The Poynter-owned Tampa Bay Times created its first mugshot web page in 2009, and it was instantly a popular destination. Other online publishers realized that there was money to be made in the mugshot game, and over the next few years, mugshot websites became more and more common.
One of the biggest problems with publishing mugshots is that not all arrests lead to convictions. But with the photos already online, it becomes a burden on the person in the mugshot.
They may have been acquitted by the court of law, but their record isn't completely clean if their mugshot is the first thing that pops up when people (such as potential employers) search for them
online.
David Segal of the New York Times wrote an excellent piece (“Mugged by a Mug Shot Online" published on October 5, 2013) detailing the nightmare of one young man who was arrested, worked hard to clean his record, and yet is still suffering consequences because his mugshot is online.
A similar issue regarding journalism, the police and citizens' privacy is the use of 911 calls in
the media. Like mugshots, it can be argued that this practice has value. It conveys the emotion and the
mood of the scene and gives the viewer a better sense of what it was like to be in the situation. But does it do more harm than good?
In relation to Denise's question about whether 911 recordings are public record:
"Six states—Alabama, Mississippi, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Wyoming—keep 911 call recordings confidential. Five other states—Georgia, Maine, Minnesota, North Carolina and South Dakota—place some restrictions on the release of 911 calls or the information contained in them." - www.ncsl.org
Not sure why the quote is all weird. Just highlight it and you can read it.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I like seeing mugshots in the news, but I could definitely understand the story just fine without them. If these sorts of situations are popping up because of mugshots, it might just be best to not post them until they are convicted. On the subject of 911 calls, I also like to hear them on the news because I feel like it helps show the feelings of the people involved more than their after-event interviews ever could. But I think there's a time and a place for them. If it helps the story, then yes. But if you are just putting it in there to show that they were scared, that seems not quite right. For instance, if the story was about a man in a bank getting robbed that had gotten a hold of a phone to call the cops, then I think it would help the story to have what he said in the news.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that mugshots should be used until the person has been convicted otherwise I think it could unnecessarily damage the person's reputation. As for 911 calls, I think there may be a time and place for it but honestly it just makes it sound like a cheap cop show on cable.
ReplyDeleteIf a news outlet want to be associated with real journalism, they should avoid posting a mug shot stream. If they just want clicks, I say go for it. It's not an ethical issue for me.
ReplyDeleteThe 911 issue might be the toughest question for me so far in this class. I think airing the tapes really drives home the violence these people are experiencing. Makes it hard to ignore. But there's a privacy issue that I can't get around. If it was my family, I wouldn't appreciate it.
I don't know it's a hard one for me.
I'm on the fence about mugshots. On one hand, it's public record, so why not use it to add more context to a police blotter or similar crime file. But on the other hand, I think the intentions behind posting mugshots is really where the ethical problem really comes into play. When news organizations have a like to a mugshots page, it seems like they are just trying to drive traffic so they can make more ad money, which seems pretty unethical to me.
ReplyDelete911 calls are far more difficult to make a decision about. I think they must be handled on a case-by-case basis. If the audio is newsworthy and adds context or appropriate emotion to a story, then it needs to be aired. But if the audio is used only for added effect, or extra emotion when it is unneeded, than that is wrong.
I think 911 calls should be aired very sparingly by any news outlet. Online or not.
I do not think mugshots should be public record period. I do not even think they should be public if the person is convicted. This would avoid ruining innocent peoples' reputations, and help avoid any gray areas. If the newsroom really needs a picture, they can go get one or go find one. Mugshots are too incriminating and embarrassing.
ReplyDeleteAs far as 911 calls, I think they should be private also. I don't think we need the audio of someone begging for help to deliver the story. I don't understand why our emergency dispatch and our police do not have to live up to the same privacy standards as our EMS workers and hospital workers. Because those two worlds cross paths regularly, I think there should be consistency in their views on privacy.