| Chapter 1
The
Crime Beat
By
Dave Krajicek
Crime Beat Issues
Reporters covering the crime or police beat frequently face particular
moral or ethical issues. Here is a look at some of them:
The Appeal of Crime News
A crime reporter from Cleveland offered a common sense answer a
few years ago when he was asked why crime stories were so popular.
He replied, "Because people like to read them."
Crime news has an enduring appeal. It provides readers and viewers
with interesting stories – some sexy, some titillating, some
engaging, some important. And news-consumers eat them up, often
while complaining about the nature of such stories. But why?
Linda Heath, a university psychologist, analyzed crime content
in 36 newspapers and assessed attitudes about crime in interviews
with readers. She concluded readers devour crime for something more
than titillation. She wrote:
"The more newspapers print articles about criminals in
other places running amok, picking victims at random, and trampling
social norms, the more secure readers feel in their own environments.
In essence, readers like the grass to be browner on the other
side of the fence, and the browner the better. Far from frightening,
reports of grisly, bizarre crimes in other cities are reassuring.
Readers are still exposed to some reports of crime that occur
locally, but the severity and outrageousness of such crimes appear
to be judged in comparison with crimes from other places. When
crimes are occurring on the local turf, however, the tables are
turned. ... Readers do not appreciate criminals choosing their
victims at random (or, at least, media accounts that make it appear
so). Reports of crime that lack rhyme or reason are frightening.
If the victim apparently did nothing to precipitate the crime,
then the reader can do nothing to avoid the crime. If, on the
other hand, the victim took some action that made him or her more
vulnerable to the victimization, then the reader can avoid that
action and presumably remain safe. ... The unexpected, the quirky,
the heinous crimes that are reported in newspapers increase fear
of crime among readers in that crime locality, even if the reporting
style itself is nonsensational."
At the center of Heath's theories is the sociological concept known
as "perceived control." For peace of mind, we must perceive
the authorities have the upper hand on lawlessness. Police reporters
provide the public with stories that serve as updates about the
degree to which police are able to maintain control.
Fame and Infamy
Some fault journalists for giving fame to infamous criminals. Crime-victim
advocates often complain that killers attain fame while their victims
are obscure. Shakespeare commented on crime celebrity 400 years
ago when he wrote, "The evil that men do lives after them;
the good is oft interred with their bones."
Recent cases suggest journalists should pay heed to a crime culture
in which fame and infamy seem synonymous.
For example, the two boys who murdered classmates and a teacher
at Columbine High School in suburban Denver in 1999 before killing
themselves left videotapes anticipating their own media immortality.
A failed Atlanta stock-trader who shot up his office made it clear
he had decided to exit life in a flash of media fire. The perpetrator
of a church shooting in Fort Worth knew he would get TV time. (He
had failed to convince local scribes that the government had implanted
a chip in his brain, so he climbed to a loftier media pulpit.) The
Unabomber was keenly aware of his media image. He made it known
he wanted to be called Ted, not Theodore.
When someone commits a criminal act purely to attract celebrity,
are journalists facilitators? On the other hand, how can we ignore
the acts of some publicity-seekers? A mass killing is news.
Bonnie Bucqueroux, coordinator of the Victims and the Media Program
at Michigan State University, says the reading and viewing public
has come to expect details about perpetrators.
"The truth is that evil is a compelling thing to look at,"
she says. "The question is, how much do we pander to our curiosity,
and to what extent do we want to show our children that this is
a viable way for a person to garner attention, because we know from
our kids that those who can't get attention through positive behavior
will turn to negative behavior to get attention?"
The question deserves newsroom consideration. Click
here for a sidebar about an ancient solution to fame and crime.
Interesting vs. Important
A debate over the relative worth of certain stories has raged in
journalism for the past decade:
- Why do the criminal exploits of celebrities rate top-of-the-news
play?
- Why do crime aberrations get so much media attention while
the preponderate crime is largely ignored?
- Some journalism critics cite the excesses of coverage of
the Simpson homicide case as the nadir of celebrity crime news.
Yet news consumers displayed an endless appetite for details about
the case. This raised an old question in journalism: Do we give
readers and viewers what they demand, or do they merely eat what
we feed them?
Joseph Pulitzer is said to have harangued his crime-reporting staff
with memos like this: "Details! Details! Details!" Details
are interesting, and often the more you have the better your
story. Many journalists adhere to the adage "God is in the
details," and journalists do a complete job of providing details
on certain crime stories.
Some advocate the same treatment for the routine crime stories.
Thefts outnumber homicides exponentially but get infrequent attention.
One study found that newspapers covered violent crimes (murder,
robbery, rape, assault) four times more frequently than property
crimes (burglary, larceny, theft), even though property crimes are
nine times more prevalent.
Even among homicides, the atypical get the attention – the
single tourist murder rather than the two dozen "drug"
murders. But if the story of a crime increase (or decrease) is buried
in the routine or typical cases, aren't those cases important, and
don't they deserve attention?
Here are a few questions to consider:
- Is the crime part of a trend or an aberration? (In either
case, tell your readers or viewers.)
- Why should people care about the story?
- Does it leave readers or viewers with a false impression
about crime or raise a safety issue that can be answered?
One new news paradigm attempts to create compelling journalism
that is equal parts interesting and important. One example was a
3,000-word Washington Post story by Donna St. George that took a
close look at the psychology and consequences of one typical homicide.
She wrote:
"There were more than 225 slayings in the District last
year, and most of them happened invisibly, mutely, against a landscape
of seeming indifference. More exceptional were the killings Feb.
8 of teenage sweethearts Andre Wallace, a football team co-captain,
and Natasha Marsh, an honor student, who were shot down hours
after a fight at a Wilson High School basketball game. Four thousand
people turned out for the funeral. The story made newspaper headlines
and television screens, inspired a memorial scholarship and stirred
President Clinton to send condolences. Police offered an eye-catching
reward. The outrage seemed justified. But it comes in poignant
contrast to the norm. Nearly two of every three slayings in the
District went unsolved in 1999. Most got little attention from
the news media. Even after last month's unveiling of a $10,000
reward program for information that lands killers in jail, new
leads were not flooding in. Some police districts experienced
a rise in tips – with one fielding as many as 10 new calls
a day – but others saw little change."
Continue to the next
page in "Chapter 1: The Crime Beat" >>>
<<< Return to the previous
page in "Chapter 1: The Crime Beat"
|
