From the Printing Press to Network Television: the Changing Face of Capital Punishment
Capital punishment has existed since the beginning of human civilisation. During the Middle Ages and up until the 19th century, capital punishment was according to Brewin[1] - public rituals “rife with symbolism”. It was all about using the convicted criminal/s as a sacrificial lamb, designed by the elite-ruling class to control the peasant masses[2]. In Medieval Europe, executions for crimes such as murder and treason were public events. Crowds of hundreds would pack themselves in public squares eagerly awaiting for the next prisoner to have their head cut off.
The advent of the printing press in the 1500s among other technologies, saw the emergence of the journalism establishment as well as the widespread coverage of capital punishment cases. Books and pamphlets were distributed to the working-class masses which told dramatic tales of notorious criminals and provided elaborate details about their executions at the gallows[3]. By the 18th Century annual newsletter-like publications had become trendy across Europe and America.
How did the proliferation of media texts change the way capital punishment was experienced by the ordinary person? Printed accounts simply increased and diversified the audience base rendering time, distance and space less of an obstacle[4]. Such publications coupled with further developments in mass media contributed to growing dissent against capital punishment. Contrary to popular belief, this was not a widespread grassroots movement, rather it originated from ballrooms and mansions as the elite classes theorised that “more reliable and less publicly fragile technology” was needed to control the masses[5] through surveillance or Jeremy Bentham’s panopticon[6].
The death penalty today:
Fast forward to the 21st Century and media coverage of capital punishment has picked up where the previous eras left off. In the US, support for the death penalty has dwindled in the last few decades[7]. Take into account increasing government and corporate surveillance on the internet, Foucault’s theories provides us with a valid explanation as to why capital punishment is fast becoming obsolete. Why have public punishment when a government can control its citizens from behind a keyboard?
On death row in front of the cameras:
Aside, from Foucault’s arguments the fact remains that for many of us our experiences of the criminal justice system are generally confined to paying a parking ticket. As such, the public has become increasingly distant from the actual execution process. We no longer find ourselves packed into a public space waiting for prisoner x to be given the lethal injection. Hence, understanding of this complex system is facilitated by the press. Cameras in courts, coupled with cable television has created an entirely new genre of reality television, which provides ‘gavel-to-gavel coverage’[8]. Such coverage is what media scholars have christened ‘infotainment’[9], which often portrays a victim-perpetrator scenario. Here, the audience is invited to view the criminal as menacing and evil who cruelly took the life of the innocent, helpless victim.Coverage of death row cases feature arresting graphics, high-tech audio-visuals, live reporting for the sake of live reporting and “chat-show use of experts”[10], neatly packaged for public consumption.
The Casey Anthony case ammassed an insane amount of publicity similar to that of OJ Simpson's trial. The prosecution applied for the death penalty to be given to Anthony, if the jury had found her guilty.
But what are the implications for this type of coverage which thrives off the violent nature of the death penalty?
As surmised by Cohen, Adoni and Bantz[11], 20th and 21st Century media coverage to some extent distorts the ‘reality’ of the death penalty presenting it “as less complex, more intense and more solvable then they really are”[12]. Due to the theatrical representations of arrests, court proceedings and subsequent jury verdict from mainstream news, there is little room for serious analysis of the death penalty. More specifically, its relevance, its effectiveness in preventing crime and the gaping holes in the American criminal justice system[13]. The intense focus of good versus evil provides the audience with a primitive understanding of why the crime/s have taken place. Not to mention, the implications of what the death penalty means. Lipschultz and Hilt aptly sums up the lack of public debate in the American journalism establishment; “it is unfortunate that capital punishment makes news only when there is a heinous crime, during a capital murder trial, or at the time of execution”[14].
As discussed, the victim is the central character in news coverage and on talk shows[15].Framing the story in this particular way only serves to reinforce what media academics have dubbed the ‘institutionalisation of closure’ rhetoric – that the victim and their family can only receive justice if the murderer is executed[16]. Closure is fundamentally an abstract concept. No one knows how to define closure let alone how it can be achieved[17]. Victims’ families are required to follow ‘feeling rules’[18], where they themselves must believe that the murderer has to suffer the same fate as the victim so that the healing process can begin and therefore, they will experience a sense of closure[19]. But what is so dangerous about exploiting the idea of ‘closure’ in advocating for the death penalty? For one the existence of closure is not clear cut. Secondly, the legal system and allied media cannot guarantee that closure will culminate from the execution of the convicted murderer[20]. Lastly, there is a distinct difference between ‘closure’ and ‘justice’ and the two terms should not be used interchangeably. The sobering reality is that; closure may never be fully realised and that news media and the legal system which perpetuates this idea are irresponsibly giving false hope to victims' families.
