearms for many different reasons — whatever those reasons are, and whether or not you yourself are an owner, we're all committed to keeping each other safe ..."

Your turn:

Identifying your audience

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm possible audiences and outcomes for your campaign — consult your overall strategy so you stay focused on your key audience and potential allies.

Who delivers the message? 

Your message will be received differently depending on who delivers it. You may want to choose and train a variety of spokespeople to deliver the message in diverse contexts. The different combinations of potential speakers are your “messenger mix.” Different messengers may be more or less effective in specific situations. 

Whoever they are, for a messenger to be persuasive, the audience has to identify with them. That is, your audience needs to see them as someone they share experiences or values with. For instance, we found that rural Californians are more likely than people living in urban areas to say that “they or someone in their family or close friend group has been a victim of gun violence” (41%) — so if you are focused on communicating with a rural audience, you may find it effective to seek out messengers who can directly speak to the audience’s personal experiences of loss.

If your audience does not identify with the messenger, even the most powerful story will fall flat. Ask yourself: What values or experiences will my audience share with our messenger?

Example: Domestic violence involving firearms

“We have to look at who is serving the community …. [they’re a] trusted factor. We have a conference [where] we go get men from the community that have domestic violence experience, assault experience [who] are then talking to the boys and men in that room to build trust.” 

Remember that your messengers, whoever they are, will need support and training. Particularly if they have joined your effort because of the pain of their personal experience, as many violence and firearm suicide prevention advocates have, we must honor and protect that experience and be sure everyone we are working with has the support they need to contribute.

Potential speakers for messages about community violence involving firearms

Potential speakers for messages about domestic violence involving firearms

Potential speakers for messages about firearm suicide

We know that messages from the “gun violence prevention” movement that gain media traction have often been delivered by white people — as one long-standing advocate, Shannon Watts, the founder of Moms Demand Action, herself a white woman noted, “because I was a suburban white mom … I was considered credible by fellow white women, the media, and lawmakers.”

While Ms. Watts may have been a credible messenger for some audiences, others have failed to grasp the extent of the problem and the range of viable solutions because the “messenger mix” was so limited. We know that credible, powerful messages need to come from the people most impacted by the problem and most knowledgeable about solutions — many of whom are people of color, whose work has too often been minimized or made invisible. Again and again, we heard people talk about the need to center “[people who are] most impacted, who're not being represented at the table … not speaking for them but uplifting their experiences and their proposed solutions as strategies.“

Communication tip:

Groups centering BIPOC communities

Several organizations are leading efforts to ensure that people of color are centered and elevated in conversations about firearms, violence, and what to do to keep communities safe, including: 

• The Community Justice Action Fund
• The Marshall Project
• The Philadelphia Center for Gun Violence Reporting
• Ujima
• The Culturally Responsive Domestic Violence Network
• Cure Violence Global
• The Vera Institute of Justice

Your turn:

Selecting messengers

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm possible messengers and the values or experiences they might share with your audience.

What do messages include?

We know that strong messages about community efforts to reduce injuries and fatalities from firearms: 

• Evoke shared values
• Name a problem — and a solution — that "match" 
• Show "the landscape"
• Include a call to action that helps people see what they can do next
• Show what success looks like or can look like 
• Acknowledge complexity and discomfort
• Use plain language

Evoke shared values 

People’s deeply held values — the principles that guide how they think the world should work — are what they connect with. Values are the “spark” that turns communication into action. A values statement isn’t the whole message or even the lengthiest part of it, but values are important and, whenever possible, should lead your statement: our research found that, across audiences, messages that named core values early swayed respondents the most.

Some of the core values that resonate with Californians when it comes to reducing death and injury from firearms are:

Your turn:

Identify shared values

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm values that resonate for you, and for your audience. Are there places where they align?

Name a specific problem and solution — and make sure they ‘match’ 

What’s the problem you want to solve? What’s the solution? How people understand the problem will affect what kinds of solutions they think are possible. We want people to understand that our solutions are possible, so how you frame your problem is key. 

To make your statement of the problem clear and understandable, focus on just one aspect. Once that portion of the problem is being addressed, you can shift your message and goals to focus on another piece, based on your overall strategy. It can be tempting to try and say everything that you know about the problem any time you have the opportunity to talk about it, but remember: you can’t be comprehensive and strategic at the same time! 

It’s important to define the step you want your main audience to take and to make sure that your solution aligns directly with the problem as you’ve defined it. That is, make sure to match your problem and solution so that it is clear why the solution is the logical response to the problem. Just saying, for example, “firearm injuries and deaths are a problem in California” might not make audiences immediately think of your solution as a logical next step.

Example: Firearm suicide 

Imagine you are making the case for educating firearm owners and their families on safe storage in the home and voluntary offsite storage (storage away from the home) as a way to reduce the risk of suicide. Try framing your problem and solution like this:

Your turn:

Pairing a problem and a solution 

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm: What do you want your audience to do? Then, describe the problem you are trying to solve in a way that anticipates that solution. 

Show “the landscape”

Deciding which piece of the problem you want to emphasize will depend on your overall strategy. Once you have narrowed the problem, you can choose the information to highlight in your message that will make the “landscape” visible — that is, the context (systems, structures, etc.) in which individual events occur. Illustrating the “landscape” in which injury and death from firearms happen is an important step toward helping people see that systemic solutions like laws and government funding are possible and necessary. 

Table 1 lists facts that may be particularly credible: some were included in our message testing research, while others have been particularly compelling in informal interviews, social media campaigns, and elsewhere. These, or facts like them, could be part of how you illustrate the landscape.

Remember that sharing data, while helpful, is not enough by itself: data can distance people from the problem rather than draw them in or raise concern. As one advocate noted, “On their own, I think what the risk is, folks think, ‘...yeah, it is horrible, but it doesn’t impact me’…” So, along with facts, people need a unified, clear solution and “intensity” — strength, commitment, and passion — to increase their likelihood to act to prevent firearm injuries and deaths. 

Finally, our research revealed that many people have limited awareness of the true scope of firearm suicide or domestic violence involving firearms. When it comes to these issues, showing the landscape might involve drawing explicit connections to illustrate the magnitude and consequences of the problem. For example, you might use phrases like: 

• “One of the biggest threats to safety in our communities is domestic violence involving firearms”
• “Many people aren’t aware that firearm suicide is a leading cause of firearm fatality”

Your turn:

Showing “the landscape”

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm: What pieces of information will help your audience see the landscape of the problem — and the solution?

Include a call to action that helps your audience see what they can do next

It’s important to name a solution to show people that change is possible, but also to help the audience see the role they can play in making that solution a reality. As one leader we spoke to noted, “[people want to know]: what can I do to be part of the solution? …. [It’s important] to empower the individual to go learn more, take some action.” 

A specific call to action gives your audience something to do to be part of the solution and helps them have agency over building a better shared future for all of us. So, what’s the next step you want your main audience and potential allies to take, and why? You will know your call to action is specific enough if you can answer these questions (though you won’t necessarily need to include all of them in every message):

• Who should take action? 
• What should they do? (e.g., pass a resolution (main audience); allocate funding (allies); visit a website (allies); sign a petition (allies); share a link (allies); attend an event (allies); deliver testimony (allies); etc.)
• When should they do it? (Is there a specific date and time? A particular season or awareness month or week that would make the action more newsworthy?)
• Where will it happen? 
• Why is this the right approach?

