The NSW State Election

As entertaining as liberal's propaganda was it undeniably reflects popular opinion about Labor's failure in past few decades. When it comes to state elections the debate over law and order has a long-standing history. In the wake of the 2011 NSW State election it seems appropriate to examine not only the role of crime as a political agenda for the wider public, biut also the role of crime as a political tool for the parties.

Recently i read an interesting article on Crikey regarding the relationship between the state government and the police, especially in the lead-up to an election. In the article it was claimed that in the past 15 years of Labor government, all requests by police for extra legislation, power or equipment has been met.

Greens MP David Shoebridge expressed his concerns over such a entrenched relationship, portraying it as an endless desire to keep the police “onside”, “what the police want, they get, no strings attached and no questions asked”. This claim, as expected, was quickly refuted by president of the NSW Police Association Scott Weber who asserted that police have “fought long and hard for everything they have achieved”. Putting aside the issue of whether or not the NSW police received all requests, it is interesting to note the pivotal role the law and order debate in politics. 

Given public opinion and history, there is little surprise that a 'tough on crime' attitude was central to both Labor and Liberal pre-election policy. Thus, there is a grave concern as to the enormous political power that the NSW Police can exert in order to attract significant pre-election promises. One main claim is that police quickly obtain tougher powers and better resources, yet fail to assume a larger responsibility. A common pre-election move is to give the popular impression that something is being done about crime. However, as Cameron Murphy, president of NSW Council for Civil Liberties highlights, “A very cheap way of doing that is to grant police extra powers.” New legislation and police resources is often “thoughtlessly” rushed through parliament, with the equipment seldom being used.

This phenomenon has been prevalent in the past. The introduction of 'bikie laws' in 2009  by the Rees Government was in large a response to a moral panic driven by the media. Essentially, it was merely a knee-jerk reaction to retain political clout, that was predicated upon minimal research and understanding. It is incidents such as these which point towards a seemingly growing trend for politicians to develop crime prevention policy around media and public opinion as opposed to expert advice. 

In lead-up to the this years election, the Police Association submission included over forty recommendations for the government to 'consider'. Many of these include greater police powers, increased salaries, and improved working conditions. Only time will tell how many of these genie wishes will be granted by the new Liberal government. But if history is anything to go by chances are NSW police will be able to have their cake (or donut) and eat it too.

A Response to 'Cheaters' by Mel Kheir

This is a response to 'Cheaters' by Mel Kheir:
http://melcrim2027blog.blogspot.com/2011/05/cheaters.html


I am ever thankful to Mel for blogging on the show 'Cheaters' which ranks undoubtedly as one of the most mind-numbingly tasteless, nonsensical and yet entertaining shows of all time. Much of its late-night popularity and longevity is drawn from it's ability to engage it's audience  subliminally on a moral and emotional level. I agree with Mel's statement that 'Cheaters' symbolises an evolving nature of the media's portrayal of crime; from facts, statistics and information to purely it's entertainment value.  


In my response i want to expand upon the reasons for this shift as well as why i believe shows like "Cheaters" enjoys such popularity.


The entertainment value of reality TV has led to an surge in the exploration of real-life crimes. From shoes concerning organised crime and homicide such as '48 Hours' and 'Crime Investigation Australia' to trivial traffic offences on 'RBT' we are drawn into the voyeuristic pleasures of watching the 'deviant' actions of others. In past this shift is due to a changing social context whereby technology has allowed for crime and its punishment to be made a public spectacle (Fishman & Cavender 1998). In the case of 'Cheaters' this is clearly evident.   


However, one of the primary reason for the popularity of 'crime' shows such as 'Cheaters' is their ability to sensationalise everyday occurrences such as infidelity and incorporate conflict and secrecy. In 'Cheaters' the host Joey Greco assumes the role of the detective and as spectators to the crime we come along for the journey.  


However, shows like 'Cheaters' are less about reality or even infotainment than entertainment, "Perhaps the most defining feature of reality television is that these programs claim to present reality...In this, they are a hybrid form of programming: they resemble aspects of news, but, like entertainment programs often air in prime-time." (Fishman & Cavender, 1998 p. 3.). In fact,  many of these shows have faced much criticism for their exaggerated or staged nature:    

However, for many of the producers, 'crime' shows are often less about informing society and portraying reality than ratings, "If it was all poppycock it sure did well in the ratings".

When reality crime TV goes wrong...

Equal Rights for Pedophiles?

Talkback radio is a powerful medium. 

In Australia, the prominence of radio talkback within political  and media circles has led to it being regarded as a barometer of public opinion (Ward, 2002). The talkback programs that attract the largest media and political interest are those from commercial radio stations, broadcasting to state and national audiences, where the host and callers provide outspoken opinions and debate on political and social issues of the day. One infamous forerunner is 3AW Melbourne shock jock Derryn Hinch.

