Crime, the Media, and the Law Policy - Research Paper Example

? Crime, the media and the law policy number Crime, the media and the law policy Crime and the effects of the media on the investigation of it are highly important issues in the present age. There are many reasons for this and the consequences of it include adverse effects on the formulation of laws that may then not be enough to deal with violations of the peace and harmony of a place. In a democratic state, there are many factors that a government needs to take into consideration while handling a case and the response that they are likely to get from the people who form their vote base would form a major factor. This paper shall take into account this scenario while looking at certain cases that generated a lot of public interest as a result of the intervention or interference of the media. The power of the media and its responsibilities towards ensuring a harmonious state shall be looked into and the effects of such media coverage on the people shall be explored. Apart from this, the commercial aspect of the media and the advertising industry that forms a large part of the media and depends on sensationalism to a great extent for drawing its revenues shall also be a part of the focus of this paper. The only way in which the masses of a particular place would get to know about the crime rates of the area that they live in is through the media. Kenneth Dowler states – “The mass media play an important role in the construction of criminality and the criminal justice system. The public’s perception of victims, criminals, deviants, and law enforcement officials is largely determined by their portrayal in the mass media” (2003). Statistics regarding the performances of specific sectors of the law enforcement agencies are often let out to the society through the work of the media. Te channel of communication between the rulers and the ruled being the media, it has the onus of redirecting power back to the people from whom it is supposed to originate. The working of a democracy in an ideal manner has thus, a lot to do with the way in which the cycles of power are managed. The interest of the people at the helm of affairs would lie in the way in which the negative aspects of their tenure along with the positive ones are reported. This would result in a balanced analysis that would enable the smooth functioning of democracy in a nation. The media would then be able to fulfil its role as a check on the power of elected representatives in a government. Problems arise, however, when this system is subverted for the sake of profits on the part of increasingly profit-oriented media ventures. The effects of commercialization can be seen the most in the news media which provides people with the maximum amount of knowledge regarding crimes and the mechanisms that seek to control it. Such control is dependent on the taxes that people pay and hence depends on their consent regarding the modes of prevention of crime and the punishments that are meted out to people who violate the law. The opinions of people regarding the methods that seek to tackle crime are always factors that decide the person that occupies the seat of power. Consequently, the process of dealing with crime is something that is important to not just the people who cover it as a part of the media but also for the people who make laws for the prevention of it (Current Problems in the Media, 2012). The credibility of the media too has undergone erosion in the last few decades. With a growth in the corporatisation of the media, the power of its lobbies has grown too. The power of the media in shaping public opinion too is something that provides it with immense clout in deciding the social affairs of the state. This has however, instead of encouraging honest investigative reporting led people to look for easy successes and fame through sensationalism (ibid). An unhealthy state of affairs in the media reflects badly upon the health of the nation’s government. It is here that one encounters a disturbing possibility. This is the possibility of a nexus between the people who create the law and those who create and circulate public opinion. Politicians who may seek to influence a certain share of the population may seek to influence that part of the society and ignore the rest. This depends on who constitutes whose vote-bank. Important cases involving people of different backgrounds have come up in news reports and have captured the minds and imagination of Americans since news channels and sensationalization of news has become a trend. Evidence of this can be seen in the cases that shall be discussed in this paper. The effects of the discussed cases on the process of the creation of laws shall also be discussed. The O.J. Simpson case is one of the most famous cases in American legal history. The effects of the case are said to have set back race relations in America by a long way and had also renewed the mistrust that races in America felt for each other. The specifics of the case aside, it is important to note that the case was televised and also had a large viewership amongst the American public. The celebrity of O.J. Simpson also contributed in a large way to the importance that the case had received amongst the public of America. According to Thomas L. Jones, To many, particularly in minority communities, the trial of Orenthal James Simpson became not so much a determination of his guilt or innocence of murder in the first degree, beyond a reasonable doubt, but whether or not a black man could find justice in a legal system designed by and largely administered by whites. To others, many of whom were white, the key question was whether a mostly minority jury would convict a black celebrity regardless of the weight of evidence against him. (n.d.). The role of the jury in deciding cases came in for critique during this case. The impartiality of the jury has always been a point of concern for legal experts; why this case renewed the interest is what is of interest to the subject of this paper. The importance that the case received in terms of increasing the rating points