Example: Domestic violence involving firearms 

For example, let’s imagine you are trying to encourage your local school board to invest in healthy relationships education in middle and high schools as a step towards preventing intimate partner violence, including intimate partner violence involving firearms.

Whatever your call to action, it should help your audience see and believe in the shared benefits of taking action — for example, a future where communities are safer and where everyone can take action to care for themselves and their loved ones.

Your turn:

Creating a call to action 

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm what you want your audience and potential allies to do next.

Show what success looks like — or can look like

People need to know that reducing injury and death from firearms is possible — and they also need to know that community-led strategies work to move us toward a world where safety for every community is real. If you have measures of success that illustrate why your proposal is the right one, use them. These may include data, stories, examples, or metaphors — think about what will connect with your audience based on your overall strategy. 

You might use local outcomes, or examples from similar communities, such as: 

• Community violence
  • Fewer instances of police shootings; 
  • A decrease in the population who return to prison after release; 
• Firearm suicide
  • More use of voluntary safe storage facilities for firearms; 
  • Increased enrollment in firearm safety classes;
• Domestic violence involving firearms 
  • More reports from clients accessing domestic violence prevention services that they feel safer in their housing or family situation. 

Even if you don’t have local indicators, a strong message should paint a picture of what it looks like when we succeed. Your description of success could be tied to the way you characterize safety, or it could paint a picture of a community your audience would want to be part of — as when Amber Goodwin, founder of Community Justice, described a landmark Supreme Court decision as a ruling that will “protect families and communities for generations to come.” 

The vision of success doesn’t have to be dramatic; in fact, overly dramatic statements may invite skepticism. Some people in our survey called statements about eradicating violence completely “utopian” or “not in tune with the moment …. [where] people are hurting.”  Instead, try phrases like:

• “We have an opportunity to make sure everyone in our community knows more — and can do more — to keep themselves and their loved ones safe”;
• “We can be successful in breaking cycles of violence in our communities”; 
• “This is an important action we can take together to stop violence in our communities before it starts.”

Your turn:

Illustrating success

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm how can you illustrate success. For example, will you share data? Are there other ways you can share a vision for success?

Be prepared to acknowledge complexity and discomfort 

As we have seen, when it comes to firearms, there are no “blank slates.” People you communicate with will likely have some fears, anxieties, or other negative emotions about the issue, or direct experience with firearm injury or death. Some of the possible doubts or negative feelings that you may encounter are:

• Feelings of overwhelm in the face of competing priorities;
• Doubts about the possibility of success, particularly if people are focused on federal policy rather than community efforts; and
• Resistance to policy solutions, particularly in communities that have historically been harmed by government action or police.

Audiences who receive messages that acknowledge the feelings they may have are more likely to remain open to hearing more instead of dismissing the speaker and message. Many people we spoke with dismissed “feel good” statements as unrealistic or out of touch (though, of course, there are some audiences for which that kind of aspirational language will be powerful — refer to your overall strategy). Statements that acknowledge feelings of difficulty and futility are far more effective — they include phrases like “I know this is a hard topic to talk about,” or “It can be overwhelming to think about solving a problem this big.” 

As one community leader summed it up, “We need to change the conversation and not shame and blame people for their lived experiences … or how they show up.”

Example: Community violence involving firearms 

Imagine you are making the case to your city council to invest in local data collection efforts to improve prevention efforts. Here’s one way you could address potential concerns your audience has about competing priorities.

No matter how effectively you communicate, people’s complicated and uncomfortable feelings about firearm violence and suicide often mean that they are left with lingering doubts. The good news is you do not have to resolve all of those doubts or bring people into complete agreement. Acknowledging those feelings can help people remain open to what the messenger has to say next: as one advocate noted, “If you're not willing to sit through some discomfort …. there's no hope of us ever coming together.”

Your turn:

Identifying and addressing negative feelings

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm answers to the following questions: What are some barriers you might encounter? Think about issues like anxiety, skepticism, or overwhelm. How might you address those concerns?

Use plain language 

No matter who your audience is, it’s important that you (or your messenger) speak plainly and avoid “insider” language or jargon whenever possible (see the introduction for more information about the language we use in this guide). The shorthand that people who are very knowledgeable about your issue use with each other may not be accessible to people outside the field. In fact, many people we spoke with complained about the “high tech” or “ivory tower” language used to talk about prevention and healing efforts, and the importance of simplifying the language to include more people in the conversation. 

In general, plain language can help audiences understand complex ideas and come to agreement about the possibility of reducing injury and death from firearms. Though no one phrase is right in every case, one option is to describe the concept in plain language, or share concrete examples — even if that means you might need to use more words. Avoid acronyms whenever possible, and if you must use them, make sure to define them. 

Your turn:

Simplifying language

What are some terms that audiences might not immediately understand? How could you restate these terms in plain language? (If you’re not sure your language is clear enough, try explaining the concept to a friend or loved one who isn’t familiar with the topic area.) Use this Google sheet to draft your answers.

What should you do when time is limited? 

Ideally, you will be able to include every element of your message every time, but sometimes, you have limited time to share information (for example, in an interview with a reporter in which you want to provide a quick but powerful quote). When that happens remember: you simply can’t be comprehensive and strategic at the same time. 

With that in mind, what information should you plan to include? You’ll need to decide as you prepare for the interview because if you don’t choose, the reporter will, and the reporter might not choose correctly. That may feel frustrating, but when it comes to working with reporters, the constraints of time, word count, and attention are real and pressing. That’s why it is helpful to identify and repeat one key message about your solution and who needs to take action, so the reporter will have a concrete example, and you won’t deliver more than the reporter can use. 

In summary

There’s no one message — or even set of messages — that works all the time for everyone, but we can still construct messages that will help audiences see why community-led efforts to reduce death or injury from firearms are important, and how they can make them successful. At times it can feel difficult and frustrating — but we know from the research that carefully constructed messages can make a significant difference in how people view prevention and their role in it. 

In brief, we need to:

• start from a place of shared values; 
• be thoughtful, clear, and concrete about describing the problem and solution; 
• show the landscape;
• include a call to action; 
• Illustrate what success looks like or can look like; 
• Be prepared to acknowledge complex or negative feelings; and
• Use plain language.

When — and how — will you use the news?

Even the most thoughtfully crafted message won’t inform people — let alone produce change — unless it reaches your audience. In today’s always-on media environment, advocates have more choices than ever about what platforms they want to use to engage people and motivate them to act. On one hand, social channels, newsletters, and “owned” media like blogs and organizational websites allow advocates to bypass traditional power structures and send messages without going through editors and publishers. On the other hand, traditional media outlets remain important because they set the agenda for public debate and discussion. In fact, much of what people share on social media still originates from traditional print, digital, and broadcast news sources. In addition, these news outlets remain a primary source of information for a key audience in the movement to prevent violence: policymakers. News affects not only what issues are on policymakers’ radars but also how they think about an issue — for example, whose perspectives are seen as credible and valuable, which solutions are elevated or ignored, and how arguments are characterized.