Unfortunately for Hinch his fearless opinions have landed him in hot water. The media machine who has bowed to few rules for almost half a century faces an uncertain future in gaol for 'naming and shaming' two pedophiles on his website and at a Victorian crime rally in 2008. After taking his case all the way to the High Court, Hinch has been found guilty for breaching four suppression orders and faces a possible custodial sentence. For Hinch, however, it's a case of 'old habits die hard' having spent 12 days in gaol in 1987 for publicly naming a pedophile priest on trial for child sex offences.

Hinch's argument is simple: 

"People know you should have the right to know if some of the worst sex offenders in this country's history are living in your neighbourhood, living next door to you."

Is this a fair statement though?

In Australia one of the fundamental tenets of our criminal justice system is the rule of law and the protection of individual rights under the law. Therefore is it unjust and hypocritical to deny these same rights to those who are yet to be convicted of their alleged crimes and those who have served their sentences? 

A perfect illustration is that of Dennis Ferguson who subsequent to his release has been forced to relocate numerous times across several states due to public threats. I recently watched a BBC documentary by Louis Theroux called 'A Place for Paedophiles'. In it Theroux  interviewed employees and inmates at Coalinga State Hospital in California, a maximum security civil-commitment facility built to contain pedophiles after their release from prison. Although their time at Coalinga is non-court sanctioned, and treatment was optional, in-mates are only released when they are deemed no longer a threat to society, which in most cases is never. 

Although such a system does not exist in Australia currently, it is undeniable that pedophiles face a stigmatised and marginalised post-prison life. Not only are all child sex offenders registered many are restricted as to where they can live by both law and public pressure. Personally, i do not condone the crimes what pedophiles have committed. I think they are despicable and morally repulsive and the hurt and irreparable damage that their victims experience. I am also aware of the real possibility of recidivism and the danger this places upon communities and society as a whole. 

However, i cannot dismiss the inherent incongruity our desire for equality under the law on one hand and our willingness to restrict the rights of some on the other. Perhaps we need to get off our moral high-ground and ask the question: Have we gone too far?

_______________

Ward, Ian (2002) "Talkback radio, political communication, and Australian politics,"

Australian Journal of Communication. Vol. 29 21-38. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/03/3235037.htm

Violent Crime: Entertainment or Unethical?

Call me a masochist but i love violent films. The more gory and repulsive the better. From Wolf Creek to the infamous Saw series i enjoy the thrill and adrenaline of watching psychopathic murderers, unsuspecting victims and a twisted storyline. 

But for me it's simply entertainment. But for others it can be more.

Does the media’s exposure of violent crime encourage and facilitate unlawful acts? Whilst it might simply be a case of entertainment and ratings, is this taken to the extent that it’s no longer ethical?  

In addition to Hollywood films, mainstream crime series on television seem in a large way to condone unethical glorification of crime. Dexter, Bones, NCIS and CSI, are all examples of largely fictional crime investigations which are ruthless in their depiction of real-life crime. Established with viewership in sight, they maintain draw dropping story lines which make for entertainment success. However, are they merely harmless entertainment vehicles or are they more influential than they intend?

A 1994 box office hit “Natural Born Killers” won director Oliver stone an Academy award for his depiction of two victims of traumatised upbringings who find love in each other as psychopathic killers. In the film, they are irresponsibly glorified by the mass media and depicted as “legendary heroes.” However, there have been genuine concerns as to the various deaths or violent real-life crimes that have been linked directly or indirectly to the film.

'The power of suggestion' is how J. Ross, criminologist of Baltimore University explains it. He contends that explicitly violent and graphic plot lines can in a large way implant a seed of crime into those who view it by causing them to covet the fame the initial offender has attained. This view, however, is contested by Ray Surette, who acknowledges that although the media can be influential for the perpetrator, the person would have committed the crime regardless. Rather than media being deemed responsible for crime the more valid perspective would be that it acts as a “rudder” steering a person in favour to a particular idea.

Perhaps no one conclusion can be drawn.

In one large sense, we cannot blame the media for the rate and nature of crime in today’s society however we need to be mindful of where that line should be drawn. Wherever that line is to be one thing is for certain; the media should be careful not to glorify criminal acts lest they encourage copy cat crimes.

_______________

http://www.livescience.com/6396-china-child-attacks-copycat-crimes.html

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/celebrity/natural_born_killers/1.html

The CSI Effect

“So what do you study at university?”

“I’m doing a Bachelor degree in Law and Criminology”

“Criminology? That’s sounds interesting. That’s like the stuff that they do on CSI and NCIS right?”

 ……….

A misguided view.

As a criminology student I often find myself having to explain my field of study to other people. Whether it’s at a family barbeque, a job interview or even to my own parents, it’s usually a case of mistaken identity. More often than not i’ve had to disappoint. To explain that my course was less about criminal profiling, DNA testing and hair fibres and more about theories, policy and Don Weatherburn. 

