Abstract

Although the “protest paradigm” remains the default analytical framework in mediated protest studies, recent scholarship has questioned its explanatory capacity, particularly in light of changes to collective action and the increasing criminalization of protests. We advance these discussions by analyzing 361 reports on the 2019 Chilean uprising aired on both a private and a public broadcasting station, using television coverage as a heuristic device. Drawing on Chan and Lee’s original argument describing the existence of several protest paradigms, as well as debates on policing demonstrations, we propose that 2 paradigms were at play in the coverage: an “antagonistic” one, which delegitimizes and marginalizes dissent, and a “paternalistic” one, which celebrates “good” protesters and “well-behaved” collective action. These paradigms echo developments in policing protests, with journalists manufacturing what we call media kettling, a type of coverage that celebrates the right to protest but severely restricts collective action. © © 2025 (César Jiménez-Martínez, Ximena Orchard, and Nadia Herrada). Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives (by-nc-nd). Available at http://ijoc.org.