This paper was presented at the Association for Education in Journalism
and Mass Communication in Toronto, Canada, August 2004.
        If you have questions about this paper, please contact the author
directly. If you have questions about the archives, email
[log in to unmask] For an explanation of the subject line, send email to
[log in to unmask] with just the four words, "get help info aejmc," in the
body (drop the "").
(Oct 2004)
Thank you.
Elliott Parker
************************************************************************

Scene of the Crime:
The Study and Practice of Local Television Crime Coverage
from the mid-1990s to the Present


By: Debora Wenger and Jeff South
Associate Professors
School of Mass Communications
Virginia Commonwealth University
Richmond, Virginia 23284-2034
(804) 827-0250; [log in to unmask]
(804) 827-0253; [log in to unmask]



Paper submitted to the
Mass Communication and Society Division
2004 AEJMC Convention
Toronto




Comments or questions should be addressed to the first author
at (804) 827-0250 or [log in to unmask]
 Scene of the Crime _ Page 9

ABSTRACT
Scene of the Crime: The Study and Practice
of Local Television Crime Coverage from the mid-1990s to the Present
By Debora Wenger and Jeff South
Virginia Commonwealth University
School of Mass Communications
Richmond, VA 23284
(804) 828-2660
This study examines the quantity and quality of crime coverage on
television and its perceived impact on public policy. It discusses various
stations' attempts to address the concern that there is "too much crime on
local TV newscasts." The paper explores three techniques that can make such
coverage more relevant to viewers: adoption of crime coverage guidelines,
use of interactive crime Web sites and, most notably, the coverage of crime
from a public health perspective.
 Scene of the Crime _ Page 9

Scene of the Crime: The Study and Practice
of Local Television Crime Coverage from the mid-1990s to the Present
Background and objective
This study summarizes the most recent research regarding crime coverage on
local television news. It also examines past and present practices among a
range of stations that have attempted to address the concern that there is
"too much crime on local TV newscasts." The report addresses such topics as
the amount of coverage, the quality of coverage, approaches to improving
coverage and the perceived impact of TV crime coverage on public policy.
The report was requested by the USC Annenberg Institute for Justice and
Journalism in collaboration with Criminal Justice Journalists. The study
was conducted by Debora Wenger and Jeff South, associate professors in the
School of Mass Communications at Virginia Commonwealth University.
Wenger and South conducted a comprehensive review of the literature and
research concerning crime news on local TV over the past decade. They also
interviewed about 20 TV news executives, reporters, academic experts and
industry observers.

Summary of literature and previous research
Over the past 10 years, numerous studies have established that television
stations devote a substantial proportion of their newscasts to crime
coverage. The amounts reported ranged from less than 20 percent to more
than 50 percent. The disparities reflected the fact that the studies often
varied in how they defined crime stories and how they selected their sample
of news stories to analyze. Most of the studies agreed that between
one-quarter and one-third of local airtime is devoted to crime news.
Several reports looked at news broadcasts in a particular city.
In 1994, the Chicago Council on Urban Affairs examined 10 weeks of news
programming on the city's five major local TV channels. The council found
that when weather, sports and commercials are excluded, more than 50
percent of the news was devoted to "crime and violence." The group's report
said that Chicago's TV news painted "an urban America seemingly out of
control: night after night the news overflows with victims and perpetrators
of violence."[1]
In 1996, Danilo Yanich, director of the Local TV News Media Project at the
University of Delaware, studied 847 news stories broadcast in Philadelphia
and Baltimore. Excluding sports and weather from his sample, he found that
31.3 percent of the stories focused on crime. "Crime news occupied a
prominent place in newscasts far out of proportion with its actual
prevalence in the community," Yanich wrote.[2]
Sarah Eschholz, an assistant professor at Georgia State University, led a
content analysis of three stations' evening newscasts in Orlando, Fla., in
1998. "The overwhelming majority of all local news broadcasts began with a
crime story, and approximately one-quarter of all stories (apart from
weather, sports or anchor chit-chat) shown on the news were crime related,"
Eschholz reported.[3]
Mark Crispin Miller, a New York University professor, conducted a similar
study in Baltimore in 1998. He found that 38 percent of the TV news there
concerned crime. Local government or politics made up 8 percent the
coverage; education, 4 percent; health, 4 percent; and business, 1
percent.[4] Crime stories were heavy on melodrama, anguished interviews and
gruesome facts but devoid of information that would help viewers understand
the causes or frequency of particular kinds of crime, Miller said. "Anchors
and reporters dwell obsessively on local crime and other telegenic
instances of pain and suffering. Despite their obvious talent, and despite
their clear concern for Baltimore's well-being, those professionals are
over-zealous in their crime coverage, which … crowds out other, more
important stories."
Besides analyzing broadcasts in individual markets, researchers have
attempted national studies of local television news.
A nonprofit group called the Rocky Mountain Media Watch monitored 100 local
TV newscasts for one evening in 1995, 1996 and 1997. The report on the
broadcasts of Sept. 20, 1995, said, "Crime reports, which often serve as
lead stories, constitute on average 30.2 percent of news time."[5] Of the
stories aired on Feb. 26, 1997, the RMMW said 42.6 percent were about
"crime, disasters, war or terrorism." The group said 72 percent of the
newscasts on Feb. 26, 1997, led with stories about "crime and violence."
Using such data, the RMMW computed a "mayhem index" for each station
studied. However, the group was criticized for coding as "mayhem" such
segments as a report on furnace-repair rip-offs and a story about how
airplane pilots handle turbulence. [6]
In 1996, journalism professors from eight universities formed the
Consortium for Local Television Surveys (COLTS) and conducted what they
called "the first known attempt to sample the news content of television
newscasts on a national scale." The researchers taped and analyzed
newscasts in eight cities in late 1996 and early 1997. The universities
(and the markets they studied) were: Ball State University (Indianapolis);
Columbia University (New York City); Northwestern University (Chicago);
Syracuse University (Syracuse, N.Y); University of Miami (Miami);
University of Oregon (Eugene); University of Southern California (Los
Angeles); and the University of Texas (Austin).
COLTS found that the TV stations devoted an average of 20.2 percent of
their news time to crime and 9.1 percent to other criminal justice stories
– for a total of 29.3 percent. The second most common news subject was
government and politics, which accounted for 15.3 percent of airtime.[7]
The consortium later expanded to nine universities and markets (adding
Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge) and studied a sampling of
newscasts during the first half of 1999. The amount of crime coverage had
dropped, but it still received far more news time than any other topic, the
researchers said. "Crime and criminal justice took up nearly twice as much
airtime as government and political coverage – 23 percent to just under 12
percent."[8]
The extent of crime coverage "should be obvious to anyone who watches TV
news," Dave Kurpius, the coordinator of COLTS, said at the time. A
professor at LSU's Manship School of Mass Communication and a former local
television news director, he said the findings raised questions about TV
stations' story selections: "Are stations just covering what's cheap and
easy, like crime and criminal justice, or are they covering stories that
help citizens and communities make decisions and play a part in the
democracy?"[9]
Also in late 1996, the Center for Media and Public Affairs, with funding
from the Kaiser Family Foundation, categorized more than 17,000 local
weekday nightly-news stories in 13 cities. The center said 3,397 stories –
20 percent of the total – were about crime. The stations broadcast 1,838
weather stories (11 percent) and 1,557 accident/disaster stories (9
percent) but only 223 city-government stories (1.3 percent).[10]
An average 30-minute broadcast, the center said, included eight minutes of
commercials, four minutes of crime stories, four minutes of sports coverage
and three minutes of weather.
Drew Altman, president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, said: "This study
shows that stories on crime outnumber other local news stories two to one.
Does anyone seriously believe that crime is twice as important as any other
issue that the public needs to learn about from local television news?"[11]
Since 1998, the Project for Excellence in Journalism has conducted an
annual study of local TV news. The project is part of the Columbia
University Graduate School of Journalism and is funded by the Pew
Charitable Trusts. Each year, it has examined newscasts from about 60
stations nationwide – a total of more than 30,000 stories and 1,200 hours
of programming. "In the 2002 local TV news study, a quarter (26 percent) of
all stories were devoted to crime, law and the courts, the most of any
single year since 1998, when we began monitoring local television
news."[12] The project's researchers found that the percentage of
crime-related stories was 28 percent in 1998, 22 percent in 1999, 21
percent in 2000 and 25 percent in 2001.
The researchers said that according to their survey of news directors,
three-quarters of local newsrooms have assigned beats, the most common
being medicine/health (42 percent), crime or courts (38 percent), education
(37 percent), investigative (25 percent), consumer news (24 percent) and
government/politics (24 percent).
"With all those beats, why are newscasts still so full of crime news?
Apparently the reflex to cover the 'live, local and late-breaking' –
usually crime – is so strong that it commands most newsroom resources not
specifically earmarked for other subjects. Indeed, the actions of cops,
criminals, suspects, crime victims, family members, and lawyers made up 27
percent of all stories," according to the PEJ report for 2002.[13]
In 2002, Jeremy Lipschultz and Michael Hilt, professors of communication at
the University of Nebraska as Omaha, published a book, Crime and Local
Television News: Dramatic, Breaking and Live From the Scene[14]. It was
based in part on a content analysis in 1999 of local newscasts from two
dozen TV markets, of varying sizes, across the nation. "The numbers vary,
but one can expect 14 to 25 percent of local TV news stories to have a
crime angle. These numbers have remained fairly stable over time,"
Lipschultz said. "Also, crime is often the lead story – particularly when
the story is new for the 10 p.m. broadcast."[15]
Grade the News, a watchdog group affiliated with Stanford University's
Graduate Program in Journalism, recently published a study about crime
reporting by television stations and other media in the San Francisco Bay
area. It found that on average, the TV stations in 2003 devoted more than
22 percent of their airtime to crime stories.[16] That was up from 2000,
when the stations devoted an average of 17 percent of their airtime to
crime. Crime news was more prevalent on TV than in the Bay area's
newspapers, the survey found.
Grade the News focused especially on stories about "episodic" crime –
isolated incidents – rather than "thematic" stories about crime trends,
causes, effects or solutions. In 2000, the TV stations devoted almost 12
percent of their airtime to episodic crime; by 2003, that jumped to more
than 17 percent – an increase of 44 percent.[17] In contrast, the amount of
airtime devoted to thematic crime stories stayed about the same, at
approximately 5 percent.
Several news directors in the San Francisco Bay market expressed concern
that the Grade the News study sampled only the first half-hour of their
broadcasts. The second half of some broadcasts has more in-depth reporting,
they said. (Grade the News has said it will adjust its sampling technique
for the second half of 2003 to record full-hour shows.[18])
The journalism trade press has echoed the concerns of academics about the
proportion of crime news on television. In 1993, the American Journalism
Review published an article titled, "Why Is Local TV News So Bad?" It
quoted Howard Rosenberg, TV critic for the Los Angeles Times, as saying,
"Local news – in Los Angeles, at least – is mostly an extension of the
entertainment programs that surround it. If I want nightly triple features
of violence – endless coverage of grisly, blood-spattered offenses that
feeds our paranoia about crime – I know where to find it: local news."[19]
In 1997, the Columbia Journalism Review published an article with a similar
title: "Why Local TV News Is So Awful." It quoted Marty Haag, senior news
vice president for the A.H. Belo stations, as saying, "Covering crime is
the easiest, fastest, cheapest, most efficient kind of news coverage for TV
stations. News directors and station owners love crime because it has a
one-to-one ratio between making the assignment and getting a story
on-air."[20] The article explained that a crime scene, marked off in yellow
police tape, provides a reliable backdrop, and crime stories require little
digging or research. "Just get to the crime scene, get the wind blowing
through your hair, and the rest will take care of itself."[21]

