The media greatly influences our perception of crime and criminality around the world. It mainly focuses on memorable or historical events that shocks the world, and will be remembered by all for a long period of time. But, what about the other crimes that happen outside of what is told by the media? The media’s perception of crime and what they show us only gives us snippets of what happens around the world everyday, and gives us a false deception of what actually happens around the world everyday in regards to crime and criminality. The media uses various methods, stereotypes, and only reports on serious (or what we consider to be serious) crimes. This majorly shapes how we view the world and our safety in our communities.
To begin, the fear of crime that people have should be discussed. Dowler (2003) asks the question of if coverage of massive and violent crimes create fear among the general public, and does this fear influence criminal justice system? It has been said that people who watch more television are more likely to feel a threat from crime, believe crime happens more frequently than what statistics show, and take more precautions when it comes to protecting themselves from crime. Crime that is shown on television happens to be more violent, sporadic, and dangerous than crime found in the “real” world. The relationship between media presentation and crime depends on the characteristics of the message and the audience. There is also a fear of victimization that comes into play. Residents in high crime areas that watch a lot of television are more likely to be afraid of crime. Also, people will tend to believe what they see and hear on the media if they do not have direct experience with crime. It is also important to mention that for the most part people do not have a fear of crime in general, but more specifically crimes that can be committed against themselves that could leave an individual in danger. This includes fears of sexual assault, getting beaten up, getting shot, and getting robbed while at home. The public’s fear and anxiety is also connected to the public’s pressure to find solutions to crime problems. The more often that crime is displayed on and by the media, the more public pressure there is for more effective policing and punishing responses to crime. This is also seen when watching reality-based crime shows and movies, where people find that there should be a more punishing response or consequence when crimes have been committed.
First, the media uses a socially constructed reality. This is, a “world” that is constructed and is perceived as the real world by individuals. Gamson et al (1992) mention that the media tends to rely on the use of images to report their stories. This is because the images get to the heart of the issue. Also, the term “images” is frequently used to remind us of the importance of the issue being presented. Gamson et al (1992:374) state that a focus on images also allows us to connect our discussion with postmodernist writers who play off the two meanings of the word. The second meaning of an image is a mental picture of something that is not real. The media heavily relies on unwritten meanings of images to catch the attention of the public and to have the situation appear more important or more severe than it really is. By having the socially constructed reality and the use of images and their second meanings, the media can change the direction of what is being reported on and what is actually happening in that particular situation. People often do not tend to research information on a certain topic themselves and go off of what they see on the internet or television. Now, this is not a bad way to get a basic rundown of what has happened, as mentioned before, the media can really change the severity or actual meaning of an issue that they are reporting on, which should always be taken into account when reading up on a current issue, whether it be national or global.
Next, the media uses stereotypes to shape how the story or issue that is being reported on plays out, or how it will end. Stereotypes are “biased information inevitably become incorporated into ‘common knowledge’ or schemata that viewers form about stereotyped groups” (Ramasubramaniam 2007:251). Foreman, Arteaga, and Collins (2016) argue that constant exposure to such biased information about a particular social group of people can cause people to change their perceptions or views, judgements, and behaviours towards these groups that fit in with the biased information that is said about them. Mastro (2003) reports that this is especially true within racial groups. Exposure to racial or ethical stereotypes in the media can influence how we interact with such individuals in the real world, usually by applying misconceptions and stereotypes against such groups, especially minority groups. Media stereotypes consist of recurring messages that associate persons of a minority group with traits, behaviours, and values generally considered undesirable, inferior, or dangerous. These biases matter, because they are a main component by which racial and ethical misunderstanding are reproduced, and become predictable influences in the criminal-justice process. Entman and Gross (2008) look at the media’s portrayal of the Black and Latino racial groups. The stereotypes that are placed against all individuals in these groups may reinforce the biases, even if there is no actual evidence or proof of these biases being remotely true. With the media constantly showing these reoccurring biases and stereotypes against certain social groups, it can potentially change the public’s view of these people and with the constant reassurance of the biases people will start to believe the stereotypes and change how they interact with individuals from such groups, even if there is no evidence that proves such statements.