Still, the choice of platform does not have to be either-or. Advocates may decide to use a combination of media types to reach their intended audiences. To guide this decision, consider the following questions: 

• In light of our overall strategy, is news media the best way to reach our audience?
• If not, what might work better? In some situations, for instance, delivering remarks at a meeting, base-building, or organizing an email campaign may be more effective. 
• If so, which outlets are most likely to reach our audience? 
• When would media attention have the biggest impact? 
• What strategies will we use to gain media attention? 
• How will we know when we’ve been successful — or need to change course? 

Let’s assume that you’ve decided news coverage is a good way to reach your main audience and potential allies. You have an overall strategy in place, are thinking about how to frame your work and have ideas about potential messengers. Now, let’s think about how journalists and news outlets can amplify those messages, how you can get those outlets’ attention, and how to support messengers as they work with reporters. Your organization's structure and your role within it will affect who needs to be involved in media outreach. In general, it's important to include communication staff early on, well in advance of the pitching process.

Identifying news outlets and reporters 

In the course of our research, we learned a lot about how people communicate about firearms and access to firearms in the state and around the country. But every community is unique, with its own political and media landscape, its own controversies and opportunities, and its own framing challenges. You know your community best, as well as its media environment and opportunities for — and barriers to — narrative change. If you’re not sure about how the media is covering the issue in your community, you can find out.

One way to keep track of how an issue is being framed is to monitor local news coverage to track patterns and explore opportunities to change the narrative. You may already have a good idea of which outlets are most likely to reach your key audience — whether it’s a policy-focused outlet like the Sacramento Bee, a site like The Trace that leads the way in reporting on issues specific to firearms and firearm violence, or a social media platform with posts that regularly get engagement from a group you’re trying to reach. 

If you don’t already have a media list to work from or aren’t sure which outlets might be the best ones to use to reach your key audiences, you can start by monitoring the media and creating a “listening dashboard.” A listening dashboard will help you identify which journalists, publications, or broadcasts are already doing a good job of covering the issue — and which ones could benefit from your feedback and expertise. Monitoring the media doesn’t mean paying close attention to all of the outlets, it means figuring out which outlets deserve your attention based on your overall strategy and audience.

To monitor the media, read, watch, and listen to the news regularly to get a sense of the media landscape that surrounds firearm-involved violence and suicide. Specifically:

• For a low-cost option, set up Google alerts, use news aggregators, or follow newsletters that compile stories.
• Designate someone on staff or in your coalition to read and assess the stories on a daily or weekly basis. 
• Look for any patterns in terms of whose voices or what aspects of the issue are being overrepresented or underrepresented. Doing so can help you figure out where to enter the conversation. 
• Track reporters who regularly write about firearms, violence, or related issues (like data, adverse childhood experiences, school safety, or other topics) in your community, and the outlets they work for. Include editorial writers, op-ed page editors, editorial cartoonists, and radio and TV producers.
• Add them to a media list that includes contact information — including their social media handles and whatever other information is available like email, phone, and outlet. Be sure to include journalists working for outlets that serve communities of color, such as media outlets that report in languages other than English.

Engaging journalists

Engaging the news media is about more than getting immediate news attention. It’s also important to build relationships with journalists who shape the media discussion. Journalists and their editors make daily decisions about which stories to cover and which to pass up. Whatever the story idea, practitioners and allies increase their chances of being selected for the news by developing relationships with reporters. After all, journalists can only tell stories about promising local practices to keep people safe if they know about the people and organizations doing that work. 

You can build and sustain relationships with journalists by: 

• meeting with reporters to introduce yourself and your organization so they can learn about the types of data and other information you can provide; 
• connecting with them on social media; 
• contacting journalists to compliment them on a story, provide information, and suggest ways to include it in future stories; and 
• inviting reporters to news conferences, community events, and other opportunities for news coverage. 

Building relationships with reporters can help you become a trusted source. That means being ready and willing to talk with journalists and share resources — and to do it on a tight deadline when journalists are covering breaking news. That requires developing media skills, including the ability to concisely frame your work and why it matters, even when time or wordcount is limited. 

Being a trusted source is worthwhile, even if it sometimes requires preparation. When they know and trust you, your work, and your networks, reporters will have somewhere to go for data and information when they have a story to tell, especially when they are on a tight deadline. 

Your turn:

Monitoring the media and engaging journalists

Here’s a template that you can adapt for your own media monitoring — tailor it to include columns for the things you are most interested in, such as:

• Organization (or partners) mentioned or quoted 
• Reach of publication
• Frames and language used
• Solutions presented or implied
• Assertions of responsibility for taking action

What to do when a reporter contacts you

Whether you have an established relationship with a reporter or are responding to a journalist you haven’t met, some simple steps can help you figure out what their needs are when they call you about a specific story.

If you understand a journalist’s needs, you will get better coverage of your issue, and the reporter will gain a reliable and valuable source.

Getting news coverage

Reporters won’t always reach out to you, but pitching stories persuasively increases the likelihood that reporters will follow up on the story idea.

As 60 Minutes producer Don Hewitt famously said, “Reporters don’t tell issues — they tell stories,” so people who want news attention must learn to craft their pitch with this in mind. For instance, the general topic of “violence” isn’t a story, but when someone is doing something to reduce or prevent injuries and fatalities, it is. Think about the elements of any story: a plot, a scene, and characters. Who will the characters be in your story about prevention? What will they do? Where will they do it? Where do they hope to end up? 

Creating news coverage 

• Brainstorm “hooks” that make your story newsworthy. Making your issue relevant to the media involves understanding what makes something newsworthy to their audience. One example could be using a seasonal news hook to create a pitch, for example, how concerns about violence involving firearms are reshaping the back-to-school season. Another could be elevating a surprising statistic that is relevant to many people but may not be well-known. In this article from The Kansas City Beacon, advocates from Missouri issued a report to highlight that in their state, 66% of suicides involve a firearm. (Learn more about the elements of newsworthiness and see examples from news about firearms and reducing firearm injury and death.) Whatever newsworthy hook you choose, remember to connect the story back to your overall strategy.
  
• Author an opinion piece. Known as op-eds, commentaries, or guest essays, opinion pieces are a relatively fast way to get published, as they are usually short (usually 600-700 words, depending on the outlet) and are often published within days or even hours of acceptance. Be sure to follow the editorial guidelines for the outlet you want to pitch to, and only pitch to one publication at a time. To learn more about op-eds, check out this tip sheet and worksheet.
  
• Release a report. If you belong to an organization that has the resources to issue reports or get research published in an academic journal, doing so can be an effective way to draw journalists in and become trusted sources for stories about reducing injury and death from firearms. In this example, U.S. News & World Report discussed the link between gentrification and firearm violence after an article came out on the subject in JAMA. Reports don’t have to be published in academic journals — they can be simple two- to three-page briefs issued by an organization.

From the news: Pitching stories to expand the narrative about domestic violence involving firearms

Although news coverage tends to underreport some types of violence and gives too little attention to potential solutions, advocates have still succeeded in using traditional and social media to elevate various aspects of violence prevention. One example comes from ACEs Too High, an online community that explores the intersection between childhood experiences and health.

