Category: Criminal Behavior

Essay on Nature Vs Nurture in Criminal Behavior

Criminal behavior is a complex phenomenon influenced by a myriad of factors, including both innate characteristics and environmental influences. The age-old debate of nature vs nurture in understanding criminal behavior continues to captivate scholars, researchers, and the general public alike. Through the examination of real-life examples, this exemplification essay aims to shed light on the interplay between nature and nurture in shaping criminal conduct.

Nature: Biological Predispositions

Biological theories of criminal behavior propose that individuals may have inherent predispositions towards engaging in criminal acts due to their genetic makeup and neurological functioning. A compelling example of this is the case of the Menendez brothers, Lyle and Erik, who infamously murdered their wealthy parents in their Beverly Hills mansion in 1989. Psychological evaluations revealed that both brothers exhibited signs of personality disorders, including narcissism and sociopathy.

Studies have shown that certain genetic factors, such as variations in the MAOA gene, commonly referred to as the “warrior gene,” can predispose individuals to aggressive and impulsive behavior. In the case of the Menendez brothers, their genetic predispositions, combined with a privileged upbringing and dysfunctional family dynamics, contributed to the eruption of violence that resulted in the brutal murders of their parents. Despite growing up in a wealthy and ostensibly stable environment, their biological predispositions towards aggression played a significant role in shaping their criminal behavior.

Nurture: Environmental Influences

On the other hand, nurture theories of criminal behavior emphasize the impact of environmental factors, such as upbringing, socialization, and life experiences, in shaping individuals’ propensity towards crime. A poignant example of this is the case of Susan Smith, who infamously drowned her two young sons in a lake in South Carolina in 1994. Psychological evaluations revealed that Smith had a history of childhood trauma, including sexual abuse by her stepfather and a tumultuous relationship with her parents.

Smith’s upbringing in a dysfunctional family environment, marked by abuse and neglect, significantly influenced her psychological development and emotional well-being. These adverse childhood experiences, coupled with Smith’s lack of adequate support and coping mechanisms, contributed to her profound psychological distress and ultimately led to the tragic act of filicide. Despite any potential genetic predispositions, it was Smith’s environmental upbringing that played a decisive role in shaping her criminal behavior.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the nature vs nurture debate in criminal behavior is characterized by the intricate interplay between biological predispositions and environmental influences. Through the examination of real-life examples such as the Menendez brothers and Susan Smith, we can see how both nature and nurture factors contribute to shaping individuals’ propensity towards crime. Ultimately, a nuanced understanding of criminal behavior requires considering the complex interaction between innate characteristics and environmental contexts. By examining these real-life cases, we can gain valuable insights into the multifaceted nature of criminal conduct and the factors that contribute to its manifestation.

Crime Statistics by Race: Essay

All black individuals are criminals. This a sentence that may be shocking but is an example of an ecological fallacy that has become so ‘normalized’ within society; the concept that the white majority is less likely to be perpetrators in crime but victims. Most people have a belief that we all deserve to be treated with equal rights, equal punishments, and equality; the story behind race and crime paints quite a different picture. Exploring the influence of ethnicity on criminality to help represent a voice for those who can’t speak, to raise the right questions, and to allow a balanced argument to manifest.

Within the media, the public narrative of race and crime is predominately based upon stereotypes; racial minority groups are frequently portrayed as acting more criminalistic and are the cause of crime. The public’s views of the criminal justice system are heavily shaped by what is relayed from media sources (Gillespie & McLaughlin, 2002), and media reports must be accurate to prevent misreported information. Worldwide, the media has a similar influence on our perceptions of race- “the criminal stereotype of African Americans in the United States is an ethnic stereotype according to which African American males in particular are stereotyped to be dangerous criminals” (Young, 2001). Within British and European countries this bias continues- people defined as an ethnic minority are more at risk of crime victimization than the indigenous population (Percy 1998; Clancy et al., 2001; Albrecht, 2000). Statistically, this can be shown in England and Wales between 2006/7-2016/17 where “Black people were over 3 times more likely to be arrested than White people – there were 38 arrests for every 1,000 Black people and 12 arrests for every 1,000 White people.” These statistics show that there is a large amount of variation within racial groups that may have a detrimental influence on the way ethnic minorities are treated, leading to the potential for harsher sentencing and consequences of racial profiling within judicial systems.

Media frequently portrays that ethnic minorities are to blame for faults in society (an extreme example being Nazi Germany’s propaganda around the Jews) and that they should be approached with caution; disregarding the influence that upbringing and social class play in determining one’s transition to crime. On American television and cable network there is an overrepresentation of African Americans as criminals and Whites as victims (Dixon & Linz, 2000a, 2000b; Entman & Rojecki, 2000; Gilliam & Iyengar, 2000), where African Americans are most likely linked to crime; most likely affecting a viewer’s idea around social policy (Gilliam & Lyengar 1998; Valentino, 1999). A portrayal of racial groups, that is not factually correct may instill false conceptions into the mind of the public, who will not know any better. If the public is filled with false beliefs (such as all African American males are law-breaking criminals or all Hispanics are drug dealing), leading to unfair treatment of those groups. Although there is little research into the representation of other racial-ethnic groups, other than African Americans, on television, the evidence to support the inequitable treatment of African Americans shows a bias in a society’s judgment of people different from themselves due to inaccurate ideas being reinforced from young ages; there is a significant difference between what is reported through the media to the general public and what is the factual truth regarding the risk of ethnic minorities.

