‘Newsmaking criminology’, as described by Barak, is the process by which criminologists contribute to the generation of ‘newsworthy’ media content about crime and justice, often through their engagement with broadcast and other news media. While newsmaking criminological practices have been the subject of detailed practitioner testimonials and theoretical treatise, there has been scarce empirical research on newsmaking criminology, particularly in relation to countries outside of the United States and United Kingdom. To illuminate the state of play of newsmaking criminology in Australia and New Zealand, in this paper we analyse findings from 116 survey responses and nine interviews with criminologists working in universities in these two countries, which provide insight into the extent and nature of their news media engagement, and their related perceptions. Our findings indicate that most criminologists working in Australia or New Zealand have made at least one news media appearance in the past two years, and the majority of respondents view news media engagement as a professional ‘duty’. Participants also identified key political, ethical, and logistical issues relevant to their news media engagement, with several expressing a view that radio and television interviewers can influence criminologists to say things that they deem ‘newsworthy’.
BarakG. (1988).
Newsmaking criminology: Reflections on the media, intellectuals, and crime. Justice Quarterly,
5(4), 565–587.
5.
BarakG. (2016).
Newsmaking criminology, policy making, and popular culture: Reflections from the margins. Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture,
18(1), 9–21.
6.
BenierK. J.BlausteinJ. B.JohnsD.MaherS. L. (2018). ‘Don't drag us into this’: Growing up South Sudanese in Victoria after the 2016 Moomba riot.
Melbourne, Australia:
Centre for Multicultural Youth.
7.
BottomsA. (1995). The philosophy and politics of punishment and sentencing. In ClarksonC. M. V.MorganR. (Eds.), The politics of sentencing reform (pp. 17–49).
Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
8.
Bottoms, A. (2000). The relationship between theory and research in criminology. In R. King & E. Wincup (Eds.), Doing Research on Crime and Justice (pp. 15–60), New York: Oxford University Press.
CarrierN. (2014).
On some limits and paradoxes of academic orations on public criminology. Radical Criminology,
4, 85–114.
12.
ChanJ. B. (1995).
Systematically distorted communication? Criminological knowledge, media representation and public policy. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology,
28(1), 23–30.
13.
ChancerL.McLaughlinE. (2007).
Public criminologies: Diverse perspectives on academia and policy. Theoretical Criminology,
11(2), 155–173.
14.
ChermakS. (1994). Crime in the news media. In. BarakG. (Ed.), Media, process and the social construction of crime: Studies in newsmaking criminology (pp. 95–129).
New York:
Garland Publishing.
15.
CohenJ. E. (2008). The presidency in the era of 24-hour news.
Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
16.
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research.
London, UK:
SAGE Publications.
Ferrell, J., & Websdale, N. (1999). Materials for making trouble. In J. Ferrelll & N. Websdale (Eds.), Making Trouble: Cultural Constructions of Crime, Deviance, and Control (pp. 3–21). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
19.
FinkelsteinR. (2012). Report of the independent inquiry into the media and media regulation, assisted by M Ricketson, Australian Government: Report to the Minister for Broadband, Communications and Digital Economy. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/1205_finkelstein.pdf
20.
FuchsC. (2017). Social media: A critical introduction.
London, UK:
Sage.
GoldsmithA.HalseyM. (2017).
Criminology – Missing in action. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology,
50(4), 471–472.
23.
GottfredsonM. R.HirschiL. (1990). A general theory of crime.
Stanford:
Stanford University Press.
24.
GramsciA. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks.
New York, NY:
International Publishers Association.
25.
GreerC. (2010). Introduction. In GreerC. (Ed.), Crime and media: A reader (pp. 1–8).
London, UK:
Routledge.
26.
GroombridgeN. (2007).
Criminologists’ say …: An analysis of UK national press coverage of criminology and criminologists and a contribution to the debate on ‘public criminology. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice,
46(5), 459–475.
27.
HenryS. (1994). Newsmaking criminology as replacement discourse. In BarakG. (Ed.), Media, process, and the social construction of crime: Studies in newsmaking criminology (pp. 287–318).
New York, NY:
Garland.
28.
HermanE. S.ChomskyN. (2010). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media.
New York, NY:
Random House.
IsraelM. (1998).
Telling stories of crime in South Australia. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology,
31(3), 213–229.
31.
IsraelM. (2000).
The commercialisation of university-based criminological research in Australia. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology,
33(1), 1–20.
32.
JewkesY. (2015). Media and crime.
London, UK:
SAGE Publications.
33.
LamA. (2014). Making crime TV: Producing entertaining representations of crime for television broadcasts.
London, UK:
Routledge.
34.
LoaderI.SparksR. (2011). Public criminology?.
London, UK:
Routledge.
35.
LSE GV314 Group. (2013).
Scholars on air: Academics and the broadcast media in Britain. British Politics,
9(4), 363–384.
36.
Merrin. (2014). Media studies 2.0.
London, UK:
Routledge.
NixonE.ScullionR.HearnR. (2018).
Her majesty the student: Marketised higher education and the narcissistic (dis)satisfactions of the student-consumer. Studies in Higher Education,
43(6), 927–943.
39.
PickeringS.BosworthM.AasK. (2015). The criminology of mobility. In PickeringS.HamJ. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook on crime and international migration (pp. 382–395).
London, UK:
Routledge.
RobertsJ.HoughM.HoughJ. (2002). Changing attitudes to punishment: Public opinion, crime and justice.
London:
Routledge.
43.
RockP. (2014).
The public faces of public criminology. Criminology & Criminal Justice,
14(4), 412–433.
44.
Royal Commission into Family Violence (Vic). (2016). Royal Commission into Family Violence Volume I-VII: Report and Recommendations, March 2016. Retrieved from http://www.rcfv.com.au/Report-Recommendations
SchwartzM. D.DeKeseredyW. S. (1993).
The return of the “battered husband syndrome” through the typification of women as violent. Crime, Law and Social Change,
20(3), 249–265.
47.
SmithA.BondC. E.JeffriesS. (2019).
Media discourses of intimate partner violence in Queensland newspapers. Journal of Sociology, https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783319837612.
48.
SuretteR. (1992). Media, crime and criminal justice: Images and realities.
California:
Cole Publishing Company.
49.
TeddlieC.YuF. (2007).
Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of Mixed Methods Research,
1(1), 77–100.
50.
TewksburyR.MillerA.DeMicheleM. T. (2006).
The media and criminologists: Interactions and satisfaction. Journal of Criminal Justice Education,
17(2), 227–243.
51.
ThompsonL.WadleyD. (2017).
Ideology, ‘truth’ and spin: Dialectic relations between the neoliberal think-tank movement and academia in Australia. Australian Universities’ Review,
59(1), 76–86.
52.
TofflerA. (1980). The third wave.
New York, NY:
Morrow.
53.
TonryM. (2010).
Public criminology and evidence-based policy. American Society of Criminology,
9(4), 783–797.
WoodM. A.RichardsI.IliadisM.McDermottM. (2019forthcoming). Digital public criminology in Australia and New Zealand: results from a mixed methods study of criminologists’ use of social media. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.v8i4.956.