The media also uses frames to report messages to the public. Entman (1993) defines framing as, “selecting and highlighting certain features of a message as important while deemphasizing other features”. Framing can effect how people perceive members of social groups, more specifically with regards to crime. The way how the media frames a certain message can impact how people perceive those individuals that the media is reporting on. Foreman, Arteaga, and Collins (2016) mention about two specific types of frames that the media often uses. The first one being a sympathetic frame, which brings up any previous or present mental health issues of a suspect, and with that assumes that the suspect is innocent or they are just acting out of their character. The second frame is a scrutinizing frame. This brings up any previous criminal history of the suspect and/or does not bring up any information on family or personal background and assumes that the suspect is guilty. Research has shown that the use of these frames will greatly influence how viewers perceive the story themselves. If a suspect is part of a minority group, viewers may be influenced to think that all members of such group act the same way. Over time, people begin to respond to the frame that is being placed against a certain issue or crime. People begin to brainstorm, produce anecdotes, and expressions. By doing so, they begin to reveal their ideas and views on an issue. Ryan, Carragee, and Meinhofer (2001) state that we all look for common threads within a certain issue and from that try to form a unifying or main frame. In regards to crime, when the media only reports or signifies crimes committed by a certain social group, it can get people to believe that all individuals part of this group are criminals and commit the same crimes. Frames and stereotypes go hand in hand, and are closely related to each other. But what the main idea or premise about them is that they provide viewers with biased information about certain groups that could potentially hurt that group and can place a negative stigma around the entire group as a whole.
Images of crime is also another important topic to be explored in regards to the media’s portrayal of crime. Garofalo (1981) finds that not everyone has had direct experience with crime, so those who have not had that direct experience are more inclined to believe the public’s and media’s representation of crime, specifically criminals, victims, and criminal justice. These factors are all shaped to an extent by the mass media. In today’s time, people’s primary source for information is from the media. This is the same, or even more common, in regards to crime and criminal justice. It is important to note that, “the public is more influenced, in its perception of the relative frequency of various crimes, by official counts than by media emphasis” (Garofalo, 1981:335). This means, that the public is more interested and is more inclined to be influenced by what they see or hear by the media when there are official statistics or reports about how often various crimes are committed, than by what the media says and emphasizes on. Another key factor to look at is the public’s exposure to media itself. Gerbner and Gross (1976) tested this on viewers who watched television often and rarely and had them respond to questions. “To each of these questions there is a ‘television answer,’ which is like the way things appear in the world of television, and another and different answer which is biased in the opposite direction, closer to the way things are in the observable world” (Gerbner and Gross, 1976:182). People who watched more television were found that their answers were heavily influenced by what they see and hear on television, while those who rarely watch television were found to have their answers greatly influenced by the “real” or observable world around them. The final issue that is of great importance is whether viewing violence in the media makes people less sensitive to violence about them in the real world, and desensitization has been found. After viewing violent presentations, people’s sensitivity to violence has been reduced, whether it be based off of physiological matters, tolerance of aggression, or if people are prone to view violence in ambiguous ways.
Next, the media only reports on certain crimes. On the news, newspapers, and online articles, we notice that only what we call “serious” crimes are reported such as mass shootings, homicides, robberies, kidnappings, sexual assaults, and more. However, we often do not see the media covering crimes such as white-collar crimes, domestic assault, thefts, drug offences, and more, unless if the crime is committed to a very high degree. The media does this because such minuscule crimes are not “eye-catching” enough, and will not grab the publics’ attention. If you were to see an article about a homicide, you would be more inclined to read about that than if the article was about tax fraud. Obviously people have their own interests and may want to read about crimes that often are not reported, but for the majority of the population, more serious crimes are found to be more interesting to learn and read about. Also, the media only wants to include information that will be profitable for them. Why would they have reporters write about issues and incidents that not many people read about? It is not only a tactic in order to grab the readers’ attention, but for the media company to be profitable and successful economically. Even though this may be a good idea regarding finances for the media, but in regards to the public and what they read, this way of reporting is not the best. As mentioned before the media only reports on serious crimes, which only gives readers the ability to read about these crimes. This can install fear in an individual and make them believe that these crimes happen often and that these are the only crimes that happen, when in reality the crimes that we see and hear about from the media has a low chance of happening. This fear can then lead to developing biases or opinions on a group of people (this is known as racial profiling). The media may not intend to spread such messages about groups of people, but how they word and how they report crimes, it can come off that way and eventually can negatively impact the group of individuals that are being mentioned by the media.
