How influential is the media in shaping public understanding of crime?

With the rise of the mass media throughout the world, predominantly the Western world, the issue of media influence has become a serious one. Due to media’s primary obsession with crime and violence, it definitely has a negative influence on shaping peoples understanding of crime by exaggerating it. A branch of media which always exaggerates on some crime e.g. terrorist attacks then other crimes is TV news this is basically an oxymoron; giving us the skin of the truth stuffed with a lie. TV news broadcasts use dramatic, usually violent stories and images to capture and maintain an audience, under the pretence of keeping it informed. What we see and hear on the news affects us both consciously and subconsciously, and sends us about our lives unnecessarily fearing the remote dangers that we see excessively portrayed on the evening news. This fact is especially true for children, who are defenceless against this onslaught of malevolence being brought into our very living rooms in the guise of informative reporting.

So how much crime is there on our TV? In November 10th to 16th 2001 BBC 1 had 14 hours, BBC 2 had 5 hours, ITV had 9 hours, C4 had 5 hours and C5 had 15 hours, which is a total of 48 hours of crime on our TV within 6 days.

Today, perhaps never as vividly before, crime stands at the centre of public consciousness. The mass media serve up a regular diet of stories of rising crime, vulnerable victims and callous offenders. According to Naylor (2001) the public persistently voice their fears and anxieties about crime in opinion surveys and in official government studies prioritising their concern with the issue. The success of the police in dealing with the crime problem in general comes under ever more scrutiny, and the effectiveness and rigour of the criminal justice and penal systems generate never-ending controversy. It is clear that crime constitutes a major realm of societal concern.

Initial focus in this essay will be on how influential media is on peoples understanding of crime through exaggeration. The subject of Cohen’s and Hall et al work on moral panic will be largely touched upon. A basic understanding Wilkins theory would be mentioned, finally a conclusion would be drawn up.

Maguire (2002) Mass media representations of crime, deviance, and disorder have been a returning cause of concern. Two competing anxieties can be discerned in public debate, and both are reflected in a large research literature. On one hand the media are often seen as fundamentally subversive, on the other as a more or less subtle form of social control.

Those who see the media as subversive see media representation or crime themselves as a significant cause of offending. This has been a constantly recurring theme. A different concern about media representation of crime has worried liberals and radicals. To them the media are the cause not of crime itself but of exaggerated public alarm about law and order, generating support for repressive solutions. Cohen (1972) “states the fundamental theme of the radical criminologies of the 1960s and 1970s was the power of the mass media to format fears about crime and disorder”.

The criminologist who first discussed how media reporting, leads to the social construction of "crime" was . He analysed the NY news media, one of Americas largest, and argued that crime waves are frequently media constructions. “Although you can't be mugged by a crime wave (but, only by a real criminal), a crime wave can certainly increase citizens' fears.” It can also directly lead to increased efforts at law enforcement, the enactment of new laws and penalties, and impact the correctional system as well.

In 1976, the NY news media created a major crime wave that resulted ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

In 1976, the NY news media created a major crime wave that resulted in an entirely new category of crime, one we are all now familiar with, The wave lasted for seven weeks and was a major news theme covered by three daily newspapers and five local TV stations.

The reported muggers, murderers, and rapists of the elderly were usually Hispanic and black juvenile delinquents, who came from ghetto neighbourhoods near areas in which the victims, characterized as elderly whites, resided. The media crime wave began with the reporting of a series of gruesome murders against elderly victims. The started the crime wave and the other media followed suit, even the usually circumspect . The raw number of reports went from about one story a week by each media organization before the wave began to over 4 per week per media outlet carried during the wave period. The response from the community and the political establishment was immediate. The publicly pledged to "do something about it." The increased the efforts of its already existing Senior Citizens Robbery Unit by creating a new plainclothes operation. The NY state legislature introduced bills to deny 16 to 19 year olds juvenile court status if they victimized a senior citizen, to enact mandatory prison sentences for crimes of violence against the aged, and to make previously closed juvenile records available to the judge when elderly victim was attacked. If teens, the attackers were to be tried in adult court as adults.

But, were crimes against the elderly really on the rise? When Fishman reviewed the for the period of time covered by the media crime wave, he found the statistics did not show that crimes against the elderly were increasing. In fact, homicides against the elderly were down 19% from the previous year. This is a clear idea of the power media possess over society and how media influence can shape peoples understanding of crime, for example: exaggerated crimes can bring chaos to society. This panic caused by the media and the over reaction from society is also known as a “moral panic.”

A moral panic ‘is’ a panic, an overreaction of the mass media, police and local community leaders to delinquent offences that are in fact relatively small, both in terms of the nature of the offence and the number of people involved. The term "moral" implies that the perceived threat is not something mundane, but is a threat to the social order itself or an idealised conception of it. “The threat and its perpetrators are regarded as evil "folk devils" and excite feelings of righteousness. The dangers posed by moral panics are continuously exaggerated and distorted by the media with the result that public concern is heightened. The response is likely to be a demand for greater social regulation or control and a demand for a return to traditional values.” (Cohen 1972)

The term 'moral panic' suggests a dramatic and rapid overreaction to forms of deviance or wrongdoing believed to be a direct threat to society. They tend to occur at times of social upheaval when people are struggling to adjust; there is a general feeling of lack of control and declining standards. At these times people tend to group into a kind of social collective, further defined by identify victims on which all that is wrong of society may be blamed. This helps them feel better and more assured. They have someone to blame for everything that is wrong, a scapegoat or 'folk devil' as describe by Stanley Cohen.

