The Tabloids Sensationalism of Crime and the Obfuscation of its Causes

March 6, 2010

Adam

How the tabloid's simplified reporting of crime does nothing to provide a solution.

Politics

Future historians wading through contemporary tabloid reports would be forgiven for concluding that in the late noughties, the UK was a warzone. For this is indeed a time of unfathomable crime-rates, driven by a ‘feral underclass’ who are hardwired to break the law at every opportunity. The only remedy to this Hobbesian hell is the implementation of rigid, retributive criminal sentencing, combined with the wholesale reform of an inept police force that is more concerned with easy arrests, rather than actually fighting crime.

At least that is the depiction of the UK today according to the likes of the Daily Mail, the Sun, the Daily Mirror and other second-tier national newspapers. The only problem is that…well…very little of this depiction is true.

“Things have never been this bad”

Tabloid coverage of crime would have us believe that rates are spiralling out of control and reaching never-before-seen levels. Tragic cases like the murder of innocent South London schoolboy Jimmy Mizen in May 2008 feature on the front pages of the tabloids to such an extent, that readers are left with the impression that they are more commonplace then they are.

Of course, even one teenager murdered on the streets is one too many. Nonetheless, what is the result of playing up these appalling but rare events? Answer: the widespread perception that the UK is now the most dangerous that it has ever been during modern times.

And yet, this perception is not something demonstrated by the statistics. According to figures from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) between April 2007 and March 2008, there were 744 homicides in the UK. Granted, this represents an increase of 27 murders on the year before, but it is still a lot lower than the 1,042 homicides seen between April 2002 and March 2003. There was also almost 80 thousand less instances of ‘Violence with Injury’ between April 2007 and March 2008 compared to the year before, resulting in a total of 430 thousand offences.

So we see that not only is crime falling in the short-term, but also evidence that the most serious crimes are falling over the long-term. Increases in police funding and advances in forensic technology have undoubtedly aided these trends.

The supposed ‘criminal class’

Admittedly, while the available figures show that rates of crime are decreasing, they still show quite high levels of criminal activity. So, who are the repeat perpetrators behind these crimes?

Having examined his or her chosen tabloid for the day, an average member of the public may walk away with the impression that a ‘feral underclass of criminals’ is responsible. The tabloids make out that criminality is so ingrained in the minds of this imagined class that they are beyond redemption. For the same tabloid commentators, it’s just a coincidence that this ‘feral underclass’, supposedly more pre-disposed to crime, overwhelmingly happen to come from disadvantaged backgrounds.

These ‘journalists’ insist that it is irrelevant that those parts of the UK with the highest rates of offenders happens to also be the lowest income areas, as well as those blighted by the most social problems. The fact that such people are less likely to have access to quality schooling, the necessary social programs and well-paid jobs is to them…well…. unrelated.

However, even a cursory glance over the history of human societies demonstrates that the most crime-ridden areas tend to also be some of the poorest ones. It seems obvious that poverty commonly precedes high crime-rates. Perhaps then: rather than being a characteristic of a section of society pseudo-scientifically prone to criminal behaviour, high crime-rates are actually a symptom of an unequal society?

Retributive punishment

Naturally, it is less troublesome to suppose that crimes are committed by a never-ending conveyor belt of irredeemable ‘wronguns’, as opposed to most criminality being the result of some major defect in the current system that we have grown-up within.

In the first scenario, the only logical solution is to simply imprison criminals as they appear – much like an eternal game of fugitive-themed whack-a-mole. However, the second scenario requires an extensive revaluation of the roots of the problem, as well as considering enormous structural changes to society as we know it. One can see why just imprisoning criminals as they make themselves known is a more attractive route to many, as it demands less disruption and allows the continuation of current societal arrangements.

Therefore, the retributive aim of criminal sentencing remains the favoured focus – much to the glee of the tabloid columnists. And yet, this aim seems to have done little to drastically alter crime-rates over the maybe thousands of years that it has been the bedrock of many criminal justice systems.

Historical examples of high crime-rates in societies that have adopted brutal judicial methods are abundant. If potentially being sent to the gallows for petty crimes like robbery wasn’t enough to dissuade would-be criminals in the Victorian-era, then what chances do less barbaric (but nonetheless hefty) sentences in the modern day have?

We don’t necessarily need huge and immediate economic reform to meaningfully tackle rates of crime. Some positive impact could certainly come from making rehabilitation a bigger focus of sentencing. Instead of sending young criminals to prison to finish long sentences alongside experienced criminals, from whom they can learn how to break the law more successfully, perhaps prison-time could be accompanied with therapy and huge efforts to provide qualifications.

This approach is generally mocked by the tabloids on the basis that it is ‘too soft’ on criminals. There’s no denying that should one of my loved ones be harmed, then I too would seek that they are dealt with the full force of the law. However, I would also feel a lot more relieved knowing that attempts had gone in to reforming them, and therefore the prospect of them hurting someone else upon their eventual release was minimized.

Conflicting demands on the police

The tabloids aren’t just incorrect about the levels of crime in this country, the explanations for the causes of those crimes, as well as their favoured solutions. They also heap unfair pressure on the police force by hitting them with contradictory demands.

On one hand, the tabloids have an insatiable lust for arrest statistics and condemn the police when these numbers do not match their expectations. In response to this criticism, the police may shift some resources onto softer crimes that can be more easily concluded; only for the front pages of the tabloids to scream that the police are focusing on more easily solvable crimes in lieu of giving adequate attention to more serious ones. The poor police are unable to catch a break.

But trying to placate tabloid criticism is as pointless as taking their characterization of crime in this country with anymore than a small pinch of salt. Tabloids, it seems, function to create fear and angst. That way they have a perpetually worried population tripping over themselves each morning to buy that tabloid.