In the last 20 years, social media has become such a relied-upon space for people of all ages to express themselves through multiple methods (photos, poems, art, etc.), it allows information to be shared instantly around the world. Although this has many benefits to individuals and society, it poses a way of communicating false information and conveying personal feelings. Hate crimes have become an increasingly concerning part of social media, especially since the large controversy of Brexit, with fake accounts making damaging comments without fear. “The volume of racially aggravated hate crime referrals from police increased slightly from 10,198 in 2016–17 to 10,472 in 2017-18 – an increase of 2.7%,” (Crown Prosecution Service); ethnic minorities are frequently victimized. Celebrities often play a part in this where Gigi Hadid, 2017, (Victoria’s Secret Model) was photographed “squinting her eyes while holding up a Buddha-shaped biscuit,” before a show in China. Impressionable, often younger audiences will see this racial hate crime and may begin to join in because it seems acceptable; potentially leading to incorrect beliefs about different ethnicities.

Reactions to this discrimination, by law enforcement, in crime do not always reflect a moral and just way of how it should be responded to. Reports over the relationship between ethnic minorities and terrorism have led to panic amongst the public and law enforcement which can be demonstrated in statistics of stop and search practices; to search for weapons or prohibited items and remove them as a threat. Overall there is a discrepancy with the number of searches being lower for white ethnicities than any other, in every year studied. 20 years ago, Theresa May made attempts to reduce the bias in the practice when a report was released discovering that black Britons were 9 times more likely to be stopped and searched for drugs than white people (regardless of using illegal substances at a lower rate). Since that report was released stop and search practices declined 52% for white ethnicities but did not fall at all for black ethnicities; understanding of the need to be less biased may be there but with such great social fear of ethnic minorities, for example, ISIS radicals, increase in terrorism, has not facilitated a change. Currently, law enforcement responds to racial minorities as perpetrators of crime, a fear of what could occur without control has led to discriminatory practices.

Within the prison and judicial system there has been a recent switch to moving towards less discriminatory practices since the release of The Lammy Review. It seeks to independently identify and reduce the bias between the white majority and Black, Asian, and Minority ethnic individuals (BAME) within England; “Black people make up around 3% of the general population but accounted for 12% of adult prisoners in 2015/16; and more than 20% of children in custody;” an over-representation that is estimated to cost England and Wales £234 million per year. Although this has been identified to be a big problem, there is little/no evidence to suggest that anything is being done to change this. Reports show that nearly three-quarters of staff claims were acted upon, contrasting to only 8% of prisoners’ discrimination reports. Politicians, juries, law enforcement, and the general public are all aware of the large discrimination within the prison system, this hasn’t facilitated any changes but it has drawn people to be more aware of the issues, as well as leading to The Lammy Review.

Parliamentary policymakers are “more likely to oppose welfare payments or support ‘get tough’ policies on crime, especially when blacks are the targets of such policies,” due to the associations of ethnic minorities and negative impacts on the country; sentencing may get harsher and a zero-tolerance policy may be implemented. Within American culture, white superiority is deeply embedded into the U.S. Constitution by the founding fathers; African slaves being their property. After slavery was abolished, African Americans were given a new freedom where participation in politics grew, between 1867 to 1877, known as the black reconstruction. Since then, the representation of black politicians in Congress has been less than 8 Black in Congress since the end of the Civil until the Nixon era (per Congressional period). However, Barack Obama became president of the United States from 2009-2017; the first black president of the New World. This became a turning point in the relationship between race and politics where discrimination, although still heavily prevalent, became a lesser issue but only for a short period where “2010 mid-term elections that were as violent and as racially loaded as ever.” To summarise, the reaction of racial crime within politics is something in vital need of change, such a large component of the discrimination of ethnicities is not all about the color of their skin, but it’s a power battle usually to support white supremacy through the concept of institutional racism.

Criminological perspectives of race and crime can identify and understand many different types of factors that cause crime, for example, social factors. The bias exerted against ethnic minorities through public narratives does not represent and complete view of the issues evident. A perspective that crime can occur regardless of race or ethnicity yet the beliefs of the public and what is represented through the media show no reference to this, that because the color of someone’s skin means they’re more likely to be tied to a crime. It is understandable to believe that in certain groups within society, crime becomes a more normalized behavior, and upbringing in this culture increases the risk of resorting to crime. However, professional understandings of the link between race and crime show that arrest rates and reactions towards those of color show unfair treatment- in 2016 “black, Asian and mixed-raced people were over one and a half times more likely to be arrested than white people.” The media distortions conveyed to the public have fed the general public with implicit beliefs that do not represent a professional understanding of the relationship between race and crime.

One of the most important ways to build a constructive argument is to have an adequate amount of research support, if findings do not support the comments being made then it is not accurate to comment upon. It is important to be able to analyze these findings to understand whether they are biased in any sense (for example research from the government) or explain the point being made. It is important, as a criminologist, to take into consideration both sides of the argument equally, to avoid only addressing one point of perspective, and to produce a balanced argument understanding that there are two sides to every discussion. Especially for crime, it is important to look at media accounts of the issues at hand so investigating the internet, newspapers, social media, etc. is key in being able to reflect on the reasoning for the public beliefs. Lastly, it is quintessentially important to be able to look at the changes over time that have occurred in crime; and to be able to reflect on how society is adapting to new information and acceptability becoming a more crucial practice.

Criminological expertise reflects large importance on being able to evaluate and investigate something in an unbiased way; criminal justice studies scholars are more likely to have more liberal positions on issues in society than the general public. The general public and professional understandings do not fully represent the whole truth, there is an inability to fully report on a topic without drawing any personal feelings into the message. The facts must be represented in an honest way, that takes into consideration both sides of the argument, allowing individuals to come to their conclusions without being hindered by a personal argument. To be a successful criminologist it is important to remain unbiased while investigating the reasons behind people committing crimes, how to prevent it occurring in the future, and being able to predict when it will take place.

To conclude, there are many different responses/reactions/beliefs regarding race and crime but without a doubt, there is a large discrepancy between what is morally just and what occurs; rates of incarceration are so disproportionate between ethnic groups and the actions by law enforcement and politicians has not change this. There are many problems within society but to overcome this it needs to begin with a fair treatment of all individuals and not assuming that the colour of their skin has any implications on their actions.

