Stalk me!

The following post is an expansion on Kristine’s blog in relation to cybercrime.         

http://krissyscrim2027blog.blogspot.com/2011/06/final-blog-reflective-note.html

Firstly, I am hopeless with technology so the sudden obsession with new technologies and social networking is a little overwhelming, but when we add cybercrime to the mix, well that is really quite worrying. Social networking sites such as facebook have become the new place where it is common to post everything and anything about yourself. I’m sure many of us can relate to behaving differently online than we would in reality simple because we have that ‘cyberspace’ barrier. Evidently the perpetrators of cybercrime are ‘faceless’ and therefore difficult to identify. This is concerning as Paedophilia on the internet, specifically termed as ‘cyber obscenity’ (Marsh & Melville, 2009) has gained much media attention, and when individuals are willing to reveal personal information about themselves over the internet it is only understandable why parents are creating their own accounts to ‘stalk’ their kids. The term ‘stalk’ I find has also lost its sensitivity as it has become a common phrase relating to finding people through social media and looking at their information, which I guess could reasonably account to stalking.

The actual extent of paedophilia on the internet is difficult to measure due to the ‘secrecy and anonymity that such behaviour encourages’ (Marsh & Melville, 2009) and there is also a lack of clarity in defining the act. Evidently it is clear that self-regulation and acting responsibly and cautiously over the internet is the simplest way to avoid becoming a victim of cybercrime. Increasingly, education surrounding cybercrime is focused around self-regulation, of understanding the risks and monitoring children’s social networking activity, without being too invasive or ‘stalking’.

American show ‘To Catch a Predator’ is a part of Datelines latest investigation into online sex predators. The show involves an actress posing as a 13 year old, who invites the men into her backyard and offers them a drink. Then the host appears and interviews them and upon leaving the police make the arrest. The show is a confusing blur between entertainment and public display of paedophiles. Does this cross an ethical boundary? Furthermore, along with the broadening definition of crime associated with the development of new technologies, is the increase in types of crime only going to result in more crime related ‘infotainment’ shows?

I.Marsh, G. Melville (2009) Crime, Justice and the Media, Routledge, chap. 7

On Trial

‘On Trial’, Australia’s first documentary series revealing the workings of Australian courts and providing behind the scenes access to major criminal trials, aired on ABC tonight. Members of the court, particularly the defence barrister and the crown prosecutor are interviewed explaining their roles and breaking down legal jargon and the courts proceedings.

The accused stands charged with threatening to shoot the victim with a firearm but the accused claims he was in fact the victim of an armed robbery. If the accused is found guilty on 3 firearm counts, possessing, using to intimidate and firing an unlicensed firearm, he faces a 14 year sentence. The case itself is controversial with evidence constantly swaying from in favour of the defence to in favour of the prosecution. Evidently to keep viewers engaged, the trials documented would have to fit the criteria of being relatively emotional, debatable, novel or violent. Certain factors such as these, which relate to ‘newsworthiness’ (Jewkes, 2004) can evidently be applied to the attractiveness of the ABC ‘On Trial’ documentary series and thus determine its success amongst its viewers.

It will be interesting for the public to understand the actual proceedings of court cases and how long and boring they often actually are, depending on the cases they choose to show. The accused has already served 10months in goal on remand and reveals the impact it has had on his life including the loss of his job. For those who are not so familiar with the courts, I think it is important to understand the legal process and its implications such as how long many trials take to be heard and consequently the length of time people can be held in remand.

Tim Macintosh, Crown Prosecutor states, ‘There is a search going on for the truth at one level, but it’s only a search that can take place within the rules of the game.. it’s a play between proof and truth.’ His statement is supported throughout the episode with both sides scrounging for anything as which to dismiss the other sides arguments. It also becomes apparent how important the jury is and that how they are to interpret evidence is greatly considered by both sides. Furthermore there are matters which are addressed in the absence of the jury as it is important to ensure evidence is reliable and admissible before heard by the jury as to avoid prejudice. Viewers are thus able to see facts which the jury may never hear in which I think the documentary has addressed very effectively, enabling the viewers to be the investigators and determine an outcome.

Evidently the courts are given little attention in the media so it will be interesting to see how the documentary series rates and if more attention will be paid to the courts in future.  

S. Lambert (2010) On Trial: Proof or Truth, Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC)

Y. Jewkes (2004) Media and Crime, Sage Publications, London, Chap. 2

Planking an offence?