According to Jones S (2001) Moral Panic was first used by Jock Young (1971) in relation to drug taking, but was given wider prominence when adopted by Stanley Cohen in his book “Folk Devils and Moral Panic (1972).

Cohen carried out empirical research into the gathering of working class youth from East End of London at the sea side town of Clacton, Essex, over the Easter bank holiday weekend in 1964. The weather was bad, the youths became front page news in the national press with claim that Clacton had been terrorised by rampaging groups of “mods” (scooter riders, motorbike riders). In fact, such individuals were in a clear minority among the young people present and any rivalry was more likely to have been on the area from which they came from than the mode of transport they used. Cohen considered that the most typical criminal offence that occurred was not criminal damage, but threatening behaviour.

Jones E (1999) Cohen’s concept of the “moral panic” lies with in the perspectives interactionism, labelling and even anomie theory, so it can be encompassed by deviancy theory. Reiner (2000) However Stuart Hall places it within a different tradition. For Hall et al. a moral panic is a mean of distracting attention from crises within the capitalist state. Moral panic forms part of a legitimising process of identifying “enemies within” while at the same time strengthening the power of the state. This ensures that the law and order debate will be promoted without public understanding of the social divisions and conflicts that help to produce the deviance and political conflict.

According to Critcher (2003) “Hall et al. Policing the crises”, in 1972-73 there emerged in Britain what was either a new kind of crime or a new label for an old kind: mugging.

Apparently first used by a police officer who described a murder in London August 1972 as a “mugging gone wrong”, it attracted press attention, the daily mirror describing it as “a frightening new strain of crime”.

Coverage peaked first in October` and November 1972 and second in March 1973, three youths from Handsworth in Birmingham were given unusually long detention sentences for a vicious attacks some five months earlier. By August interest had waned. The first wave of concern about mugging lasted thirteen months. Hall et al analysed these thirteen months worth of the press coverage of mugging from August 1972 and concluded that the press had sensitised the public’s reaction to mugging to such an extent that it ceased to be “a particular kind of robbery occurring on British streets” and became a reflection of a “general social crises and rising crime”.

The advantage of the moral panic thesis is Jones E (1999) argues that the moral panic thesis not only allows us to identify instances of media exaggerations and distortions, but also demonstrates that selective reporting by the media can be instrumental in generating crime waves and social problems. Therefore by knowing this social problems and crime waves can be reduced.

Another advantage is Halls and Cohen’s work on moral panic are all based on empirical research this means all results are based on observation of human beings in real life situations and how they act towards these situations. This is an advantage because the research is not from labs which could be biased but from what is seen in the real world and by seeing connections from relationships from cause and effect.

The disadvantage of a moral panic thesis was developed by Naylor B (2001) this is the most serious flaw is it lacks agency. It is never very clear who is doing the panicking; is it the media, the government, the public or who? This problem is partly explained at the methodological level by the fact that both Cohen's and Hall's work is largely based on an analysis of press cuttings, and the activities of the rest of the 'control culture' (for the press is seen as part of it) or the beliefs of the public go entirely unexamined except as they are 'read-off' from an analysis of news coverage. Cohen refers to the impact on public opinion as 'mass delusion', yet whether the public were actually as deluded as Cohen imagines remains an open question.

Another disadvantage is Hall et al and Cohen’s work on moral panic is it is only based on empirical research. As well as this being an advantage it is also a disadvantage because it only observes limited amount of people and how they act in situations and therefore cannot be generalised to everyone and to make a theory such as the “moral panic theory” and to say everyone is like this is unethical also it shows that the theory has flaws in it as well.

Another researcher who made a lot of contribution to the moral panic theory is L T Wilkins. He came up with the “Amplification of Deviance”. He originally first used it in 1964 this term refers to the “unintended outcome of moral panics or of social policies designed to prevent or reduce deviance. The stimulus is the identification of the deviant act by the police, a politician or the media.” Typically, the attention given to deviance by the media and moral entrepreneurs serves to attract new recruits and provides them with a definition of what the public expects, thus amplifying the amount of deviance in society. Therefore he stated the two types of amplification is “The amplification of deviant behavior” and “The amplification in the number of people arrested for such behavior”.

In conclusion media has a very big influence of peoples understanding of crime (refer back to essay). The majority of the time it has a negative influence over peoples understanding. The moral panic theory tries to prove that. Moral panics are not a new phenomenon; they tend to arise in periods of social upheaval and change. The path of a panic can take one of two directions; it can quickly die down and is more or less forgotten to a great degree or can have more serious and lasting implications such as new legislation and changes in social policy.

Society plays their part, encouraged by the press - people who are in the midst of a moral panic clamour for any available news and basically believe anything they are told. Moral panics feed off guilt that is spread by contagion to make people feel more comfortable by blaming another group for their deviances.