Expository Essay on Identity Theft

 Identity theft comes in many forms: from credit card theft to social security numbers, people nowadays have the power to steal or take what they own or even who they identify themselves to be. Especially in today’s society with the advancement of technology, it is much easier to scam credit cards and the identification of others. It is important to educate all age groups from teens to elders about the importance of being safe, smart, and aware of credit card scammers and stereotypical opinions on pageantry.

First, it is important to be educated about credit card scammers with information on what to look out for and how to protect your identity. Most of the time scams look like the real deal, which tricks the victims into believing it is authentic and valid. Scams come in many forms, from emails to phone calls and even online ads, so it is important to make sure it is coming from an accredited source. Most scammers are manipulative and target young ages and elders who are too young to know better or too old to understand, which is why I stated before the first step to stop the spread of victims is to be educated. In the journal, “SCAMS: What You Need to Know,” Ingrid Paguar speaks on various actions you can take to help prevent scams. One type of scam is government and banking. “These scammers say they are from a government body or a bank and that you are owed money, usually a refund of overcharged fees or taxes. You will

be asked to pay a fee and supply your banking/personal details, but the refund money will never be deposited in your account and the scammer has your details” (Paguar 36). This will give the scammers your banking information, which leads to future access or credit and debit cards. Since they have access they can purchase anything under your name which could cause lower credit scores.

Since credit card scammers are attacking various people, it is important to learn about tips on how to protect yourself and what to be aware of when scammers come your way. “Don’t fall for promises. The companies claim to have a special relationship with your credit card company. But the FTC said investigators found that people who pay for these services don’t get the interest rate reductions or savings promised, and don’t pay off their credit card debt three to five times faster, as promised” (Willis). Scammers will trick you into thinking they have a relationship with your credit card company, when in fact, they do not. Scammers will say anything too promising to be true to get your attention. Getting your attention and making you believe it is true will only cause problems for you and your credit card company.

Credit card scammers will find a way to contact you in different forms. From phone calls and letters, they will trick you into believing they are available sources. One way that credit card scammers contact people is through email. Through emails, the scammers are trying to receive your personal information to have access to your bank account or any form of account on the internet that has access to your credit or debit cards. Scammers will also come up with events that are personal to you to receive your information. “The scammer might indicate you’ve inherited money from an uncle you didn’t know you had, but to collect it you need to pay legal fees first. Or you won a lottery but need to pay a small fee of only $100 to obtain your prize” (Goldsborough 14). Scammers grab your attention by paying a small fee to receive a bigger fee. They are smart, creative, and determined to receive access to your account.

While credit card scammers have tricked people for years, banks are ready to fight back. A well-known credit card company, MasterCard, has become aware of credit card scammers and is starting to protect its customers. “Its Operation STOP IT has helped shut down 750 Websites trafficking in stolen consumer credit card account numbers and almost 1,400 counterfeit financial institution sites” (Wolfe). While MasterCard has started its Operation “STOP IT,” it has protected many people from credit card scammers by shutting down any websites that are suspicious online. Bank accounts, including MasterCard, have passwords and protection on credit cards and bank accounts for their customers. My father has a MasterCard and when he purchases an item with his card, MasterCard calls his number to verify the transaction was made by him.

Identity theft is more than scamming credit cards and stealing other people’s information; it could also be changing someone’s personal information and who they identify to be. Many people have discriminative opinions on beauty pageants, stating women are judged based on their looks, actions, and clothing choices. Negative stereotypes of pageants have been around for years, many believe that these women competing are only beautiful and not academically inclined; however, I disagree. The identity of a modern pageant woman is stereotyped to be a beautiful face under a sparkling crown; however, that is just a skin-deep impression. Most pageant women use the connections brought from the crown to initiate change in the outside world. I would know this since I am a pageant girl myself.

I started competing in pageants from the age of six to the age of eighteen. I grew up in the spotlight on stage and amongst my peers. Since the age of six, I was stereotyped to be the girl who dressed up to only win pageants because I was “pretty” and nothing more. For the longest time, I gave into the discriminatory opinion that there was nothing more to me than a pretty dress and a sparkling crown. Most people do not view the stereotype as a negative issue, but pageant women do. Most people do not know the layers of the pageant system: community service, scholarship, style, and success.

I was involved with the Miss America Organization for twelve years, which is based on the layers I mentioned before. Most girls including myself, competed in pageants to earn scholarships for future education. I knew I wanted to major in business and someday become a CEO. Pageants gave me confidence in myself and taught me how to use the sparkling crown as a microphone to speak up for what I believe in and what I choose to become with the standing foundation of pageantry throughout the years. Pageants also taught me how to become a role model for other girls and how to carry myself with style and class. While wearing the sparkling crown, I used it with grace by helping others, including my little brother, who is visually impaired. I raised money and collected eyeglasses for the visually impaired living in developing countries. I collected over 400 pairs of eyeglasses throughout my years of pageantry. Throughout the years of scholarship, style, and service I became successful. By the age of nineteen, I created my platform, called “C.O.L.E- Collecting Opportunities for the Lions Club Eyeglasses,” and won a scholarship for my future education. I learned how to speak for what I believe gracefully.

There is much more to me than a sparkling crown and a pretty gown. Pageant women are hard-working, determined, graceful, and ready to make a change. Pageant women are only evolving as we speak and I am grateful to be a part of the change. Pageant women must remember our worth is not revealed by other’s judgments, but we must remember we are defined by our character. The stereotypes that many pageant women and I are identified by are not nearly who we are. For many years, I allowed stereotypes to get the best of me until I realized my worth.  

