Arresting Images
Crime and Policing in Front of the Television Camera

By Aaron Doyle
Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press, 2003

The author’s objective was to undertake a path-breaking study of the nature and effects of broadcasting “real” incidents involving police and the investigation of suspected wrongdoing, not just with respect to the participants but also on the institutional level. If one accepts that television, like other media, often shapes the things it records, then it stands to reason that “television might actually alter or transform social situations when they are broadcast” (p. 4). I confess that I was intrigued by the potential of a study seeking to lay bare how crime and policing itself may be altered by the fact of being televised. To say that my interest was piqued would be an understatement. As will be apparent from this favourable review, I am pleased to report that my investment of time was well rewarded in that this small but very well written and insightful study has yielded a treasure trove of insights and uncovered many previously unrecognized associations between the actions of police authorities and the fact that a televised record is being made of the event.

I begin by emphasizing that Chapter Two sought to draw attention to three alternative ways of thinking about the influences of television and that the social leveling that the author describes so ably, notably as a result of breaking down social barriers, has had a pervasive influence on a number of institutions, notably policing. I note in particular the reference on page 23 to the Arizona police sting operation in which politicians accepted bribes on television, so to speak, and that this might well have been perceived as an end in and of itself, without the need for prosecution. Think of the effect of the Gomery Inquiry on the role of police work after the presentation of damning information and it may well be that there is room to question whether any further public condemnation is required…

I was also impressed by the author’s comments and explanations surrounding the ability of the police to exploit the media’s interest and expertise in developing public opinion in order to promote the status quo, as opposed to promoting any form of social transformation. In this vein, note that in an influential text that appeared two years after Arresting Images, Re-Imagining Policing in Canada, edited by Dennis Cooley, [Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005], we read on page 16 of the introductory chapter of a democratic gap between the mandate of the police and the practice of police agencies.

The next chapter draws valuable attention on reality television and policing with an emphasis on “Cops”, especially by delineating how the “raw reality” of the video footage undergoes considerable processing before it hits the airwaves. The resulting belief naturally shared by any right-thinking members of the public would normally be along the lines of “we need more police officers” if we are to be protected (p. 38). Once again, it is apposite to repeat the author’s concerns respecting inequality respecting police work. As we read on page 41, “Rather than creating pressure for social equality, they will help reproduce an ideology that justifies and reinforces social inequality.” Interested readers are encouraged in the strongest terms to read Professor David Tanovich’s stellar book, The Colour of Justice, Policing Race in Canada [Toronto: Irwin Law, 2005]¹

I also wish to emphasize the signal importance of the author’s inquiry directed to the issue of the means whereby television succeeds in reshaping the criminal justice system in terms of the emergence of informal rituals of punishment for the camera. As set out on page 58, “The result is the spectacularization of arbitrarily selected day-to-day instances of crime and punishment. For example, police sometimes parade arrested suspects in handcuffs in strategic locations so they can be visually recorded by the media – a ritual known colloquially as the ‘perp walk’.” A simple example of the pervasiveness of this practice, at least in the mind of a celebrated novelist, is drawn from a recent work of fiction, Andrew Vachss’ Down Here, [New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2004], on page 10: “… All I want is to find out if the cops are planning to splash it [the arrest]”. All in all, the author’s warnings respecting the fear of informal rituals of summary justice must be heeded.

The next issue examined by the author surrounds the influence of surveillance cameras and so-called amateur videos. As discussed ably on pages 64-82, the development of a video wanted poster is a phenomenon that bears careful scrutiny, reminiscent as it is of the shocking but as yet futuristic electronic posse described in Ray Bradbury’s searing novel of ‘policing’ excesses, Fahrenheit 451 [New York: Ballantine Books, 1991]. I was especially intrigued by the discussion surrounding biases in surveillance camera footage on pages 71-72 and the ensuing discussion of the convergence of police surveillance and television news surveillance. As we read on page 73, “It remains to be seen to what extent other police operations might adopt [the approach] of not striving for criminalization but primarily for publicity and public shaming of suspects.”

“Television and the Policing of Vancouver’s Stanley Cup Riot”, the title of Chapter Five, introduces another quite well constructed study of an important issue in considering the impact of broadcasting images and the institution that is policing. Indeed, the salient element of this study is the potential influence of images that were not created or sought out by the authorities, and the correctness of the belief that so-called “softer policing methods” will be selected by those whose conduct will, to their knowledge, be scrutinized. At the end of the day, however, the description and analysis of the lengthy process whereby the meaning and nature of clashes between police and rioters come to be re-negotiated after the fact may well be the author’s most significant contribution. It is this process of “making the camera lie”, if I may select this expression, which is the most salient aspect of the study of the thesis according to which police do not engage in coercive policing in front of the cameras for fear of exposure.

Professor Doyle next turns his attention to the issue of Greenpeace and how it has sought out the television cameras in order to foster its goals, well knowing that the pursuit of its agenda will bring it in conflict with the police. In this respect, “This chapter asks: How has the presence of television affected law-breaking political protest, and the activists that use it” (p. 111). The resulting study advances a number of insights into the relationship between protest (and largely public protest stunts) and policing, as viewed through the lens of the camera.

The two concluding chapters suggest that a new critical model is required for understanding how television influences other institutions, especially policing, being mindful always of the potential for broadcasting of images to be a weapon in the ability of powerful institutions to support and strengthen existing power relations. In addition, they suggest that television may well promote penal punitiveness² and that if left unchecked, one possible nightmarish scenario would see judges and prosecutors, as well as politicians, checking the Nielsen ratings as to the impact of certain publicized crimes in order to assign appropriate weight to aggravating elements in sentencing…

In sum, Arresting Images is a valuable addition to the bookshelves of criminologists.

¹ Refer as well to Understanding Social Science Research Applications in Criminology and Criminal Justice, edited by G.P. Albert and J.M. MacDonald [Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press Inc., 2001], Chapter 6, pp. 89-107.

² Refer to Penal Populism and Public Opinion Lessons From Five Countries, by J.V. Roberts et al., [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003], and to my review (December 2003) Vol. 41(3) Alberta Law Review pp. 797-799.