How nature of crime presented by the media Essay

_INTRODUCTION_A considerable amount of literary works consistently argues that the way abhorrence is portrayed in the media signifi privytly differs from what formal records and research tell us, that is to say, that the media is said to misrepresent the discourtesy problem. Five chief(prenominal) arguments ar presented demonstrating that the media distorts the iniquity problem. First, the media tend to report on crimes that atomic number 18 considered newsworthy. Second, it is argued that the medias role is that of an agenda-setter. Third, media reporting on crime is deliverive of uprightness enforcement agencies exclusively is negative towards coquets. Fourth, the media reports on crime that escalates usual fretfulness to such an intent that it can lead to moral panic approximately feature crimes. Fifth, stereotypes of whatsoever(prenominal) victims and offenders dominate media representations of crime. It is call upd that the media is the publics old source o f knowledge about crime and it has exploited this by inaccurately presenting the nature of crime to our decree._DISCUSSION_The branch argument supporting that the media distorts the crime problem is that the reporting of crime is discriminating and the types of crimes reported in the media be those deemed newsworthy. Media compete in a market place to attract as large an audience as possible as they be kale orientated organisations. Consequently, crimes are selectively reported and are generally reported in ways that conform to news value of the immediate, the novel, the dramatic, and so on, which reinforce already established images of threat from crime. The self-assertion that the rule book of crime is senior high school and rising is one of the main arguments advanced by hostelry.In Australia, studies have shown that a substantial proportion of the population falsely believe that crime rates are increasing when, in fact, they are stable or declining (Indermaur D & adenosine monophosphate Roberts L, 2005). The discrepancy between the crime rate and the publics perceived crime rate has been normally attributed to the expansive media coverage of crime, especially violent and to a greater extent sensationalised crime (Duffy B, 2008). The media is the primary source of indirect knowledge of the crime problem and by selectively presenting crime to friendship in a dramatised and sensationalized manner it has lead to the legend that the volume of crime is high and rising.The second line of reasoning is that some contend that the medias construction of crime is more than just selective, it is that of an agenda-setter (Surette R, 1996). As an agenda-setter, the media defines the problem of crime in a way that sets parameters of discussion and debate. The relate of agenda-setting is that only some types of crime are brought to the publics economic aid and in the same way, only some kinds of criminal justice responses are presented as solutions to co ntrol crime. Research has found that the media reports the nature of crime in a way that brings crime and its control to the fore almost issue of policy-makers assessing imperative mood social problems (Teece M & adenine Makkai T, 2000).The assumption that sentences are too cushy is one of the main arguments advanced by society and a perfective ex international amperele of the media pushing its own agenda. The public depend on the media more or less exclusively for their information about sentencing and re cent data from the Australian scene of kindly Attitudes show that 70% of respondents agreed that people who break the jurisprudence should be given stiffer sentences (Indermaur & Roberts, 2005). However, most criminal matters proceeding to court are finalised at the Magistrates Court, i.e. without a jury. With this in mind, it shows that the media have a heavy(p) impact on setting the public agenda and initiating discussion and debate by inaccurately presenting the crime problem.The third argument correspondingly elucidates that the medias reporting on crime is often deceptively supportive of practice of law or law enforcement agencies but is negative towards courts. This is due to the media depending largely on limited, easily accessible sources often authorities such as police, and and then presents a one-sided picture (Teece M & Makkai T, 2000). Police are privileged sources to the media and therefore the police-media relationship is mutually rewarding as it generates an stiff and successful image for the police, as well as providing information to the media about crime. This substantiates the grounds of the support devoted to law enforcement agencies by the media. Furthermore, as previously verified, the fact that the media pushes its own agenda and as a result the public view in regard to sentencing is that sentencing is too lenient evidences the fact that the media caution the courts. In