Forgiveness and Retribution in the Criminal Justice System Essay

Justice is one of the most fundamental social, ethical, and moral principles we encounter every day. How you define justice affects how you think society should work. Some people may define justice as doing just actions such as buying food for someone in need, punishing a criminal by sending him or her to prison, or volunteering at a local shelter. Justice is when all individuals in this world are happy and secure; however, this can never be achieved. Since the world is not perfect, there are theories on how justice can be achieved as closely as possible. There are three main theories of justice: The Retributive, Utilitarian, and Restorative. The Retributive Theory of Justice states that actions deserve punishment and that the offender must suffer in the same magnitude that he or she caused. The utilitarian view states that whatever situation maximizes good and minimizes bad for the overall population is just. Lastly, The Restorative Theory of Justice states that the offender or criminal must personally repair the damage done and make the situation whole again. In this essay, I will argue why justice is when the world has an overall net positive outcome and should be addressed with a restorative view.

As John Rawls states in the Theory of Justice, justice is fairness and equality that can be achieved by all people having equal access to the basic rights and social and economic inequalities arranged to even out disadvantages (Rawls, 1971). His idea is a need-based justice system which results in a utilitarian society. It focuses specifically on making sure everybody can achieve their basic need, thus allowing the most people to achieve happiness. This is superior to a distributive justice system: a system in which everybody gets an equal distribution of goods (Lamont, 2016). This does not fulfill the utilitarian view because not everybody needs the same thing. For example, someone in the working middle class may need enough money to pay off house loans while a homeless person needs a house. If the distributive justice system were implemented and everybody was granted a certain amount of money, this homeless person would still be unable to afford a house. Need-based justice would grant their needs, which in turn maximizes net good for society (Traub, 2017).

Individuals in our society have been told throughout their lives that if they work hard and with ambition, they will succeed. This is not always true as it does not account for structural injustice. Rawls acknowledges that our society is filled with inequalities beyond our control, so it is only fair to account for these inequalities by giving more to those at a disadvantage. He calls this the difference principle. Though some may argue that this is unfair to those who have strived to achieve the most, they likely do not view the world under what Rawls calls the “veil of ignorance,” which allows us to view the circumstances without any personal biases. The “veil of ignorance” is a social thought experiment that requires one to think about the new world (Rawls, 1971). Behind the veil, one does not know anything about their future self such as sex, gender, or race. Those who argue Rawls’ need-based justice system is unfair are likely those who are currently at an advantage; therefore, do not see society in the eyes of the disadvantaged.

Justice must also be addressed in terms of criminal justice. Many people in The United States may find the Restorative Theory of Justice difficult to think about because it is so different than what we are used to. Instead of punishing criminals by incarceration, this theory forces the offender to take responsibility for their actions and harm by seeking forgiveness from the victim. This pushes our society to move forward as it introduces the idea that criminals can change and should not always be labeled as criminals. Encouraging the criminal to seek forgiveness from the victim is important. The action cannot be undone, but restoration will help. A research program conducted in 2001 concluded that 85% of the victims were satisfied with this process. (Sitemap, 2019)

Restoration and forgiveness are superior to the Retributive outlook for many reasons. The retributive justice theory states that the criminal must suffer in proportion to how his or her actions made others suffer, similar to the Biblical saying, “an Eye for an Eye.” Instead of focusing on the suffering of the criminal, we should be focusing on what was already done by moving forward. The United States overemphasizes incarceration: so much that our country has the highest incarceration rate in history (“United States…”, 2019). The United States holds 5% of the world’s population; however, it holds 25% of the world’s prisoners (“Mass Incarceration”, 2015). It can be concluded that if high incarceration rates increase overall safety, the United States should be the safest country in the world. Our country is not even on the list of the top 10 safest countries. Previous restorative justice implementations show that offenders are 83% less likely to reoffend again while 3 out of 4 incarcerated offenders are likely to offend again. A main issue with the US prison system is that it does not hold the offender accountable or require them to act, think, or change while they are in prison. They have no responsibility to acknowledge or answer for their mistakes. Alternatively, restorative justice will hold them accountable to repair things as much as possible as well as take responsibility and vow to not commit the crime again.

Another reason why retributive justice may cause criminals to re-offend is that it repeatedly exposes criminals to the main core drivers of violence including isolation, exposure to violence, and economic instability (Morris, 2007). Incarceration takes these drivers and forces criminals to be constantly surrounded by them. Even after incarceration, many criminals find themselves unstable economically, which may push them to turn to violence. Restoration avoids this as it pushes the offender to make amends with the victim rather than forcing the offender into an environment that is filled with drivers of violence. Restoration is much more personal and puts the criminal in a position to be looked at as a person rather than a body who committed a crime. An additional “consequence” in restorative justice views may be community service. This is a better approach to incarceration because it may help the criminal realize that their current path is wrong and possibly lead him or her to grow positively.

In conclusion, justice can never be achieved due to our imperfect world. Realistically, justice is when the individuals in our society have an overall net positive in happiness, safety, and security. In a situation where someone has caused suffering to another, justice is when the offender makes the situation whole again by confronting the victim.

References

1. Rawls, John, 1921-2002. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1971.
2. Lamont, Julian; Favor, Christi, ‘Distributive Justice’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =.
3. Traub, Stefan & Bauer, Alexander & Siebel, Mark & Springhorn, Nils & Weiss, Arne. (2017). On the measurement of need-based justice.
4. Sitemap, et al. “Evidence Supporting the Use of Restorative Justice.” Evidence Supporting the Use of Restorative Justice | Restorative Justice Council, Restorative Justice Council, restorativejustice.org.uk/resources/evidence-supporting-use-restorative-justice.
5. “United States Still Has Highest Incarceration Rate in the World.” Equal Justice Initiative, 4 Nov. 2019, eji.org/news/united-states-still-has-highest-incarceration-rate-world/.
6. “Mass Incarceration.” American Civil Liberties Union, www.aclu.org/issues/smart-justice/mass-incarceration.
7. Morris, Stephen. “The Causes of Violence and the Effects of Violence On Community and Individual Health. .” Global Health Education Consortium, Sept. 2007, www.cugh.org/sites/default/files/62_Causes_Of_Violence_and_Violence__Effects_on_Community_and_Individual_Health_FINAL_0.pdf.