The industry's reaction to the research
Television news professionals have dismissed some of the studies as flawed.
For example, Scott Libin, a former TV news director now with the Poynter
Institute, called the Rocky Mountain Media Watch's study "sloppy
research"[22] for its overly broad definition of "mayhem." And Barbara
Cochran of the Radio-Television News Directors Association criticized the
RMMW's methodology: "You can certainly quarrel with the methodology" of
sampling just one evening of any newscast.[23]
Likewise, an industry publication, DigitalTV, said news directors largely
criticized or ignored the report by the Project for Excellence in
Journalism: "Most of them took the study with a grain of salt."[24] The
article said PEJ had blown out of proportion its main finding: that the
percentage of crime stories in local TV news increased 1 percentage point,
from 25 percent in 2001 to 26 percent in 2002. Some of PEJ's other findings
were contradictory, the article said. "That's not to slam PEJ, which at
least tried to quantify trends in local news, but it does suggest that the
exercise is a little like measuring steam with a yardstick." The article
joked that it could have carried the headline, "News Directors Shrug at
Ambiguous Study."[25]
Some news directors said PEJ's sample of newscasts was too small (each
station was evaluated on two weeks' worth of newscasts – a total of 10
hours each year). Others said PEJ ignored the commercial pressures in the
TV newsroom. Mike Devlin, news director at KHOU in Houston, said:
They don't factor in that a publicly owned station has to be commercially
successful. When America's Funniest Home Videos gets twice the rating of a
senate debate … that speaks to the public appetite. I wish they would at
least question the appetite of the public. There's a reason stations put on
mother-daughter breast implants during sweeps … I'm not saying we shouldn't
be held accountable, but the public should be held accountable, too.[26]
TV news industry officials don't dispute that there is "a lot" of crime
news on local television. "I don't find that surprising at all," Cochran
said. She said stations would be criticized if they didn't report crime
stories.[27]
But Cochran disputed the assertion by some studies and experts that local
stations follow the philosophy of "if it bleeds, it leads." "That's pretty
outdated now."[28] She said stations are making a better effort to report
the causes and possible solutions to crime. "It's hard to talk about it in
any generalized way."[29]
TV news directors, producers and reporters say there is a logical reason
that crime stories are common and prominent: Viewers are deeply interested
in crime and want comprehensive crime coverage.
Katherine Greene, news director at WBAL-TV when Mark Crispin Miller was
conducting his study there in 1998, said, "We're like the viewers. We get
sick of crime coverage, too." But she said crime is a story that can't be
ignored: "The safety issue makes crime one of the most important stories."[30]
Indeed, a 1998 study by the Radio-Television News Directors Association
found that viewers and news directors are in sync when it comes to crime.
The group surveyed viewers to find their level of interest in different
story topics. It then asked local TV news directors to predict the public's
level of interest. The news directors estimated that 67 percent of the
public would be very interested in "crimes that happen in your area." In
the general survey, 65 percent of viewers said they would be very
interested in such stories.[31] A 2003 survey by the RTNDA reinforced that
finding: Asked what topic was most important on the local news, 72 percent
of viewers said they tune in for weather, 62 percent for crime and 31
percent for sports.[32] At a time when journalists are trying harder to
listen to their audience, some believe it is arrogant for the profession to
override viewers' demand for crime news.
In a 1999 editorial, Broadcasting & Cable magazine said TV news directors
should neither play up nor play down crime. "It is not TV's job to
underreport crime to keep from shocking or offending viewers. That would be
a true disservice, because it would provide a false sense of security. But
trolling the satellite feeds for violence, or giving it more airtime
because of its power to shock and attract, provides viewers with a false
sense of insecurity by putting so many violent acts, no matter how remote
from the individual viewer, in every living room, everywhere."[33]

The focus on violent crime
Some researchers criticized TV stations not just for the amount of crime
they covered but the kinds of crime they covered and the ways they covered
crime.
In his study of newscasts in Baltimore and Philadelphia, Danilo Yanich, an
associate professor in the Graduate School of Urban Affairs and Public
Policy at the University of Delaware, found that half of the crime stories
were about murders and a quarter were about other types of violent crime.
In contrast, Yanich noted, most crimes are property crimes – and murders
are rare. "What was remarkable about the offenses that were chosen for
inclusion in the newscasts in both television markets is how far they were
from the reality of crime in both Baltimore and Philadelphia. Remember,
murder accounted for less than one-half of one percent of the crimes in
both metropolitan areas. In other words, the coverage of murder on
newscasts was about one hundred times more likely than its occurrence in
reality in both metropolitan areas." [34]
Yanich said most crime stories appeared in the first segment of the
newscasts as part of a montage – packaged with other crime news. "The
result was a set of broadcasts that gave the impression that we were being
bombarded by 'one crime story after another.'"
News directors argue that their broadcasts reflect the fact that crime is
part of the reality of the city, Yanich said. He rejected that argument as
disingenuous. "Crime is only a part of city life. The local newscasts in
Baltimore and Philadelphia that we examined made conscious decisions to
cover more crime news than any other social issue. They also decided what
crimes they would cover (mostly murder) and how they would cover them (in a
montage of stories placed in the first segment). Crime is part of the
reality of urban life, and it is a legitimate subject for local news
coverage. But crime is only a part of city life."
Sarah Eschholz leveled similar criticism at TV stations in Orlando. She
said that more than two-thirds of the crime stories she studied in 1998
focused on violent crime.[35] In contrast, she cited FBI statistics showing
that violent crime made up 18 percent of all crime in Orlando that year.
In its 1996 study, the Center for Media and Public Affairs also bemoaned
the attention devoted to coverage of violent crimes: 60 percent of the
crime stories in the group's national sample involved violent offenses.[36]
Robert Lichter, the center's president, noted that in the years preceding
the study, crime in the United States had decreased. But he said, "If it
bleeds, it leads on the local news, regardless of the reality of falling
crime rates."[37]
 From the standpoint of news professionals, many academic experts ignore
the very definition of news in criticizing the amount of local TV coverage
of crime in general and violent crime in particular. News is the
extraordinary, not the ordinary. Murders and certain violent crimes are
clearly more serious than most property crimes and deserve greater coverage
by traditional news standards. Arguing that crime or certain categories of
crimes should be covered in proportion to their occurrence in society is
like arguing that news organizations should downplay or ignore plane
crashes because most planes land safely.
To many TV journalists and observers, the debate should center not on the
quantity of crime news on local TV but on the quality. They believe the
misplaced emphasis on quantity has stalled the movement toward finding ways
to improve crime reporting.
"I think the quality of coverage counts more than the quantity," said Scott
Libin, director of development and outreach for the Poynter Institute. "My
chief concern is that we so often take the easy way out, and avoid what we
consider to be 'newspaper stories' because they are complex and
challenging. If we weighed stories truly on their merits, instead of
principally on ease of execution, I think crime coverage would assume its
appropriate place in our newscasts."[38]