In a recent blog post, publisher Jane Ellen Stevens examines how intervention programs can be used to prevent individuals who have abused their partners or family members from continuing to cause harm. The types of programs she discusses take a healing, rather than punitive, approach to disrupt domestic violence. They are highly successful: Rearrest rates for participants range from nearly zero to 8%. This is in contrast to rearrest rates of 12-60% for traditional programs.

Jane’s reporting is in-depth and nuanced. She:

• Identifies the specific problem she wants to address (Intervention programs that focus on blaming, shaming, and punishing people who have caused harm don’t work.)
• Explains the context for family violence (People who cause harm and people who experience harm come from the same “soup” — in fact, people who cause harm nearly always have experienced abuse themselves.)
• Describes the widespread benefits of interrupting the cycle of violence (Entire families and communities would experience healing.)
• Provides concrete examples of success (She includes data that show how effective the programs are and quotes people who have participated in them.) For example, Jane captured the voice of Ray Fisher who has firsthand experience both as a student and teacher of the program: “When I got out of prison and took the batterer intervention course in 2015, I taught everything I learned to my family members,” he said. “And I lived it so that I could demonstrate it for them with my wife, teach them how to live.”

Reacting to existing coverage

Another way to get reporters’ and editors’ attention is to comment on what is already being discussed in news coverage. You can: 

• Piggyback on existing news. Look for coverage that you can refer back to and either critique or expand on. Doing so can provide a compelling reason to reach out to journalists and suggest other stories or angles for them to consider.
• Write letters to the editor. This technique involves writing a direct response to an article that has been published recently (typically within the last 24-48 hours). Letters should be short and to the point, as many outlets have a word-count limit of 150-200 words. To write your own letter, check out this tip sheet and template.

From the news: Opportunities to piggyback off breaking news about firearm suicide and community violence involving firearms

In an article from nonprofit newsroom The Trace, titled “Can School Nurses Prevent Shootings? These Nurses Think So,” reporter Chip Brownlee engages school officials (primary audience) and their surrounding communities (secondary audience) in a conversation about taking a public health approach to school shootings. He shares the vision of Robin Cogan, a Camden, New Jersey school nurse who advocates adding gun locks to school nurse toolkits, alongside other essential items like epi-pens and inhalers.

“School nurses are on the front lines of all school emergencies, including school shootings,” said Cogan. “So why aren’t [we] on the front lines of prevention of school shootings?”

There are more than 100,000 school nurses throughout the United States, and they often already work closely with counselors, psychologists, and other professionals to identify conditions linked to violence and suicide risk. These include financial strain, abuse at home, and various forms of bullying.

 Advocates working on this issue can piggyback off of articles like this one to reach local  leaders in their own school district, or to amplify existing coverage through email, social media, and “owned media” like blogs.

Supporting authentic messengers

Six in 10 people living in the U.S. think it’s too easy to legally obtain a firearm in this country, according to survey data from the Pew Research Center.²⁴ That same survey revealed that 4 in 10 Americans live in a household with a firearm, while 1 in 3 own a firearm themselves. Yet many people remain unaware of these statistics. The widespread support for change, especially among firearm owners, often goes unacknowledged, at least in part because media coverage tends to cover violence involving firearms as inevitable or as a binary, misleadingly suggesting that people sit at one extreme or the other on debates around firearms. 

One factor driving this disconnect in media coverage is a lack of “authentic voices,” or people who have firsthand experience with an issue. This could be people who have been harmed by firearms, but it also could include everyday firearm owners — those without law enforcement credentials — whose views are often omitted and, thus, misunderstood by those unfamiliar with firearms and the culture associated with them.

From the news: Engaging authentic voices about firearm suicide

An example of how important everyday voices are in efforts to prevent violence comes from a 2023 article in which Ben Botkin, a health and social services journalist, shared findings showing that many Oregon residents either don’t know about or don’t know how to use extreme risk protection orders (ERPO), one of many tools for preventing firearm suicide. An extreme risk protection order temporarily removes firearms from those who are a safety risk to themselves or others — it is equivalent to California’s Gun Violence Restraining Order (GVRO). 

The article details a 33-page advisory report, released by the Oregon Secretary of State, which found barriers that “can prevent or discourage Oregonians from filing the court petitions to prevent their family member’s suicide.” As Botkin wrote, “Those barriers include a simple lack of awareness or an unfamiliarity with how to navigate the court system and fill out the required paperwork.”

Although lawmakers passed the legislation needed to implement extreme risk protection orders, the article’s focus is law enforcement and family members, both of whom can petition the court to have someone's firearms temporarily removed if they are a known safety risk.

The journalist could have taken an extra step to provide a checklist for evaluating safety risks and/or linked to external resources to help police officers and family members learn more about how to file such petitions in their area. This approach, which goes beyond providing information to help readers take an action, is known as service journalism. Advocates can and should encourage it when talking with reporters, editors, and other members of the press.

Credible messengers are uniquely important in communicating about firearms: throughout the process of interviewing firearm owners for this guide, people repeatedly expressed frustration with only hearing from law enforcement or criminal justice representatives in stories about firearms. “The most powerful stories in journalism often feature the voices of people with little power,” wrote Kelly McBride, senior vice president for the Poynter Institute, a thought leader at the intersection of media and technology.⁵⁰ McBride also noted that one reason why such voices are underrepresented is that revealing private information can become a safety risk: “They could become the target of harassment … They could be shunned by their communities. Some people could lose their jobs or face legal consequences. Others may experience shame or humiliation.”

While these risks are not unique to people talking about firearm issues, the need for taking extra care and precautions applies to them. Whoever they are, credible messengers need support. Depending on their experiences and background, they may need training and practice, logistical help (like child care or transportation to a meeting), or emotional support (like someone to sit with them during an interview). They may need support after the interview is over, too — for example, someone to filter comments on a story they appeared in or with whom to debrief and process their experience. 

Think about how you will support messengers, particularly survivors or those directly affected by violence, to ensure that they are empowered to speak as advocates and leaders, not just as victims or subjects of pity. As Greg Jackson, former Executive Director of the Community Justice Action Fund, observed on a conference panel, “I’ll never forget walking into meetings and being told, ‘Oh, you’re a survivor. Share your story. Let us cry. Then you leave, and we’ll handle the policy’ …. I was always minimized to being a survivor …. I was only seen as someone who was in pain or with a cape. But never seen as an expert that could contribute to the crisis.”⁴⁹ Working with messengers (whether informally or through training) so they can talk concisely about solutions as well as problems, name their values, and issue calls to action can help authentic voices speak as “authentic experts.” 

Your turn:

Supporting authentic messengers

Use this Google sheet to brainstorm potential messengers, the types of support they might need, and who could provide it.

In summary

Whether and how you use the news depends on many factors, including your overall strategy. If media coverage is the best way for you to communicate with your audience, consider: 

• Monitoring the media to identify the best outlets to reach your audience;
• Engaging with reporters and preparing yourself (or your messenger) to work with them;
• Using the media to create or respond to news and shape the conversation; and
• Exploring how to most effectively support authentic messengers who can share their lived experiences and expertise. 

