Мedia and criminal behavior – between social responsibility and destruction

Media wield significant influence in shaping public opinion on critical societal issues, including criminality as a negative social phenomenon. The majority of stereotypes and misconceptions surrounding criminal behavior are a consequence of the media’s portrayal of these phenomena. Behind many media reports lies the need for sensationalistic depictions of criminality, particularly violence, and the pursuit of profit. By adopting such an approach towards criminality, the media jeopardize the normal functioning of the justice system, which must strike a balance between the “right to know” and the freedom of the press on one hand, and the presumption of innocence on the other. The phenomenon of moral panic, which has garnered the attention of scholars in recent decades, is closely tied to the issue of media construction of a reality that does not necessarily align with the truth.

Media coverage of criminal events and personalities exerts an intense and continuing impact on people’s understanding of security, justice, and social cohesion. Given that criminality is often perceived as a threat to society, the media plays a crucial role in shaping attitudes toward this phenomenon and bears the responsibility to inform the public about crime in a manner that promotes justice, legal security, and constructive discussions about the causes and consequences of criminal behavior. This dual role of the media, encompassing reporting on crime and the promotion of social responsibility, creates a complex framework for analysis and discussion. This text will analyze various aspects of this problem, providing deeper insights into propaganda, disinformation, the promotion of violence and aggression, media addiction, the effect on mental health, and the link between media and criminal behavior.

Lorimer (1998) highlights that mass media easily engender an uncontrolled dynamic of influence on a broader audience. These media become a means of manipulation, employing diverse techniques such as propaganda, disinformation, and associative methods. Propaganda is often used as a tool for shaping public opinion, while disinformation can significantly undermine social cohesion. Movies, video games, and news frequently depict violence in ways that can influence the aggressive behavior of viewers. How can the promotion of violence in the media be reduced, and which strategies can be effective in this regard? Regulatory frameworks, media industry selfregulation, and the role of families, educators, and education all have a place in addressing this problem.

The ubiquity of digital media and smart devices has led to media addiction, which presents an additional problem and prompts consideration of preventive measures and treatments for media addiction. The effect of the media on psychological health also requires attention, given the establishment of unrealistic standards and the idealization of perfection. Constant exposure to violent content can increase levels of anxiety and depression. Although research indicates a moderate causal link between exposure to television violence and real aggressive behavior, the issue remains complex because the popularity of certain programs suggests that the audience desires such content. With the aim of exploring the perception and awareness of citizens in the Republic of Serbia regarding the influence of the media on them and their families, we conducted an empirical study, the results of which we will present in this paper.

2.    Types of Negative Impact of Mass Media on Society

Methods of manipulation. Due to their biological nature, humans are susceptible to suggestion, imitation, and misinformation. Individuals and social groups that control the media recognized this potential early on and made it available to various groups, often in exchange for money or social power. Such media activities aimed at producing the expected opinions of individuals and large segments of society are not ethical because people cannot control the influence exerted on them and are generally powerless against such suggestions.

One of the negative impacts is propaganda, which has developed a variety of techniques to manipulate public awareness and influence the masses. According to Laswell (1979), “propaganda is in any case always a deliberate act, associated with a pre-defined controversy, that is, a fundamentally conflictual situation, as a kind of given.” One of the negative impacts on people’s awareness is the method of disinformation that affects the human subconscious. However, the method of disinformation is coarse and therefore easily recognizable, so it is less frequently used in modern media, unlike the influence associated with associations. The method of association involves careful selection and a specific arrangement of concepts that evoke either positive or negative associations, enabling influence over information selection. Since the method is based on specific associations, it facilitates influence on an individual due to their habits and beliefs. This subsequently leads to the formation of stereotypes. Stereotypes effectively control the entire process of information perception. Stereotypes are formed under the influence of two factors: unconscious collective processing and individual sociocultural environment, as well as deliberate, sometimes subliminal media influence. With the help of stereotypes, it is easy to manipulate human awareness because stereotypes are closely linked to society’s life. Arendt (2023) points out the close connection between stereotypes and the significant influence of the media on behavior that reproduces the actions of “heroes” created by print, radio, or television.

Fake news. Mass media, especially social media, is often criticized for spreading disinformation and fake news. This phenomenon can have serious consequences for society, including polarization, reduced trust in the media, political instability, and risks to public health. Fake news can exhibit a wide range of negative effects on society (Aïmeur, Amri & Brassard, 2023). Disinformation can lead to societal polarization because people often accept and spread information that confirms their existing beliefs, regardless 20

of its accuracy, leading to increased social divisions and a reduced ability for constructive discourse. Disinformation can threaten political stability and the legitimacy of institutions. Disinformation can be used to destabilize societies and often poses risks to public health. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the spread of false information about the virus, treatments, and vaccines could lead to dangerous situations. Disinformation can originate from various sources, including individuals, organizations, political groups, and foreign actors. Social media often performs a crucial role in the spread of disinformation. Individuals may spread disinformation out of ignorance, misunderstanding, or deliberate misuse. Organizations and political groups often use disinformation for political purposes, using it as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Foreign actors may also spread disinformation to destabilize other countries or promote their interests. Algorithms that show users the content that engages them the most often favor the spread of sensational or controversial information, regardless of its accuracy. Fighting disinformation is essential to limit its negative impact on society. This includes educating the public on recognizing disinformation and developing critical thinking. Collaboration between governments, civil society, and technology companies can help the development of effective strategies to combat disinformation. Addressing disinformation is crucial for preserving the integrity of the information space and upholding democratic values.