What is planking? The latest craze? A competitive sport? Or a criminal offence? While planking has become a worldwide fad seen as a bit of harmless fun, Queensland police warn that plankers caught in dangerous situations could be charged with Unauthorised High Risk Activity. The activity has so far seen a man charged with trespass after planking on a police vehicle, has caused the death of a man who fell from a 7-story building while attempting to plank on the railing of his balcony and the death of a man who was thrown from the roof of a car, however it has been said he was car surfing but his death continuously is referred to as a planking incident. The activity itself involves lying face down, hands by your side and in unusual places, the more unusual and creative the better. What has sparked the craze is that plankers post their photos on facebook pages and websites which offer prizes for the best planker, thus through social media the activity has gone international.

 It’s likely however that many individuals only learnt of the ‘sport’ through mainstream media as I myself only heard of it on the 6 o’clock news when a crew member planked across the news desk following the report of the recent craze. Therefore is it then only the media we have to blame for promoting reckless planking resulting in illegal behaviour and even death. Personally I don’t understand the obsession with planking and why some schools have even banned the activity with already many students being suspended. Victorian police are claiming to impose $293 on-the-spot fines if plankers’ were walking or climbing on any part of rail premises not intended for passenger use and also a fine to those who cause an annoyance on/around public transport. One mans’ comment over South Australia’s discussion over outlawing dangerous planking reads ‘They will now have to outlaw mountain climbing, bungy jumping, crossing the road…’, which is the general disbelief of the public in which the amount of media and government attention over planking is ridiculous and if anything, only fuelling the activity.

It is the focus that ‘dangerous’ planking is what is of concern, however isn’t this then the same as dangerous walking and standing. Individuals should not be charged for planking but if it involves actual illegal behaviour such as trespass, public nuisance or reckless behaviour then yes these are offences. It is evident that the definition of a criminal act is broadening with new technologies and changing societal values and morals however is it necessary to include simply idiotic behaviour to the list?

A.Cook (24/05/11) What a Plank: SA AGS office mulls planking ban, Crikey

http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/05/24/what-a-plank-sa-ags-office-mulls-planking-ban/

A.Godfrey (17/05/11) How Brisbane planking death of Acton Beale is fueling a dangerous web craze, The Daily Telegraph

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/how-brisbane-planking-death-of-acton-beale-is-fueling-a-dangerous-web-craze/story-e6freuzr-1226056501630

T. Chilcott (19/05/11) Students suspended for planking at two queensland schools, The Courier Mail

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/students-suspended-for-planking-at-two-queensland-schools/story-e6freoof-1226058894755

The War You Don't See





John Pilger’s 2010 documentary ‘The War You Don’t See’ is an important and essential investigation of the true war in Iraq. The truth in which is either unreported, obscured or concealed is due to embedded journalism in which their assumed obligation to accurately informing society of news and events is further diminished due to the fact that the information they have access to, its interpretation and what is reported, is controlled by the military unit they are embedded with.

The most horrific scene shown in the documentary is 2007 footage of US military shooting innocent civilians and camera men in Baghdad as well as the commentary that goes with it, ‘Light em’ all up’, ‘oh yeah, look at all those dead bastards’, ‘nice’. When a van came to attempt to collect the pieces of what was left of these bodies, the military again opened fire. There were 2 young children inside the van, their father in the drivers’ seat. Up to 90% of deaths during the war in Iraq are of civilians and over a million people have been killed. Under the Fourth Geneva Convention 1949, ‘The killing of civilians and wilfully causing great suffering is a war crime’. So why are our military forces above the law? With further efforts of independent journalism could something be done, perceptions changed? 300 journalists have been killed during the war in Iraq including British reporter Terry Lloyd, shot dead by American Marines. Lloyd was injured in crossfire between US military and Iraqi troops and when a makeshift ambulance picked Lloyd up and drove away, US military fired upon it killing the reporter along with his translator and cameraman. No one has been charged over the deaths and while forensics identify that it was an American bullet which killed Lloyd, they cannot determine exactly who fired the shot. None of the men involved gave evidence or were questioned. Journalist and author of ‘Beyond the Green Zone’ Dahr Jamail states, ‘seeing what I see (and) contrasting that with what has been reported by most of the mainstream, it’s like two completely different worlds’. Viewers of mainstream media do not have any idea of the civilian death toll, of the scale of suffering and of the unprecedented and unnecessary brute force of western military forces.

Pilger states independent journalists don’t have to risk their lives to tell the truth, ‘but we do have to be brave enough to defy those who seek out collusion in selling their latest bloody adventure in someone else’s country.’

