the media and crime prevention

8/17/2019 The Media and Crime Prevention

1/21

The Media and Crime Prevention

Chapter 1

Introduction

Cagayan de Oro City is one of the most blooming city in the Philippines. In the

past several years it has had an expanding economy and a rising population. While the

economy booms, prices rise, and the maor cities experience gro!th and a tendency to

a more cosmopolitan outloo" than it has in the last ten years. #s one might expect, !ith

rapid gro!th have come a number of social problems, not the least of !hich is a rising

crime rate. When crime rates rise and are publici$ed, pressure is put on governments to

%do something% about the problem. The primary responsibility of &doing something' is in

the shoulder of the police and the local government. While much efforts have been

given to address such problems of crimes through local legislature, numbers are still on

the rise.

Mass media crime prevention programs have become (uite popular. )or the past

several years, propagandas against crime have been aired over the media to

encourage citi$ens to participate in its prevention. In response to this, the media outlets

as part of their social responsibility has engaged in massive media campaigns that

ans!ers the &ho!s' in crime prevention and specific television programs have been

created to let the people be informed on the &ho!s' of crime and the possible

prevention.


2/21

The media is a prime source of information on crime and safety for a significant

proportion of the !orld*s population. Within the context of Canada, +udith ubois, a

researcher at the -niversit du /ubec 0 Montral, refers to several national studies

recorded by the Canadian 1entencing Commission that reveal 234 of intervie!ees use

the media as the main source of information on crime5related issues. espite the

impressive figure, there have been endless debates on the degree to !hich media

coverage of crime5related events influences public opinion and policy. Whether the

influence is strong or !ea", this paper outlines several critical studies, practices and

partnerships in the field of crime prevention and urban safety, !hich suggest that the

media exerts both negative and positive influences on public opinion and policy and is

most relevant in our focus on crime prevention. In order to examine this role, it is

important to recogni$e that the 6media* is not a single source of en(uiry, but includes a

series of elements !hich re(uire their o!n separate analysis, from ne!s papers, to

radio, internet, television, alternate media in the investigation of the influence of crime

media on public opinion and criminal ustice and prevention policy and practice. 7iven

the scope of this preliminary piece, the media*s impact !ill be largely discussed in

relation to ne!s media, given the interactions and complexities, that have been

identified and (uestioned, yet still remain to be tested and proven


3/21

Chapter 2

Review of Related Literature

In the process of collecting and disseminating information on crime, media

representations can negatively influence perceptions on crime5related issues, and

interfere !ith the implementation of crime prevention strategies and policies. Media

coverage of crime can be inaccurate, biased and promote inappropriate and harmful

policies on crime control &the portrait of random, violent crime8that is communicated by

the ne!s media leads to an understanding of crime and ustice that translates into

public policies that often see" simple solutions to complex problems' 9:anich ;


4/21

On another note, print media can present an inaccurate portrait of crime.

#ccording to +effrey C. @ubbard et. al. 9=2A3?, print media influences public opinion on

crime trends by increasing coverage of certain crimes disproportionately to the amount

of crime in a community 9p.;;5B?. +udith ubois recalls O*Connell*s study 9=222? in

Ireland, !hereby he directly blames the media for its misrepresentation of crime. The

!ay the ne!s media represents crime often includes 6sensationalistic* aspects of crime

events, !hereby 6ne!s!orthy* stories act on emotion more than on fact, and focus on

negative images of crime in communities. +ames C. @ac"ler, in his Canadian

Criminology> 1trategies and Perspectives 9;


5/21

increasing media coverage of youth crime has been lin"ed to more repressive criminal

ustice policies, such as the adoption of Canada*s :outh Offenders* #ct. The #ct permits

=F and =A year olds to be tried in adult court, even for minor offences 9&Criminalit che$

les eunes'?. Media coverage can negatively influence the implementation of ne!

measures, !hereby an isolated event can influence large scale changes even if

previous measures have not yet been evaluated or produced their effects. @o!ever, to

assert that media reports prompt the adoption of 6tough* crime policies and punitive

attitudes remains a challenging tas". There are ongoing debates on the extent to !hich

the media plays a role in the 6production of violence*. The direct influence has not yet

been proven, ho!ever assumptions suggest a more or less causal lin". #ccording to

Melanie Gro!n from the #ustralian Institute of Criminology, studies on television and film

violence do not suggest a direct causal lin" bet!een media exposure and aggressive

behaviour, but instead refer to a complex relationship !hich identifies 6interacting

variables*9=22F, p.;?. The ;


6/21

end, they claim that the media holds a highly influential role and therefore by removing

media images of !omen as victims and helpless, violence against !omen !ill reduce.