Public policy implications in crime coverage
In criticizing the amount and tone of crime coverage on local television
news, researchers often make two related assertions:
•       That people are more likely to get their news from local TV than from any
other source. According to a nationwide survey of 3,000 Americans, 34
percent said local television news was their most important source of
information; 17 percent picked national TV news and 15 percent local
newspapers.[39]
•       That watching disproportionate crime coverage on TV instills fear in
viewers and distorts their views toward public policies.
Several studies in recent years found that people who watch a lot of local
television news tend to have a greater fear of crime in their
community.[40] Local TV news was strongly related to perceptions of crime
in one's city and neighborhood and to the belief that crime was increasing
in the city.[41] Exposure to crime news on TV was directly related to
perceptions of the probability of violent crime.[42]
In his 1997 book, Media, Crime and Criminal Justice, Ray Surette, professor
in the College of Health and Public Affairs at the University of Central
Florida, discussed how the American media's coverage of crime and violence
affects news consumers. Because of such coverage, he said, people
overestimate the frequency of different classes of crime and violence.
Surette also maintains that TV news has contributed to an unwarranted
increase in fear – and that people do not realize crime has decreased in
recent years.[43]
Barry Glassner, a sociology professor at the University of Southern
California, made a similar point in his book, The Culture Of Fear: Why
Americans Are Afraid Of The Wrong Things.[44] "Television news programs
survive on scares. On local newscasts, where producers live by the dictum
'if it bleeds, it leads,' drug, crime, and disaster stories make up most of
the news portion of the broadcasts."[45]
Glassner blamed media-induced fear for the disconnect between reality and
public opinions about crime. He said that in 1997, after six consecutive
years of falling crime rates, more than half of the respondents in a
national survey disagreed with the statement: "This country is finally
beginning to make some progress in solving the crime problem." Instead,
Glassner said, "62 percent of us described ourselves as 'truly desperate'
about crime – almost twice as many as in the late 1980s, when crime rates
were higher."
Glassner reiterated his views in a recent interview with the Web site
Buzzflash:
TV news gains by continuing its style of coverage in several ways. First,
it is relatively inexpensive to run a news operation based on the maxim "if
it bleeds, it leads." You need a police radio and an adequate camera, or,
in some cities, a helicopter, to follow the police around. You will get
very dramatic pictures. The audience is understandably anxious and engaged
when presented with the prospect of violence by strangers in their own
community. In point of fact, of course, most interpersonal violence is
between people who know each other, often people who live together.
But we don't get that impression from the TV news. And were they to present
that to us, it would create lots of uncomfortable viewers, uncomfortable
advertisers, and an uncomfortable political climate for them. It would
raise difficult and important questions. No one can disagree with the
premise that an attack by a stranger is a bad thing and a frightening thing
that should be stopped. And that's basically what they cover, and what
those newscasts cover, and a lot of what police in many cities focus upon.[46]
Glassner's theories are not new, and such criticisms aren't directed only
at television. In his 1978 essay, "Crime Waves as Ideology,"[47] Mark
Fishman, an associate professor of sociology at the City University of New
York, argued that crime waves are frequently media constructions. He said
that in 1976, the New York media – three newspapers and five TV stations –
carried a spate of stories that incited public concerns about "crimes
against the elderly." But during this "crime wave," police statistics
showed no increase in crimes against elderly New Yorkers. The media created
the elderly-crime wave because they often seek a theme – a means of
connecting anecdotes to present a seemingly bigger story, Fishman said.
This has big implications for the public: "Although you can't be mugged by
a crime wave (but, only by a real criminal), a crime wave can certainly
increase citizens' fears. It can also directly lead to increased efforts at
law enforcement, the enactment of new laws and penalties, and impact the
correctional system as well."[48]
A study published recently in the Journal of Communication also found a
link between television news and fear of crime. "Cultivation theory
suggests that widespread fear of crime is fueled in part by heavy exposure
to violent dramatic programming on prime-time television," said the
researchers, headed by Dan Romer of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at
the University of Pennsylvania. The researchers concluded "that fear of
crime is in part a by-product of exposure to crime-saturated local
television news."[49] The study was based on a recent national survey of
perceived risk as well as a survey of more than 2,300 Philadelphia
residents. "The results indicate that across a wide spectrum of the
population and independent of local crime rates, viewing local television
news is related to increased fear of and concern about crime." [50]
Studies and critics have said that local TV news contributes not only to
fear but also to dubious public policies regarding crime. Especially in the
1980s and 1990s, when crime rates were higher than they are today,
politicians often used television to express "get tough" policy changes;
their proposals typically were driven by election strategy, not
criminological research. Afraid of the crime they see on the local TV news,
viewers have been quick to embrace such policies, Danilo Yanich said in a
1998 study funded by the Soros Foundation's Center for Crime, Communities &
Culture:
The reality and the perception of danger have significant policy
implications. For example: (1) President Clinton promises to put 100,000
more police officers on the streets of America's cities as a response to
crime; (2) Thirty-four states in the United States allow citizens to carry
concealed weapons, justifying that action as a deterrent to crime; (3)
State legislatures enact laws that increase lengths of sentences, requiring
consecutive rather than concurrent sentences; (4) State executive branches
embark on prison-building programs that represent the fastest increasing
portion of state budgets; (5) State attorneys general call for changes in
state laws that will make it easier to prosecute more juveniles as adults. [51]
Crime coverage also impacts public policy because it displaces other
stories that local TV news could pursue, Yanich said. "News is a zero-sum
game. If a crime story goes in, something else must be left out."[52]
In a 2002 report also for the Local TV News Media Project at the University
of Delaware, Lisa Budzilowicz analyzed TV news stories that the Project for
Excellence in Journalism had collected in 1998 from New York and Los
Angeles (the largest markets), St. Louis and Buffalo (medium-size markets),
and Lansing and Tallahassee (the smallest markets).
PEJ had taped 7,700 stories from those markets in 1998. About 2,100 of the
stories – 27 percent – focused on crime. Budzilowicz selected 313 crime
stories for her study. She found that the stories usually aired in the
beginning of the newscast, were short, relied heavily on video, often were
about court proceedings and employed "minimal use of sources." Budzilowicz
wrote:
The heavy reliance on video footage as a production necessity likens crime
coverage more to a television drama than to a public service. In addition,
the prominence of court-related stories shows little initiative in covering
crime as an issue. These stories, which appear so very often in the
beginning of each evening newscast, serve the purpose of entertainment more
so than information. Episodic coverage dominated every station in every
market in my sample. …
Crime stories are framed in a way that leaves little or no interpretation
of the causes or treatments for crime. It is overwhelmingly obvious from my
observations that individuals are largely held responsible for the causes
of crime, despite the myriad existing social dysfunctions that may have
precipitated that crime. In addition, more certain or severe punishment is
seen as the most acceptable prescription for the problem of crime, despite
such issues as overcrowded prisons and the existence of many other methods
of treatment. …
It is no wonder that politicians enter the picture at this point and
harvest votes with simplistic proposals to build more prisons and hire more
police. There is no incentive in this system to engage in more critical or
thoughtful discussion of society's problems. [53]
A 1997 study at the University of California-Berkeley reached a similar
conclusion. Researchers with the Berkeley Media Studies Group conducted a
content analysis of local television news in California and explored how
such coverage shapes the public and policy debate on youth violence. The
study concluded: "Local television news provides extremely limited coverage
of contributing etiological factors in stories on violence. If our nation's
most popular source of news continues to report on violence primarily
through crime stories isolated from their social context, the chance for
widespread support for public health solutions to violence will be
diminished."[54]
The 2003 study by Grade the News also said that crime-saturated news
reports "can create a climate of public mistrust that can warp public
policies."[55] Mark Leno, who chairs the California State Assembly's Public
Safety Committee, said the state could save $1 billion a year under his
plan to allow early release of "non-violent, non-serious, non-lifer
offenders." But the frenzy over crime in the news prevents a rational
discussion of such reform proposals, Assemblyman Leno said. "The concepts
are that much more difficult to explain to my colleagues if they and their
constituents are convinced by the media that crime is on the rise. The
obvious response to rising crime is lock 'em up and don't let 'em out."[56]

