Media coverage outside the courtroom : public opinion of restrictions imposed on news journalists and psychological effects on crime victims

Comme les études sur la couverture médiatique ont démontré qu’elle influence pratiquement toute personne qu’elle touche, des consommateurs aux jurés aux témoins, les deux études de cette thèse doctorale ont respectivement examiné l’opinion du public sur l’imposition de restrictions sur les médias dans les palais des justices et l’impact de la couverture médiatique sur la santé mentale des victimes de crime. Le gouvernement québécois a récemment introduit des restrictions sur les médias dans les palais de justice afin de minimiser l’influence des journalistes et des caméramans. Bien que l’affaire a atteint la Cour suprême du Canada, une étude préliminaire a trouvé que le public est largement favorable à ces restrictions (Sabourin, 2006). La première partie de cette thèse doctorale cherchait à approfondir ce sujet avec un échantillon plus représentatif de la population. Deux cent quarante-trois participants comprenant six groupes expérimentaux ont rempli des questionnaires mesurant leur opinion de ces restrictions. Les participants ont été divisé en deux conditions expérimentales où ils ont visionné soit des clips audiovisuels démontrant une atmosphère de débordement dans des palais de justice ou des clips plutôt calmes. Un troisième groupe n’a visionné aucun clip audiovisuel. De plus, il y avait deux versions du questionnaire ayant 20 items où les questions ont été présenté en sens inverse. L’étude a trouvé qu’une grande majorité des participants, soit presque 79 pourcent, ont supporté la restriction des médias dans les palais de justice. Il est intéressant de noter qu’un des groupes n’a pas supporté les restrictions – le groupe contrôle qui a lu les énoncés supportant l’absence des restrictions en premier. La deuxième composante de cette thèse doctorale a examiné l’impact des médias sur les victimes de crime. De nombreuses études expérimentales ont démontré que les victimes de crime sont particulièrement susceptibles à des problèmes de santé mentale. En effet, elles ont trois fois plus de chances de développer un trouble de stress post-traumatique (TSPT) que la population générale. Une étude a confirmé cette conclusion et a trouvé que les victimes de crimes qui avaient une impression plutôt négative de leur couverture médiatique avaient les taux les plus élévés de TSPT (Maercker & Mehr, 2006). Dans l’étude actuelle, vingt-trois victimes de crimes ont été interviewé en utilisant une technique narrative et ont complété deux questionnaires mésurant leur symptômes du TSPT et d’anxiété, respectivement. Une grande proportion des participantes avaient des symptômes de santé mentale et des scores élévés sur une échelle évaluant les symptômes du TSPT. La majorité des narratives des participants étaient négatives. Les thèmes les plus communs incluent dans ces narratives étaient l’autoculpabilisation et une méfiance des autres. La couverture médiatique ne semblaient pas être liée à des symptômes de santé mentale, quoique des facteurs individuels pourraient expliquer pourquoi certains participants ont été favorables envers leur couverture médiatique et d’autres ne l’été pas. Les résultats de ces deux études suggèrent que le public approuve la restriction des médias dans les palais de justice et que des facteurs individuels pourraient expliqués comment la couverture médiatique affecte les victimes de crime. Ces résultats ajoutent à la littérature qui questionne les pratiques actuelles qu’utilisent les médias.

Don’t trust your poll lead: how public opinion changes during referendum campaigns

Politicians call (or call for) referendums with increasing frequency. But how can they know they will win? Looking at the polls is not enough: opinion during referendum campaigns is often volatile. But this chapter shows that there are nevertheless some recurring patterns that allow us to make reasonable predictions in most cases.