J. Bingham (28/07/08) No one to be charged over shooting of ITN reporter Terry Lloyd in Iraq, The Telegraph, UK.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2465218/No-one-to-be-charged-over-shooting-of-ITN-reporter-Terry-Lloyd-in-Iraq.html

J. Pilger (2010)The War You Don’t See, A Dartmouth Films Production, Strand Films MMX

J. Simpson (15/10/06) Are the killers of Terry Lloyd getting away with his murder?, The Independent, UK.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/are-the-killers-of-terry-lloyd-getting-away-with-his-murder-420189.html

NSW State Election



Did you like the video? Well if so you can download the ringtone from the NSW Liberal Party website! Personally I would be a little embarrassed to answer my phone in public with this particular ringtone, plus I would likely be soon driven insane if it was stuck in my head all day. Surely with the recent state election we are all aware of the repetitive backstabbing advertisements and campaigns that tell us not what they are planning to do to improve our state but what the opposition is doing wrong. Are these advertisements even effective and should we be concerned about the money and time spent towards criticising the oppositions policies through advertisements played every single add break. Why can’t they actually do something more productive and beneficial, which logically you’d assume would then increase their votes, proving they are fit to run the state and perhaps actually care about its’ operating rather than their own status and reputation. However the media does specifically manage to show us footage of our party leaders in schools and hospitals, talking with the elderly or visiting sick children, evidently giving the public what they want. Its clear it’s a pretty fierce fight to the finish but surely they can go without the, lets just say it, lame and unnecessary add campaigns and do I need to even mention the ringtone again? I mean really.

However there is also positive use of the media used by the political parties. With a whole new and rapidly evolving generation of technology, many companies and organizations have branched out into social media for promoting and advertising of absolutely anything and everything. Even politicians are getting involved, on the Labour Parties website it lists which of their members have facebook, twitter or are on youtube. Evidently these efforts are aimed at reaching today’s generation of social media fanatics’ but as the social media community increases it is becoming an essential source for obtaining immediate information and also allowing us to comment and have our say. Whether it’s considered or even read, who knows, but it still provides a feeling of involvement accessible to anyone and of which I think is highly valued by most individuals.

NSW Liberal Campaign Head Quarters (2011) Liberal Party of Australia, New South Wales http://www.nsw.liberal.org.au/

NSW Labor Party (2011)

http://www.nswalp.com/

Victims of.. media?

It is evident that the public’s perception of crime is largely based upon how it is portrayed in the media. I admit that I, like many others, fall victim to the media’s often exaggerated crime stories which tend to blur the lines between reality and fiction.

My own consumption of media news is very mainstream; I watch the 6 o’clock news most nights which I sometimes regretfully follow up with Today Tonight (often promoting the latest diets and styling tips!), and regularly browse through the Sunday Telegraph of a weekend. Being a criminology student I realised I definitely need to pick my act up and so I have started off the semester by broadening my sources of crime and media news.

I’m particularly drawn to fictional crime shows a favourite being criminal minds, purely due to the entertainment derived from the constant twists and mind games. But I’m also fortunate enough to have the crime channel on foxtel which provides me with an array of programmes ranging from quite boring police procedures, to horrific murders told by America’s worst criminals themselves. A particular documentary on the crime channel which I watched only recently documented a group of teenage boys from America who made a series of movies called ‘Bumfights’ which exploited the homeless by getting them to fight each other or commit humiliating acts in exchange for a small amount of money or alcohol. I couldn’t understand how these teenagers found this even remotely funny and how they managed to think anyone would actually watch or even buy these movies. But since 2001 when these videos began, 6.8 million similar videos have been sold.

It’s clear that the media has great influence over not only the publics’ perception of criminal behaviour but also offenders and victims too. With that said, the media is able to form stereotypes of these people, whom society marginalises, whom we are wary of. Has the media contributed to this discrimination of the homeless, making it ok for them to be treated like dogs when they are at their lowest and genuinely need help not a supply of alcohol to support a possible addiction?

Though I have gone on quite a tangent, I thought it was interesting to address these videos as it questions two different perceptions on crime, its seen as humorous entertainment and fun to the makers of ‘Bumfights’ and possibly to many who bought the movies, but then another side sees it as immoral, as a criminal offence, almost a hate crime. What creates this difference? Is it personal opinion or media influence?


S. Walshe (2010) Hate Crimes Against the Homeless, The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/aug/20/homeless-bum-fight-hate-crime