How to Spot Copaganda:
Four Questions to Ask when Reading News about Cops and Crime

Mainstream media coverage of “crime” often gives people the false impression that crime is constantly on the rise and that police and punishment are the only ways to stop it. But that’s simply not true. The media plays a large role in how we understand “crime,” so it’s important to read news on crime carefully and keep the following questions in mind:

1. Does the News Cover the Things that Cause Communities the Most Harm?

The media covers homicides every day. Yet 20 times more people die of tobacco use every year than by homicide. At least four times as many people die of air pollution than by homicide. While gun deaths deserve to be taken seriously, systemic harms caused by corporations, like tobacco and air pollution, are clearly more deadly than interpersonal violence like homicide. Yet headlines about deaths from air pollution and tobacco use are far less common than headlines about homicides. Why does the news focus so much more on the latter? For one thing, homicides are easier to track and to report on than deaths by systemic factors. In addition, the people who profit from tobacco and air pollution– while killing people in the process– are far wealthier and more powerful than the people responsible for individual homicides. Tobacco companies and oil companies pay major news outlets to advertise; in fact, The New York Times and The Washington Post both have in-house brand studios that have created marketing campaigns for Exxon, Chevron, and the American Petroleum Institute. Air polluters and tobacco profiteers pay media outlets’ bills, so the media is less likely to hold them accountable. 

Another example: The media covers shoplifting from retail stores every day. However, they do not cover that large employers steal five times more money from their employees through wage theft every year than is stolen from all stores, homes, and cars in the country. What’s more, tax evasion accounts for the loss of 40 times more money yearly than shoplifting. When was the last time you saw an article about wage theft or tax evasion? News coverage ignores harm caused by the rich to disproportionately focus on the “crimes” of the poor, making poor people seem like a greater threat, thereby justifying police violence against poor communities and letting wealthy employers off the hook.

2. Whose Voices Do the Media Take Seriously?

News coverage of “crime” almost always includes quotes from police and prosecutors. But police and prosecutors are not trustworthy sources–they have a track record of manipulating crime statistics, making false claims, and covering up acts of violence, including sexual violence, committed by police officers. Instead, news outlets should include voices from victims, defense attorneys, and people harmed by policing and prisons.

Police and prosecutors have a reason to lie: they are often promoting a political agenda. Prosecutors’ associations and police unions engage in political activity, from endorsing and financially supporting candidates to lobbying for harsher punishments to crime. They are interested in expanding funding for police, prosecutors, and prisons. When articles quote mainly police and prosecutors, readers should question whether the article is accurate or objective.

3. How Does the News Present Data?

Studies show that people believe that overall crime rates are increasing even when they’re not. People also overestimate the likelihood that they will be the victim of a crime. News stories often sensationalize interpersonal violence, reporting only on increases in crime rates, not decreases, without giving more context. This can scare readers, misleading them to think interpersonal violence is a bigger problem than it actually is. 

What’s more, stories on increasing crime rates normally imply that more policing and prisons are the solution to high rates of crime. However, the U.S. incarcerates people at higher rates than any country in the world. In fact, we make up only 5% of the world’s population but have more than 20% of the world’s prison population. We spend more than $120 billion per year on police. If police and prisons actually solved crime or reduced harm, the U.S. would be the safest country in the world.

Data on crime can also be inaccurate; yet the media often take it at face value. Police have a track record of manipulating crime statistics and can cover up police violence in many ways. In the last 30 years, more than half of all homicides bypolice–over 17,000 killings–weren’t reported in official government data.

4. What Stylistic Choices Did the Journalist Make?

Journalists and editors can change the meaning of an article based on how they write it. Take these two headlines: 

In the cases described in both articles, it was the police who killed people. Yet both titles hide that fact, in one case portraying police officers themselves as the only victims. 

In addition, by manipulating the style of their writing, journalists can make the police seem like heroes and portray police victims as dangerous “criminals” in many ways. These include:

  • Describing police violence in the passive voice–writing “man shot” or “man dies in officer-involved shooting” instead of writing “police shoot man”. This downplays the police’s responsibility for violence.

  • Describing people arrested, charged, or convicted of crimes as “convicts,” “felons,” or “prisoners.” This strips people of their humanity and boils them down only to acts they may or may not have been involved in. 

  • Publishing a persons’ mugshot in an article, even if they haven’t been convicted of a crime. Studies show that publications disproportionately publish mugshots of Black people, and that mugshots can prime racial stereotypes. When mugshots are online and searchable, they publicize people’s criminal records and can inhibit them from finding jobs and housing, even decades after their case is over. 

By asking ourselves these four critical questions, we can all better understand the media’s biases and the ways our communities are really harmed. Hopefully these four questions help us read articles on “crime” more carefully and make us less susceptible to pro-police propaganda.