Putting it all together: Sample messages and promising practices

We know that strategic communication about local efforts to reduce death, injury, and trauma from firearms must be rooted in an effective overall strategy and carefully consider how and when to use different communication channels, including news media, to reach key audiences. We know, too, that messages should use plain language to expand the frame and illustrate not only the problems of injury and death but the many solutions that exist to prevent that harm in the first place; that audiences will connect with shared values and see the possibility of taking action when it is presented to them; and that communication is most successful when audiences feel that their concerns or negative feelings are acknowledged, not judged or waved away. 

In short, strategic communication is challenging, but, with planning, it is a powerful and worthwhile tool to make communities safer and stronger. But what does all that look like in practice? 

To make our suggestions more concrete, we offer sample scenarios and messages below, applied to real-life examples of promising practices (like localized data collection, support for those at greatest risk of harm, and investment in community leadership) to reduce injury and death from firearms. To develop them, we drew on our research (including language adapted from messages tested by Lake Research Partners) and the lived experience of our colleagues leading prevention, intervention, and healing work around the state and the country. Of course, not every strategy will apply everywhere — you can’t be strategic and comprehensive at the same time — but we hope you can adapt and apply them meaningfully for your community and your work. 

View the following sample messages for three key promising practices to build messages to address domestic violence involving firearms, firearm suicide prevention, and community violence interruption efforts. To build your own, we’ve also included an interactive template. 

Scenario #1: Reducing community-level injury and fatality involving firearms 

Promising practice #1: Collecting meaningful local data

• Overall strategy: Concentrating violence interruption programs and prevention services in high-need areas. 
• Solution sought: Support for collecting and making accessible local data to craft community-specific solutions. 
• Possible messengers: Representative of community-based organization; researcher; local politician; city manager or controller
• Audience: City council
• Communication channel: Public testimony or letter to the editor

Sample message #1: Reducing community-level violence

Instructions: Hover over the bold, underlined text in the message below to learn what communication components and techniques make it effective.

Articles like [recent story] remind me of how proud I am to live here and of what we in this community can accomplish together. That’s why I’m concerned that we’re not doing everything we can do to reduce death and injury from firearms. 75% of all homicides in our state involve a firearm, according to data from the Centers For Disease Control (CDC). We can’t wait to take action — but here in [community], part of the problem is the lack of local data about what our neighbors, our people, need right here and right now. 

You might be thinking: What does data have to do with violence? But data about the specific needs of our community is an important first step toward helping us craft the kinds of innovative, long-term solutions we need to keep ourselves and each other safe. Next month, local leaders will vote on whether we should join an initiative that will support community-led data collection about injuries and fatalities from firearms and prevention services in our community. Information collected by and shared with community members who know problems — and solutions — best can help us see where shootings are happening, where there are programs and services that need support, and where we can focus prevention efforts. 

For our community to thrive, our leaders must prioritize investing in the health and safety of our neighbors and loved ones — starting with reliable data that we can use to take action where it’s needed most. We can’t do it without you — please join me in calling on our council members to vote yes on the resolution. Visit [website] to learn more about how data collection can help us make smart, successful investments to harness community wisdom and keep people safe and healthy.

Scenario #2: Reducing injury and fatality from firearms when intimate partner violence is happening

Promising practice #2: Investing in existing community leadership and relationships 

• Overall strategy: Creating multiple touchpoints that address firearm access, risk, and safety issues for families experiencing DV
• Solution sought: Strengthen capacity of DV service providers to incorporate questions about firearms into safety planning
• Possible messengers: Coalition staff member; client/survivor; grantee of CBO 
• Audience: Coalition members 
• Communication channel: Newsletter and social media outreach

Sample message #2: Reducing domestic violence involving firearms

Instructions: Hover over the bold, underlined text in the message below to learn what communication techniques make it effective.

We’re proud of our commitment to justice and liberation for Black and Brown folks in this community — that’s why we do what we do every day and why you join us in that hard, and necessary, work.  

But one of the biggest issues facing some of our clients is something we need to talk about more: domestic violence involving firearms. No matter who owns a firearm or why, research shows that a firearm in the house can make domestic violence situations 5 times deadlier, and Black, Indigenous, and Latine women like those we serve are at highest risk of being shot by an intimate partner. What that means is that we can’t talk about safety, justice, or liberation for Black and Brown folks unless we’re talking about domestic violence involving firearms.

California has a lot of options for families seeking safety from firearms, but those can be overwhelming and difficult for families to navigate, and service providers often aren’t trained to ask questions during safety planning that could help protect survivors. That’s where we have the opportunity to make a big difference. As a coalition, we’re taking steps to ensure that DV service providers around the state have the resources and training they need to ask questions about firearms and how they’re stored during safety planning. 

It can be challenging to talk about lethal means of abuse, but we know those questions are vital: Clear communication with survivors about whether the person who harmed them has access to firearms, and about the safety tools that are available, can set the stage for actions that can reduce risk, like removing firearms from the situation, even temporarily.

To make sure you — and your agency — know about the tools that survivors need to make plans that help keep them and their families safe, visit [XXX].

Scenario #3: Reducing incidents of firearm suicide 

Promising practice #3: Building and tailoring sustained support for those most at risk of harm

• Overall strategy: Coordinating resources and aligning funding priorities for suicide prevention across the region 
• Solution: Apply for funds for local and regional asset mapping, including voluntary safe storage sites 
• Possible messengers: Advocate with lived experience of loved one/friend at risk for firearm suicide; representative of community-based organization 
• Audience: Local policymakers 
• Communication channel: Remarks at City Council meeting 

Sample message #3: Reducing firearm suicide

Instructions: Hover over the bold, underlined text in the message below to learn what communication components and techniques make it effective.

Just like everyone in this room, I want the people I care about to be safe. Not just my biological family, either. My best friend, for example: My life is better because she’s in it even though we don’t always see eye to eye. For one thing, I’m not a firearm owner, and she owns several that her grandfather left her, plus a few she bought during the pandemic. 

I’m here to talk today about something her community did that saved her life and to encourage you to make that a possibility for people here in our community. As many of us do at some point or other, my friend started having a hard time last year — struggling a lot. I began to worry about her. I knew that firearm suicide rates are going up: Half of all firearm deaths in California were suicides in 2020, according to the California Department of Public Health. And I’d heard that, no matter why someone owns a firearm, having one in the house can increase the risk of injury or death. This alarms me when I think about someone going through a crisis.

You can imagine how nervous I was getting, especially because I knew she doesn’t store her firearm in a safe. But luckily, she lives in an area that maps safe storage sites, where people can voluntarily and temporarily store their firearms without having to involve the police, and get them back once they’re not in crisis anymore. 

My friend is doing fine today, and I couldn’t be happier. But at the same time, I can’t stop thinking about all the others like my neighbors who own firearms who might be struggling — or living with someone who’s struggling — and aren’t sure where to go for help, especially if they don’t feel comfortable going to the police. 

One thing we can do to help those folks out is to make sure they know where they can safely store their firearms outside of the home or learn about other safe storage options they can use until things calm down and the worst of the danger has passed. Not everyone is going to want to use a safe storage site, of course, but some will. By documenting where those sites are, we can make sure people have the information they need to keep themselves — and the people they care about — safe. 