Promotion of Violence and Aggression. Media content, including movies, video games, and news, sometimes depict violence in ways that can influence aggressive behavior and violence among viewers, especially young people. People can be more sensitive to violent media content, and prolonged exposure to such content can lead to increased anxiety, fear, and trauma. Media violence can distort perceptions of the real world, especially in terms of risk perception. Continuous exposure to depictions of violence can create an exaggerated fear of crime and real-world violence. Research (Reissler, 2006) studies measures that can be taken to limit the promotion of violence in media content, including regulatory frameworks and selfregulation within the media industry. Besides the state, the role of the family and schools in promoting media literacy and critical thinking in viewers should be emphasized. Through a better understanding of these issues, society can work toward creating media that adhere to ethical standards and promote positive values rather than violence and aggression.

Impact on Mental Health. Mass media often play a role in shaping body images and idealizing perfection, which can contribute to a negative impact on mental health, including eating disorders and low self-esteem. Media create standards of good and bad, desirable and undesirable, and can harm individuals with these standards. Media beauty standards and the idealization of perfection are often associated with negative effects on mental health. Research conducted at University College London (UCL, 2023) indicates that media body image perception can contribute to eating disorders. The negative emotional effects of media standards can affect self-confidence and self-esteem. Media content that depicts violence, tragedies, and other stressful situations can increase levels of anxiety and depression in viewers. Research (Lambert et al., 2022) indicates that continuous exposure to such content can affect mental health, especially in the context of media reporting on current events.

3.    Media and Criminal Behavior

Since the mid-20th century, violent TV programs have been the subject of extensive research, often concluding that there is a moderate but consistent causal connection between exposure to television violence and real-world aggressive behavior. Different theoretical explanations include social learning, excitation transfer, disinhibition, or desensitization (Mass Media and Crime, n.d). The central debate develops in two directions. The first direction, associated with the “general aggression model” (see: Bushman & Anderson, 2002; DeWall, Anderson & Bushman, 2011), argues that exposure to media reporting of violent crimes can “trigger” the development of aggressive attitudes or behaviors, leading people to real violence (see more: Phillips & Hensley, 1984; Laser, Luster & Oshio, 2007; Anderson et al, 2015; Gentile, 2016). In contrast to this theory, proponents of approaches such as “uses and gratifications” (Sherry et al., 2006) and “self-determination” (Przybylski, Rigby & Ryan, 2010) have not found solid evidence of such effects. These researchers argue that media reporting of violent crimes is better interpreted as a “crime steerer,” a factor that can shape criminal behavior through influencing the style of crime but is not a factor that triggers criminal behavior (see more in: Ferguson et al., 2008; Savage & Yancey, 2008; Surette, 2012). To understand the phenomenon of crime fascination and the propensity for imitation, a good example is the American documentary TV series “CopyCat Killers.”

While there are various contradictory viewpoints, we can conclude that the media can contribute to aggressive behavior. The media subtly guide us to adopt a distorted perception of reality, and as a result, our perception of reality becomes skewed, with digital violence having the “power to blur the boundaries between the virtual and the real world” (Bjelajac & Filipović, 2021a). It is essential to emphasize the challenges that children face due to exposure to inappropriate content on the internet, exposing them to numerous security challenges, risks, and threats (Bjelajac, 2012; Bjelajac & Filipović, 2021b;

4.    Discussion

In order to obtain data on the extent of citizens’ awareness of the media’s influence, we conducted a direct empirical study to gain a clear understanding of how citizens perceive the media’s impact. The study was conducted in the form of a random sample survey and included 504 respondents who were selected randomly and contacted by phone between September 1, 2023, and November 1, 2023. Initially, 1,244 respondents were contacted, but only 504 of them agreed to answer the questions. The study consisted of one primary research question, and additional questions were asked to segment the results into various categories, including gender, age groups (less than 30, 30-50, and older than 50), urban or rural living environments, educational levels (primary and secondary education or higher education), and family size (single individuals, couples without children, couples with one child, and couples with more than two children). These parameters proved significant as they revealed variations in the perception of media influence and responses to the primary research question. The primary research question was, “Are mass media good or bad for your family?” Below, we provide an overview and interpretation of the research results, beginning with a breakdown of the respondents based on the parameters mentioned in the previous text, followed by a tabular representation of the research findings.

In the study, 228 respondents were male, and 276 were female, representing 45% and 55% of the total sample, respectively. The total sample 24

included 104 individuals under the age of 30, 171 individuals aged 31 to 50, and 229 individuals older than 50. Out of the total number of respondents, 345, or 68%, lived in urban areas, while 159, or 32%, lived in rural areas. In the total sample of 504 surveyed citizens, 370 respondents, or 73%, had basic or secondary vocational education, while 134 respondents, or 27%, had a college education, including those with completed postgraduate studies at both levels. It should be noted that households with five or more members account for only 6% of the total number of households in the Republic of Serbia, so we combined that category, which typically represents families with three children, with the category of individuals or couples with two children to increase the representativeness and size of that part of the sample. Out of the total number of respondents, 146, or 29%, lived in households without children, 262 respondents, or 52%, lived in households with one child, and 96 respondents, or 19%, lived in households with two or more children.

Table 1. Are mass media good or bad for your family, total results