Within the sociology of mass communications, it is possible to single out t!o

maor intellectual developments !hich led to these dramatic modifications of existing

media5effect models. The first concerns the discovery of %opinion leaders%. arly studies

by Ja$arsfeld, Gerelson and 7audet 9=2HE? and at$ K Ja$arsfeld 9=233? reported that

in many types of situations, media influence does not flo! directly from the media to the

individual audience members. Instead, they argued, there is a %t!ostep flo!% in !hich

the effects of media are filtered through interpersonal relationships. Influence flo!s first

from the media to opinion leaders, individuals !ho have higher media exposure and are

influential !ithin their primary groups. The second stage of this %t!o5step flo!% involves

the channeling of influence from these opinion leaders to other audience members. The

concept of opinion leadership has been of immense heuristic value in the study of

media effects and the relevant literature is voluminous. Convenient summaries of the

maor findings of opinion leadership studies have been provided by Weiss 9=2F2? and

Logers 9=2AB?. In recent years, the notion of a %t!o5step flo!% has been the subect of

an intense debate and much has been !ritten !hich is critical of this conceptuali$ation

9Marcus and Gauer, =2FH #llen, =2F2 #rndt, =2FE Gostian, =2A


7/21

#ccording to Logers 9=2AB?, such a model> ...

1uggests that there are a variable number of relays in the communication flo!

from a source to a large audience. 1ome members !ill obtain the message directly

through channels from the source !hile others may be several times removed from the

messageNs origin. The exact number of steps in this process depends on the intent of

the source, the availability of mass media and the extent of their exposure, the nature of

the message and its salience to the audience. 9=2AB ;2F?

The second maor development !hich formed the basis of modern

communications study is the conceptuali$ation and empirical investigation of

%intervening variables%. 1uch variables, it has been argued, differentially affect the flo!

of influence from source to receiver and thereby mediate communication effects. #s !ith

opinion leadership, the literature relating to intervening variables is extensive.

1ystematic summaries of much of this literature, ho!ever, are found in the !or" of

lapper 9=2F


8/21

+anis, =232 Losenberg et al., =2F


9/21

In a no! classic paper entitled %1ome Leasons Why Information Campaigns

)ail%, @yman and 1heatsley 9=2HA? attempted to ma"e explicit some of the problems

involved in large scale efforts to inform or persuade the public. The study, based on data

collected by the ational Opinion Lesearch Council in the -nited 1tates concluded that

the apparent lac" of success experienced by many campaigns is a result of the failure

of the communicators to ta"e the psychological characteristics of audience members

into account.

#ccording to the authors>

The physical barriers to communication merely impede the supply of information.

In order to increase public "no!ledge not only is it necessary to present more

information but it is essential that the mass audience be exposed to and that it absorb

the information. #nd in order to ensure such absorption, the psychological

characteristics of human beings must be ta"en into account. 9@yman and 1heatsley, =

2HA, H=;?.

The conclusions reached by @yman and 1heatsley include the follo!ing>

=. There exists a hard core group of %chronic "no!5nothings% !ho, despite the

level and availability of information, remain uninformed about a maority of public issues.

There is something about this group, they argue, that ma"es them harder to reach no

matter !hat the level or nature of the information.

;. People !ho report a prior interest in an issue tend to see" out and 5 =F 5

ac(uire the greatest amount of information. The !ide5spread dissemination of

information is a futile underta"ing unless such information is geared to the publicNs


10/21

interest. Thus, e(ual opportunities to be informed are differentially affected by the level

of interest. The authors argue that at the initial stages of many information campaigns,

there exist large groups of people !ho express little or no interest in the issue. 1uch a

problem cannot be solved by merely ma"ing information available.

B. People tend to see" out information that is consistent !ith prior attitudes.

H. Gecause of the influence of certain psychological or sociological variables,

people !ill interpret the same information differently.

