Systematically Distorted Communication? Criminological Knowledge, Media Representation and Public Policy1*
| Author | Janet B L Chan |
| Published date | 01 December 1995 |
| Date | 01 December 1995 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/00048658950280S103 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Systematically Distorted Communication?
Criminological Knowledge, Media
Representation and Public Policy*
Janet
B L
Chant
Introduction
I am very honoured to have been asked to discuss Kathy Daly’s excellent
paper to this Symposium. Let me first assure Professor Daly that the
journalistic practices and political rhetoric in Australia are not all that different
from her description of North America.
Only a few weeks ago we made international headlines with
our
own
‘celebrated crime case’, which was relentlessly exploited by the ‘infotainment’
industry. Some sections of the media managed to turn this individual tragedy
into a divisive force in Australian society.’ As a result, Australian citizens and
immigrants of Indo-Chinese descent bore the brunt of bigotted attacks and
racist stereotyping. As a person sharing the same phenotypical features as
those under attack, I was shocked and saddened by the reaction of some
Australians who were stirred up by the media.
The political rhetoric of law and order described by Professor Daly is also
familiar
in
Australia. Even though our crime rate is no more than a fraction of
that in the United States, the competition between political parties to ‘own’ the
crime issue is turning out to be one of the key features of the next New South
Wales election. We’ve even got a political slogan, ‘tough on crime, tough on
the causes of crime’ borrowed from Britain, where, again, the crime problems
are much different from ours. No amount of hard evidence from
criminologists is going to shake the confidence of these crusaders that crime
is out of control in
our
community.’
While agreeing with Professor Daly that the criminologist’s task of
injecting some rationality and cool-headedness into the law and order debate
is a difficult and thankless one, I’d like
to
temper her argument that ‘[plublic
policy toward crime and justice is largely driven by media-generated stories
. . .
instead of social science research’ with some local success stories and my
own analysis of the issues. My argument consists of three parts. First, with the
exception
of
a few high-profile examples, the direct impact of media reports
on public policy is much less than is commonly believed. Secondly, the
influence of criminological knowledge on public policy is more pervasive than
we realise. Finally, media coverage of criminological research does not
necessarily lead to better policy; newsmaking criminology is as powerful as it
is hazardous.
I
will go through these points by following the arrows clockwise
*
A response to
K
Daly’s paper ‘Celebrated Crime Cases and the Public Imagination: From
Bad Press
to
Bad Policy?’ at the University
of
New South Wales Annual Symposium,
29
September
1994,
Sydney.
t
Associate Professor and Director, Institute
of
Criminology, University
of
Sydney Law
School.
23
at SAGE Publications on June 20, 2016anj.sagepub.comDownloaded from
To continue reading
Request your trial