of certain channels was something that probably led to this. The importance that was given to the case by television channels also needs to be viewed suspiciously. Such cases that include angles of racial tension always have a scope for controversy and interest among the public. The attitudes of the public get a point to get crystallized and strengthened by the profit-seeking manoeuvres that are conducted by the media. This point of racial politics can also be seen in the Casey Anthony case which saw a great deal of interest on the part of the American public. The concept of the scandal can be used to understand the psychology behind the high viewership in this case. Charlie Smith argues that the viewership for African American or Latino defendants would be lower as a result of public perceptions and prejudices. He argues that a white middle class defendant would be the subject of greater speculation and would trigger greater reforms in crime law legislation policies. This, he attributes to what people think of as an unusual suspect in crimes. He states –“Far more often than not, these shows focus on middle-class or high-income Caucasians who've done something very bad....Perhaps this is because crime stories involving people of African or Latin American descent don't generate as high viewership. There's a lot of money to be made selling ads on television sandwiched between these sordid tales” (2011). As a result of the defendant being a woman, the interest deepens and the media coverage too, sniffs out possibility of coverage and sensation. Such ideas of scandal were relevant to a population that existed in the Victorian age. It is indeed a shameful state of affairs that such codes of ethics are still in prevalence in today’s age. Policies regarding the controlling of institutions preventing crime have a lot to do with political will and what politicians feel is good for the community that they are a part of. Playing vote-bank politics may win a candidate temporary gains but hurts his or her constituency in the long run. This leads to the creation of divisions, something even the candidate may not have bargained for. Control of law and order becomes a tough situation in such a situation where loyalties to institutions other than the nation become a priority for the citizen. While it needs to be admitted that racial divisions and animosities do exist, it also needs to be acknowledged that certain forms of reporting done by the media only serve to deepen the tensions that already exist. Legislation may be necessary to fight off the encroachment of the media over the duties of the judiciary as a sensationalization of the crime may negate the ability of the judiciary to reach out to the public on its own. This becomes a problem as it affects the credibility that the judiciary has in the eyes of the people and leads to parallel trials that occur in the media. The debate regarding whether or not coverage of courtroom scenes are to be allowed needs to be successfully resolved in order to create a system where the different parts of the society function together to create a better standard of living for the people of the United States of America (Should cameras be allowed in federal courtrooms? n.d.). Legislation that seeks to limit the role of the media may lead to a situation where people do not get details of a case that is being tried at a certain point of time. Transparency of the process of trying a person and other processes of the judiciary is necessary so as to retain the faith that people may have in it. This is very important in a democratic nation where the judiciary is one of the most important pillars of the governance of the nation. It remains that part of the nation’s government which can overturn the decisions of the legislature and the executive when it feels that it is against the interests of the nation. Having said this, it is also important that money is not made out of the proceedings of the court. This requires television channels that are disinterested in profits to probably broadcast the process of justice. Channels that enter this process without the intention of disseminating knowledge need to be prevented from being a part of the process. This would lead to the absence of sensationalization and people would be able to watch the proceedings only with a view of bettering the manner in which the process is conducted. Tensions that are set in motion on the basis of class and racial prejudices can in this way be avoided. All this can happen only when the authorities who are in charge of them take up this issue and the policy of dividing people for selfish political gains. The positives for the community need to be at the forefront of the activities that are done by elected representatives of the people. In the long run, this would help in not just more peaceful lives for the people of the constituency but also lesser crimes that would lead to electoral consolidations. References Dowler, K. (2003). “Media Consumption and Public Attitudes towards Crime and Justice: The relationship between fear of crime, Punitive Attitudes, and perceived Police Effectiveness.” Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture 10(2). Retrieved 20th September, 2012, from http://www.albany.edu/scj/jcjpc/vol10is2/dowler.html Jones, T. L. (n.d.). “The Murder Trial of O.J. Simpson”. Crime library. Retrieved 20th September, 2012, from http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/simpson/index_1.html Smith, C. (2011). “Casey Anthony verdict feeds insatiable U.S. media appetite for sensational crime stories.” Straight.com. Retrieved 20th September, 2012, from http://www.straight.com/article-402872/vancouver/casey-anthony-acquittal-feeds-insatiable-us-media-appetite-sensational-crime-stories Current Problems in the Media. (2012). Daily Source. Retrieved 20th September, 2012, from http://www.dailysource.org/about/problems#.UGFV17IgcUo Should cameras be allowed in federal courtrooms? (n.d.). Annenberg Classroom. Retrieved 20th September, 2012, from http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/speakout/should-cameras-be-allowed-in-federal-courtrooms Read More