3. xposure to ne! levels of information does not necessarily result in changes

in attitudes. 1ome!hat similar conclusions !ere reached by 1tar and @ughes 9=23


11/21

selectively perceive and interpret the ne! information. oelle5euman 9=232? reported

on a campaign conducted in West 7ermany !hich !as similar to the Cincinnati

campaign, in terms of its goals and effects. This campaign gre! out of a desire on the

part of 1outh 7erman radio officials to increase public consciousness regarding the

upper house of the federal legislature in Gonn, the Gundesrat. #t the start of the

campaign, opinion polls indicated that only about =


12/21

campaign and those !ho !anted such information could locate it. 1eventy percent of

the Cincinnati sample "ne! about the -.. prior to the start of the campaign and the

remaining individuals may have been those for !hom the -.. had no utility or those

!ho reected information relating to the -.. because it created problems of

consistency. In the /uincy study, ho!ever, there probably did not exist a !idely

available pool of information relating to the use of pesticides and thus there may have

been a large number of people !ithout prior access to this information !ho found it

useful. # successful information campaign !as also reported by ouglas et al. 9=2A


13/21

Chapter 3

Methodology

In the last chapter, the %natural experiment% !as briefly discussed. In this chapter,

the pragmatic realities of a field proect are delineated. In an initial proposal, something

approximating the ideal type of field study !as presented. @o!ever, !hen the proect

!as actually underta"en, many compromises resulted in a ne! design. The present

discussion is thus concerned !ith the modified research design !hich actually formed

the basis of the current proect. It has been suggested by several authors that the best

!ay to begin an evaluation is for the agency providing the intervention and the evaluator

to !or" out limited, realistic goals, !hich can be empirically assessed through

evaluation research. This of course, does not reflect reality in most cases. In the present

research, the evaluators !ere not involved in the decision ma"ing elements of program

development. #fter the decision to do a mass media educational proect !as formali$ed,

commercial agencies !ere as"ed to submit proposals for the ad campaign. The

guidelines presented to the ad agencies !ere very broad but the prevention of seven

specific crimes !as seen as the maor goal by all of the agencies. While the evaluators

!ere invited to see the final submissions by the ad agencies, they had no significant

input into the selection of the campaign materials. In essence, the present research

involves evaluating a campaign designed by a commercial agency to meet the needs of

a sponsoring group that maintains that such a program is valuable. #gain, it should be

emphasi$ed that this description typifies the realities of evaluation research more

accurately than the descriptions offered by most methodologists. 7iven these realities,

ho! then do evaluators do evaluationsD They compromise. Gut it is not only the type of


14/21

situation described above that creates the need for compromise. There are also the

exigencies of doing evaluations in a natural setting.

The type of design finally agreed upon by all parties is !hat pstein and Tripodi

9=2AA? characteri$e as a formative evaluation. %)ormative evaluations do not generate

"no!ledge that can be easily applied to other programs. They ma"e possible inferences

!hich are only suggestive of cause5effect relationships because they do not routinely

employ control groups or random selection of subects... @o!ever, the maor

advantages of formative evaluations are that they are less costly, re(uire less expertise,

present fe!er practical and ethical problems, and provide more immediate feedbac"

than do summative evaluations% 9pstein and Tripodi, =2AA> ==B? Gecause formative

evaluations are (uasi5experimental they are not characteri$ed by problems of external

validity. #t the same time, ho!ever, such designs may be confronted by any number of

threats to the internal validity as delineated by Campbell and 1tanley 9=2FB?.

7iven that the goals suggest a change in attitudes and behaviour, a first survey

!as conducted to establish baseline information concerning attitudes, behaviour, and

"no!ledge !ith respect to crime prevention. )urther, much of that survey !as devoted

to discovering other variables that might effect crime prevention behaviour and

"no!ledge. ? The second survey !as designed to tap not only those same dimensions

as measured on the first (uestionnaire, but also to assess "no!ledge of the specific

program that had been conducted. The maor analytic chapters of this report thus

involve comparing the first and second surveys in these terms, as !ell as offering

additional data, that might be used to measure some of the dependent variables.


15/21

The sampling unit !as the household and t!o different types of sampling !ere

done. N In dmonton and Jethbridge, stratified random samples !ere dra!n, !hile in the

remaining sites 9Calgary, )ort McMurray, 7rande Prairie, Medicine @at, Led eer?

prospective intervie!ees !ere selected by a techni(ue "no!n as random digit dialing

9L?. 1amples !ere dra!n on the basis of approximate proportion of the population

represented by each to!n or city. Q /uota sampling for males and females in the

households !as used so that at least one5third of the sample !ould be male.