TV coverage and crime rates
Glassner, Yanich and other critics of local television news coverage
contend that as the rate of serious crime has fallen, the amount of crime
coverage on TV has risen. This assertion merits scrutiny.
By any measure, crime rates in the United States have decreased. Each year,
the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics surveys Americans, asking if they
have been victimized by crime. The rates of victimization for violent
crimes and for property crimes in 2002 were the lowest since the survey was
started 30 years ago.[57]
Another measure of crime is the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform
Crime Reporting system, which tracks offenses reported to law enforcement
agencies. According to the UCR, the crime rate dropped sharply between 1991
and 2000: from nearly 6,000 crimes per 100,000 residents, to about 4,000
crimes per 100,000 residents. The 2000 crime rate was the lowest since
1973. The UCR rate held steady in 2001 and increased slightly in 2002.[58]
The rate of violent crimes (murders, rapes, assaults and robberies) also
has fallen: After decades of rising steadily, the number of violent crimes
per 100,000 residents peaked at 758 in 1991 and has dropped every year
since then, to 504 violent crimes per 100,000 residents in 2001.
Glassner said that TV journalists should have realized by 1997 that crime
rates were falling, and that they should have reduced or modified their
news coverage accordingly. Many journalists say such criticism is unfair:
In 1997, they say, the downward trend of crime rates was unclear. First,
the FBI doesn't release UCR data until almost about 10 months after the
calendar year has ended. So for most of 1997, the latest data available
were for 1996. And in 1996, the decline in the rate of serious crimes was
in its infancy: The number of UCR crimes per 100,000 residents went from
5,898 in 1991 to 5,087 in 1996; and the number of violent crimes per
100,000 went from 758 in 1991 to 637 in 1996. While those dips were
significant, journalists had no way of knowing that this the start of a
dramatic plunge in crime.
Regarding crime rates and television coverage, some journalists raise novel
questions that hint at a contrarian view: Is it possible that local
television's coverage of crime contributed to the decline in crime rates?
That rather than (or in addition to) raising fears about crime, local TV
kept a spotlight on the issue – and kept the heat on local officials,
prompting communities and police to mobilize?
Scott Libin of the Poynter Institute believes that may be the case. "I'm
familiar with the argument that we continue to cover crime
disproportionately at a time when crime rates are actually down
significantly, but I'm not sure what the relationship between those two
phenomena might be. I think we have to acknowledge the possibility that
government 'got tough' on crime, built more prisons, put more cops on the
street, etc., at least in part because people demanded it, and that people
demanded it because TV news had raised their consciousness of the problem."[59]
That's possible – but doubtful, other experts say.
"It sounds like a spurious relationship," said Dr. Laura Moriarty, a
criminal justice professor at Virginia Commonwealth University.[60] "There
are many reasons why the crime rate has decreased – and maybe one facet is
the awareness of crime. However, most often the public has an unrealistic
understanding of crime, and they get this 'picture or perception' from the
media."

Early station response
Discussion concerning the need for media restraint in covering crime often
occurs after high-profile crimes that receive national attention. The
arrest of Lee Harvey Oswald for the John F. Kennedy assassination in 1963
led to one early set of proposed crime coverage guidelines.[61] In 1975,
after Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme tried to assassinate President Ford,
Congress and the White House denounced a "violence-prone media that was out
of control."[62] More current events have rekindled discussions about the
need for the media to have crime coverage guidelines. These events include
school shootings, hostage situations, and arrests of priests on sexual
abuse charges.
In the mid-1990's dozens of stations made attempts to control crime
coverage with varying degrees of success. Some of the most innovative
approaches gained national attention, including the KVUE crime guidelines
and WCCO's family-sensitive approach to news.
KVUE, Austin, Texas
One of the most publicized attempts to improve crime coverage came in
January 1996 at KVUE in Austin, Texas. Executive producer Cathy McFeaters
and news director Carole Kneeland spearheaded a movement at the station to
introduce published guidelines for covering crime. The impetus came from a
series of monthly meetings the station held for members of the community to
give the station feedback about its role in the community. At the meetings,
audience members complained that the station sensationalized some crime
stories and presented others in poor taste.
At the time, the Gannett-owned station established the following five
guidelines to determine whether and how to cover crime stories:
1.      Is there specific action the audience could take (such as calling police
if they have seen someone the police are searching for)?
2.      Is there an immediate threat to public safety?
3.      Is there a threat to children?
4.      Is there a significant impact to the community?
5.      Does the story lend itself to a crime-fighting or prevention effort?
The station called the project "KVUE Listens to You on Crime" and promoted
it extensively. Station management asserted viewers responded favorably to
the changes in coverage.[63] The station's ratings remained at No. 1, and
the policy remained in place for several years. In a 1999 interview with
USA Today Magazine, McFeaters (by that time the station's news director
after Kneeland's death) said that the guidelines had resulted in fewer
crime stories on the air and that complaints about crime coverage were
virtually non-existent. She was quoted as saying, "We were liked before;
I'm convinced we're respected now."[64]
On June 1, 1999, Belo purchased KVUE from Gannett. In August 2000, Belo
named Frank Volpicella as news director. Volpicella decided the guidelines
were hurting the news department. Now, he says, the station still has crime
guidelines but not in the form originally created. "The crime project,
however noble it was in my opinion, it over the years became a twisted line
that ended in poor news judgment. It became an excuse for the news
department not to cover spot news."[65]
Volpicella believes you can't decide on the significance of a story until
you actually cover it. He says the station was automatically dismissing
coverage of stories because they fell under a certain category – crime.
Volpicella said the station's current policy is to evaluate every story on
its own merit and to look for the deeper impact a story might have whether
it's about crime or any other subject.
Bay News 9, Tampa, Fla.
When Time-Warner's 24-hour local cable news channel first went on the air
in 1997, the management stated that the station would follow and publish
specific guidelines for covering crime. The station still adheres to the
policy (though it was revised once in July 2000) and features the
guidelines prominently on its Web site. The guidelines not only say what
the station will and won't air; they tell viewers who will make the
decisions and provide precise details concerning what information or video
will appear on screen.
The following summarizes the guidelines (a full copy can be found at
http://www.baynews9.com/site/crime.cfm):
1.      Avoid showing corpses unless the news director decides it significantly
adds to the story. Avoid showing corpses when children and watching, and
always provide an on-air warning 10 seconds before the video showing
corpses airs.
2.      Interview grieving relatives only with permission, and indicate their
permission in the script and in supers.
3.      No non-fatal stabbings, shootings or suicides unless unusual.
4.      Offer the audience the chance to help solve crime, but give suspect
descriptions only when specific characteristics are provided. NEVER use
race as a sole identifying characteristic.
5.      Show moderation when deciding how often to report the same murder and
where in the show the story will air. Don't repeat a murder story past 12
hours unless there's new information.
6.      Track key court dates, but don't air arraignments, preliminary hearings
or pre-trial motions unless it's a high-profile crime.
7.      Name suspects only after they are formally charged in court, or possibly
after arrested, depending on circumstances.
8.      Name juveniles only if charged as adults and only with news director's
decision.
9.      NEVER name the victim of a sex crime unless he/she comes forward and
wants to speak out. Otherwise, don't reveal the victim's identity.
10.     Don't show live coverage of police teams during hostage situations.
Never contact a hostage-taken during an incident.
Mike Gautreau is the news director at Bay News 9. He says the guidelines
are the brainchild of the station's general manager, Elliott Wiser. Wiser
was the news director at WTVR in Richmond back in 1994. At the time, the
market was ranked second in the nation in terms of murder per capita. Wiser
and his wife had just had a daughter, and he became concerned about
families who wanted to see the news but not be inundated with the "gore"
often associated with crime blotter reporting. He developed his first set
of crime guidelines for the Richmond market and brought the idea with him
to Bay News 9 seven years ago.
Gautreau says the station has been able to stick to the guidelines because
they make provisions for atypical cases. "In most instances, the guidelines
are not a set of rigid direction but a roadmap of the overall direction we
would like to go in pursuing the majority of our stories."
Gautreau also takes issue with those who believe that there's too much
crime on television news in general. "Stories on crime are not a bad thing
in my opinion. It's the manner in which the stories are told that can be
questionable," he says. He believes what is seen on television news is
reflective of viewer consumption. "For example, since September 11th, there
has been a seemingly renewed interest by the viewing public in public
safety issues in general, which can translate into more crime coverage. Of
course, I think it's easy for a newsroom to inadvertently use crime
coverage as a crutch if it's not careful."[66]
The 'family-sensitive' response
Another often discussed approach to improving crime coverage came out of
WCCO-TV in Minneapolis. That station is credited with starting the "family
sensitive" approach to news. At the start of 1994, the station promised
viewers that its 5 p.m. newscast would never contain material that a family
with children watching would find offensive. Family-sensitive news was the
result of WCCO's research involving focus groups in which consumers were
asked what was wrong with TV news. The overwhelming response was that news
was too violent.[67]
A handful of other stations around the country picked up the approach for
their own newscasts. More than a year after WCCO implemented its
family-sensitive approach, the station remained in first place, but other
stations weren't so lucky. Several that tried family-sensitive news
suffered lower ratings and dropped the experiment. In 1995, noted
journalist Ellen Hume wrote that one reason may be that some of the
family-sensitive stations were missing the point. "Violence should not be
swept under the rug any more than it should be gratuitous. It should be
covered in a way that provides meaning and context for viewers."[68]
There appear to be few, if any, mentions of WCCO's family-sensitive
initiative after 1997, when WCCO's news director John Lansing left the
station. Noel Holston, radio/TV critic for the Star-Tribune in
Minneapolis-St. Paul, says that after Lansing left, all of the innovations
he tried were quietly phased out.[69]

