Public Perception of Crime

Deviance, Crime, and Social Control SOCI 1306 Public Perception of Crime While neither the Uniform incident Reporting (UCR) programme nor the National Crime Victimisation Survey (NCVS) record every incident that happens in the country, taken as a whole, they paint a comprehensive picture of long-term patterns in crime. These data sources have limits, but they consistently demonstrate that since peaking in the early 1990s, crime rates have been declining, especially for violent and gun-related offences (Cohn, Taylor, Lopez, Gallagher, Parker, and Maass 2013). But public opinion has not kept pace with this drop in crime. Many people in America still think that crime is at an all-time high or is even becoming worse. Numerous recent polls have brought attention to this discrepancy between perceived and real crime rates (Saad 2011; Pew Research Centre 2013, referenced in Overburg and Hoyer 2013). Despite statistical evidence to the contrary, these studies show that a sizable number of American people think crime is worse now than it was twenty years ago. There are several reasons for this ongoing misconception of crime rates. The way that crime is portrayed in the media is one important factor. Television shows that portray a world where violent crimes are common and law enforcement is always fighting a wave of criminal activity include "Law & Order," "CSI," and other crime dramas (Warr 2008). Even though these programmes are fictitious, they have the effect of influencing viewers' views of reality by making them think that crime is more common and violent than it actually is. Public opinion is also greatly influenced by extensive and frequent media coverage of crime. News organisations frequently give priority to dramatic stories involving violent or unique crimes in an effort to increase audience engagement and ratings. It may appear as though these crimes are more frequent than they actually are as a result of this publicity, distorting reality. The hypothesis that media consumption affects how people perceive crime is supported by research. According to studies, people who pay great attention to crime stories in the media tend to overestimate how common crime is and to be more afraid of becoming a victim (Chiricos, Padgett, and Gertz 2000). This dread extends beyond local crime to include more general worries about terrorism and national security. For example, widespread media coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013 and the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks had a significant effect on public perception of future dangers and dread. According to recent study by Holman, Garfin, and Silver (2014), those who watched news coverage of these incidents every day for longer than an hour developed a markedly increased dread of terrorist attacks in the future. This increased dread, which is a result of constant media exposure, emphasises how influential the media is in influencing public opinion and feelings. The public's inaccurate impression of crime rates is influenced by a number of psychological and social factors in addition to media impacts. The availability heuristic, a mental shortcut that depends on the first instances that spring to mind while assessing a particular topic, concept, approach, or choice, is one such aspect. People who are often exposed to news reports on crimes tend to overestimate the frequency and likelihood of crimes because these tales are easier to remember and more memorable. Perceptions can also be influenced by one's own experiences and anecdotal evidence from friends and relatives. Someone who knows someone who has been a victim of crime may extrapolate from that person's experience to the larger community, believing that crime is more common than it actually is. Moreover, perceptions of crime are influenced by social and demographic variables. For example, research indicates that residents of metropolitan regions, whose crime rates are often higher than those of rural areas, tend to be more fearful of crime. People's perceptions of crime are also influenced by their age, race, and financial background. For instance, despite having a statistically lower likelihood of being victims of violent crime, older persons frequently express higher levels of dread of crime than younger people. In a similar vein, people from lower socioeconomic classes and members of minority groups are more prone to view crime as a serious issue due to their experiences with social and economic inequalities as well as their increased susceptibility to specific forms of criminal activity. The public's view of crime is further complicated by political rhetoric and public policy. Politicians and decision-makers may inflate the severity of crime issues in order to justify more laws enforcement tactics and policies. They also frequently utilise crime data to further their own agendas. This kind of speech has the potential to increase public anxiety and misperceptions about crime rates, which can lead to a vicious cycle in which policy drives fear and vice versa. For instance, the "tough on crime" policies of the 1980s and 1990s were motivated by a fictitious rise in crime, which served as justification for the enlargement of the criminal justice system and the enactment of harsher sentencing guidelines. Although the goal of these programmes was to lower crime, they also served to maintain public anxiety by supporting the idea that crime was out of control. Creating effective crime prevention plans and public policies requires addressing the discrepancy between real crime rates and public perception. Sensationalised media coverage can be lessened by initiatives to increase media literacy and public comprehension of crime data and trends. A more educated and logical conversation about safety and crime may be promoted by educating the public on the facts of crime and the causes of fear. Public perception may also be brought into line with reality by promoting responsible media reporting that strikes a balance between the necessity of public knowledge and the significance of accurate and contextualised information. In conclusion, public opinion has not changed despite the fact that crime rates in the US have decreased since the early 1990s. Media representations of crime, psychological elements like the availability heuristic, and social and demographic factors all play a major role in this disparity. A holistic strategy is needed to address this issue, one that involves educating the public, advancing media literacy, and supporting ethical media coverage. Society can establish safer, better-informed communities and more successful crime prevention initiatives by bridging the perception and truth gap.