It is important to point out if the media can create “crime waves” or not. Garofalo (1981) found that studies have documented sharp short-term changes in media crime coverage that was unrelated to changes in the amount of crime. There have been no reports that found positive associations between the number of crimes covered by the news and/or media, and the number of crimes known to the police. Comparisons show that the different levels of crime are not reflected in different amounts of crime news. So, we can get the possible assumption of the media influencing more crimes to be committed to being false and inaccurate.
Crimes reported in newspapers differ from crimes that are reported online. Sheley and Ashkins (1981:493) researched and found out that print media news reporting has centred on the process of newspaper story selection (also known as the process of “creating news”). Certain crimes receive attention by the paper, where as others can go unnoticed or can have minimal reporting and information provided. In St. Louis newspapers, Jones (1976) found that crimes against people receive thirty-five times more attention than property crimes do. Murder received ninety times more coverage than other major offences. The papers use police wire service which signals reporters on certain offences that police, the paper, or the public expressed interest in and want to learn more about it. Also, newspapers carry their attention on certain offences around similar themes that may be present. Meaning that newspapers only report on crimes that carry a similar theme that may be of interest to the public. These themes may be a popular topic of interest at that time, so in order to grab readers’ attentions the papers report on crimes related to that theme and filters out the rest. This way of filtration once again only puts emphasis on those serious crimes that most people are afraid of. This instills fear into people and makes them fear for their own safety. In all, newspapers are not the best source for crime reporting and because of the great influence of global, political, and economical trends, the papers filter out many and most of the crimes that are committed, most which are minuscule and property crimes, and distort the appearance and images of crime. The image of crime in the news differs than crime that is displayed in general by the media. Garofalo (1981) notes that violent individual crimes, such as murder, get the view of this crime distorted. Graber (1980) noticed that when crime topics mentioned in the media are placed in four categories: police/security, judiciary, corruption/terrorism, individual crime. She found that individual crime was the largest category found in all forms of media. There is an over-representation of violent crimes and street crimes in the news media. Also, news media tends to overrepresent older and higher-status offenders for non-local crimes. For local crimes, however, lower-status offenders are often covered in local news media. It is also important to look at these three findings on newspaper crime coverage. First, very little attention is given to post-dispositional processes of the criminal justice system. Second, when dispositions are reported, the prison sentences are overrepresented for the cases. Third, crime stories in the papers primarily consist of brief accounts with discrete events, and provide little to no background material.
Television shows and movies about crime are also a main concern about the media’s portrayal about crime. Most televised productions about crime give their audience a distorted view of crime. This has many similar qualities and methods of showing and presenting crime like a newspaper would, but in modern day most people do not read the newspaper, and are often found watching the news. There are more television stations and programs than there are newspapers, so the competition is high in order to get enough people watching their station. Shows and movies must be developed on interesting topics and issues relating to crime in order to attract a greater audience. Sheley and Ashkins (1981:494) define so called “good” news for television as immediate news. However, immediate news does not necessary mean that it is accurate. Television is more focused on the appearance of events and how they will be played out more than how “news worthy” it is. In television, there is a larger emphasis on soft news, topics that will interest the greater audience rather than on actual crime events themselves. Hard news is only televised if it created a great impact on a community, and if it can be shown in an action and dramatic way that appears live or in the moment. There is a focus on homicides and fires. Once again just as newspapers do, televised productions of crime related issues and topics are largely distorted and often events are dramatized for effect and greater interest to continue on watching the program.