Journalism organization guidelines
Journalism organizations such as the Radio-Television News Directors
Association and the Society of Professional Journalists have made only the
most general recommendations on how broadcast journalists should cover crime.
In the 2000 RTNDA Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, in a section
titled "Fairness," the code says the following about crime: "Treat all
subjects of news coverage with respect and dignity, showing particular
compassion to victims of crime or tragedy." In a section titled,
"Integrity," the code says, "Refrain from contacting participants in
violent situations while the situation is in progress."[70]
The Web site for the RTNDA also spells out specific ethical guidelines for
its members to use when covering hostage-taking crises, police raids,
prison uprisings and terrorist actions. The guidelines are lengthy and
detailed. In general, they tell journalists not to interfere with police
work in any way and to seriously weigh the benefit of giving the public
information against the harm that it could cause. The RTNDA distributed the
guidelines to TV news directors after the Colorado school shootings in
April 1999.[71]
RTNDA President Barbara Cochran has been questioned many times about the
amount of crime coverage included in many television newscasts. She has
said repeatedly that crime is a topic that broadcast journalists cannot
ignore. The RTNDA's own research shows that crime is important to TV news
viewers and that crime coverage can provide a public service when it
informs people of dangerous situations.
The Society of Professional Journalists' current Code of Ethics contains no
section dealing specifically with crime. Under the section titled,
"Minimize Harm," the SPJ urges sensitivity and good taste in all news
coverage. It also says, "Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects or
victims of sex crimes. Be judicious about naming criminal suspects before
the formal filing of charges. Balance a criminal suspect's fair trial
rights with the public's right to be informed."[72]
SPJ President Gordon McKerral says that to his knowledge, SPJ has never
drafted or proposed guidelines for coverage of any specific content area;
however, he does think many of SPJ's ethics code tenets clearly apply to
covering crime. McKerral also says, "I do not think the amount of crime
coverage is the most serious issue. It's how it's covered."[73]

Suggestions from academic experts and think tanks
Several experts recommend that TV newsrooms have a crime beat, as 38
percent of stations do.[74] But the experts say TV stations should define
the beat broadly. "Some have called it a public safety beat or social
justice beat. First you need to think about what you want to cover: just
daily cops and courts? Or trends and solutions? I would argue that the
latter makes for better coverage," said Jan Schaffer, executive director of
J-Lab: The Institute for Interactive Journalism, at the University of
Maryland.[75]
Mark Crispin Miller of New York University said stations should assign
knowledgeable and experienced reporters to the crime beat – reporters who
understand such issues as those outlined in the KVUE guidelines. He said it
would be good if the reporter has covered crime for a newspaper or magazine
and perhaps has written books about crime. "Such a person would know
something about criminology and law – would know more, in other words, than
your average semi-educated titillator." [76]
TV stations should carefully consider which crime stories to air and when
to air them during the newscast, Miller said. "Crime should be covered only
if the crime in question is especially newsworthy and/or if the coverage
would improve public safety. Crime in poor urban neighborhoods should be
contextualized, moreover – for example, by asking why particular
neighborhoods have high rates of violence, drug use, etc. By and large, it
shouldn't lead the newscast, which should be covering other things in order
of their true importance. Those stations that overdo the violent crime
thing also tend to underplay real news – on local politics, business,
labor, the environment – that actually affects how people live."
Al Tompkins, the broadcast/online group leader at the Poynter Institute,
agrees that "stations should cover crime responsibly. Don't exaggerate the
size of the problem or severity of crime. … Exaggerated coverage has the
potential to encourage viewers to disconnect with their community, turn
inward for safety and shut the community out of their lives." It's cheap
and easy for TV crews to "drive by a murder scene and take pictures,"
Tompkins said. But "society pays a heavy price for the skewed coverage" in
unwarranted fear.[77]
Danilo Yanich of the University of Delaware says TV stations should show
restraint in airing stories about crimes from outside their market areas.
He said his research shows that about a quarter of the crime stories on
local TV aren't even local stories. "It is so clearly gratuitous when a
station airs a crime story from hundreds or thousands of miles away just
because it has good video."[78]
Sometimes, a story about a non-local crime "rises to the level of
'entertainment' and it's covered as a national story," Schaffer said. "But
I think the public feels bombarded by a lot of duplicate 'noise' on these
stories. I'd advise stations to push their assignment editors on what
'added value' the station could provide that would advance the coverage
beyond daily incremental developments (or non-developments.)"[79]

New attitudes toward covering crime
While much of the focus of crime coverage research has been on the amount
of crime covered, several stations have tried to address the quality of
their crime coverage by creating franchises that force reporters to go
beyond the daily story to put crime in perspective and/or offer possible
solutions to the problem or advice on how viewers can protect themselves.
Bob Kaplitz is a principal and strategist for Audience Research and
Development, a leading newsroom consulting firm. He says, "Many viewers
complain about what they call the 'if it bleeds, it leads' approach to
crime coverage." Instead, Kaplitz says, they want to know what crime means
to them – even if it's a short story read by the anchor.
That's one reason why in markets where viewers say the issue of crime is of
great importance, AR&D does recommend putting a reporter knowledgeable
about crime and criminal justice issues on the crime beat. Kaplitz says,
"As with any beat, a specialist is in a better position to provide the
perspective and context that viewers want. Otherwise, viewers complain
they're just getting a barrage of meaningless crime stories not relevant to
their lives."[80]
That theme of relevance is consistently raised as they key to better crime
coverage. Philip O'Brien is the assistant news director at WCBS in New
York. In the Project for Excellence in Journalism's 2002 survey of "who's
best" in local television news, WCBS received a grade of "C" and the
comment "Loves everyday crime." In the past year, O'Brien says senior
management has changed, and so has the station's approach to crime
coverage. "Now, we stop and think. That doesn't mean we reject crime
stories, especially when the story has an impact on public safety and
affects many people. So, yes, we'll do a story abut a rape pattern or
burglary spree. But we won't run to any old murder just because our
reporters don't have a better story idea."[81]
At WSOC-TV in Charlotte, N.C., station news director Robin Whitmeyer says
there's still too much crime on television news that is not put in
perspective for the audience. That's why newsroom managers make it a habit
to probe reporters and producers about crime stories. Whitmeyer wants to
make them question and answer why a crime story matters. "The audience
wants more understanding of what is going on – not just a listing of the
crimes of the day."
Whitmeyer says station research supports this approach. "Our research
continues to tell us that people want information that impacts their lives
– if someone or something is potentially putting them or their families at
risk or in danger, they want to know about it."[82]