How does Crime and the Media Lead to Young Male Knife Crime Victimisation?

Knife crime is a crime taken place using a sharp object such as a blade or a knife as a weapon. I will be discussing how crime and the media leads to young male knife crime victimisation by discussing the effects of the media. This will include the news, online social media’s such as YouTube, television programs and video games. I will also be touching upon arguments against. The media is today’s main way of communicating and to be a victim is a result of an individual suffering in result of a crime or incident.

Knife crime is frequently reported in the news and many individuals who carry knifes and become victim to knife crime are young males. Knife has been a rising cause of concern in Britain however news reports often exaggerate crimes. ‘All media appear to exaggerate the extent of violent crime in Britain, this includes newspapers, news, entertainment, radio and crime fiction’ (Greer 2005). Violent crimes are often over represented leading crimes to be a popular topic of interest within society leaving people to feel unsafe, fearful and creating a moral panic leading to social disorganisation and a risk society. Research carried out by Ditton and Duffy (1983) found that ’46 percent of the news concerned violent crimes however when looking at police recorded crime such crimes made up less than 3 percent’. Those who feel they are at most risk of becoming a knife crime victim, may feel they need to carry a knife on them for protection. As a result this turns into knife crime victimisation as those who carry knifes are highly likely to become victim of it. Young males may use a knife to defend themselves when they believe they are in a dangerous, unsafe or intimidating situation in result of news reporting’s within the media shaping the way we think about the world we live in. ‘The role of the media is to shape how people think about the world we live in’ (Miliband 2973). ‘Crime news unjustly stereotypes groups (Cohen 197) in orchestration of moral panics (hall et al, 1978) and there by heightens the public fear of crime’.

However sociologists such as Jock young argue news within the media deters individuals from committing violent acts as it informs and shows us consequence for such crimes. ‘Seeing the effects of violence and especially suffering that it causes to victims and families make us more aware of consequences and so less inclined to commit violent acts’ (Jock young). Furthermore, ones attractiveness can make individuals more victim prone to violent acts such as knife crime within society. Dressing in a particularly attractive way can leave individuals to be vulnerable due to other people’s greed for wealth. ‘Ones display of wealth may draw attention’ (Sparks, 1982).

Television programs and documentaries within the media also have a big impact on young male knife crime victimisation due to being criminogenic. This is since the creation of real life knife crime being aired on mainstream television and online websites for entertainment. BBC Three released a short clip on knife crime with the title ‘Teenage Knife Wars: What’s behind the rise in UK knife crime?’ The short clip shows various different young boys flaunting knives, blades and wearing intimidating clothing such as balaclavas. This leads to young knife crime victimisation due to content causing an arousal of violent visual imagery. Television content gives young people an idea of what knifes are popular, how to use them and potential copycat crimes to be carried out. ‘Violent programs make people more violent’ (Sonia Livingstone 1996). Moreover this, television programs can lead to social learning theory due to the visual observation of violent content which include knifes. Sociologist Reiner suggested that one of the consequences of how crime is represented in the media is that violence is easy mimicked by others. ‘The media may easily act as a form of social learning theory or be a source of crime by imitation’ (Reiner). Television programs and documentary can blur boundaries through repetitive viewing making it difficult for some individuals to recognise violent acts have consequence and are not normal. ‘Rapid growth in reality TV blurs the boundaries between fact, fiction and entertainment’ (Carrabine et al., 2002:129).

In contrast to this, why young males become victim to knife crime can be related Socio-economic factors such as radical victimology. Those of a lower social class have increased risk of becoming victim to criminal activity and knife crime. This is due to living in a deprived areas and craving an increase in social status and materialism. Self-fulfilling prophecy and being labelled as deviant or a criminal within society, school or household can also contribute due to individuals living up to their label.

Social media platforms such YouTube and the internet also play a big part in the knife crime industry. This is due to them fuelling knife crime by allowing knife usage content to be posted, streamed and viewed, supporting the knife crime culture. YouTube is one of the world’s biggest search engines and drill trap music has become a popular sub-genre of music for young males in the UK. Drill music is a dark rap genre which often involves gun, knife and violence within its lyrics and visual content. On the 2nd August 2018, a drill rapper named incognito aged 23 was stabbed to death in south London. His death is said to have been gang related. His music contained references to other rival groups, which were of violent content and his music, videos and rivalry had a high amount of views. Social media platforms such as these leads to young knife crime as drill music has a young male target audience. Individuals aspire to such genres and view artists as role models. ‘Popular songs were especially dangerous as they all too often presented criminals as heroes’ (Barker and Petley, 1997:7). YouTube also enables criminals to post videos of violent crimes being carried out. This allows viewers to get a deeper insight to the life of a criminal and the potential development of visual criminology.

On the other hand linking media content such as YouTube and the internet to be the cause of young male knife victimisation is hard to prove due to many factors contributing. Reasons for young males becoming victim to knife crime can be due to facilitation and one knowingly putting themselves at risk of knife victimisation. Young males may have criminal involvement and be part of gangs which are not influenced by the internet. Gangs tend to have rivals and use acts of violence towards the other and being a part of a gang individuals would be at risk of possible becoming a knife crime victim. ‘Victims of violent crime themselves have criminal involvement’ (Dobrin, 2001).

The video game industry is successfully thriving in Britain. It is said that 11 to 64 year olds in the UK spend 10.3 hours per week playing games. 54 percent of video game players in the UK are male and are between the age of 15 to 24 (Ukie game statistics). There are many knife games available for purchase, some examples of these are blade and sorcery, call of duty and dead by daylight. Violent video games normalise deviant and criminal behaviour. Violence such as the usage off knives allows behaviour to be encouraged and praised. Games such as these leads to young male knife crime victimisation due to decriminalising the behaviour of carrying sharp objects such as knifes and blades. Video games are to be played for amusement and for this reason violent content encourages the act of using a knife to victimise another. Lifestyle and fantasy of video games lead to young male knife crime victimisation.

