Violation of Social Due Process in News Media
Crime-Based Reporting
Crime-based reporting offers an example of how the news media grossly violates Social Due Process. The news media sometimes reports stories of alleged crimes and indiscretions by plastering the accused’s name and pictures in news articles (often on the news agency’s social media).
News agencies ignore having to focus on their reported content being true, fair, and accurate by using the terms “arrested for” or “accused of” or “allegedly” to indirectly (and possibly falsely) accuse people of crimes and wrongdoing. By insinuating, rather than directly declaring guilt, they avoid legal defamation.
But this common practice serves as the evidence that social due process has been violated. News agencies spend little energy verifying truth, fairness, and accuracy of facts. If they cannot or do not adequately attend to truth, fairness, and accuracy of facts, they should not be humiliating people for stories.
Consequences of Improper Crime-Based Reporting
1. Violations of Due Process -
By running stories of alleged, versus actual crimes, the news media interferes with individuals from receiving fair criminal due process. In New York, a federal judge banned a police practice of parading arrested suspects (e.g. “perp walks”) on the news because it violated the due process of arrestees. How can people be fairly treated by judges and juries when news agencies have already insinuated guilt by running stories? Despite objections from news agencies who claimed this violated freedom of press, the prevalence of this practice has largely disappeared.
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/perp-walk-due-process-v-freedom-press
2. Destroying People's Lives and Reputations -
News media stories ruin people’s lives by running stories of arrests or allegations of wrongdoing. Are those individuals guilty of crimes? We have no idea. But their names and pictures will forever be online for any future mate, employer, or individuals to easily find. While this is a complicated matter, with some of those arrested or accused of wrongdoing having committed those crimes, we still believe the news media acts recklessly and irresponsibly by needlessly identifying pictures and names. If the news agency claims it’s a public benefit to know about such crimes, they can run stories without identifying individuals (e.g., names and pictures), at least until a trial can be held. After they are convicted, there might be a reason to run more detailed stories, assuming there is some constructive social and journalistic purpose to the story that requires the name and picture.
3. Vigilante Justice -
These stories can create a vigilante mob response against people who may be innocent of wrongdoing. Another gross example of a violation of social due process, those featured in the stories receive threats and violence.
4. Perpetuating Stereotypes -
These news media crime stories amplify stereotypes and prejudice. Anyone who watches the news often sees the faces of specific groups (e.g., Black males, poor people, etc.,) paraded across the screen in stories highlighting people arrested for a variety of crimes. Some will justify this practice by arguing that some groups “are more likely to commit crimes.”
We suggest that repetitive exposure to unnecessary pictures and names only serves to drive irresponsible crime narratives. In other words, while there may be valid reasons for reporting crime, including raising challenges facing specific communities, viewers rarely need to see the faces and names of people accused of crimes.
Responses to Concerns about Social Due Process and Crime Reporting
1. Crime Stories are Important -
Some argue that crime stories serve an important function in society by raising awareness of crime that might affect society in a variety of ways. But news agencies can still accomplish this potential service by running stories by omitting names and pictures, especially when those stories largely focus on allegations of crimes versus actual findings of guilt.
Alternatively, news agencies can frame stories as - “A suspect was arrested and charged for…”
2. Freedom of Press -
Some might suggest that the news media has first amendment rights to publish those stories. However, just because a news agency might have a first amendment right to say something does not mean that they have to, nor does it justify violating the central ethical tenets of social due process.
Also, as described above, there’s an argument to be made that news media’s first amendment rights do not outweigh the due process rights of current or future criminal defendants to a fair, unbiased trial. The news media can still reasonably exercise 1st Amendment rights by running stories with omitted names and pictures.
3. No Sympathy for Criminals -
Finally, some may have little sympathy for people who commit crimes. The Social Due Process Project is not advocating for crime. For those accused of crimes, they should receive fair and proper due process within the criminal justice system. Until then, we believe in “innocent until proven guilty,” and suggest that news media agencies are not in a position to referee guilt and punishments for potential wrongdoing.