Vox Populi, Vox Dei? A closer look at the ‘public opinion’ argument for retention

The Japanese government’s justification for retaining the death penalty is that abolition would erode the legitimacy of and public trust in the criminal justice system, leading to victims’ families taking justice into their own hands. This justification is based on the results of a regularly administered public opinion survey, which is said to show strong public support for the death penalty. However, a close analysis of the results of the 2014 survey fails to validate this claim. Just over a third of respondents were committed to retaining the death penalty at all costs, while the rest accepted the possibility of future abolition, with some of them seeing this as contingent on the introduction of life imprisonment without parole as an alternative sentence. These findings hardly describe a society that expects the strict application of the death penalty and whose trust in justice depends on the government’s commitment to retaining it. My reading of the 2014 survey is that the Japanese public is ready to embrace abolition. Japan, after all, is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which calls on states not to delay or prevent abolition, so this should be welcome news for the Japanese government!

世論という神話―望むのは「死刑」ですか？’ (Public opinion myth: is ‘death’ what we really want?)

This paper summarises Mai Sato's recent report on public attitudes to the death penalty in Japan.

This is public health : Australian students’ understanding of public health

This is Public Health Campaign,Young adults are a frequent target of health promotion campaigns in Australia yet there is evidence to suggest that this cohort has little understanding of the nature and intent of Public Health initiatives in their own environment. This paper describes the results of a study that evaluated the knowledge and understanding of public health of a sample of 333 first year health science students at an Australian University. Students were asked to submit photographs depicting their ideas about public health and accompany these with a written rationale for their choices. The results of the study suggest that the students at this level have a narrow interpretation of public health and do not understand the organized nature of public health efforts or the aims of such initiatives. This study provides important insight into the thinking of this cohort of young Australians, both in the context of preparing them for future careers in public health as well as in relation to their response to health promotion campaigns targeting them.

The awkwardness of Australian engagement with Asia : the dilemmas of Australian idea of regionalism

Australia has experienced difficulties engaging with Asia-Pacific regional integration. Despite Australian attempts to punch above its weight in regional forums and to be a regional leader, it is still not regarded as a full member or as quite fitting into the region. It is an ‘awkward partner’ in the Asian context, and has experienced the ‘liminality’ of being neither here nor there. The former Rudd government’s proposal for an ‘Asia Pacific Community’ (APC) by the year 2020 was a substantive initiative in Australia’s ongoing engagement with Asia. It has, however, attracted a high level of criticism both at home and abroad. The main critical analysis of the proposal has focused on institutional building or architecture, or its relationship with existing regional institutions, but overlooks a host of often fraught questions about culture,
norms, identities, and international power relations. The APC concept needs to be scrutinized in terms of these questions with a critical eye. This paper examines the cultural, cognitive, and normative dimensions of Rudd’s proposal. It analyses four dilemmas or awkward problems that the APC faces.

Proportionality in sentencing: the need to factor in community experience, not public opinion

This is the first book to address the question of what role public opinion should play in the way criminal offenders are punished.Should public opinion determine—or even influence—sentencing policy and practice? Should the punishment of criminal offenders reflect what the public regards as appropriate? These deceptively simple questions conceal complex theoretical and methodological challenges to the administration of punishment.In the West, politicians have often answered these questions in the affirmative; penal reforms have been justified with direct reference to the attitudes of the public. This is why the contention that politicians should bridge the gap between the public and criminal justice practice has widespread resonance. Criminal law scholars, for their part, have often been more reluctant to accept public input in penal practice, and some have even held that the idea of consulting public opinion constitutes a populist approach to punishment.The purpose of this book is to examine the moral significance of public opinion for penal theory and practice. For the first time in a single volume the editors, Jesper Ryberg and Julian V. Roberts, have assembled a number of respected criminologists, philosphers, and legal theorists to address the various aspects of why and how public opinion should be reflected in the way the criminal justice system deals with criminals. The chapters address the myriad complexities surrounding this issue by first weighing the justifications for incorporating public views into punishment practices and then considering the various ways this might be achieved through juries, prosecutors, restoratifve justice programs, and other means.

The state under scrutiny: public opinion, stateness and government performance in Latin America

Includes bibliography