'Crime in the Information Age Essay\r'

'It’s non difficult to gauge what the popular notions of law-breaking in the unite States argon. Engage in any mannerly conversation over dinner or cocktails and bingle is likely to hear similar accounts: â€Å" disgust is pop of control, it’s just not the same domain we grew up in, it’s not safe to liberty chit down the street anyto a greater extent, it’s a designate military personnel go forth there,” etc. The underlying theme that bear be drawn fread- unaccompanied memory these notions is headache. There is a widespread conception that iniquity is a uncontrolled line of work in this country and that savage offence and others ar on the leaven.\r\nHowever, these beliefs be not back up at all by the facts, as yet those impute onwards by our own law enforcement agencies. So why because, argon around Ameri pots so come to with the flagellum of unpeaceful curse in particular(a)? While the answer to this question is a mixed one involving many contri exactlyors, the focus of this essay is touch on with the impact of popular media on these perceptions, because the media, it would seem, is one of the close to influential contributors to the social construction of horror in this country.\r\nThe insurance coverage of abhorrence, and particularly trigger-happy offense, in the intelligence service media has profitd in frequency of coverage and sensationalized insurance coverage patronage statistical proof that unfounded abomination has been decreasing for many categorys. This phenomenon is of great business sector because how we get under ones skin at our perceptions of our world should be critically examined so polity sources react to truth not manipulated literality.\r\nAs of 2001 homicides make up one to two-tenths of one pct of all arrests, yet made up 27-29% of hatred coverage on the nightly intelligence service (Dorfman and Schiraldi). even-tempered one of the most shocking statistics from Dorfman and Schiraldi’s conceive states that, â€Å"Crime coverage has increased art object real discourtesy order work fallen. While homicide coverage was increasing on the network news by 473% from 1990 to 1998, homicide arrests dropped 32. 9% from 1990 to 1998. We can see one indicator of the effects of this unrealistic inform in 1994 when, for example, in a Washington Post/ABC analyse respondents named law-breaking as their number one concern (far to a greater extent(prenominal) than any other unveil) with 65 portion of those who responded as such saying that they learned about this issue from the media (Jackson and Naureckas). The fact is, however, that violent disgust has been on the hang for roughly thirteen years and is estimated to be at a roughly thirty year low (U. S. Department of Justice). The following graph rom the Department of Justice collections a dramatic falling off in the rates of violent offensive base in the early nin eties: ? The National wretched Victimization Survey, which is conducted contrastively than the more common consistent Crime Reports, shows a decrease in violent as well as property criminal offences in the United States for more than a decade (qtd. in Torny 118). The evidence seems to be overwhelming; no question what the method utilize for measuring offensive activity rates there is an obvious decrease in annoyance, curiously with obeisance to violent crime in the United States.\r\nThese atomic number 18 just a couple of the statistics researchers and academics drive home compi guide over recent years addressing the discrepancy amongst media coverage of crime and actual crime statistics. So in light of these multiple studies using different methods, how and why is it that media coverage of violent crime has grown exponentially? Surette explains that crime is both an individual and ethnical product (237). There is a correlation amidst media consumption and conduct for more harsh sorry arbiter policies and perceptions of the â€Å"mean-world view” (Surette 196).\r\nThis supports the theory that the more news a person consumes, particularly television possessr news, the slight they know about the actual state of the world. Surette explains that while the media certainly does have an impact it is not the only calculate in creating this culture of the fear of crime and impacts those who live in a more dislocated environment and consume higher levels of media (200). He withal notes that research suggests that those who watch a good mass of television have trouble differentiating between the television world and the real world (204).\r\nThe media has a â€Å" descent with fear” that can correlate with fear obeisance almost viewers (Surette 206). One example of this â€Å" alliance with fear” that the media seems to have can be imbed in a 1994 word in â€Å"US intelligence service and World Report” where the au thors, notwithstanding noting soon that violent crime by all statistical accounts is actually down, names the previous year as â€Å"the scariest year in American history” likely to assert that the numbers don’t content (Jackson and Naureckas).\r\nThe hold besides makes a good stopover about the contradiction between perceptions of crime and the mankind of crime: â€Å"the drumbeat of news coverage [that] has made it seem that America is in the midst of its vanquish epiphytotic of violence ever. That understanding is not support by the numbers” (Jackson and Naureckas). Throughout the rest of the article similar contradictions abound and it is difficult to tell exactly what conclusion should be drawn from it. The causes of crime, as with most crime reporting, be not carry offt with in the article while â€Å"random violence” is examined most (Jackson and Naureckas).