Abstract
In Policing and Media, Lee and McGovern examine the ongoing and ever-changing relations between the police, the media, and ultimately the public. Early on, the authors argue that the role of the media has often served as a bridge between the police and the public. In mapping the transformation between such relationships, one of the book’s major contributions is its focus on new technologies that have been used by police organizations, which include social media and reality television (also referred to as observational documentaries).
The book is organized into three overarching sections. The authors begin with a historical backdrop of police/media relations particularly as they relate to the active role that police play in creating the news. Professionalized police media departments emerged due to the increased need for the centralization of information dissemination in order to control information and prevent negative news. Also, since the public’s perceptions of police (which are critical to police effectively doing their job) are highly influenced by the media, the control of information served to rebuild police relationships with the public by depicting positive images. While managing the image of the police has been one of the key rationales for police organizations engaging with the media, there are also other objectives (referred to as “key logics”) for such engagement. Police seek to educate and inform the public about crime, to manage risks and responsibilize the public, and to promote public confidence and police legitimacy.
The book uses four theoretical frameworks as guiding themes to understand police engagement with and essentially becoming the media. Garland’s (2001) culture of control thesis focuses on police organizations’ attempts to control individual officers, media personnel, and ultimately the information that is being released all in order to promote positive images. Mathiesen’s (1997) concept of the viewer society is used to relate the public’s keen interest in observing and/or policing the police (synopticism)—a practice facilitated by social media, whereas traditionally the police have been tasked to watch the public (panopticism).
O’Malley’s (2010) simulated policing is the major conceptual framework used throughout the book, thus the authors dedicate the entire second section of the book to examples of such. Simulated policing is “the emerging practice of achieving, or attempting to achieve, operational policing outcomes through cyber-, media-, or image-related modes of policing” (p. 141). The authors claim that the work police organizations do in terms of engaging with the media has become operational policing. Three concrete illustrations of simulated policing are identified. First, police communicate through press releases and online information systems, hence directly producing and providing the news story. Next, social media have served to fulfill the key logics listed above and act as an investigative tool to solve crimes. Lastly, observational documentaries serve to deter crime and increase public confidence by instilling in the public the perception that police are doing their job effectively and catching criminals. Consequently, the representations being put forth through this mediatized policing environment serve the same goals as traditional policing methods, such as improving police image, establishing the legitimacy of the agency, and enforcing public compliance with the law.
The last theoretical framework adopted in Policing and Media is De Certeau’s (1984) tactics of resistance, comprising the last section of the book. The authors contend that the culture of control has bred passions of resistance by the public, journalists, and police officers. Moreover, the viewer society and simulated policing environment have facilitated the success of resistance tactics. The colloquial nature of social media, coupled with the creation of professional accounts for police organizations, has opened the door for counter-images and narratives of policing to be promoted. Similarly, the public resist by engaging in the surveillance of police (referred to as “counterveillance” and “sousveillance”), such as recording police abuse of power. Likewise, traditional media has seen journalists and police officers resist the culture of control by finding unofficial chains of information release from police agencies. Taken as a whole, police organizations have to deal with leaks of information coming from their organizations and competing information on multiple technological platforms.
The aforementioned theoretical frameworks are interrelated and referred to consistently throughout the book, whereas the authors use empirical research as evidence in support of these frames. Thus, the book’s major contribution is the combination of theory and empirical research (both quantitative and qualitative). The research includes interviews, documentary analysis, open- and closed-ended survey responses, and social and traditional media analysis. While a drawback of the empirical research is the lack of generalizability of a single case study (i.e. an Australian police force), the book compensates by using incidents from various contexts, including the UK and USA. The research conducted spans a 10-year time period and provides support for the definitive statements made, with qualitative excerpts seen frequently throughout.
The authors successfully outline how police have engaged with the public over time, by providing a survey of both dated and current research. Although a great deal of information is condensed within the book, which may have been better articulated using separate research articles, the authors do appear cognizant of such limitations. Furthermore, the authors thoroughly break down the topic by providing reiteration of concepts, themes, and content, which may appear mundane to some, yet provide greater understanding for others. The empirical research findings provide confirmation and support of past research in this field.
While the book provides a neutral, yet informative analysis of police, media, and public relations, the authors provide the reader with food for thought. For instance, the reader is invited to question the link between crime and the media due to the heavily influential role of police organizations in constructing the news. Also, the authors imply a call for greater accountability systems to be placed on the media. Overall, Lee and McGovern have achieved a difficult feat in writing a book that reaches both their intended readerships: academics and practitioners in the fields of policing and media. They do so by carefully including original empirical research, an overview of the literature, and practical examples.
Policing and Media is an informative and timely book for those specifically interested in police–community relations. The critical examination of the associations between police, media, and the public is particularly opportune due to the recent political pushes for the introduction of body-cameras as an accountability mechanism for police agencies. There is great potential for future work to expound upon the last section of the book as it pertains to “policing the police”, particularly in light of the increased shootings of unarmed individuals in the USA. This expansion can detail the impact of such policing images and narratives on the public at large and/or specific groups of people. Altogether, the authors have provided an in-depth analysis in a way not yet explored. In providing this critical analysis, the authors defend their argument that operational policing has changed from what it once was. However, they do not wholeheartedly persuade the reader that the representations and images of policing via media is policing in and of itself, rather they establish that virtual tools can facilitate policing purposes.