Current approaches to crime coverage
This drive to make crime coverage more relevant and to put it in
perspective has created some new approaches and some renewed interest in
formalized crime coverage guidelines.
At KWTV in Oklahoma City, the station has developed a Web component (at the
suggestion of Kaplitz and AR&D) that allows viewers to gather information
about crimes in particular neighborhoods by typing an address into an
interactive database. Called Crime Tracker, the site indicates to users
that "the reports you produce can be useful in determining the nature and
frequency of crimes occurring in your neighborhood and the trends that
indicate an increase or decrease in crime activity."[83]
KWTV's executive producer, Jenny Monroe, says that Crime Tracker was
developed as a way for the station to track what was happening with crime
in the market and to allow viewers to do it for themselves. "One of the
reasons for developing Crime Tracker was to make our crime coverage
actually have some meaning." Though the station does have a reporter who
does daily beat checks with local law enforcement, there is no one person
assigned to handle Crime Tracker reports.
Monroe believes there's too much crime coverage in the Oklahoma City market
in general. But she says station research indicates that viewers see Crime
Tracker as a beneficial tool and that it sets KWTV's crime coverage apart
from the competition.[84]
Several other stations offer or have offered similar services, including
WFLA in Tampa, KPHO in Phoenix, KGUN in Tucson, Arizona, KVBC in Las Vegas
and KOLR in Springfield, Mo.
The J-Lab's Schaffer believes the Web's interactivity has great potential
to enhance local TV coverage of crime and empower and inform viewers. "I
like [WFLA's] Crime Tracker because it goes beyond the stories the station
wants to tell; it lets the audience find their own stories in crime stats
and trends."[85]
WCCO in Minneapolis labels its crime coverage as Crime Tracker, but the
franchise name means something different at that station. WCCO has one
reporter specifically assigned to cover crime trends and prevention. The
station also provides an e-mail address to which viewers can send questions
concerning crime, crime tips or comments on crime. Finally, the station
airs and posts still frames from surveillance video for viewers to identify
suspects.[86]
Caroline Lowe is the lead reporter for Crime Tracker 4. She's been covering
crime for about 20 years and has just recently passed Minnesota's police
officer exam. Lowe says she approached her bosses about a year ago with the
Crime Tracker concept. "I was finding that we often didn't give enough
context to our crime coverage. One of the things I realized is how many
crimes could be prevented if people took steps to reduce their risk."
Lowe says she got the idea for the Crime Tracker 4 Web site from KVBC in
Las Vegas. Popular features of the WCCO site now include an interactive
database that allows viewers to look up registered sex offenders by ZIP
code and stills of suspects wanted by police.
The site has even been used by local law enforcement agencies. At one
point, Lowe tipped police in one agency to check out a story on the site
about a similar set of robberies under investigation by another agency. The
Crime Tracker approach has also helped WCCO cultivate more sources within
local law enforcement. Lowe often speaks to law enforcement groups about
the site, encouraging them to use it as a way to get crime prevention
information to viewers.[87]
Though it's been years since they were developed, KVUE's crime coverage
guidelines live on. Ron Coming is news director for KXTV News 10 in
Sacramento, Calif. He credits the guidelines for reducing the amount of
crime coverage and for tempering the amount of emphasis placed on some
crime stories. Under the guidelines, he says, "Many stories once covered by
a reporter in the field are handled as voice-overs or short copy stories by
the anchors … or not covered at all."[88]
At KTAL in Shreveport, La., the station has incorporated KVUE's crime
coverage guidelines into item No. 3 in a "Viewers Bill of Rights." The
promise states that viewers have the right to relevant crime coverage and
that "NewsChannel Six recognizes that an over-emphasis on crime coverage
would harm our community through portraying it in a false, negative light.
We will cover crime in such a way as to provide context, meaning,
perspective and relevance." Before airing any crime story, KTAL promises to
weigh the story's newsworthiness by asking the crime guidelines questions.[89]
Susana Schuler is the corporate news director for Nexstar, which owns KTAL.
She says the guidelines were instituted based on what corporate and station
management saw as too much crime coverage out of context in the market.
"Shreveport has the highest crime rate of any of our markets even though
it's not the largest, but much of that crime is centered around drugs, and
when it's not put in context, it appears to be a greater threat than it
truly is."
Schuler also confirms that it's not the amount of crime coverage that's at
issue for viewers, but the approach to crime coverage. "In our markets
where we've done research, we haven't heard that there is too much crime
coverage overall, but too often how the crime is covered doesn't provide
viewers with enough detail."[90]
Many stations around the country make helping law enforcement the focus of
their crime coverage. The most recognized name in the United States for
calling in anonymous tips concerning crime is CrimeStoppers. CrimeStoppers
began in 1976 in Albuquerque, New Mexico when the local community banded
together with law enforcement to catch a criminal. There are now hundreds
of local CrimeStoppers organizations throughout the United States. Many of
the organizations use local television stations to broadcast photographs or
surveillance video of suspects or just telephone numbers for reporting
criminal activity. Stations use the CrimeStoppers name on the air, post the
telephone numbers on station Web sites, or perhaps offer links to the
CrimeStoppers sites.[91]
Beyond CrimeStoppers, a number of stations air or post photographs and/or
surveillance video of criminal suspects in cooperation with local law
enforcement. For example, KPHO in Phoenix uses the label, "The Valley's
Most Wanted List" on photographs and information concerning a list of
people wanted by detectives from various local police agencies. Several
stations use labels other than CrimeStoppers to provide telephone numbers
that allow viewers to call police investigators with anonymous information
concerning crimes. WPVI in Philadelphia airs "CrimeFighter" segments and
refers people with information about the crimes covered to the Citizens
Crime Commission tip line.
This helping law enforcement approach meshes well with another trend in
television news – that of trying to involve viewers in the coverage
whenever possible. By providing tip lines and encouraging the audience to
share information with police, TV stations are trying to dispel a sense of
helplessness that many people feel when confronted with crime stories.

A public health approach to coverage
Some researchers have advocated that journalists adopt a new approach – a
public health perspective, also known as a prevention or data-driven
approach – to covering crime. The Reporting on Violence Project of the
Berkeley Media Studies Group has strongly advocated such an approach. The
project was conceived by Lori Dorfman, director of the BMSG, and Jane
Stevens, a multimedia journalist who teaches at the University of
California-Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism. The project later
involved Esther Thorson, associate dean of the School of Journalism at the
University of Missouri-Columbia, and Brant Houston, director of
Investigative Reporters and Editors Inc. and the National Institute for
Computer-Assisted Reporting.[92]
In 2002, Thorson, Dorfman and Stevens wrote: "It is well-supported that the
way crime news is structured has crucial impact on audiences. It seems
reasonable, then, to ask what crime news would include if it were to
provide information for people to use in understanding crime and violence
from a richer point of view, one that emphasizes prevention rather than
inevitable and often sensationalistically represented occurrences."[93]
Stevens, the director of the Reporting on Violence Project, has elaborated
on what this approach to crime coverage might mean for reporters. She
suggests that crime and violence news should regularly provide:
1)      Information about how often this type of violence occurs in the community.
2)      Information that puts violent incidents into context about what is usual
and can be prevented and what is unusual and cannot be prevented.
3)      Information about methods being developed to prevent violence and how
successful they are.
4)      Information about whether people's communities are implementing these
approaches.
Stevens sees a tremendous opportunity for using the Web to provide this
kind of perspective. "Mainly because what you need to do with this public
health approach is to provide context and continuity. Television as a
medium doesn't lend itself to that, but the Web is such an amazing and
demanding medium in the sense that the people who use it are looking for
answers and information."
What Stevens is suggesting is that stations target those crimes that are
creating the biggest problems in their communities. The station would then
build a Web page for each crime category. The page could include crime
statistics, resources for preventing the crime and other relevant
information. (A prototype of what Stevens is talking about can be found at
http://www.bmsg.org/hs/main.html.) Any time a story about a crime in one of
the station's key categories is reported, viewers would be referred to the
Web for more perspective and opportunities to be proactive. Stevens says
it's a way for TV news organizations to remain viable in an increasingly
competitive media landscape. "If you have a news organization that's giving
you stories that just point out the problem but don't help you as an
interested and involved citizen in figuring out the answer, I don't think
the news organization is going to survive."[94]

A new crime beat reporter
Some educators who study crime coverage say the quality of television news
could be improved by providing more training for those who make crime their
beat. Sarah Eschholz, an assistant professor at Georgia State University,
says crime reporters should be trained in how to interpret basic crime
statistics such as the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports and the Bureau of
Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey. "Crime coverage should
provide more context and offer more stories about the criminal justice
system and crime policy."[95] According to Eschholz, making sure crime
reporters have a working knowledge of the criminal justice system is
essential to providing context so that "viewers are better able to
understand how an individual event is related to the overall crime problem."
Dr. John McManus is the project director for Grade the News at Stanford
University. He says that instead of a crime beat reporter, stations might
try having a reporter look at the broader issue of violence rather than
crime. "I think it makes much more sense to address violence as a social
pathology, rather than merely as a crime, which implies individual
responsibility alone."[96]
McManus suggests a shift in thinking about crime. Instead of looking at it
as a problem of "bad people who need to be locked down (at vast public
expense)," McManus suggests that the focus should be on what causes
violence – such as poverty, disintegration of social infrastructure, lack
of positive role models, drugs and alcohol. McManus says, "It would be more
useful if reporters tracked patterns and asked 'why,' and looked for
solutions."