\r\n closely violent crime is perpetrated by someone whom the victim knows y et the theme of â€Å"random violence receives often whiles more attention in the media (Jackson and Naureckas). The US News piece illustrates how the media engages in a form of â€Å"double hypothesise” where patronage knowledge of factual evidence indicating a decrease in crime they continue to put forth images that depict violent crime as an epiphytotic and continue to support perceptions of fear, distrust, and cynicism. This fear mongering often plays into gestate notions of crime and violence such as racism, ageism, and classism held by some.\r\nA 2001 plain by Dorfman and Schiraldi found that crimes against African Americans were underrepresented in reporting and overrepresented as perpetrators, white victims tended to receive more lengthy coverage as well. In Los Angeles television news African Americans were 22% more likely to be shown on TV committing violent crimes than non-violent ones despite the fact that arrest reports indicate that African Americans in Lo s Angeles commit both types of crime intimately equally (Dorfman and Schiraldi).\r\nThe study also shows how youths argon also disproportionately covered: 7 out of 10 local TV news stories dealing with violent crime in calcium had youths as the perpetrators despite the fact that youths commit only 14. 4% of violent crime in that state. Furthermore, half of the stories dealing with bush league for any reason involved violence even though only 2% (though due to unreported crimes the actual number may be higher) of California youths have been victims or perpetrators of violent crime (Drofman and Schiraldi).\r\nThe study also found by looking at news reports over the last decade that in Hawaii there has bee a 30 curve increase in the number of youth crime stories despite a steady decrease in youth crime over that same time period. This increased focus on youth crimes has led to increased support for treating juvenile offenders as adults and, oddly in instances of more serious crimes , applying the same relatiative punishments previously not applied to young offenders (Glassner 73). These findings show how not only are the media’s sensationalized reporting of crime contributing to a false sense or candor for many hoi polloi, but are also einforcing stereotypes and bigotry. Utilizing these preconceived ideas also intensifies the impact of fear based coverage. This sense of fear that the media is able to get up up in certain situations can slow be manipulated by politicians and policymakers looking to gain some support. According to Glassner, the more fearful citizenry are of crime the more likely they are to support more punitive justice systems instead of renewal programs. This is especially true with respect to juvenile offenders (72).\r\nGlassner come along argues that it is interesting that as we cut into funding for educational, medical, and antipoverty programs we receive to grow more interested about crime and there seems to be what he calls â€Å"unacknowledged wickedness” about why crime now seems requisite (72). While the media is often the target of criticism and peck it has been argued that largely the media mirrors human race whimsey and can be controlled by it (Gans 76). There is evidence however that particularly brutal crimes or large amounts of coverage of crime can shift globe opinion somewhat.\r\nFor example, canvass show an increase in support for the stopping point penalty following news of horrifying crimes (Gans 76). Gans believes that despite the fact that the news media is often thought of as having more position than it actually does it may have long-term effects on in the public eye(predicate) opinion (88). So, even though the media of course cannot shift public opinion overnight in the long mental testing a shift in coverage of sensationalized crime coverage can have long ex modifyless effects of the political climate around crime policy.\r\nIf the tone of the media is largely c ontrolled by previously held notions of media consumers then how might the news media correct the public when it’s beliefs are erroneous? Chiricos examines the effect of â€Å" honourable panics” which something or someone becomes nail downd as a threat to societal values or norms (2). Moral panics are signaled by a rapid increase in the volume of media reporting and are often followed by political action as the public feels that â€Å"something essential be done” (Chiricos 60). Every so often crime and violence becomes the subject of a virtuous panic in America.\r\nChiricos examines two moral panics occurring in the early to mid nineties: crack cocaine and violent crime. Both of these stories where covered in oft the same way: as inner-city problems leaving the ghettos and overweight the middle-class way of life (63). When this issue was border as a direct threat to suburban America a moral panic followed. When crime was confined to urban areas and  "ghettos” there was little to botheration about until the perception became that crack and violence was scatter into areas that were considered to be â€Å"safe”.\r\nDuring this time 49 percent of Americans then said that crime was the most all important(predicate) issue facing the country compared to only 9 percent before the moral panic began to instal in (Chiricos 64). The panic was kick upstairs compounded by reports that these issues were spreading to children which Chiricos notes is a common component of the rise of a moral panic (65). The reaction to these panics was unsurprising. Panics are viewed as sudden problems and treated with fundamentally unfitting solutions such as sending more people to prison and building more of them (Chiricos 67).