[1] Brewin, M 2012 ‘Girard, Mediated Texts, and the Modern Death Penalty’, Journal of Media and Religion, volume 11, issue 4, p178.
[2] Brewin, M 2012 ‘Girard, Mediated Texts, and the Modern Death Penalty’, Journal of Media and Religion, volume 11, issue 4, p178.
[3] Brewin, M 2012, p183, ‘Girard, Mediated Texts, and the Modern Death Penalty’, Journal of Media and Religion, volume 11, issue 4, p183.
[4] Brewin, M 2012, p183, ‘Girard, Mediated Texts, and the Modern Death Penalty’, Journal of Media and Religion, volume 11, issue 4, p183.
[5] Brewin, M 2012, p183, ‘Girard, Mediated Texts, and the Modern Death Penalty’, Journal of Media and Religion, volume 11, issue 4, p179.
[6] Brewin, M 2012, p183, ‘Girard, Mediated Texts, and the Modern Death Penalty’, Journal of Media and Religion, volume 11, issue 4, p179.
[7] A poll showed that 56% of Americans support capital punishment which is the lowest record in 40 years:
Dutton, J. de Pinto, A. Salvanto, and F. Backus 2015, ‘Less Support for Death Penalty, Especially Among Democrats’, Pew Research Center, April 16, http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/16/less-support-for-death-penalty-especially-among-democrats/
[8] Bock, A.M. & Araiza Andres, J 2014, 'Facing the Death Penalty While Facing the Cameras', Journalism Practice, volume 9, issue 3, p322.
[9] Refers to a type of news media which combines information and entertainment into its broadcasts:
Thussu K.D. 2003, ‘Live TV and Bloodless Deaths: War, Infotainment and 24/7 News, Chapter 8, in War and the Media, eds. D Thussu and D Freedman, Sage, p124.
[10] Thussu K.D. 2003, ‘Live TV and Bloodless Deaths: War, Infotainment and 24/7 News', Chapter 8, in War and the Media, eds. D Thussu and D Freedman, Sage, p124.
[11] cited in Lipschultz H. J & Hilt, L. H 1999, Mass Media and the Death Peanlty: Social Construction of Three Nebraska Executions', Journal of Boradcasting and Electronic Media, volume 43, issue 2, p241p235
[12] Lipschultz H. J & Hilt, L. H 1999, 'Mass Media and the Death Peanlty: Social Construction of Three Nebraska Executions', Journal of Boradcasting and Electronic Media, volume 43, issue 2, p241
[13] Lipschultz H. J & Hilt, L. H 1999, 'Mass Media and the Death Peanlty: Social Construction of Three Nebraska Executions', Journal of Boradcasting and Electronic Media, volume 43, issue 2, p250
[14] Lipschultz H. J & Hilt, L. H 1999, 'Mass Media and the Death Peanlty: Social Construction of Three Nebraska Executions', Journal of Boradcasting and Electronic Media, volume 43, issue 2, p251.
[15] Berns, N 2009, 'Contesting the Victim Card: Closure Discourse and Emotion in Death Penalty Rhetoric', The Sociological Quarterly, volume 50, issue 3, p386.
[17] Berns, N 2009, 'Contesting the Victim Card: Closure Discourse and Emotion in Death Penalty Rhetoric', The Sociological Quarterly, volume 50, issue 3, p383.
[18] Are societal norms which shape how people deal with their emotions in a particular social situation: Nomura, T 2002, ‘Formal representation of double bind situations using feeling rules and triad relations for emotional communication’, in R in Robert Trappl (ed.), Cybernetics and Systems. Austrian Society for Cybernetics Studies. 733--738.
[19] Berns, N 2009, 'Contesting the Victim Card: Closure Discourse and Emotion in Death Penalty Rhetoric', The Sociological Quarterly, volume 50, issue 3, p401.
[20] Berns, N 2009, 'Contesting the Victim Card: Closure Discourse and Emotion in Death Penalty Rhetoric', The Sociological Quarterly, volume 50, issue 3, p401.
