Читать книгу Approaching Victimology as social science for Human rights a Spanish perspective - Gema Varona Martínez - Страница 31

The high profile cases mentioned in the previous paragraphs are an example of how the Spanish media has raised awareness13 and also has caused secondary victimisation. Different studies have shown how victims are usually portrayed as the passive objects of the crime while the offender awakens more curiosity in its active role, particularly when exercising violence. We can think, for example, in how the media portrays serial killers and their victims in popular culture. This does not mean to fall into Wertham’s moralism, but to reflect on the attraction of violence and its transformation into market commodification as spectacle. Violence, as part of our culture, has been treated by media as news, but also as spectacle and business, putting into question the value and benefits of informing on certain victimisations. Often the media, particularly today’s social media, reinforces the myths on victims and the negative notion of an ideal victim and steals the recognition of all who deserve the acknowledgement and respect of their rights as victims, including not to be manipulated and really helped, beyond punitivism.

In this direction, Article 21.2 of the 2012/29/EU Directive, on the right of protection of privacy, states that: “In order to protect the privacy, personal integrity and personal data of victims, Member States shall, with respect for freedom of expression and information and freedom and pluralism of the media, encourage the media to take self-regulatory measures”.

On the ambivalent role of media for victims (Greer, 2007), we reproduce the possible benefits and risks of media (it is important to think them in relation to victims, but also to the society as a whole), as stated by the Canadian Resource Center for Victims of Crime14, with a particular emphasis on social media.

According to that Center, the possible benefits of sharing victims’ stories in the media are:

• Changing Public Policy and Awareness. Victims may bring attention to current inadequate government policies and help be a voice for change within the criminal justice system.

• Awareness of Victimisation. Being victimised takes a toll physically, emotionally, spiritually, financially, socially and psychologically. Coverage about individual victims can help other citizens understand what happens to crime victims and how violence affects them and their loved ones. Victims can help future victims cope with certain stresses and anxieties. Victims’ stories can be a driving force for those who work in the field of victim assistance.

• Victims’ Side of the Story. Telling victim’s story brings balance to the criminal justice system by sharing the perspectives of the crime victim/survivor as the media often focuses on the accused/perpetrator.

• Prevention. Educate the public and help prevent similar victimisations.

• Humanization. The over-saturation of crime in the news can lead to the dehumanization of victims. Crime deeply affects victims and their loved ones and it also impacts communities. Speaking out through the media may serve to help others see the direct impact of crime.

• Validation. Sharing victims’ perspective with others may bring support and validate what victims have been through. The experience may prove to be therapeutic in dealing with what has happened.

• Inspiration. Victims’ circumstances and what they reveal to the public may inspire others to report crime and/or seek support.

• Empowerment. Victims may feel that they have regained control of their life by sharing details of their victimisation, as well as through influencing change in the criminal justice system.

• Support. Telling the victim’s story may increase public support for victim assistance initiatives.

At the same time, the Canadian Resource Center for Victims of Crime highlights the possible risks of speaking out in the media:

• The Police Investigation. It is wise to refrain from commenting in the media, especially if the police are still investigating. Speaking to the media during the police investigation or trial could jeopardize a criminal case. Victims should be sure to consult with the police media officer or victim services staff if they are unsure.

• Well-Being. For some victims, speaking publicly about what happened to them can intensify the trauma of victimisation. It takes time to work through being victimised, let alone coping with ongoing police investigations, court processes and intrusive media.

• Lack of Control. It is impossible to predict how one’s case will be covered, if at all. There is potential for gaps in coverage and intensity of coverage. Some cases get little coverage due to competing breaking news at the time.

• Secondary victimisation: People may feel secondly victimised when reporting is insensitive, inaccurate or sensationalized. The media can cause additional harm by being insensitive and intrusive in searching for information.

• Photographs. Victims should keep in mind that any photo provided to the media of their loved one will be used continually in reporting, even months and years later. If the media cannot track down a photo immediately, they will go to social media spaces and may use an image out of victims’ control. The media can also film/photograph victims’ home.

• Family Members. Family members may not be supportive of some direct victims’ need to speak out in the media. They may not feel ready to include the public in their grieving process. Family members also might not want certain information released. Victims should consider extended family members and young children/youth that may be affected by media reports now and in the future.

• Media Letdown. In the immediate aftermath of the crime, the media are constantly present and the victim’s story may be in the headlines. Eventually, other news begins to take precedence and victims may feel abandoned and alone.

• Aggressive Reporting. Reporters may seek interviews immediately after the crime, at funerals, trials, sentencing, parole hearings and anniversaries. They may phone or e-mail victims, approach them in public, find them through social media or visit them at their home or workplace.

• Where the Victim’s Information Gets Posted. When victims release statements to the media, their information can be published in many places. Victims should expect the information they release to be printed in newspapers/magazines, talked about on television and radio, referred to in blogs, on Facebook, Twitter, and all over the internet. Once made public, it is very difficult to take back or erase the information.

On technology and social media, the Canadian Resource Center for Victims of Crime states:

• Technology has changed the way crime is reported and how quickly reporters must write/file their stories. Newspapers no longer have publication deadlines for the morning paper as they all have websites that distribute information about the incident immediately.

• Most crime/justice reporters are on Twitter which allows them to broadcast information instantaneously from crime scenes, the trial, etc.

• The mass media is only bound by publication bans (particularly the names of child victims). Media outlets often fight for access to private information restricted by the courts because it is “in the public interest”. Public interest means information that benefits public safety or welfare.

• Social media can be a source of information for those curious about the victim(s). Journalists look for personal information found in blogs, personal websites and social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram to include in their stories. They can gather a great deal of background information and photographs of victims and their family members through their social media pages.

• Many of the users of smartphones have accounts with one or more social media platforms, which allow them to instantly share their feelings or beliefs on victimisation. Users should remember that pictures, comments and status updates may give those who are tagged unwanted attention, and in some cases, put them in danger. Online posts can also change the course of a police investigation or alter a trial verdict. Anything posted online or emailed can be accessed by defence lawyers and used in criminal court. Online activity may also be viewed by the offender, so it is important to maintain privacy.

• Video streaming, available through platforms like Facebook Live, allows users to share events as they happen. They have been used to record assaults and other types of crime. They offer a raw look at what happened and have been used in the media. They can also be used as evidence in court.

• Following victimisation, victims/survivors and their family members should be very cautious about what they post in social media spaces. It is recommended to restrict privacy settings and to refrain from posting personal details or location. Family members may wish to check with a particular social media application to see how to secure or close down their loved one’s accounts.

• Anyone Can Publish. The internet allows people to anonymously post harmful comments, videos, and pictures. This can impact victims by having sensitive or previously undisclosed information about the victim or the offender released. Family members and friends may also learn about important or sensitive information through online sources before victims get a chance to inform them.

• Fact/Fiction. People tend to believe everything that is posted on the internet, regardless of the source or reliability. Falsehoods can be made about the crime, the victim and the offender.

• Even though account profiles may be set to private, victims’ social media presence can still be found. It is almost impossible to keep personal information private when social media is involved. This might compromise victims’ safety or integrity.