\r\nFollowing moral panics, according to Chiricos, â€Å"commands” are issued by the public (71). The policy ramifications from these moral panics included 9. 7 billion dollars for more prisons, Californiaâ₠¬â„¢s three strikes program, and various restrictive laws aimed at adults and children alike in many states (Chiricos 71). These examinations of the media’s relationship with public opinion point out how in this age of culture the media is an important factor in how we carry out our democracy and conclude what issues are important.\r\nIf this has become the case than there are serious concerns for how the media is serving democracy. Lawrence sees the media as an arena where problems are constructed and there is constant struggle between elites, groups, and the public seek to define and address problems (3). What constitutes a problem is socially constructed. This is also true of crime problems. Lawrence is concerned with how problems are socially constructed in the media because when something is defined as a problem facing the country power is conferred upon the social institutions we would likely look to deal with it (5).\r\nSo, in the arena of the media if crime is put upd by elites as stemming from the degradation of society or loss of opportunities for many people then programs and institutions organized for supporting the little and communities will be empowered. However, the usual winners in this crash of frames typically define crime as an epidemic problem fueled by a justice system which is too soft on criminals. With this frame politicians must appear â€Å"tough on crime” and power is given to more punitive crime control policies and the prison-industrial complex flourishes as more and more money is worn out(p) on warehousing offenders.\r\nThis further disempowers social welfare institutions as money spent on police and prisons cannot be spent on education, healthcare, or welfare programs. This struggle to define problems can be looked at as a friction of differing realities where vastly different takes on issues exist but one is adopted by the media and then disseminated to the public (Lawrence 5). Lawrence says that the preva iling reality held by the most booming definers typically comes from officials within the government (5).\r\nThere exists a close relationship between government officials and the news media. They are the primary definers and therefore the strongest factor in how we construct the reality of crime (Lawrence 5). This is ulcerous because, with the issue of crime in particular, officials are quick to define crime as an epidemic issue make full with fearful imagery and then act against criminals in draconian shipway. When they construct a reality where they are shooted to protect their constituents justice in harmed for the pursuit of political capital.\r\nThis manipulation of reality and fear for the pursuit of power is addressed by Entman but with respect to the war on terror instead of crime and justice. He argues that the elite exert control by hegemony and list (4). Hegemony refers to the way officials release only information that supports the narrow reality that they seek to perpetuate and indexing is how the media reflect this narrow debate among elites quite closely (Entman 5). With this control over public perception it is comparatively easy for officials to frame issues such as crime or terrorism.\r\nWhen they win the battle to define a problem obvious remedies arise. If terrorism is framed as an attack on our way of life garblenatively than a consequence of our projection of power crossways the globe then it follows that the remedy is defense and war. Similarly, if elites accompany in defining crime not as a consequence of lost economic opportunities but as a result of naturally pervert personalities then the reaction that follows is to lock up these big personalities and isolate them from the rest of â€Å"normal” society. The way in which we think about various issues and problems directly affects how we deal with them.\r\nMost in society would say that the solution to problems is obvious because it is. What is missed however is t he fact that how we think about problems can completely shift the ways in which we deal with them. In order to switch over policy then the first step is to change the perceptions and the reality surrounding it for officials and the public alike. Lakoff tells us that if we can reframe issues we can create social change (XV). When we change the way the public sees the world, largely through the media, and alter that perceived reality we can change the policies that follow.\r\nSo why then does the media seem to be so concerned with violent crime and creating feelings of fear and concern in its consumers? The reason seems to be sensationalized journalism meant to increase viewership and a system where officials control our perceptions through the media. It postulate to be understood that passive consumption of the media is unhealthy and we should think critically about how reality is constructed by elites and the media because, that subjective reality directly affects the solutions t hat are used to deal with our problems.\r\nWhile so many people are given the impression that crime is rampant the underreported fact is that crime has been decreasing for many years. In order for there to be rational crime control policy in the United States we need to have accurate information about the reality of crime in this country. In order for this to advance the media must provide an accurate depiction of crime that is constructed by a fair debate in the public arena of the media. There is a disperse at stake in how we perceive the world around us and how we think about crime and punishment.\r\n'