Introduction
“According to one 2006 weekly Nielsen rating, 30 million people watched CSI on one night, 70 million people watched at least one of the three CSI shows, and over 40 million watched two other forensic dramas.” (Shelton, 2008) Crime TV shows have become extremely popular, 7 of the top 10 TV shoes of 2013 where crime investigation genre shows.
The topic that I chose to research was to do a content analysis. I watched six episodes of CSI:NY and will discuss my findings on what is fiction and what is real in CSI:NY. I will also discuss the CSI effect and how it can influence a jury trial, and its positive and negative effect on the criminal justice system. The sources of the information for my research will come from the course content
…show more content…
They had a special earth metal scanner gun that they were able to point at a rat and see if it had the lead bullet that it had swallowed. In a lab there are most likely large, no portable, extremely expensive tools that can scan and determine a certain metal, but a portable gun that can be used to find a specific metal is highly unlikely and would be extremely expensive. From week 10b I learned that only 60 percent of the tools and equipment used in the show have actually been invented. If the equipment does exist it is often very expensive and the crime scene agencies don’t have access to it due to lack of funding and the space to house the …show more content…
Shelton, I can see how watching CSI might affect a trial outcome. If jurors watch CSI they want to have CSI style evidence, and if they don’t have this type of evidence they might be more likely to acquit the defendant. “There was scant evidence in our survey results that CSI viewers were either more or less likely to acquit defendants without scientific evidence. Only 4 of 13 scenarios showed somewhat significant differences between viewers and non-viewers on this issue, and they were inconsistent.” It is very unlikely that if you watch a lot of CSI you will find the defendant not guilty. If you are a Light CSI viewer you are more likely to be influenced by the CSI effect. “For all categories of evidence—both scientific and nonscientific—CSI viewers (those who watch CSI on occasion, often, or regularly) generally had higher expectations than non-CSI viewers (those who never or almost never watch the program). But, it is possible that the CSI viewers may have been better-informed jurors than the non-CSI viewers. The CSI viewers had higher expectations about scientific evidence that was more likely to be relevant to a particular crime than did the non-CSI viewers. The CSI viewers also had lower expectations about evidence that was less likely to be relevant to a particular crime than did the non-CSI viewers.” (Shelton,
Since the airing of the CSI: Crime Scene Investigation and the other televised series that followed have led jurors to compare fiction with reality. The shows have changed the view on the real world of forensic science as the series have a world of forensic science of their own. For this paper the televised series titled Bones by forensic anthropologist Kathy Reichs will be used as an example for comparison. In the series Bones Dr. Temperance Brenan arrives at the scene of the crime to examine the skeletal remains found in the scene of the crime equipped with one or more forensic kits. Upon momentarily examining the skeletal remains Dr. Brenan is able to determine the gender, ethnicity, and age. When this type of scenario is compared to nonfictional
...the public opinion of government trustworthiness. Studies have not been able to clearly define if the CSI effect has had an actual influence on the outcome of trials. However surveys indicate many possible jurors believe they are more knowledgeable about criminology after watching the shows. CSI viewers may become more knowledgeable about forensic science and investigation processes but that knowledge does not affect the outcome of the criminal justice process.
Since its debute, Kimberlianne Podlas discusses how “CSI has been attributed with causing a rash of unjustified acquittals, exerting on trials what is called the CSI Effect.” This refers to how CSI influences or impacts a jury’s interpretation of a case. She goes on to say that, “Even though forensic evidence is prevalent on CSI, it is a factor in only a small portion of real-life cases.” Additionally, “many of the techniques shown on CSI do not exist, and this has led “forensic scientists to complain of the near infallibility of forensic science after watching a few episodes of CSI.” The CSI Effect has caused these viewers of the program, who have gone onto become jurors, to expect the presentation of forensic evidence in order to prove their cases, and without it, they are unlikely to reach a guilty verdict. This has led prosecutors to expect the need to present forensic evidence as a prerequisite to conviction. Even with eyewitnesses and other findings to offset this lack of forensic evidence, many unjustified acquittals have resulted from this mindset as jurors do not believe a case can be proven beyond reasonable
Mancini, Dante E. "The "CSI Effect" In An Actual Juror Sample: Why Crime Show Genre May
A synthesis essay should be organized so that others can understand the sources and evaluate your comprehension of them and their presentation of specific data, themes, etc.
In a well-known study conducted by Judge Donald Shelton, jurors were asked various questions to see if there was a significant difference in the rate of acquittals between those who watched shows such as CSI and those who do not. Attorneys, judges, and journalists have claimed that watching television programs like CSI have caused jurors to wrongfully acquit guilty defendants when no scientific evidence has been presented. To test this, 1,027 jurors were randomly selected and given a questionnaire to fill out. Questions about their demographics were listed and the jurors were asked what kind of TV shows they watched, how often, and how real they believed these shows were. The survey asked questons about seven ty...