Funding is available to help our local public health department build a “safe storage map”: I hope this council will apply for that funding and take steps to make sure everyone in this community has the opportunity my friend and I did. And I hope that everyone here tonight will visit [XXX] to learn more about safe storage and how to talk about it — whether to share it with someone in your life who needs it, or to learn more about how we can keep ourselves and the people we care about safe, even when times are tough.

In summary

Everyone using this guide has specific goals in mind for reducing firearm death and injury — from supporting survivors as they navigate safety planning to mapping data to show where prevention efforts will have the greatest impact. To help you get to wherever you’re going, we’ve shown how to apply message guidelines to real-world examples of promising local practices that can help make communities safer and more just. Some of these approaches may align with your own, or you may be working toward other goals altogether. Whatever your approach, remember to: 

• Lead with shared values;
• Talk about a problem and solution that “match”;
• Show the landscape;
• Illustrate success;
• Show your audience what they can do next;
• Acknowledge complexities or doubts that your audience may be feeling.

What do you want to see your community do to reduce injury and death from firearms — and what will you do to get there?

Conclusion

Imagine a future where safety is the norm — where people don’t feel fear for themselves or their loved ones. Building that future is possible, but it has to begin with believing it is within our reach. And fostering that kind of collective vision will only happen if we change the stories we tell ourselves about ourselves. Currently, too many of our stories, which often begin in the news media and get amplified — and even meme-ified — on social media, are stories about bloodshed, death, and despair. They are stories about political inaction, cultural division, and perhaps worst of all: apathy and fatalism.  

But as advocates know, such stories offer a distorted and incomplete picture of what safe people, safe families, and safe communities can be. Cities and counties across the state and country are using a range of models, like restorative practices and trauma-informed interventions, to interrupt cycles of firearm violence, place community members at the center of these efforts, and replace feelings of defeat with ones of hope and excitement. Those are the stories we need to be telling, loudly and often, to demonstrate that change is possible and build the political will to make it happen on a larger scale. 

Advocates can help give voice to those stories to make them the norm, the expectation, and, ultimately, our new reality. That requires fine-tuning goals; identifying, training and supporting spokespeople who can deliver clear, compelling messages that highlight shared values and community-led solutions; and building relationships with key news outlets to ensure that the right messages reach the right audience at the right time. 

If you get stuck, revisit your vision for what is possible and remind yourself of the successes the field has already achieved. So many incredible stories are already there; we hope the recommendations in this guide will bolster your capacity to tell them.

If you get stuck, just remember:

The messenger matters!
Name your values.
Talk about solutions and problems — and help your audience see what they can do next.
Speak plainly.

Authors and acknowledgments

This message guide was written by Pamela Mejia and Heather Gehlert, with contributions from Lori Dorfman, Kim Garcia, and Sarah Perez-Sanz. 

Thank you to the advocates and community members leading local efforts to make California safer; you are the reason we created this messaging guide. Although we thank by name those who were directly involved in shaping this resource below, we are grateful to everyone doing this work, in California and beyond. 

We express our deep gratitude to the Hope and Heal Fund for making this guide possible. The Hope and Heal Fund is a state-based fund, established in 2016, dedicated to preventing injury and death from firearms in California. It would take many pages to list all of the reasons we are grateful to the Hope and Heal team; they have been supportive, enthusiastic colleagues, thought partners, and champions since they commissioned this project in 2017. For their ongoing dedication, content knowledge, insights and unflagging commitment, we thank Brian Malte and his team, including Ally Barron, Diana Guardado, Mary Kopp, Refugio “Cuco” Rodriguez, and Saul Serrano. We also thank Maggie Mayer, a former fellow at the Hope and Heal Fund. 

This guide was made possible thanks to a whole community of practitioners and experts who generously shared their time, their stories, and their lived wisdom to shape our thinking, develop and strengthen the material, and help us build connections to ensure the final product reached its intended audience. 

• For sharing their deep knowledge of community violence involving firearms and communication issues that span different types of violence and harm, we thank:  Devone Boggan of Advance Peace; Shani Buggs of the Violence Prevention Research Program (VPRP) at the University of California, Davis; Rachel Davis of Prevention Institute; Kanwarpal Dhaliwal of the RYSE Center; Jill Fitzimmons formerly of Spitfire Strategies; Lisa Fujie-Parks of Prevention Institute; George Galvis of Communities United for Restorative Justice; Sybil Grant, formerly of the Alliance for Boys and Men of Color; Joseph Griffin of Youth Alive!; Erin Hart formerly of Spitfire Strategies; Laurie Kappe of i.e. communications; Steve Lindley of Brady United; Anne Marks formerly of Youth Alive!; Christine Maulhardt, formerly of of the Blue Shield of California Foundation; Michael “Pastor Mike” McBride;  David Muhammed of the National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform; Mark Philpart formerly of the Alliance for Boys and Men of Color; Fernando Rejon of Urban Peace Institute; Erica Rice formerly of Brady United; Kiersten Stewart of Futures Without Violence; Julia Weber; and Dr. Garen Wintemute and his team at the Violence Prevention Research Program (VPRP) at the University of California, Davis. 

• For providing insights and guidance on messaging about firearm suicide and communicating with firearm owners, we thank: Catherine Barber of the Harvard Chan School of Public Health’s Injury Research; Amy Barnhorst of the UC Davis Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences and the BulletPoints Project; Dr. Marian Betz of the Program for Injury Prevention, Education and Research at the Colorado School of Public Health; Lisa Brenner of University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus and the Department of Veterans Affairs Rocky Mountain Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center; Vicka Chaplin of the California Firearm Violence Research Center, the UC Davis Violence Prevention Research Program, and the BulletPoints project; Chris Cheng; Stan Collins; Gigi Crowder of the National Alliance on Mental Illness; Kevin Dixie of No Other Choice Firearms Training; Luis Garcia of Pacific Clinics; Anara Guard; Rachel Guerrero of the UC Davis Center for Reducing Health Disparities; Christina “Chris” Gutierrez; Russell Lemle of the Veterans Healthcare Policy Institute; Megan McCarthy of the US Department of Veterans Affairs; Matthew Miller of the Harvard School of Public Health and the Harvard Injury Control Research Center; Dr. Shauna Springer, and Jason “Jay” Zimmerman of the James H. Quillen Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center.  

• We thank Krista Colon of the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, a tireless supporter of every stage of this work. She also was one of many thought partners who contributed insights on communicating about domestic violence involving firearms, along with: Noemi Elias formerly of Fathers and Families of San Joaquin; Patti Giggans of Peace Over Violence; Barbara Kappos of the East Los Angeles Women’s Center;  Dave Keck, formerly of the National Resource Center of Domestic Violence and Firearms; Pallav Kumar, formerly of the National Resource Center of Domestic Violence and Firearms; DeAngelo Mack of Public Health Advocates; Kandee Lewis of the Positive Results Center; Michael Macias formerly of  Fathers and Families of San Joaquin; Leo Martinez formerly of Fathers and Families of San Joaquin; Jessica Merrill of the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence; Alicia Nichols, formerly of the National Resource Center of Domestic Violence and Firearms; Eric Morrison-Smith of the Alliance for Boys and Men of Color; Gauri Sanchez formerly of Fathers and Families of San Joaquin;  Hector Sanchez-Flores of the National Compadres Network; Kelly Roskam of the Center for Gun Violence Solutions; and Dr. Susan Sorenson, now retired from the University of Pennsylvania.