Conclusions
For many television stations, the focus is now on improving the quality of
crime coverage. At the heart of it all is a desire to put crime news in
perspective. Around the country, across a broad spectrum of market sizes,
broadcast journalists are addressing this issue of putting crime in context
in a variety of ways. Whether it's crime guidelines, interactive crime
databases or simply looking for ways to link daily crime to larger trends,
stations are trying to make crime more relevant to viewers. What's unknown
is what impact these various approaches are having on coverage quality, and
that may be fertile ground for a follow-up study on the effectiveness of
these efforts.
What is clear is that the audience is telling researchers and television
stations alike that crime is an important topic that should be covered. AR&
D consultant Bob Kaplitz says, "Viewers are most interested in protecting
themselves by knowing about crime trends that will impact them."[97] In
fact, Kaplitz says when AR&D has tested the concept of Crimetracker,
viewers say they'd leave their favorite station to watch one that was
tracking crime trends.
One other relatively new approach that has not captured the attention of
many broadcasters is the idea that crime can be put in context through a
public health reporting perspective. This approach can have the added
benefit of capitalizing on the capabilities of the Web – something that
many television stations underutilize as a resource. The Web's continuity
allows TV stations to collect and post data that can be used over and over
again in relation to the crime stories they cover.
Many broadcast journalists seem hungry for reporting techniques that will
allow them to improve the quality of their crime coverage. But the
solutions offered must be based on a realistic understanding of time and
resource constraints. With crime coverage making up approximately a quarter
of the content on local television news, future research might do well to
focus on effective approaches to reporting on crime.



List of Contacts
Name
Position
Contact information
Budzilowicz, Lisa
Researcher,
Local TV News Media Project
[log in to unmask]
Comings, Ron
News Director,
KXTV News 10, Sacramento, CA
[log in to unmask]
Gautreau, Mike
News Director,
Bay News 9, Tampa, FL
[log in to unmask]
Eschholz, Sarah
Professor,
Georgia State University
[log in to unmask]
Kaplitz, Bob
Strategist,
Audience Research & Development
[log in to unmask]
Kurpius, Dave
Professor,
Louisiana State University
[log in to unmask];
225-578-1697
Libin, Scott
Director of Development and Outreach, Poynter Institute
[log in to unmask];
727-821-9494
Lowe, Caroline
Reporter,
WCCO, Minneapolis, MN
[log in to unmask]
McKerral, Gordon
President,
Society of Professional Journalists
[log in to unmask]
McManus, John
Project Director,
Grade the News
[log in to unmask]
Miller, Mark Crispin
Professor,
New York University
[log in to unmask];
212-998 5188
Monroe, Jenny
Executive Producer,
KWTV, Oklahoma City, OK
405-841-9968
O'Brien, Philip
Assistant News Director,
WCBS, New York, NY
[log in to unmask]
Schaffer, Jan
Executive Director,
J-Lab
[log in to unmask];
301-985-4020
Schuler, Susana
Vice President/Corporate News Director, Nexstar Broadcasting Group
[log in to unmask]
Stevens, Jane
Lecturer, University of California-Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism
[log in to unmask]
Tompkins, Al
Broadcast/Online Group Leader, Poynter Institute
[log in to unmask];
727-821-9495
Volpicella, Frank
News Director,
KVUE, Austin, TX
512-459-2056
Whitmeyer, Robin
News Director,
WSOC, Charlotte, NC
Robin.Whitmeyer
@[log in to unmask]
Yanich, Danilo
Director, Local TV News Media Project, University of Delaware
[log in to unmask];
302/ 831-1710

[1]  Fitzgerald, M. (1994, June 18). Newspapers and violence coverage.
Editor & Publisher, Vol. 127, Issue 25, 14-15.

[2]  Yanich, D. (1998, Fall). Crime, community & local TV news: covering
crime in Philadelphia & Baltimore. A report of the Center for Community
Development & Family Policy and the Center on Crime, Communities & Culture.
Retrieved Sept. 5, 2003, from
http://www.localtvnews.org/papers/CrimeCommLocalTVNews.pdf

[3]  Eschholz, S., Chiricos, T., and Weitzel, P. (1998). News consumption
and perceptions of crime: an assessment of media content and public opinion
in Florida. A report for the Collins Center for Public Policy and the
Poynter Institute.

[4]  Miller, M.C. (1998). It's a crime: The economic impact of the local TV
news in Baltimore. Technical report, New York University, New York.

[5]  Klite, P., Bardwell, R.A. and Salzman, J. (1995). Pavlov's TV dog: a
snapshot of local TV news in America taken on September 20, 1995. Rocky
Mountain Media Watch Content Analysis 7; Rocky Mountain Media Watch; Denver.

[6]  Libin, S. (1997, June). Trashing television news: Some of what passes
for research is a crime. Retrieved Sept. 5, 2003, from
http://www.scripps.ohiou.edu/producer/thebook/chapter8.htm

[7]  Fitzgerald, M. (1997, May 24). Local TV news lacks substance. Editor &
Publisher, Vol. 130, Issue 21, 8-9.

[8]  Geisler, J. (2000, May). Blacked out. American Journalism Review, 36.

[9]  Geisler, J. (2000, May). Blacked out. American Journalism Review, 36.

[10]  Fletcher, J. (1998, August). Crime stories dominate local TV news: If
it bleeds, it leads. PM. Public Management; 22-23.

[11]  Fletcher, J. (1998, August). Crime stories dominate local TV news: If
it bleeds, it leads. PM. Public Management; 22-23.

[12]  On the road to irrelevance. (2002, November/December). Produced by
the Project for Excellence in Journalism, an affiliate of the Columbia
University Graduate School of Journalism. Retrieved Sept. 5, 2003, from
http://www.journalism.org/resources/research/reports/localTV/2002/public.asp

[13]  Dean, W., and Brady, L.A. (2002, November/December). After 9/11, has
anything changed? In the report "On the road to irrelevance."

[14]  Lipschultz, J.H., and Hilt, M.L. (2002). Crime and local television
news: dramatic, breaking, and live from the scene. Mahwah, N.J.: Earlbaum
Associates.

[15]  "Book offers analysis of appeal of local TV crime stories." Retrieved
Sept. 5, 2003, from www.unomaha.edu/~wwwcomm/booknote.html

[16]  Stoll, M. (2003, November). Ratcheting up the mayhem. Retrieved Nov.
30, 2003 from http://www.stanford.edu/group/gradethenews/pages/crimewave.htm

[17]  Stoll, M. (2003, November). Ratcheting up the mayhem. Retrieved Nov.
30, 2003 from http://www.stanford.edu/group/gradethenews/pages/crimewave.htm

[18]  Stoll, M. (2003, November). Ratcheting up the mayhem. Retrieved Nov.
30, 2003 from http://www.stanford.edu/group/gradethenews/pages/crimewave.htm

[19]  Rieder, R. (1993, September). Why is local TV news so bad? American
Journalism Review, 18-27.

[20]  Grossman, L.K. (1997, November/December). Why local TV news is so
awful. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved Sept. 5, 2003, from
http://www.cjr.org/archives.asp?url=/97/6/grossman.asp

[21]  Grossman, L.K. (1997, November/December). Why local TV news is so
awful. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved Sept. 5, 2003, from
http://www.cjr.org/archives.asp?url=/97/6/grossman.asp

[22]  Libin, S. (1997, June). Trashing television news: Some of what passes
for research is a crime. Retrieved Sept. 5, 2003, from
http://www.scripps.ohiou.edu/producer/thebook/chapter8.htm

[23]  McClennan, S. (1997, May 19). Violence, fluff lead local news, says
survey; RTNDA challenges media group study's methods, conclusions.
Broadcasting & Cable, 34.

[24]  McAdams, D. (2003, January). News you can lose; why great newscasts
fail. DigitalTV, 14-17.

[25]  McAdams, D. (2003, January). News you can lose; why great newscasts
fail. DigitalTV, 14-17.

[26]  McAdams, D. (2003, January). News you can lose; why great newscasts
fail. DigitalTV, 14-17.

[27]  McClennan, S. (1997, May 19). Violence, fluff lead local news, says
survey; RTNDA challenges media group study's methods, conclusions.
Broadcasting & Cable, 34.

[28]  McAdams, D. (2003, January). News you can lose; why great newscasts
fail. DigitalTV, 15.

[29]  McClennan, S. (1997, May 19). Violence, fluff lead local news, says
survey; RTNDA challenges media group study's methods, conclusions.
Broadcasting & Cable, 34.

[30]  Trigoboff, D. (1998, July 6). Study blasts Baltimore news.
Broadcasting & Cable, 33.

[31]  Geisler, J. (2000, May). Blacked out. American Journalism Review,
Vol. 22, Issue 4, 34-41.

[32]  Lee, D. (2003, Sept. 19). All eyes on those in eye of storm: Weather
stories test TV journalists. Raleigh News & Observer. Retrieved on Sept.
20, 2003, from http://newsobserver.com/news/story/2880976p-2655888c.html

[33]  Top of the news. (1999, Sept. 27). Broadcasting & Cable, 102.