Police effectiveness can also be influenced by the media. For the most part, the public attitude towards police are positive, however the media does play an important role on how we view the police and the work that they do. Dowler (2003) finds two conflicting views about the media’s portrayal of police officers. The first people that the police are presented well and favourably in the media, and the other being that the police are negatively portrayed in the media. Often enough on television, representations of police officers are over-dramatized and romanticized by fictional crime dramas, while the news media portrays police officers as heroic, professional crime fighters. On television, most of the crimes and cases get solved, and suspects and offenders of these crimes get brought to justice and serve their time. News similarly tends to exaggerate the amount of offences that end in arrest, which may provide the public with the false message that police are more effective than official statistics demonstrate. Also, the favourable or positive view of policing is partly a consequence of the police’s public relations strategy. When people report proactive police activity, an image of the police as being effective and efficient investigators of crime emerges. Positive police portrayals reinforces traditional approaches to law that involves an increase of police presence, harsher penalties, and an increase of power given to the police. Dowler (2003) also notes the symbolic relationship that exists between the news media and police. The police and media engage in a mutually beneficial relationship. The media needs the police to provide quick, reliable sources of crime information. The police do this because they want to continue their positive public image, and improve it anyways that they can. However, docu-dramas and news tabloids present the police as “heroes that fight evil”, yet broadcast the message of the police seen as ineffective and incompetent. The public sees the police’s performance in a more positive light when being compared with courts and correction. In all, the media provides little information to judge the police on, and news media focuses on the negative criticism rather than the positive or successful crime prevention efforts.
Finally, the media also portrays victims in a distort way. Over time, victims have taken on an unprotected significance in media and criminal justice discourses and in the development of crime policy. Reiner noted that, “the foregrounding of crime victims is one of the most significant qualitative changes in media constructions of crime and control since the Second World War” (Reiner et al., 2000). This means, that victims and they way how they are portrayed towards the public by the media plays a crucial role as to how the crime and case will be portrayed and viewed by others. Greer (2017) notes that the “ideal victim” is a person or category of individuals who when hit by a crime most readily are given the complete ad legitimate status of being a victim. This includes people who are perceived to be vulnerable, defenceless, innocent, and worthy of sympathy and compassion. Some examples of such ideal victims are children and the elderly. The attributions that make someone an ideal or legitimate victim and related levels of interest by the media are influenced by demographic characteristics. As well, gender and race are defining factors of who is seen to be a legitimate victim. Ideal victims are also known as primary victims, which are those harmed directly and immediately as participants in the criminal event. Most cases also feature indirect victims, which are the families and friends of the primary victim, those who may be distressed by witnessing serious crimes, and the wider community. The legitimacy of a primary victim is decided on the bases of the victim’s characteristics, the wider socio-economic context, and their degree of separation from the offender. The ideal victim status is the new media’s most emphatic expression of victim legitimacy. The news media’s construction of indirect victims is unpredictable. Their status of worthy of news media support and public sympathy is judged based off of their closeness to the primary victim, their personal and demographic characteristics, and their willingness and ability to engage with the media. As we look at these types of victims and how they get casted as victims or not really depends on the media. The media is known to overemphasize or deemphasize certain parts of cases that may be very important. Victimization and the types of victims that there are within a case is very important, and in the end can distort the entire view of the case in general, which can affect the public’s own views and opinions on the case.
In conclusion, the media does have a big influence on its portrayal of crime. Whether it be through victimization, frames, policing or stereotypes. The crimes that we see and hear about through the media are only some of many crimes that are committed each day, but we should take into consideration that the media greatly emphasizes or deemphasizes on certain facts of a case, which can provide viewers with a false message or statement. The fear that is instilled in the population by looking at the crimes mentioned in the media give us almost a false fear, a fear of which may never occur. Most crimes that are committed are miniscule, and only the big and memorable ones make it to the papers and internet. We should not rely solely on the media for information on a certain case. Further research should be conducted or read on about a certain case or crime, and from then the public should be able to provide with their own views and opinions on the case. This will provide people with their own sense of individuality and give them the freedom to create and have their own opinion on a current world issue. We should always take into fact that only serious crimes get reported, and we should not fear them as in most cases and in most unreported crimes not covered by the media are minuscule and will not put us in immediate danger.