Admittedly though, when i first began this course, I too had a rather misguided perspective of the academic field of criminology. My own consumption of crime and media news, primarily composed of CSI and NCIS, had fuelled a distorted and glamourised view. 

Which made me think. 

How do these television crime dramas inform people's understanding of crime and justice and what effects does it have?

The 'CSI Effect'

Fictional stories provide an interpretative framework through which informs and shapes our understanding of culture (McCullagh, 2002).Thus, the genre of crime dramas provide popular interpretative perspectives that shape our thought, in this case about crime. Rafter (2006) argues that crime dramas are framed heavily as morality plays which replicates the fight between good and evil. Thus, adored crime-fighting poster boys such as Special Agent Leroy Jethro Gibbs and Dr. Gilbert Grissom are at the forefront in the battle between heroes who stand for moral authority and their villain contemporaries who challenge that authority.

In addition, there is a growing misperception of the work of criminologists and forensic scientists. The portrayal of instant, infallible DNA results, investigative expertise and deductive genius as the norm have drawn many people into the image of exciting, fast-paced successes. This understanding, however, is most certainty detached from reality.

Be careful what you believe!

Founding father of America Ben Franklin famously said, 

“Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see.”

One interesting aspect of crime dramas is it's relationship with our perception of real-life crime. According to recent research by Kort-Butler and Harts Horn (2011), the rate at which the public watched popular crime shows on television, such as CSI and NCIS, directly affected they way they thought about real-life crime.The study discovered that the more people watched crime dramas the more likely they were to fear victimisation in real life. They also tended to be less confident in the criminal justice system and believed the crime rate was rising. 

It is this aspect of crime dramas which is of concern. Not only do they create false expectations and understanding about criminal justice institutions but induce people to falsely assume fear and harm.

This is a realisation that i have come to during my time in this course. The media is foundational in shaping our understanding of real-life crime, often in inaccurate and exaggerated ways. There is a need to be cautious and critical; to consciously separate entertainment from information. Otherwise, we face analysing and seeking to prevent crime in ineffective and counter-productive ways.

_______________

McCullagh, C. (2002) Media Power: A Sociological Introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Rafter, N. (2006) Shots in the Mirror: Crime Films and Society, 2nd edn. New York: Oxford University Press.

Kort-Butler, Lisa & Hartshorn, Kelley J. Sittner, "Watching the Detectives: Crime Programming, Fear of Crime, and Attitudes About the Criminal Justice System".Sociological Quarterly, 2011; 52 (1): 36

Bad Cop, Bad Cop.

The latest season of Underbelly: The Golden Mile began with the tagline:

"the story of the excesses of the empire, the collapse of the empire, the chaos that followed...seen through the eyes of some of the most sexy, charming, corrupt and deadly people of the time"

The glamour of police corruption is often painted across our television and cinema screens. We are exposed daily to countless fictional and not-so-fictional tales of cash-swindling, womanising cops. Admittedly though, we are often drawn in. Perhaps it's the need to satisfy our own indwelling deviance. Perhaps it's the sweet allure that comes with seeing someone else bend the rules. Perhaps it's merely curiosity.

A few months ago I sat in at the trial of Mark William Standen, former assistant director of the NSW Commission. Amongst various other misdemeanours, he had been charged with conspiracy to import 300kg of pseudoephedrine. I recall wondering what would drove him to commit such a crime. Was it pure greed? A search for more power? 

Or perhaps the pressure of being one of the 'good guys' had simply gotten to him. 

Whatever it was, there was definitely no glamour about it. The sex, money and fame promised by Underbelly were a far cry from the handcuffed, hunched figure of a disgraced cop.

Police corruption, both fictional and fact, is a popular topic in our contemporary media consumption, ever since the days of Philip Marlowe and the image of the cigar-smoking, rule-bending hard-boiled detective. The story of fallible police treading the fine line between discretion and dishonesty has seen great history in classics such as Dirty Harry and L.A. Confidential, as well as the new-age likes of The Departed and The Shield. But often, these tales are all but a reflection of the systemic and entrenched corruption of real life. The most prolific example to date is the infamous Wood Royal Commission into the NSW Police Service between 1995-1997. Tabloids pounced upon hundreds of uncovered instances of bribery, money laundering, drug trafficking, and falsifying of evidence by police. For many citizens it represented a failure of authority and seeded distrust of those who were supposedly meant to protect them from crime.

The question however, remains: What is the cause of police corruption?
Delattre (2008) purports the idea that corruption begins with apparently harmless and well-intentioned practices and leads over time—either in individuals or in departments as a whole—to all manner of crimes-for-profit. Though this view does address pertinent issues in police culture, the idea of allowing discretions in traffic offences leading to trafficking 300kg of narcotics seems a tad far-fetched to me.

I just prefer the idea that cops too are human; and susceptible to the same morally deviant impulses like the rest of us mortals.