Why internet users’ perceptions of viewing child exploitation material matter for prevention policies
| Author | Karen Gelb,Charlotte Hunn,Jeremy Prichard,Caroline Spiranovic |
| Published date | 01 June 2020 |
| Date | 01 June 2020 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0004865820903794 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Australian & New Zealand Journal of
Why internet users’
Criminology
2020, Vol. 53(2) 174–193
!
perceptions of viewing
The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
child exploitation material
DOI: 10.1177/0004865820903794
journals.sagepub.com/home/anj
matter for prevention
policies
Charlotte Hunn
, Caroline Spiranovic and
Jeremy Prichard
School of Law, University of Tasmania, Australia
Karen Gelb
Department of Criminology, University of Melbourne, Australia
Abstract
There are claims that the societal appetite for ‘child exploitation material’ is increasing. Yet,
Australia’s policy response does not include initiatives to dissuade potential offenders from
deliberately viewing child exploitation material for the first time (onset). To critically examine
this issue, this paper draws on Situational Crime Prevention theory. It argues that (a) many
first-time child exploitation material viewers fit the Situational Crime Prevention construct of
the Opportunistic Offender and (b) suggests that current policy overlooks the kinds of non-
instrumental factors that increase the risk of onset for this group, including doubts about the
criminality and harmfulness of viewing child exploitation material. The paper then empirically
examines social attitudes to child exploitation material viewing by presenting the findings of a
survey of 504 Australian internet users. Results indicate that a sizeable minority of the
participants were: unaware that it is a crime to view certain types of child exploitation
material in Australia; and held doubts about the harmfulness of viewing child exploitation
material. These findings are used to reflect on how the presence of these non-instrumental
factors among ordinary internet users may affect the offending readiness of the
Opportunistic Offender. Policy implications are then briefly discussed.
Corresponding author:
Charlotte Hunn, University of Tasmania, Grosvenor Crescent, Sandy Bay, Hobart, Tasmania 7005, Australia.
Email: charlotte.hunn@utas.edu.au
Hunn et al.
175
Keywords
Child exploitation material, internet users, Opportunistic Offender, prevention policy,
Situational Crime Prevention Theory, social attitudes
Date received: 15 April 2019; accepted: 7 January 2020
Introduction
Australia’s policy response to ‘child exploitation material’ (CEM) offending relies heavi-
ly on law enforcement agencies (LEA) to detect, pursue and prosecute offenders
(Attorney General’s Department [AGD], 2013; Commonwealth of Australia [COA],
2000, 2016; Council of Australian Governments [COAG], 2009). Despite the concerted
efforts of LEA, there is growing concern, including among those on the front line, that
‘societal appetite for child sexual exploitation material is increasing’ (Australian Federal
Police [AFP], 2016, p. 47). Reflecting this, prosecutions for the online use of CEM
account for a substantial proportion of matters dealt with by the Commonwealth
Director of Public Prosecutions (2018).
To date, little policy attention has been given to the need for and potential utility of
preventing individuals from onset – the first deliberate viewing of CEM online
(Prichard, Watters, & Spiranovic, 2011, p. 587). When mentioned, the term ‘prevention’
is used narrowly to refer to programmes that seek to reduce the likelihood that children
in Australia will be victimised (AGD, 2013; Law, Crime and Community Safety
Council, 2017; Minister for Law Enforcement and Cyber Security (Cth), 2018). While
there is movement in this space (e.g. Minister for Home Affairs (Cth), 2019), a policy
blind-spot exists.
It is claimed that ‘beginners’ may make up a large proportion of CEM-viewers
(Aiken, Moran, & Berry, 2011). Yet, little is known about how onset occurs
(Merdian, Perkins, Dustagheer, & Glorney, 2018; Morgan & Lambie, 2019). The few
studies that do exist suggest that it is not uncommon for onset to be precipitated by
accidental exposure to CEM (Merdian, Wilson, Thakker, Curtis, & Boer, 2013; Seto,
Reeves, & Jung, 2010; Winder, Gough, & Seymour-Smith, 2015); albeit that the dearth
of empirical data makes it difficult to quantify the proportion of individuals who may
experience onset in this way. Nonetheless, as a factor motivating onset, such exposure,
or ‘opportunity’, is thought to have a ‘greater impact’ on an individual’s likelihood of
viewing CEM than pathological motivations or drivers such as overpowering sexual
urges (Elliott, Beech, Mandeville-Norden, & Hayes, 2009). This is not to say that such
‘urges’ including paedophilic interest, are not implicated in onset; the research shows
that convicted online-CEM offenders exhibit high rates of paedophilic interest (Seto,
2019; Babchishin, Hanson, & VanZuylen, 2015; Seto, Cantor, & Blanchard, 2006).