However many would argue against this due to individuals not coming from the traditional nuclear family and coming from a broken or abusive homes. This can lead to individuals picking up traits of violence and using them within society known as social learning theory. Furthermore fear, depression and anxiety can be developed due to various social circumstances leading to knife crime victimisation. Knife crime has existed before video games were introduced to society and although crime rates may have increased, this proves such crimes are down to one characteristics and not the influence of violent knife video games.

References

1. https://ukie.org.uk/research – Video game statistics
2. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/video-games-fuel-knife-crime-says-police-chief-in-suffolk-rh3f6966j
3. https://www.last.fm/tag/uk+drill/artists – Male drill rap artists
4. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-45039590 – icognito
5. ‘All media appear to exaggerate the extent of violent crime in Britain, this includes newspapers, news, entertainment, radio and crime fiction’ (Greer 2005). ( crime and the media ) criminology sociology introduction. Chapter 4 page 77
6. ‘Crime news unjustly stereotypes groups ( Cohen 197) in orchestration of moral panics ( hall et al , 1978) and there by heightens the public fear of crime. criminology sociology introduction. Chapter 4 page 417 crime and the media
7. Violent programs make people more violent’ (Sonia Livingstone 1996).
8. Ditton and Duffy (1983) found that ’46 percent of the news concerned violent crimes however when looking at police recorded crime such crimes made up less than percent’.
9. ‘The role of the media is to shape how people think about the world we live in (Miliband 2973)
10. ‘Seeing the effects of violence and especially suffering that it causes to victims and families make us more aware of consequences and so less inclined to commit violent acts (Jock young)’.
11. . ‘The media may easily act as a form of social learning theory or be a source of crime by imitation ( Riener)’ Page 804- sociology book chapter 12
12. ‘Popular songs were especially dangerous as they all too often presented criminals as heroes’ (Barker and Petley, 1997:7). – page 414 chapter 20 criminology book
13. ‘Rapid growth in reality TV blurs the boundaries between fact, fiction and entertainment’ (Carrabine et al., 2002:129). page 414 chapter 20 criminology book
14. ‘Victims of violent crime themselves have criminal involvement’ (Dobrin, 2001).

The Relationship between the Media and the Fear of Crime

Introduction

Living in the modern world, technology and the media surrounds us in our everyday lives. Entertainment such as news, movies and video games depict violent imagery in millions of homes, yet are considered normal in today’s society. This consumption of media either makes the threat of the outside world more daunting or less alarming. People have always been fascinated by crime despite the fact it is condemned. This has led many to questions the role and relationship between media and crime. Over the years there have been countless debates and proposed theories surrounding the effects of the media on political agenda, the judicial system, and general public opinion. A study from Global News, Scotti, (2017) found out that “The average percentage of crime that is violent is believed to be 45 percent, when in fact it is around 20 percent, highlighting the same exaggerated sense of crime in Canada”. This aligns with the perceived notion that members of the public tend to overestimate the violent crimes and crimes in general committed in Canada. The media’s focus on over-representing certain crimes produces a reaction in viewers to fear crime rather than to learn about it. Fearful people choose quick solutions against crime, choosing a strategy of relying on punitive rather than reformatory changes to crime control policies.

Social Imagery

There is a consensus that human minds can be influenced by certain factors. How you grow up and the people around you can potentially shape how you will act in the future. Generally, there is a dynamic between crime and justice in the media interconnected world. (Eamonn, 2017: p. 238). This dynamic has the power of broadcasting images in a broader scheme from individuals to a societal perspective. This creates the potential of media and crime shaping social imagery. Certain crimes can begin to seem “normal” causing a shift in social imagery. (Eamonn, 2017). This can break and cause the divide between reality and representation with media only showing the things they want you to see. NEED 1 MORE SENTENCE

The connection between crime and fear of crime cannot be analyzed through patterns. Most would imagine that if the rate of crime was high, it would lead to fear also being high. The opposite being if that if the crime rate was low, fear of crime would follow this pattern. This relationship however has rarely ever depended on each other as they are both independent. As noted in lecture and throughout the course, while crime in Canada has been declining for the past 20 years, fear of crime has always been a topic of our concern. This brings forth the idea that there may be some sort of fascination from the public in regard to crime consumption. (Dolliver, Kenney, Reid, & Prohaska, 2018). NEED 2 MORE SENTENCE

Mediatization

The media effects theory is a psychological analysis which believes that the media plays a direct role in presenting images to its audience. These images have the potential power to change, manipulate or control opinions of the population. (Jewkes, 2015). Jewkes (2015) states individuals who consume news reports obtain information to make choices about consumer products based on the information learned through the media. (p. #22). For instance, if the media focuses our attention on certain issues, we will probably, as a result, become influenced by the issue. (Eamonn, 2017 p. 238). This could include anywhere from older examples like prohibition in the 30s to more recent examples such as gun violence in America. While this theory may not be completely accurate as everyone is influenced differently, it may hold sway to some of the general public. NEED 2 MORE SENTENCE

Potential Victimization through Individualism

Concern about the crime can be associated with the perception of potential victimization. With gun violence being apparent in America, comparisons have been made by the media to other countries in terms of dealing with gun laws. A way to measure fear of crime is to ask people whether they avoid doing certain things and take preventive measures. This can help to differentiate fear as you can compare results to actual facts to determine if the fear is warranted. (Dolliver, et. al, 2018). It can allow you to analyze perception vs reality in that crime has generally decreased over time but due to media overrepresentation of violent crimes, the public may assume crime is more prevalent in our society. The connection between fear of crime and the media is difficult to pinpoint. (Dolliver, et. al, 2018) Do individuals fear crime on the grounds that a large amount of crime is broadcasted or does the media provide document crime because people fear crime and want to find out more? This fear of crime alludes to the potential danger of being a victim of crime as compared to the actual probability of being a victim. Fleming (2006) states depending on actual risk and a person subjective approaches to the danger it can erode public health and psychological well being. (p. 851). This may also affect routine activities, habits, and can diminish community trust.