Intervie!ing of subects !as done by telephone. #gain, cost and time determined

the choice of this method. Intervie!ers !ere hired in each city or to!n and, as a result,

the (uality of the intervie!s varied across sites. @o!ever, this variation !as controlled

by use of a pre5tested (uestionnaire that contained mainly closed ended (uestions

9particularly during the second phase?. The variation seemed to result in differential

completion rates rather than differential (uality. While the second phase (uestionnaire

overlapped considerably !ith the first one, it !as not identical.

While some of the (uestions tapped sensitive information 9particularly about self5

protective behaviours? respondents !ho started the intervie! rarely failed to complete it.

There !ere very fe! complaints about either the (uestions as"ed or the intervie!

techni(ue. Gecause telephone intervie!ing has only recently been used for extensive

(uestioning and because of its relationship to the present evaluation, a brief disucssion

of this methodology may be in order. In recent years, the telephone intervie! has

become an increasingly acceptable means by !hich to collect social science data. ItNs

more general acceptability has been hampered by t!o related research concerns the

first involves the selection of a sample of respondents !ho can be intervie!ed by


16/21

telephone the second issue concerns the relative utility of telephone intervie!s as

compared !ith other data collection techni(ues. In the past, researchers interested in

sampling telephone subscribers have usually used as their relevant universe the

telephone directory. The problems inherent in such a techni(ue are obvious. #s

Cooper9=2FH? notes, as high as =E4 of the population of telephone subscribers may not

be listed in the directory. Included in this group are those individuals !ho have

re(uested that their telephone number not be listed, those !ho have recently moved,

and those !hose numbers have been omitted due to clerical errors. 1imilarly, Grunner

and Grunner 9=2A=? note that significant differences do exist !ith respect to the

characteristics of populations !ho do and populations !ho do not voluntarily list their

numbers in directories. # more general problem that is fre(uently cited in the literature

concerns the notion that those in the population !ho have telephones may be socially

or demographically distinguishable from those !ho do not. # methodology "no!n as

Landom igit ialing 9L? has been developed in order to overcome some of these

problems of sample selection. 9Cooper, =2FH @au" and Cox, =2AH Tuchfarber and

lec"a, =2AF.

The concensus of the literature seems to be that for most types of survey

research, intervie!ing is (uite acceptable !ith respect to its validity, and rate of

response 9illman, =2AE?. The intervie! is particularly appropriate to this survey since

!ith respect to at least some (uestions, it allo!s subects to discuss sensitive issues

anonymously. In a related study, it has been found that intervie!ing may be an excellent

!ay of collecting victimi$ation data 9reported in @orton and uncan, =2AF?. The

/uestionnaires The (uestionnaires !ere designed in such a !ay as to tap "no!ledge of


17/21

specific crime prevention techni(ues, attitudes to!ards crime, defensive behaviours

concerning crime as !ell as related concepts such as feelings of personal safety, media

vie!ing habits and demographic variables. Gy comparing the results from the first

(uestionnaire !ith the results of the second !ave of intervie!ing, the effects of crime

prevention campaigns may be cautiously inferred. Measurements The intervie!

schedules include both attitudinal and behavioural indicators. To be sure, these rest on

reports of behaviours and perceptions of activities in certain circumstances, but there

are a good many such indicators and they provide the necessary data for present

purposes.

There are also items !hich tap general attitudes to!ard crime and criminal

ustice. Goth "no!ledge of crime prevention techni(ues and defensive behaviours are

indicated by reports of behaviour as they relate to crime prevention. 1pecific items !ere

designed to indicate "no!ledge of on5going crime prevention programs. 9ven during

the baseline period, certain programs !ere on5going.?.Of course, in the second survey it

!as necessary to include items designed to measure exposure to the campaign. In

order to ac(uire this information very specific (uestions !ere included !hich attempted

to tap recognition of campaign themes. #dditionally, specific (uestions !ere included

!hich attempted to assess the ability of respondents to recall specific campaign

messages. )or the sa"e of reliability, certain bogus items !ere included, and

respondents !ere also as"ed (uestions about other on5going crime prevention

community programs. 1ince the long5range goal of such a campaign is the reduction of

crime, an examination of crime rate data before, during and after the campaign !as

made. While direct lin"s bet!een the campaign and the crime rate !ere not possible,


18/21

the police data can at least indicate unaccounted for change in crime rates during the

period of the study. Gecause dmonton has been sho!n to have high reliability in itNs

data collection 91ilverman, =2AA? only that city !as used in the crime rate analysis. Of

course, no generali$ations beyond dmonton !ere possible in this part of the analysis.