The opinion polling that grounds much of this guide was led by Lake Research Partners. We thank Celinda Lake and her team, including Anderson Gardner, Jesse Kline, Alysia Snell, and Izzy Vinyard, for being such diligent and insightful thought partners. 

Changing media narratives about firearms is a long-term process that requires substantial changes in how news is produced, delivered, and consumed. We are so glad to be working in this space with thought partners including Dr. Jessica Beard and the team at the Philadelphia Center for Gun Violence Reporting, as well as James Burnett and the staff of The Trace. 

We greatly appreciate those who provided feedback on our manuscript drafts, including Krista Colon of the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, Joseph Griffin of Youth Alive!, Jesse Kline of Lake Research Partners, Russell Lemle of the Veterans Healthcare Policy Council, and Julia Weber. Any errors are, of course, our own. 

Thanks to Lunden Mason and other members of the Berkeley Media Studies Group team who were instrumental behind the scenes. We are also grateful to our dedicated former staff members and interns who contributed, including Laura Carter, Sarah Han, Daphne Marvel, Laura Nixon, and the late and beloved Fernando Quintero. 

We are honored for the opportunity to connect with and be part of the passionate, committed, and brilliant community of people engaged every day in making California — and the nation — safer and more just. It has been, and continues to be, a true privilege to be engaged in this work with you all.

Appendices

Template: Building your own message

Use this Google doc and the building blocks below to create a message, grounded in your overall strategy, about how you want to reduce death and injury from firearms. The order of each statement might change depending on your circumstance, but whenever possible, start by evoking shared values. And remember, use plain language! 

We’re committed to/we all want to [values statement], but [problem statement that “cues up” solution]. [Show the landscape].

It doesn’t have to be this way. That’s why we’re calling on [who] to [solution statement].  

It can feel [acknowledge complex or difficult feelings], but [vision for success]. 

[Call to action]. Together, we can [values statement].

What makes a story newsworthy? 

Firearm injuries and fatalities happen every day – but fortunately, so does work in communities to reduce injury and death, and make people safer. When a particular story about harm from firearms (be it community violence, domestic violence, or firearm suicide) is covered in the news, why? Why that story, and why that day? Reporters commonly refer to the catalyst for a story as a "news hook."

Many factors can influence why reporters and editors select some stories and not others, from the details of a specific incident to what else competes for attention during the news cycle. Gaining coverage requires understanding what makes an issue newsworthy. Use this worksheet to identify ways to make your issue relevant to the media using examples from recent news.

Methods

At BMSG, we have been attentive to firearm violence since opening our doors in 1993. Then, as now, our process for understanding and reframing narratives is iterative and grounded in the expertise of the field. For this project, we have built upon what we have learned working with communities and studying media narratives over 30 years, and we have gathered data in multiple ways, including interviews, media analyses, and listening sessions, always centering the experiences of those who are most deeply involved in prevention work. We also gathered sample strategies, data, and examples of systems change from reports generated during the last few years by researchers and other groups in the field.

With all the data we had already collected as a starting place, we commissioned Lake Research Partners, a public opinion research firm, to help us understand underlying attitudes around violence involving firearms and firearm suicide, to identify barriers and potential opportunities for communicating more effectively, and to develop messaging approaches that help to build support for efforts to prevent death and injury from firearms. 

Lake Research Partners designed and administered an online dial survey conducted between May 24 to June 1, 2022. The survey reached 1,000 California adults statewide, with oversamples of 100 Black adults and 122 Spanish-speaking Latinx adults. The survey also reached 12 advocates connected to the Hope and Heal Fund. 

Survey respondents were drawn from multiple online panels. The base sample was slightly weighted by region, region by gender, race, race by gender, and party ID; the Black adult sample was weighted by gender, age, and education; and the Spanish-speaking Latinx adult sample was weighted by gender, age, and party ID. Latinx adults overall were weighted by age, party ID, and education. All oversamples were then weighted to reflect their actual proportion of adults statewide. The margin of error for the total sample is +/-3.1%. It is higher among subgroups.

Lake Research Partners then designed and conducted 20 one-on-one follow-up telephone interviews with members of the California public who had taken the dial survey and opted-in to be recontacted for further discussion. The interviews were conducted between August 15th and September 27, 2022. Participants were chosen to reflect a mix of gender, age, regional representation, race/ethnicity, and firearm ownership status. Those who said they strongly oppose firearm violence prevention were not considered for this phase of the project.

LRP also conducted 11 one-on-one telephone interviews with advocates connected to the Hope and Heal Fund and currently working in the firearm violence prevention field, representing a mix of general firearm violence prevention, community violence, firearm suicide, and domestic violence advocacy organizations. The interviews were conducted between August 31st and September 27th, 2022.

References 

1. Jeffrey M. Jones. More Americans See U.S. Crime Problem as Serious. Gallup. Published Nov. 16, 2023. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://news.gallup.com/poll/544442/americans-crime-problem-serious.aspx

2. Conner A, Azrael D, Miller M. Public opinion about the relationship between firearm availability and suicide: results from a national survey. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2018;168(2):153-155.

3. Scheufele D, Tewksbury D. Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication. 2007;57(1):9-20.

4. Entman RM. Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication. 1993;43(4):51-58. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x

5. Iyengar S. Is Anyone Responsible?: How Television Frames Political Issues. University of Chicago Press; 1994.

6. Kaiser Permanente, Berkeley Media Studies Group. Changing the discourse about community violence: To prevent it, we have to talk about it. Published online 2016. https://www.bmsg.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/bmsg_kp_pi_community_violence_discourse_final2.pdf

7. Gamson W. Talking Politics. Cambridge University Press; 1992.

8. Dearing JW, Rogers EM. Agenda-Setting. Sage; 1996.

9. McCombs M, Reynolds A. How the news shapes our civic agenda. In: Bryant J, Oliver MB, eds. Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research. Taylor & Francis; 2009:1-17.

10. Berkeley Media Studies Group. Media Advocacy 101. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.bmsg.org/resources/media-advocacy-101/

11. The Center for Gun Violence Solutions, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. A Year in Review: 2020 Gun Deaths in the U.S.; 2022. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://publichealth.jhu.edu/sites/default/files/2022-05/2020-gun-deaths-in-the-us-4-28-2022-b.pdf

12. Everytown for Gun Safety. Impact of Gun Violence on Historically Marginalized Communities. Everytown. Published 2023. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.everytown.org/issues/impact-of-gun-violence-on-historically-marginalized-communities/

13. Brocklin EV. What Gun Violence Prevention Looks Like When It Focuses on the Communities Hurt the Most. The Trace. Published July 10, 2019. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.thetrace.org/2019/07/gun-violence-prevention-communities-of-color-funding/

14. Dorfman L, Schiraldi V. Off Balance: Youth, Race and Crime in the News. Building Blocks for Youth Initiative; 2015. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. http://bmsg.org/sites/default/files/bmsg_other_publication_off_balance.pdf