Broadcasting and Communication

Potential Victimization through Communication

Hearing about events, knowing others who have been victimized these are all thought to raise the perception of being at risk of victimization. Evidence exists that hearing of someone you know being a victim increases anxiety. (Dolliver, et. al, 2018). These indirect experiences of crime may play a stronger role in fear about victimization than direct experience. A subject’s criminal risk perception could become exaggerated even more with the constant feed of crime in the media if they have never been a victim. (Fleming & Muzzatti, 2006). When watching the news we tend to look at certain things about the event such as the perpetrators, victims, motive. The notion of having similarities may be key if the audience can identify with the described victim, or feels as though their surroundings bears resemblance to the one described. (Eamonn, 2017). This information presented to the public on serious crimes could also produce fear within the public, causing moral panics. (Fleming & Muzzatti, 2006). This is easily caused by the constant feeding of crime stories which leads the audience to fear and develop the idea that they may easily become a victim of such crime. With the media’s contributions, a climate of fear is created, with the actual frequency of victimization being a tiny fraction. The reality is that violent crimes have been declining over the years. Dolliver (2018) states that media could exploit social naivety, covering crime not only selective but also distorting the everyday world of crime. (p. 406). This significance is said to form the perceptions of society on crime, victimization and criminal justice policies. (Eamonn, 2017).

Stigmatization

A more significant issue here is how the perception of individuals, who rely on information from the media due to their lack of knowledge and experience with crime. (Surette, 2015). They form stereotypes of certain criminals and crimes in our society due to the moral panics the media creates. As a result, people start to believe the myths and distortions of the media and associate certain minorities or individuals with certain crimes. The consumption of media had a profound effect on instilling the fear of terrorism in the United States, though these acts of terror are very rare. Media can influence the public’s perception to the point where it can create a distorted view on reality. After the events of 9/11, the threat of terrorism was made well aware through the general media. Many changes were made to protect the National security of many countries concerning flying. Many people in the public began to believe in the distorted view against Muslims or even South Asians despite not knowing that the perpetrators of these attacks do not represent the majority of the religion they were associated with.

Stigmatization was very prevalent and still is thanks to media coverage not broadcasting all the facts but instead presenting the facts with the highest shock value. The media’s main purpose is to make money and they need an audience to keep tuning into these shows. (Fleming & Muzzatti, 2006) Shock and drama usually always attract an audience. The analogy of having both a basketball game and a fight going on in close proximity of each other can clearly demonstrate this. Most people would be watching and surrounding the fight due to it having the biggest potential shock factor and providing the more dramatic form of entertainment. Apart from the public interest in crime, the production of crime news also serves the purpose of making the public feel involved in social change and informing them about the criminal justice systems in our society. (Surette, 2015).

Overrepresentation and Distortion

Evaluation of News Presented

Crime has always been and always will be a current topic of interest as it will continue to be apart of society. Media presents it for the purposes of both information and entertainment. (Surette, 2015) Jewkes (2015) suggests that news reporters must evaluate the value of a news story and test to see if it meets certain news structures and elements to make it a newsworthy piece. (p. 84) Crime news meets most of these necessary news values which include elements of a stories unpredictability yet simplification and the involvement of risk. Its proximity, violence and the involvement of potential political or ideological value. (Jewkes, 2015). When a shooting occurs, it is generally associated with all these values as it is surrounded around unpredictability of why it occurred yet is simple to report as the audience can understand. It has a large involvement of risk as shootings occur in regular areas of visitation such as malls, school or even outside. The Eaton Centre shooting in 2012 can be a prime example of this as it is a place where one should not be expected to be involved in a shooting unlike say in a war overseas. Politicians will flock to these situations to try and address these circumstances to the public in hopes of winning support but all these factors contribute to fear. To live in a society where shootings are now seen as somewhat normal, it makes you question why can’t you become a victim?

Key Elements

Even though most crime news may contain most of these features, some stories may not be explored in the media. (Fleming & Muzzatti, 2006). This is evident in that often times local stories you hear around you don’t really make it to the local news such as a robbery at your local mall. That is why, as Dolliver, (2018) states, a crime story has a major element that brings certain attention with it and this is the fact that it has ‘novelty’ or ‘newness’ which teaches something new to its audience. (p. 408). In her own words, Jewkes (2015) states despite often being described as a ‘window on the world’ or a mirror reflecting real life, the media might be more accurately thought of like a prism, subtly bending and distorting the view of the world it projects. (p. 41) Generally, the perception of crime is viewed as dangerous and something you do not want to not want to be apart of yet there is an influx of crime representation in our media consumption. The media presents a distorted image of the reality of crime and criminals. (Dolliver, et. al, 2018).

Distortion

Media distortion of crime facts and statistics is not only limited to violent crime committed. White collar crimes can also be associated with media distortion as it plays a large role in the reporting of these crimes. As mentioned in lecture, non-violent crimes like white collar or corporate crimes and criminals are distorted differently by the media and are underrepresented. For instance, violent crimes like murder are overrepresented compared to corporate or white-collar crimes. (Eamonn, 2017). If you were to conduct a study on violent crime, you would get a lot more financial and public support whereas if you were to do the same for white collar or corporate crime, the general public would feel as though it isn’t as serious of a matter. (Jewkes, 2015) The popularity of such themes of violent crimes is one which the public is fascinated with and thus, the media distorts its images, facts and statistics about crimes in order to meet this public fascination and public demand. Surette (2015) states that a crime is a hidden activity and one which is ‘out of sight’, individuals become further interested in these ‘unknown’ activities as they hope to learn more. (p. 14).