19/21

Chapter IV EXPOSURE TO THE CAMPAIGN Although interest in mass meia

!rime pre"ention !ampaigns usuall# !entres aroun the $uestion o% e&e!ts' there is

a set o% $uestions logi!all# prior to this issue( These !on!ern the issue o% e)posure'

that is' the e)tent to *hi!h auien!e mem+ers are a*are o% on,going mass

!ommuni!ate !rime pre"ention an the egree to *hi!h su!h messages are salient

to them( -espite the o+"ious importan!e o% the e)posure $uestion' it is some*hat

i.!ult to assess su!h e)posure *ithin the present resear!h esign %or primaril#

t*o reasons( /irst' the !ampaign o% interest *as onl# one o% se"eral su!h !ampaigns

to *hi!h Al+erta resients *ere regularl# +eing e)pose( Other t#pes o% mass meia

!rime pre"ention !ampaigns to *hi!h Al+erta resients *ere +eing e)pose uring

this perio in!lue those *hi!h *ere sponsore +# lo!al +usiness groups 0i(e( an

anti,shopli%ting !ampaign1 an those *hi!h originate on Ameri!an tele"ision

stations an *hi!h *ere tele!ast to Al+erta resients "ia tele"ision !a+le ser"i!e(

Su!h !ampaigns' to some e)tent at least' ma# +e e)pe!te to ha"e a !ontaminating

e&e!t *ith respe!t to re!ognition o% the present Soli!itor General Al+erta Campaign(

A se!on %a!tor relates to the use o% 2"isual ais2( O%ten' in postinter"ention sur"e#s

esigne to assess e)posure to mass meia pu+li! in%ormation !ampaigns' it is

possi+le to emplo# these e"i!es in orer to etermine *hether or not responents

re!ogni3e !ampaign material an *hether or not the# are a+le to $uote the

a!!ompan#ing slogans( Sin!e ata in the pre, an post,inter"ention sur"e#s relating

to the present stu# *ere !olle!te +# telephone' su!h a strateg# *as not possi+le(

I I i , 45 , Ho*e"er' responents to the post,inter"ention sur"e# *ere as6e a

num+er o% $uestions *hi!h *ere esigne to allo* %or an estimate o% e)posure to

the Soli!itor General Al+erta mass meia !rime pre"ention !ampaign( Earl# in the

inter"ie*' responents *ere rea a series o% 2!rime pre"ention2 slogans an in ea!h


20/21

!ase' responents *ere as6e to ini!ate *hether the# ha 071 hear o% it' 051 not

hear o% it' or 081 *ere not sure( O% the 9"e !rime pre"ention slogans' three *ere

non,e)istent 02pull together to pre"ent !rime2: 2!rime pre"ention is a !ommunit#

a&air2: 2help !ure the !ommon !rime21 an one *as a real on,going !rime

pre"ention !ampaign other than that sponsore +# the Soli!itor General Al+erta

02shopli%ting is no *a# to ma6e #our mar6 in li%e21( The 9%th slogan on the list 02let;s

not gi"e !rime a !han!e21 *as +eing use in the present Soli!itor General Al+erta

!ampaign( The a@?1 is to +e

e)pe!te gi"en that the !ampaign has generall# less "isi+ilit#( It *ill also +e note in

Ta+le 4(7 that the three 2+ogus slogans2 generall# ha"e mu!h lo*er reporte

e)posure than either o% the t*o genuine slogans( Per!entages *hi!h report ha"ing

hear o% these +ogus slogans range %rom a lo* o% 74 in the !ase o% 2help !ure the

!ommon !rime2 to a high o% %or 2!rime pre"ention is a !ommunit# a&air2( That

this latter item e)hi+its a higher than e)pe!te reporte re!ogni3a+ilit# is

instru!ti"e in that it ma# +e interprete as ini!ating that to some un!ertain e)tent

the re!ognition o% real slogans is pro+a+l# inBate( This issue is !onsiere in

greater etail later in the report( A se!on post,inter"ention item attempte to

assess the e)tent to *hi!h responents *ere %amiliar *ith one o% the spe!i9!

!ampaign themes +# as6ing the %ollo*ing Dusinessmen tell us that shopli%ting !osts


21/21

!onsumers millions o% ollars ea!h #ear( Ho* mu!h o #ou thin6 shopli%ting as to

ea!h ollar #ou spen

the media and crime prevention

Documents