With a record of an average 119 television channels available to each household, television dominates American life (MediaBuyerPlanner). This wide assortment of television gives viewers many different realities to imitate, like a small child following and obeying its parent. One of the leading television shows in our society is the CSI franchise, with three different extensions. CSI, and shows similar to it, portray the criminal justice system in a negative light, which causes confusion between reality and fiction. Television is a means of entertainment, yet its influence on today’s generation is powerful and enchanting. Television shows centered on criminal justice are implausible portrayals of reality that create unrealistic expectations of evidence in the courtroom, as well as creating superfluous fear of murder for the viewers.
In 2006, over 100 million people in the United States tuned in to watch either CSI or any if the other forensic and criminal investigation related television show each week (CJSG). Since then, the number of viewers has increased rapidly, as well as the amount of television shows with the same type of theme. As a result of the increase of these television programs, researchers are discovering a new phenomenon called the ‘CSI Effect’ that seems to be fueling an interest in forensic science and criminal investigations nationwide. This effect is actually the ability of criminal justice themed television shows to influence and increase victims’, jurors’ and criminals’ ideas about forensics, DNA testing and methods, and criminal investigations (CJSG). Although the connection between the CSI Effect and a criminal’s mind is a growing problem, the CSI Effect influencing jurors in the United States by causing unrealistic expectations for definite forensic evidence, creating an increased ‘knowledge’ about forensic science and by creating an expectation for criminal cases and trials to be equivalent to what happens on popular criminal justice television shows is a much bigger issue.
As realized, the criminal justice system has been utilized as entertainment for a while. It all started with ‘America’s most wanted ' that once featured John Walsh in search of lost children and renegades from justice. The program merged accurate details with a theatrical description of the crime in question. Not merely was the program educational, but it was enjoyable as well. In 1989, entertainment aspect of Criminal justice as continued with the debut of ``COPS, a program that pursued police officers throughout their shift and exhibited how they hunted down wrongdoers, pursued them if needed and apprehended them. At present, there are numerous fact-oriented shows on the TV, and each describes a different aspect of the criminal justice system.
The media is a dominating aspect of American culture. The way the media depicts crime and criminal behavior has an effect on the way society views crime and criminals. Television series such as CSI, NCIS, Law and Order, Criminal Minds and countless others, have become very popular in our society today showing that our culture has an immense interest in crime. It is clear that there is a fascination with criminals and why they do the things they do. To analyze the way crime dramas represent crime and criminal behavior, I completed a content analysis of one episode of Criminal Minds. The episode I chose was season one; episode eight, which first aired in 2005, titled ‘Natural Born Killer’.
Television has affected every aspect of life in society, radically changing the way individuals live and interact with the world. However, change is not always for the better, especially the influence of television on political campaigns towards presidency. Since the 1960s, presidential elections in the United States were greatly impacted by television, yet the impact has not been positive. Television allowed the public to have more access to information and gained reassurance to which candidate they chose to vote for. However, the media failed to recognize the importance of elections. Candidates became image based rather than issue based using a “celebrity system” to concern the public with subjects regarding debates (Hart and Trice). Due to “hyperfamiliarity” television turned numerous people away from being interested in debates between candidates (Hart and Trice). Although television had the ability to reach a greater number of people than it did before the Nixon/Kennedy debate, it shortened the attention span of the public, which made the overall process of elections unfair, due to the emphasis on image rather than issue.
Roane, Kit R. “The CSI Effect: On TV, It's All slam-dunk evidence evidence and Quick
in Houck). Jurors who are influenced by the CSI Effect tend to have biased opinions because CSI shows are the basis for their knowledge. Rather than simply acknowledging courtroom expectations by deliberating based on only the facts presented in the courtroom, jurors are asking for more evidence than that is provided or necessary because jurors are comparing forensic evidence used to convict on television to real life cases. Thus, jurors are not impartial to the case because they have a prenotion of what information they require to convict, such as fingerprints in burglaries and blood analysis in murder cases. Smith et all reports that viewers of CSI-type shows and other similar shows have “inflated perceptions of accuracy, reliability, and usefulness of forensic evidence (but not ‘nonscientific’ evidence)” (qtd. in Stinson et all). As CSI-type shows emphasize the collection, analysis, and presentation of forensic evidence during court proceedings more so than other types of
Media portrayal of crime and criminal justice has become incredibly widespread in the last decade, with crime often considered both a source of news and entertainment. As a source of entertainment, crime and criminal justice have emerged as central themes across various sources of media. Most individuals do not have any direct experience with the criminal justice system, so their only source of information on this topic is the media. Particularly in television shows, portrayals of crime and criminal justice can be seen in everything from courtroom dramas to nightly news programs. Indeed, the popularity of crime shows has lead to some of television’s most enduring series, such as Law and Order and CSI. Because of this, fictional
Van den Bulck, J. (2004) “Research note” the Relationship between Television Fiction and Fear of Crime” An Empirical Comparison of Three Casual Explanations” European Journal of Communication Vol. 19, Issue 2, p.239-248.