[34]  Yanich, D. (1998, Fall). Crime, community & local TV news: covering
crime in Philadelphia & Baltimore. A report of the Center for Community
Development & Family Policy and the Center on Crime, Communities & Culture.
Retrieved Sept. 5, 2003, from
http://www.localtvnews.org/papers/CrimeCommLocalTVNews.pdf

[35]  Eschholz, S., Chiricos, T., and Weitzel, P. (1998). News consumption
and perceptions of crime: an assessment of media content and public opinion
in Florida. A report for the Collins Center for Public Policy and the
Poynter Institute.

[36]  Fletcher, J. (1998, August). Crime stories dominate local TV news: If
it bleeds, it leads. PM. Public Management; 22-23.

[37]  Fletcher, J. (1998, August). Crime stories dominate local TV news: If
it bleeds, it leads. PM. Public Management; 22-23.

[38]  E-mail. (2003, Sept. 14).

[39]  1996 survey by Louis Harris and Associates, commissioned by the
Center for Media and Public Affairs.

[40]  Chiricos, T., Padgett, K., and Gertz, M. (2000). Fear, TV news, and
the reality of crime. Criminology, 38, 755-786. Also, Chiricos, T.,
Eschholz, S., and Gertz, M. (1997). Crime news and rear: toward an
identification of audience effects. Social Problems, 44, 342-57. Also,
Eschholz, S., Chiricos, T., and Weitzel, P. (1998). News consumption and
perceptions of crime: an assessment of media content and public opinion in
Florida.

[41]  McLeod, J.M., Eveland, W.P., Moy, P., Scheufele, D., Yang, S.,
Horowitz, E.M., Guo, Z., and Zhong, M. (1996, August). Is what we see what
they get? Probing the processes of media effects on support for crime
policy proposals. Paper presented to the Communication Theory and
Methodology Division at the 79th Annual AEJMC Conference, Anaheim, CA.

[42]  O'Keefe, G. (1984) Public views on crime: Television exposure and
media credibility. In R.N. Bostrom (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 8.

[43]  Surette, R. (1997). Media, Crime and Criminal Justice. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.

[44]  Glassner, B. (2000). The Culture Of Fear: Why Americans Are Afraid Of
The Wrong Things. New York: Perseus Books.

[45]  Glassner, B. Excerpt from Culture of Fear. Retrieved Sept. 20, 2003,
from http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com/library/fear/03.php

[46]  Professor Barry Glassner, The Man Who Knows About Fear in American
Culture. (2003, April 10). Retrieved Sept. 20, 2003, from
http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/03/04/10_glassner.html

[47]  Fishman, M. (1978, June). Crime Waves as Ideology. Social Problems,
25: 531-543.

[48]  Greek, C. Lecture notes for "CCJ 4938 Section 1: Seminar in Crime and
Media," Florida State University. Retrieved Sept. 20, 2003, from
http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimemedia/lecture3.html

[49]  Romer, D., Jamieson, K., and Aday, S. (2003). Television news and the
cultivation of fear of crime. Journal of Communication; 53: 88-104.

[50]  Romer, D., Jamieson, K., and Aday, S. (2003). Television news and the
cultivation of fear of crime. Journal of Communication; 53: 88-104.

[51]  Yanich, D. (1998, Fall). Crime, community & local TV news: covering
crime in Philadelphia & Baltimore. A report of the Center for Community
Development & Family Policy and the Center on Crime, Communities & Culture.
Retrieved Sept. 5, 2003, from
http://www.localtvnews.org/papers/CrimeCommLocalTVNews.pdf

[52]  Telephone interview. (2003, Sept. 19).

[53]  Budzilowicz, L.M. (2002, Summer). Framing responsibility on local
television news. A report of the Local TV News Media Project, University of
Delaware, p. 44. Retrieved Sept. 5, 2003, from
http://www.udel.edu/ccrs/pdf/FramingCrimeNews.pdf

[54]  Dorfman, L., Woodruff, K., Chavez, V., and Wallack, L. (1997,
August.) Youth and violence on local television news in California.
American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 87, Issue 8, 1311-1316.

[55]  Stoll, M. (2003, November). Focusing on random incidents of violence
can harm us all. Retrieved Nov. 30, 2003 from
http://www.stanford.edu/group/gradethenews/pages/antisocial.htm

[56]  Stoll, M. (2003, November). Focusing on random incidents of violence
can harm us all. Retrieved Nov. 30, 2003 from
http://www.stanford.edu/group/gradethenews/pages/antisocial.htm

[57]  Criminal Victimization, 2002. Bureau of Justice Statistics Web site.
Retrieved Sept. 2, 2003, from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/cv02.htm

[58]  Federal Bureau of Investigation – Uniform Crime Reports. Retrieved
Sept. 20, 2003, from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm

[59]  E-mail. (2003, Sept. 13).

[60]  E-mail. (2003, Sept. 13).

[61]  Rosenstiel, T. and Balzar, J. (1994, February 9). News Analysis;
Frenzy to Ice the Harding Saga Freezes Out Standards. Los Angeles Times.
Part A, Page 1, Column 1.

[62]  Getlin, J. (1999, Sept. 13). Journalists under Fire for Coverage of
Violent Crimes. Los Angeles Times. Part A, Page 1.

[63]  Holley, J. (1996, May/June). Should the Coverage Fit the Crime? A
Texas TV station tries to resist the allure of mayhem. Columbia Journalism
Review. Retrieved Aug. 9, 2003 from http://www.cjr.org/year/96/3/coverage.asp

[64]  Papper, B. (1999, January). Fixing Television News. USA Today
(Magazine), Vol. 127, 56.

[65]  Telephone interview. (2003, Sept. 4).

[66]  E-mail. (2003, Aug. 28)

[67]  Rubel, C. (1995, April 24). Viewers choose the news they want to use.
Marketing News.

[68]  Hume, E. (1995). Tabloids, Talk Radio, and the Future of News:
Technology's Impact on Journalism. A report for The Annenberg Washington
Program in Communications Policy Studies of Northwestern University.
Retrieved Sept. 22, 2003, from
http://www.ellenhume.com/articles/tabloids6.html

[69]  Brown, R. (1997, Oct. 12). Aiming to Picture Community; New TV-5
Chief Still Carries Passion of News Photographer. Cleveland Plain Dealer.
Arts, 1I.

[70]  Full text for the 2000 RTNDA Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
can be viewed at http://www.rtnda.org/ethics/coe.shtml

[71]  Full text of the guidelines for covering hostage-taking crises,
police raids, prison uprisings, and terrorist actions can be viewed at
http://www.rtnda.org/ethics/crisis.shtml

[72]  Full text of the SPJ Code of Ethics can be viewed at
http://www.spj.org/ethics_code.asp

[73]  E-mail. (2003, Sept. 22)

[74]  Dean, W., and Brady, L.A. (2002, November/December). After 9/11, has
anything changed? In the report "On the road to irrelevance."

[75]  E-mail. (2003, Sept. 17).

[76]  E-mail. (2003, Sept. 19).

[77]  Tompkins, A. (2002). Aim for the Heart. Chicago and Los Angeles:
Bonus Books, 190-191.

[78]  Telephone interview. (2003, Sept. 19).

[79]  E-mail. (2003, Sept. 17).

[80]  E-mail. (2003, Aug. 28).

[81]  E-mail. (2003, Aug. 29).

[82] E-mail. (2003, Aug. 25).

[83] KWTV's Crime Tracker site can be found at http://www.newsok.com/?crime

[84]  Telephone interview. (2003, Sept. 2).

[85]  E-mail. (2003, Sept. 17).

[86]  WCCO's Crime Tracker 4 site can be found at http://www.wcco.com/crime/

[87]  Telephone interview. (2003, Sept. 16)

[88]  E-mail. (2003, Aug. 7).

[89] KTAL's "Viewers' Bill of Rights" can be viewed in its entirety at
http://216.87.159.53/viewers_rights.asp

[90]  E-mail. (2003, Aug. 26).

[91]  The history of CrimeStoppers is described at http://www.crimestopusa.com/

[92]  BMSG: Reporting on violence. Retrieved Sept. 5, 2001, from
http://www.bmsg.org/content/28.php

[93]  Thorson, E., Dorfman, L., and Stevens, J. (2002, November). Reporting
crime and violence from a public health perspective. Paper presented to the
November 2002 Crime, Media & Public Policy Symposium. Published by the
Journal of the Institute of Justice and International Studies; 56.

[94]  Telephone interview. (2003, Sept. 16).

[95]  E-mail. (2003, Sept. 26).

[96] E-mail. (2003, Sept. 24).

[97] E-mail. (2003, Sept. 22).