Intelligent Chat: Publicity

I see that the intelligent chat topics have gone tragically downhill since I left ;).

Here's the topic: Do you think that the publicity given to crimes (either disappearances of women, murders, rapes, etc.) is actually detrimental to society or the judicial process, rather than beneficial?

The main thing that sparked my inquiry is that whenever I watch Fox news the only thing they cover are crimes such as these that the criminals can ultimately benefit and profit from, as well as gain fame and notoriety. It encourages criminals to comit their acts for attention. I have a problem with so much media coverage turning breaking the law into a large aspect of pop culture.

I believe that the judicial process would be better off without media's interference, and I also believe that it does more harm to society than good to dwell on these things as if they are the things that the world is based around.

Where can you find an unbias government? Isn't that a lot like western civilization?

There are various ways to look at it,

we all know that the main purpose of the media is to act as a source of information, to let the poeple know whats happening around their area and the rest of the world etc.

so if its news about crimes then this merely reflects whats happening around us, and lets face it crime is at its highest.

also i think its a viscous cycle. Someone commits a crime, it gets aired, some 'copy cats' commit the crime and again gets aired or appears in the news.

media (news channels) in my opinion are only interested in their ratings, and the newspaper companies are only interested in getting people to read thier paper, and for some reason people are more interested in a crime that has happened rather than a good incident that has happend. A bomb goes off, 20 odd people killed, 30 odd wounded, thats what you hear, but what you dont is that a medic first at the scene end up saving like 30 lives, which part of the news gets broadcasted ? the part that grabs the attention, the part that shocks you.

i have to agree that the media isnt doing the society any favours, but the society isnt doing itself any favours either.but not broadcasting it, isnt going to solve the problem, you just won't hear about it thats all.

I think that all high profile, and even low profile crimes should be anonymous.

It is proven that the type of people who commit these crimes are attention-seeking personalities, so why satiate their inner craving for the spotlight for acting out heinously?

Then, there comes a problem with the media again. The media, even public media (individuals who setup independent websites, etc.), refuses to respect the rights of privacy and anonymity. Just look at the Michael Jackson case, the jurors names, addresses, and phone numbers, as well as personal details about their lives, are strewn all over the news and internet.

At the same time, the checks and balances against the government is important. It all comes down to the media acting responsibly, which, for monetary reasons, we can't trust them to do.

Unbiased reporting is crucial to a well functioning nation and general populace, but is it truly unbiased if it is based upon pop culture to draw in profit? And that's what this is about, pop culture. Crime is becoming part of it, and as much as I hate to blame hip hop for all the worlds problems, the genre of music and new culture that is emerging is making crime a bigger aspect of pop culture that the media is now making bank on.

Pop culture is all consuming of resources and attention. That's why gossip rags like "Star" are on the shelves, so as long as the media's main focus is to draw a profit, it will never be unbiased. Governmentally unbiased? Perhaps, but not really, because the politicians and government use the media all the time (indirectly or directly) to influence us through the media.

What would be great is a non-profit and non-governmental media, but because everything exists to turn profit (even governments), that won't happen.

Earlier, someone mentioned reading the newspaper, preferably a non American news paper, to get the “news.” The reason why this is such a good idea is because the paper has always been a relatively clean medium of exchange for factual information, it can be proved and disproved over time by records of its existence, and therefore set straight if the information relayed is disproved. Another benefit of finding out world information from a non American source is that it is not influenced by our all consuming pop culture. Then again, it will be influenced by the culture of wherever it is coming from.

No, I do not think so. Yes, publicity might be part of the criminal's motivation, but it's not television and fame that ultimately pushes them to go through with the crimes. The people who do commit these crimes for attention have the same amount of justification as those who don't (though I know you weren't saying they were justified in their actions). The fact that they are craving attention and fame in the criminal world might have contributed some to the ultimate decision to go through with the acts, but either way they were going to hurt someone. A person doesn't merely commit such a heinous crime for a few moments on television, a sick and distorted person does. If those people were capable of hurting another in such a manner for their name in the paper, then they were capable of doing this same without the publicity and would very much most likely go through with it either way. I believe that those who do want their name in the paper will commit the crime either way, just in a more violent manner (or some other technique) to have it receive such great lengths in attention. Not to mention, if a criminal wants the fame that badly, they would do it just to earn a story in the area of which they attacked even if their crimes didn't make the news.

As for how much the media displays these kinds of crimes, I don't think it's necessarily beneficial, but I do think it would be detrimental to take that sort of information off of television. They do not need to display it as much, that's true. Other crimes that many people do not even know occur should be reported at the same rate, but unfortunately it's the more violent acts that pull attention. I do think though that people need to be aware of these particular crimes, as well as the others taking place.
Most likely however, the media isn't going to change.

(note)
"have you noticed how many copy cat crimes are being committed,"
yes but do you think that if the copy catters (?) had not been exposed to that particular crime that they would not have committed it?
I don't.
I think they would have went through with the act either way, the particular actions of how to perform it would be the only thing influenced by the previous stories.

"...have you noticed how many copy cat crimes are being committed,"
yes but do you think that if the copy catters (?) had not been
exposed to that particular crime that they would not have committed it?
I don't.
I think they would have went through with the act either way, the particular actions of how to perform it would be the only thing influenced by the previous stories..."

That action that the criminal copied from television might be exactly what the criminal needed in order to pull off the crime successfully. By giving the details on television, you're giving the criminal a chance to improve upon what other criminals have already done.
It may be that one factor that helps THIS criminal get away with his crime.

"That action that the criminal copied from television might be exactly what the criminal needed in order to pull off the crime successfully. By giving the details on television, you're giving the criminal a chance to improve upon what other criminals have already done.
It may be that one factor that helps THIS criminal get away with his crime."

Yes, that's true and technically the media is not allowed to (unless granted permission which they usually are from people who want their 15 min) release details of how the crime takes place for exactly that reason. But I don't think that's what we're asking here (does it help the criminal get away with the crime or give them points) it's is the publicity creating criminals, which I don't think so. I think they would have done the deed either way, The act of how it is carried out is determined by what they learn from the media.

Publicity and crime… steal a little and they throw you in jail, steal a lot and they make you king. When I was a drunk I remember only a few people I wanted to hide it from. When I made a decision to stay sober I am expected to remain anonymous. I saw a quote on a jailhouse wall that said kill a few and you are a murderer. Kill a lot and you are a conqueror. Kill them all and you are a god. If a found this to be reasonable would I have a criminal mind? The point that most criminals have a different value system is well taken

Yes actually it is reasonable, but what makes you a criminal is whether or not you are capable to cause that much suffering for gain in power