Publicizing Criminal Trials

Question

Greetings everyone!

We sometimes see some criminal trials getting broadcasted on national television. Some quite famous ones are made into movies, documentaries, or drama series. What can be the possible implications of this in propagating crime? Can it give people ideas? Can it somehow motivate or entice people with a criminal mindset to do the same?

Julianna Kirschner · Accepted Answer

Hi Affra,

Publicizing criminal trials has a lot of impacts, both good and bad. Sympathy for the victim and aid to the family as well as showing people how something can be avoided in the future. Plus, everyone loves to see when justice is served (or hate to see when it's not), especially in high profile cases.

However, there are also so many potentially negative outcomes as well. Many of the trials that are publicized are either very egregious (Casey Anthony) or have a large social impact (Kyle Rittenhouse). That being said, this can create what is known as a moral panic, which essentially means that as a collective unit, the media and consumers create a narrative that pins a group or thing as the bad guy and everyone fights together to overcome the "bad thing". For example, the case of the Central Park Five is an example of a moral panic. They were accused of raping a white women in central park and a moral panic ensued that basically presented that all urban youth (black males) in New York were dangerous and violent. The term became known as "wilding" and suggested that the youth were sexually motivated to commit crime and referred to them in various animalistic terms. The press coverage and the guilty narrative that they pushed played a large role in their false conviction. The boys were all imprisoned but were later exonerated.

There actually have been quite a few events like the one mentioned above where the media takes a story and runs with it, creating a narrative that immediately criminalizing the person ahead of a trial. Even if found not guilty during trial, it is extremely difficult to get rid of the negative media attention after it has been established.

Affra Iftikhar · Answer

Thank you Julianna for such an insightful and full of knowledge answer.

Paul B. · Answer

One unfortunate consequence has been sensationalizing the cases and making the defendants notorious and infamous. There are many serial killers and mass shooters who, when questioned by police or others, have made statements that they were inspired or motivated by other prior killers/shooters. They were fascinated with the cases, wanted to build on what others had done, wanted the fame and attention, and sometimes even wanted to set new "records" such as how many people were killed. For some individuals who feel isolated, unseen, and unheard, the treatment the media gives some of these individuals is alluring and attractive.

Paul B. · Answer

@Affra Iftikhar I completely agree with you. The media is quick to point responsibility for what these people do at just about anyone and anything (e.g., guns, the government, mental health, politics, religion, race, etc. depending on the news outlet). They never seem to recognize or appreciate the impact of their own actions.

Affra Iftikhar · Answer

This is exactly what I wondered as well. For some people, the fame and publicity, although negative, that comes with airing the trial on media, is an alluring thing. Some people even commit crimes to get that kind of publicity. This is why I think airing a criminal trial should be done with somewhat control of what gets out in the news and what stays in.