On the evening of Friday, November 13, 2015, a group of men killed 130 people and injured hundreds through a series of attacks in Paris. The so-called Islamic State (also referred to as Isis, Isil, or Daesh) claimed responsibility for the attacks at the Bataclan Concert Hall, where the American rock band Eagles of Death played; outside of the Stade de France, which was hosting an international football match; and at multiple restaurants and a bar. Following the attacks, police led raids in both France and Belgium, where many of the men lived, to arrest those associated with the planning and execution of the attacks (BBC 2015a ; Reuters 2015 ). Throughout this chapter, we refer back to these horrific crimes and subsequent investigations to explore the role of new media, to examine the applicability of criminological theory to crimes that transcend borders, and to highlight key concepts in the study of media and crime.
Terrorism is the crime du jour in our global society of the twenty-first century. While efforts to focus on terrorism are negotiated and policies are created, there is a need to discuss the role that media, and in particular new media (e.g. social media), plays in the commission, perception, and reaction to this crime. In response to the Paris terrorist attacks, Rutledge (2015) wrote in her blog post in Psychology Today:
This quote highlights the importance of new media in the study of crime. The massive assault in Paris was coordinated across borders in Europe and the aftermath of the crime played out on new media platforms throughout the world. The role of new media and how it impacts the act of crime, criminal justice responses not only within a country but also across borders, and perceptions of crime need to be better understood both theoretically and empirically.Social media is the terrorist’s best and worst friend. Acts of terrorism need to be public to get attention, make a statement and spread fear. Social media amplifies these events, allowing people around the world to instantaneously see and respond to the horror and to feel the sense of vulnerability and chaos. Social media is also the terrorist’s worst friend. Social media shows terrorism for what it is, senseless, reprehensible violence. It unites people against their cause.
There is an extensive body of literature examining legacy media (e.g. traditional media) and crime, and over approximately the past ten years scholars have begun to explore the impact of new media on crime. According to Surette and Gardiner-Bess (2014), there has been little research on this relationship, but there are plenty of hypotheses. Throughout this book, we draw from cutting-edge criminological and media studies research on new media, as well as proposing and discussing hypotheses for future research. We pose questions that encourage the reader to consider how new media applies to and expands existing theoretical frameworks and research in our global world that is increasingly interconnected through new media.
As new media is an ever-changing technology, writing this book was a daunting task. Questions about whether our examples would be outdated by the time this went into print were asked, to which we responded, “Yes, of course.” New examples will always present themselves as they do in all areas of justice inquiry. Even when examples are no longer fresh, the concepts and issues raised with the “outdated” examples can still be relevant. For example, criminal justice textbooks in the United States commonly discuss the O. J. Simpson trial (see box O.J. Simpson), which occurred over 20 years ago, but is still timely for numerous reasons. The role of race and racism in the trial, which led to much divisiveness in how the trial was viewed by white versus black Americans (Brown et al. 1997), is still relevant in today’s criminal justice system. Likewise, the notion of being able to buy your innocence and America’s fascination with celebrity status (especially sports celebrities) were also key issues in this case that continue to be relevant. And, most pertinent to this book from the O. J. Simpson trial is how it brought up questions about the role of the media in criminal proceedings. Judge Lance Ito allowed television cameras into the courtroom to capture the entire trial, which contributed to the fascination with the case. Even though the murders of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman occurred in 1994, this case is part of our collective understanding of how the criminal justice system operates in America (Barak 1996; Brown et al. 1997; Dershowitz 1997). The current interest in the case is evidenced by FX’s recent The People vs. O.J. Simpson: American Crime Story (2016) and ESPN’s O.J.: Made in America (2016), which continue to encourage conversations about race, crime, and the media.
O. J. Simpson
Orenthal James (O. J.) Simpson, a United States football star, was charged with murdering his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and Ronald Lyle Goldman. He was acquitted of their murders in criminal court, but later found liable of battery and wrongful death in civil court. The cases, which occurred during the 1990s, were publicized in a manner that previous cases in the United States had not been. It was one of the first cases where cameras were allowed in the courtroom, which allowed the public a firsthand look at the criminal legal system that previously did not exist, and thus ushered in a new era of media involvement in the criminal legal system. Even more interesting is that these cases brought about questions and discussions about the US legal system, race, gender, and class, which provide a unique look into American society. This case (even 20 years later) is still being discussed and is still presented in many criminal justice texts. There was even an FX series on this case in 2016. (For further reading on this case and its impact, refer to Gregg Barak’s, 2012 Representing O.J.: Murder, Criminal Justice and Mass Culture or Jeffrey Toobin The Run of his Life: The People v. O.J. Simpson.)
In the following chapter, we:
- 1.Define legacy media and new media with particular attention to social media
- 2.Discuss trends in media consumption
- 3.Overview a selection of key theories (Social Construction, Moral Panics, and Cultivation Theory) on media and crime, and how/if they are applicable to new media
- 4.Discuss new theories and concepts that directly apply to new media and crime
Defining Media and Exploring Trends
It is important to establish the distinctions between legacy and new media as even though there is overlap there are differences in the effects of each on the criminal legal system. Legacy media includes print media (pamphlets, novels, newspapers, etc.), visual media (television, film), and sound media (radio). New media includes the internet, social media, electronic games, and the smartphone. While these definitions are taken partially from Surette (2015), we acknowledge that there are competing definitions of these terms and some overlap between them. For example, traditional print media is now available through social media.
Media began with print, followed by audiovisual, and finally, the digital age emerged (University of Minnesota nd), where media is now commonly accessed through the internet. In a Ted talk, Shirky (2009), a journalism professor who specializes in global networks, discusses how social media is the next big boom that ties all previous media booms together. The printing press, the telephone, the television have all evolved with social media. Everyone has a printing press in their pocket with a smartphone, access to the internet, and a social media account. Media is now almost instantaneous. When something happens in our social world, we can tweet or post an Instagram picture immediately. Shirky provides the example of public officials in China not admitting to an earthquake until three months after it took place. More recently, an earthquake in China was reported on Twitter in real time and public officials were not able to delay their reporting of the event. This made us think about how social media is impacting crime, the criminal justice system, and the public response. One such example is the recent fatal shooting of Philando Castile by police in Minnesota, the United States, which was livestreamed on Facebook by his girlfriend. Instead of the police being able to control the narrative, Castile’s girlfriend was able to shape the narrative with her real-time video (CNN 2016).
Throughout this book we use the term “new media,” which encompasses social media (Surette 2013), but we need to spend some time defining social media, which itself has many definitions. The Oxford Dictionary defines social media as “websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking.” Similarly, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines social media as “forms of electronic communication (as Web sites for social networking and microblogging) through which users create online communities to share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content (as videos)” (April 26, 2016). However, in communication studies an accessible commonly used definition is: “Social media are Internet-based channels that allow users to opportunistically interact and selectively self-present, either in real time or asynchronously, with both broad and narrow audiences who derive value from user-generated content and the perception of interaction with others” (Carr and Hayes 2015, p. 50). From Carr and Hayes (2015) here are some examples of social media: social network sites (e.g. Facebook and Google Plus), professional network sites (e.g. LinkedIn), Tinder, and Instagram. Here are some examples of not social medium: online news services (e.g. NYT online, Pere...