Of the 40 articles during the 28 days when the SPPP was still defining "what happened?
This focus on headlines is necessary in order show that the SPPP could have used the neutral term "tragedy" as Hmong Americans newspapers did (Moua 2004; Xiong 2004).
The SPPP invoked a wide range of names to define the events of November 21 for readers.
On the second day of coverage the SPPP chose a much more inflammatory term: "rampage.
On November 25 the SPPP used the term "tragedy" for the first and last time.
Thus within the first nine days of coverage (November 22 through November 30) the SPPP had constructed a contradictory vocabulary to define for readers "what happened?
The SPPP chose a word that would horrify readers given how massacre had been previously used.
In the preceding one year (November 22, 2003, through November 21, 2004) the SPPP had used the word massacre in headlines only three times.
On December 10 the SPPP again chose a very inflammatory term for a headline on the front page of the local section: "slayings.
Yet when the jury reached its verdict on September 17, 2005, a front page headline in the SPPP stated: "Vang Found Guilty; St.