However, typological accounts of CEM offending motivations suggest motivations
are heterogeneous (Beech, Elliott, Birgden, & Findlater, 2008; Merdian, Curtis,
Thakker, Wilson, & Boer, 2013). And, perhaps reflecting this, the demographic profiles
of online-only CEM offenders, who do not commit child sexual assault (hereafter CEM-
viewers), are also, with the exception of sex (male) and race (Caucasian), heterogeneous
176
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology 53(2)
(for a recent review, see Henshaw, Ogloff, & Clough, 2017). Indeed, such individuals are
commonly described as ‘normal men in normal families’ (Harrison, 2006, p. 368) with
‘ordinary’ characteristics (Wortley & Smallbone, 2012, p. 45).
To explain onset among such individuals, researchers increasingly point to the avail-
ability and accessibility of CEM online as a key driver (e.g. Wortley & Smallbone, 2012).
That is, the expansion of the CEM market is not driven by an increase in demand per se
– perhaps a population level increase in paedophilic interest – but rather by an increase
in the supply of CEM. On this point, an individual’s physical experience of onset is
invariably one of ‘extraordinary ease’ – involving little more than clinking on a link
(Quayle, 2012, p. 110). It seems hardly surprising therefore that recent studies using
general population samples find that between 2.4% (Dombert et al., 2016, p. 5), 4.2–
5.4% (Seto et al., 2010, pp. 222–223) and 9.8% (Seigfried, Lovely, & Rogers, 2008,
p. 291) of respondents admit to deliberately engaging in online-CEM offending.
Yet, while government and non-government agencies, together with multinational
corporations (e.g. Google), have been successful in reducing the availability and acces-
sibility of CEM on open access areas of the internet (Ward, 2013; Westlake & Bouchard,
2016), CEM remains ‘endemic’ (Brennan & Hammond, 2016, p. 2) and ‘extremely
accessible’ (Chertoff & Simon, 2015, p. 5) in popular online spaces. These include
peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing networks (Brennan & Hammond, 2016; Wolak,
Liberatore, & Levine, 2013) – where unsolicited opportunities to view CEM can be
provided (see Prichard, Spiranovic, Watters, & Lueg, 2013, p. 996) – and adult pornog-
raphy websites (Fortin, Paquette, & Dupont, 2018, p. 35; Ray, Kimonis, & Seto, 2014).
This article explores the fact that national policy appears to ignore the basic dynam-
ics of onset. In doing so, this paper draws on Situational Crime Prevention (SCP) theory
(Cornish & Clarke, 2003). While SCP theory is not uncontested (e.g. von Hirsch,
Garland, & Wakefield, 2000), its utility here lies in its pragmatic explanations of the
situational conditions under which some crimes becomes more likely and, as a result, the
value of thinking about the situation in which CEM-onset occurs. In adopting this lens,
the following part briefly overviews SCP theory, and the sets of assumptions about
offenders that inform it. Next, the scope and limits of the current policy response to
CEM offending are assessed against the aforementioned assumptions. This assessment
demonstrates that while the current policy response addresses instrumental factors rel-
evant to onset, it fails to address non-instrumental factors and, as a result, overlooks the
assumptions that inform the Opportunistic Offender. To ground this criticism, this
paper explores the intersection between the factors relevant to the offending readiness
of the Opportunistic Offender and the empirical evidence about CEM-viewers. In doing
so, a major limitation of current evidence is noted; namely, that research focuses on
existing CEM-viewers and thus it has limited value in terms of indicating levels of
knowledge or the presence of beliefs prior to onset. Cognisant of this, this paper
argues that the perceptions of ordinary internet users towards laws criminalising
CEM have value in determining whether the policy response ought to be expanded to
include non-instrumental factors, informed by the construct of the Opportunistic
Offender. In making this argument, this article presents findings from an exploratory
study of the perceptions of 504 Australian internet users towards the viewing of CEM
online. Informed by the findings of this study, and the construct of the Opportunistic
Hunn et al.
177
Offender, this paper concludes by briefly reflecting on the policy implications of key
findings, the limitations of this study and areas for future research.
SCP theory and ideal types
In brief, SCP theory claims that the likelihood of crime occurring can be reduced by
increasing the effort and risk required to offend, reducing rewards of and provocations
for offending and removing excuses (Cornish & Clarke, 2003). Originally, SCP theory
operated on the basis of the ‘unidentified offender’ (Cornish & Clarke, 2003, p....
To continue reading
Request your trial