this way, the media distorts the nature of crime presented to our society and leads society to obtain high confidence in services provided by police and minimal support towards courts.The fourth argument is that violent crimes that induce feelings of anger and panic in the public are generally the only types of crime that the media present to us and are reported in such a way that they wait the most common types of crime committed in society. Public anxiety about crime can be escalated to such an extent that it can lead to a moral panic about a particular crime, specifically violent crime. The assumption that a large proportion of crimes overwhelm fury is one of the main arguments advanced by society. However, research consistently finds that in western countries the media over-reports violent crimes, especially murder, sexual-assault and assault (Hayes H & Prenzler T, 2009).A study of public perceptions in Australia by Indermaur (2005) found that terce in four people overestimated by a large shore the proportion of crimes involving violence. In fact, violent crime statewide declined 6 per cent in 2004 to continue a downward trend that began in the other(a) 1990s (Bavis B & Dossetor L, 2010). The media has presented the nature of crime in our society exceedingly inaccurately to the point that it has led our society to deem that most crimes involve violence.The fifth line of reasoning is that the medias representation of crime, preponderantly violent and sexual offences, is _stranger danger._ This depicts that victims are selected at random by offenders they do not know. The media constructs images of risk and these images lie in line with conceptions of _stranger danger_ rather than _fear of the near_. The assumption that offenders do not know their victims is one of the main arguments advanced by society. Contrary to popularised media reporting, research evidence shows that most victims are not wrong by strangers (Tiby E, 2009). In fact, females are more likely to become the victims of violence from someone they know, e.g. a partner or family member (Hayes H & Prenzler T, 2009). Accordingly, the medias inaccurate representation of _stranger danger_ has distorted the nature of crime presented to our society, guide to the myth that offenders usually do not know their victims._CONCLUSION_The nature of crime in our society is not accurately presented by the media. The evidence is benefit that the media is societys primary source of knowledge about crime and has outlined some key elements about the influence of media reporting that shapes how society accept, relate and react to the nature of crime. Most media are businesses operating for profit and therefore they compete in a marketplace to attract as large an audience as possible, therefore the media report on crimes that are deemed newsworthy, conforming to news values. Its role is that of an agenda-setter and in this way deceivingly supports law enforcement agencies and criticises courts. Media has the capac ity to escalate public fear of crime by selectively focusing on a particular crime as more prevalent and stereotyping both victims and offenders. For these reasons, it is evident that the nature of crime in our society is not accurately presented by the media as it has lead society to believe various myths._REFERENCES_Bavis, B & Dossetor, L. (2010). Misperceptions of crime in Australia. _Trend and Issues in criminal offence and Criminal Justice (396)._ Retrieved from http//search.informit.com.au.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/fullTextdn=20103330res=AGISPTDuffy, B. Wake, R. Burrows, T. Bremner, P. (2008). Closing the gaps-crime and public perceptions. _International Review of Law, Computers &_ _TechnologyVol._ _22_ 17-44. London UK. Retrieved from http//web.ebscohost.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=19b4d519-d160-4062-a7d9-20ea3ba483ee%40sessionmgr13&vid=6&hid=106Hayes, H. Prenzler, T. (2009). _Introduction to crime and criminology 2__nd_ _ed. _ Australia Pearson Australia Group.Indermaur, D. & Roberts, L. (2005), experience of Crime and Justice, in _Australian Social Attitudes,_ UNSW Press, Sydney.Surette, R. (1996). News from Nowhere, Policy to Follow Media and the Social Construction of Three Strikes and Youre Out. _Three Strikes and_ _Youre Out Vengeance as Public Policy_, Thousand Oaks.Teece, M. & Makkai, T. (2000). Print Media Reporting on Drugs and Crime, 1995 1998. _Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice (158)_. Retrieved from http//search.informit.com.au.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/fullTextdn=20010687res=AGISPTTiby, E. (2009). Stranger-Danger or Fear of the sound? Accounts on Fear of Sexual Abuse. _Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention_. Retrieved from http//pdfserve.informaworld.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/999873_751313171_917284778.pdf