15. Corners: Center for Neighborhood Engaged Research & Science. The Media Accountability Project: Race and Media Depictions of Gun Violence.; 2024. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.cornersresearch.org/projects/the-media-accountability-project

16. Marquez A. Poll: Gun ownership reaches record high with American electorate. NBC News. Published November 21, 2023. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/poll-gun-ownership-reaches-record-high-american-electorate-rcna126037

17. De Visé D. Americans bought almost 60 million guns during the pandemic. The Hill. Published April 21, 2023. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/3960527-americans-bought-almost-60-million-guns-during-the-pandemic/

18. Miller M, Zhang W, Azrael D. Firearm Purchasing During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results From the 2021 National Firearms Survey. Ann Intern Med. Published online December 21, 2021:M21-3423. doi:10.7326/M21-3423

19. Geller LB, Booty M, Crifasi CK. The role of domestic violence in fatal mass shootings in the United States, 2014–2019. Inj Epidemiol. 2021;8(1):38. doi:10.1186/s40621-021-00330-0

20. Conner A, Azrael D, Miller M. Suicide Case-Fatality Rates in the United States, 2007 to 2014: A Nationwide Population-Based Study. Ann Intern Med. 2019;171(12):885. doi:10.7326/M19-1324

21. Montanaro D, Westervelt E. Most gun owners favor modest restrictions but deeply distrust government, poll finds. NPR. Published July 8, 2022. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.npr.org/2022/07/08/1110239487/most-gun-owners-favor-modest-restrictions-but-deeply-distrust-government-poll-fi

22. Clifford Young, Chris Jackson. Americans are more worried about gun violence compared to most other issues. Ipsos. Published July 26, 2023. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/americans-are-more-worried-about-gun-violence-compared-most-other-issues

23. Taylor Orth. Most Americans want more gun control but doubt it would stop mass shootings. YouGov. Published April 26, 2022. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/42293-most-americans-want-more-gun-control

24. Pew Research Center. Gun Violence Widely Viewed as a Major – and Growing – National Problem. Published June 28, 2023. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/06/28/gun-violence-widely-viewed-as-a-major-and-growing-national-problem/

25. Dorfman L, Wollack L. Moving from Them to Us: Challenges in Reframing Violence Among Youth. Berkeley Media Studies Group; 2009. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.bmsg.org/resources/publications/moving-from-them-to-us-challenges-in-reframing-violence-among-youth/

26. The Opportunity Agenda. A New Sensibility: An Analysis of Public Opinion Research on Attitudes Towards Crime and Criminal Justice Policy.; 2016. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.opportunityagenda.org/explore/resources-publications/new-sensibility

27. Sorenson SB. Taking guns from batterers: Public support and policy implications. Evaluation review. 2006;30(3):361-373.

28. Montanez J, Donley A. Opinions on a firearm prohibition policy that targets intimate partner violence. Journal of interpersonal violence. Published online 2018:0886260518807213.

29. Betz ME, Azrael D, Barber C, Miller M. Public opinion regarding whether speaking with patients about firearms is appropriate: results of a national survey. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2016;165(8):543-550.

30. Morgan ER, Rowhani-Rahbar A, Azrael D, Miller M. Public perceptions of firearm- and non-firearm-related violent death in the United States: A national study. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2018;169(10):734-737.

31. Miller M, Azrael D, Hemenway D. Belief in the inevitability of suicide: results from a national survey. Suicide and life-threatening behavior. 2006;36(1):1-11.

32. Betz ME, Miller M, Barber C, et al. Lethal means restriction for suicide prevention: beliefs and behaviors of emergency department providers. Depression and Anxiety. 2013;30(10):1013-1020.

33. Sudak H, Maxim K, Carpenter M. Suicide and stigma: a review of the literature and personal reflections. Academic Psychiatry. 2008;32(2):136-142.

34. Bellah RN, Masden R, Sullivan WM, Tipton SM. Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life. University of California Press; 1996.

35. Dorfman L, Wallack L, Woodruff K. More than a message: Framing public health advocacy to change corporate practices. Health Education & Behavior. 2005;32(4):320-336.

36. Dorfman L, Daffner Krasnow I. Public Health and Media Advocacy. Annual Review of Public Health. 2014;35:293-306.

37. Topaz C, Higdon J. News Media Coverage of Gun Violence: A Systematic Review. The Health Alliance for Violence Intervention; 2024. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.thehavi.org/news-media-coverage-of-gun-violence-a-systematic-review

38. Beard JH, Raissian R, Roberts L, et al. Systematic disparities in reporting on community firearm violence on local television news in Philadelphia, PA, USA. Preventive Medicine Reports. 2024;42:102739. doi:10.1016/j.pmedr.2024.102739

39. Beard JH, Trombley S, Walker T, et al. Public health framing of firearm violence on local television news in Philadelphia, PA, USA: a quantitative content analysis. BMC Public Health. 2024;24(1):1221. doi:10.1186/s12889-024-18718-0

40. George Gerbner. Reclaiming Our Cultural Mythology. Context Institute. Published September 16, 2011. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.context.org/iclib/ic38/gerbner/

41. Patrick Darrington. Alec Karakatsanis on Copaganda, Punishment, and Policing in the United States. Teen Vogue. Published May 9, 2023. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.teenvogue.com/story/alec-karakatsanis-copaganda-policing

42. Smith GW. Gun death vs. social violence. Vallejo Times Herald. Published October 10, 2017. Accessed February 26, 2024. https://www.timesheraldonline.com/2017/10/10/gary-w-smith-gun-death-vs-social-violence/

43. Nass D. Gun Background Checks Reached New Record During Coronavirus Surge. The Trace. Published April 1, 2020. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.thetrace.org/2020/04/coronavirus-gun-background-check-record-nics/

44. Helmore E. US gun sales spiked during pandemic and continue to rise. The Guardian. Published May 31, 2021. Accessed Sept. 27. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/31/us-gun-sales-rise-pandemic

45. Tavernise S. An Arms Race in America: Gun Buying Spiked During the Pandemic. It’s Still Up. The New York Times. Published May 29, 2021. Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/29/us/gun-purchases-ownership-pandemic.html

46. Christianna Silva. Some Black Americans Buying Guns: “I’d Rather Go To Trial Than Go To The Cemetery.” NPR. Published September 27, 2020. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.npr.org/2020/09/27/911649891/some-black-americans-buying-guns-i-d-rather-go-to-trial-than-go-to-the-cemetery

47. Brown C, Brown T, Burton N, Heru A, Taylor L, Traylor K. I’m a Black American. I Need a Gun to Feel Safe in This Country. The New York Times. Published July 1, 2020. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/opinion/black-gun-ownership.html

48. Alfonseca K. What’s behind the rise in gun ownership for people of color? ABC News. Published November 4, 2021. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://abcnews.go.com/US/rise-gun-ownership-people-color/story?id=80008877

49. 2023 GIH Annual Conference: Terrance Keenan and Andy Hyman Awards.; 2023. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUw4Am9zVAU

50. Kelly McBride. How to interview vulnerable sources without exploiting them. Poynter. Published August 22, 2023. Accessed Sept. 27, 2024. https://www.poynter.org/ethics-trust/2023/how-journalists-can-interview-vulnerable-sources-without-exploiting-them/