Crimes with unpredictability could include those committed by children. Children committing crime meets the criteria of newsworthiness compared to the local robbery of a store. As mentioned by Jewkes (2015) these types of violent crimes by young children allow the media to instill fear of crime in the minds of the public which as a result leads to the implementation of changes in public policies. (Eamonn 2017). This furthermore, causes the public to view these children as ones who cannot be rehabilitated causing support for punitive policies as opposed to rehabilitation. (Surette 2015).

Populism

Effects of Overrepresentation on the Public

With the idea of idea of overrepresentation coupled with distortion and its potential psychological effects, an increased amount of media intake may cultivate a societal culture full of fear. Results indicate that more media consumption could lead to significant support for crime control policies and support for stricter crime control policies despite crime rates dropping in most parts of the world. (Surette 2015). An example of this could be the Vegas shooting, with some of the public calling for stricter hotel regulations such as baggage checks. This can allow politicians a scapegoat for their campaigns in order to help the public. Despite limited evidence, it seems to prove that stricter crime control policies such as harsher sentences do not seem to deter the perpetrators of these crimes. (Fleming & Muzzatti, 2006) Rather there is this sensation received from the public in wanting to support more regulatory rules. Politicians and the media abide by this in hopes of cultivating for populism.

Bias and Political Agenda

It is significant to know that despite the decrease in crime, media coverage of crime increased by 600% between 1998 and 2008. Crime is a problem which cannot be eradicated but we should look to minimize it to our best efforts. The media’s culture of fear has largely been dominated by frequent stories of crime and punishment as politicians hope to achieve an emotional bias. (Surette 2015) Fear of crime has had an impact on crime control policies which can further lead to larger incarceration rate. Having inspired tough on crime policies the support for more punitive policies can be fueled with media in our lives. This could lead to a more decisive and action-oriented response to crime. The media is considered as both a source and an audience. (Roberts 2003). The ‘war on drugs’ was fueled by media as the government hoped to combat and sway public opinion. Drugs were the hottest reporting story after the Vietnam war as drug use went on to become one of the most publicized new issues in the mid 80s. (Roberts 2003). This provides a prime example of how political and media interacts can work together to enhance public concern for their own benefit.

Public Dependence

Media can influence public opinion on the leniency of the judicial system. Coverage of murders committing further acts of crimes provokes public opinion and outrage as well as more severe support for crime control policies such as the death penalty. Media’s influence can cause support for penal populism as the media caters to the largest majority as do politicians battling each other to be tougher on crime. Medias influences the belief in the value of punishment as a response to crime. (Roberts 2003) With the overrepresentation of violent crimes, it has increased the public’s dependence on their facts causing policies to sway in their favor and even the judicial system to follow this as well. An important way in which media can change public perception is through the shaping and framing of the actual number of crime and volume. Can look at the distorted view towards the public from the media and emphasis on dramatic crime when compared to real evidence such as police reports and victimization surveys. There is an overestimation in the prevalence and the chance of victimization.

Media as “The Source”

Media and news want to hook its audience so they always tune in which further to leads to the concern of what is the primary purpose of the media? (Fleming & Muzzatti, 2006). Is it to bring forth entertainment or is it to educate viewers? If it is to entertain then it is considered successful as millions watch the news. If the purpose to educate viewers, it is not necessarily sharing the ‘real facts’. The answer is neither as once again, the primary purpose of these large media sources is to make money with all other purposes coming after the fact. Roberts (2003) states that if public policy is based on public opinion, that opinion is conditioned by media output. Media may affect crime policy through the assumption that they reflect the true nature of the public opinion. Most people think of violent crimes when asked general questions crime showcasing the general public’s reliance on media as their main source. (Roberts 2003) A politician may use media as a source for what the majority of people are thinking. (Roberts 2003) When relating to the judicial system and crime control policies, Judges regularly cite public opinion as a factor in sentencing decisions which are likely to attract public criticism. (Roberts 2003) Judges could possibly gain their impression from public opinion in the same way politicians do. Media has the power to pursue their own agenda if they choose to do so as they can hold potential sway on the general public, politicians and the judicial system. (Roberts 2003) Crime policy favors populism and if media creates fear, this could either create a systematic distortion of information about crime where there is usually larger support for punitiveness rather than rehabilitation.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the effects and influence of the media in relation to crime continue to be a popular theme. With the media having the potential power to bring forth fear to the public it may cause moral panics and changes throughout society. This is evident through their depictions of certain crimes and criminals. These distortions by the media in relation to crime have influenced the future of our justice system. Overrepresented illustrations of crime have the power to set public agendas, form public opinions and even change policies and laws. Future research questions could include, does media consumption impact or lead to potential aggressiveness and change in psyche? The idea of learning through your surroundings is always prevalent in our lives and this question could analyze the impact of media consumption through a scientific lens as opposed to the sociological lens. Crime in the media covers crime using a national lens. Crime is viewed as a society-wide failure and brings others together to shift focus on crime control policies instead of addressing other issues such as maybe the over-glorification of crime in the media. In conclusion, crime consumption does impact both crime control policies and brings forth fear, as the potential notion of being a victim is further instilled due to media coverage.

References

1. Dolliver, M. Kenney J. Reid L, & Prohaska A, (2018). Examining the Relationship Between Media Consumption, Fear of Crime, and Support for Controversial Criminal
2. Justice Policies Using a Nationally Representative Sample. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice,34(4), 399-420.
3. Eamonn, C. (2017). “Crime and Media” In Carlen, P. and Leonardo Ayres, F. (Eds.), Alternative criminologies (pp. 234-246). London: Porto Alegre.
4. Fleming T. & Muzzatti S. (2006). Constructing Crime: Media, Crime, and Popular Culture, Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 48(6), 837-865.
5. Jewkes, Y. (2015). Media and crime. Los Angeles: Sage.
6. Roberts, Julian et al. (2003) “The Influence of the Media” in Penal Populism and Public Opinion: Lessons from Five Countries. Pp 76-32. New York: Oxford University Press.
7. Surette, R. (2015). Media, crime, and criminal justice. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.