http://cmc.sagepub.

com
Crime, Media, Culture
DOI: 10.1177/1741659007074455
2007; 3; 110 Crime Media Culture
Michael Mopas
Examining the CSI effect through an ANT lens
http://cmc.sagepub.com
The online version of this article can be found at:
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
can be found at: Crime, Media, Culture Additional services and information for
http://cmc.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:
http://cmc.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Reprints:
http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav Permissions:
http://cmc.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/3/1/110 Citations
by Jean Segata on April 21, 2009 http://cmc.sagepub.com Downloaded from
110 CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 3(1)
Examining the CSI effect through an ANT lens
MICHAEL MOPAS, Carleton University, Canada
CSI: Crime Scene Investigation is part of a new generation of police drama where science
and technology play a central role in catching criminals. Though very few would mistake it
for educational programming, the show appears to be inuencing how its audience comes
to think about forensics. Dubbed the CSI effect, the show is said to be giving viewers the
impression that the use of forensics in criminal investigations is not only common, but is
quick, easy, and without budgetary constraints.
Whether it is the rising number of science-savvy jurors or the growing workload for
crime labs, the current urry of media coverage appears focused on the effects that CSI
is having in various areas of criminal justice. Because of the supposed impact on the
judicial system, a common reaction among legal commentators is to try to separate fact
from ction by pointing out examples where these portrayals of forensics are somehow
inaccurate, grossly oversimplied or highly implausible.
However, for socio-legal researchers interested in studying the representations of forensics
in popular culture, it may be unwise to become overly preoccupied with highlighting
what is not real on CSI and dismissing these depictions as make believe. Rather than
bracketing fact from ction, we need to embrace complexity (see Law and Mol, 2002)
and concentrate on the interaction between what is presented on TV and what we often
describe as the real world of forensics and criminal justice.
In order to do this, it may be useful to draw on the theoretical and methodological
insights from the eld of Science and Technology Studies (S&TS) and the specic branch of
research known as Actor-Network Theory (ANT). Like other branches of S&TS, ANT theor-
ists look at how social and human elements are implicated in the production of scientic
facts and technological artefacts. ANT considers the ways in which ideas and things are
produced through a network of heterogeneous actors. This focus on the processes of
translation allows ANT theorists to consider the existence of hybrids and, as such, avoids
what Latour (1993) describes as the modern project of purication with the ontological
divisions that are created between nature and society or human and non-human.
This Research Note adopts a similar approach to the study of forensic science and
technology in order to illustrate the messiness of hybridity and the many connections
between the TV depictions of forensics and their real world counterparts. Using ANT to
CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 2007 SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore,
www.sagepublications.com, ISSN 1741-6590, Vol 3(1): 110117 [DOI: 10.1177/1741659007074455]
by Jean Segata on April 21, 2009 http://cmc.sagepub.com Downloaded from
MOPAS EXAMINING THE CSI EFFECT 111
further theorize the CSI effect, I demonstrate how various actors are mobilizing the repre-
sentations of forensics found on the show for different purposes. I begin by briey discuss-
ing how forensics and the work of forensic investigators are typically portrayed on CSI.
FORENSICS IN THE TV SPOTLIGHT
A modernized version of the classic whodunit mystery, CSI chronicles the adventures of a
Las Vegas Crime Scene Investigation Unit as its members piece together forensic clues to
solve crime. Invariably, this evidence is only made perceptible through the use of various
forensic tools. Chemical dyes, powders, and alternative light sources are commonly used
to render clothing bres, bodily uids and other forensic traces visible to the investigators.
Presented in this manner, CSI puts forth the idea that forensic expertise is inextricably
linked to the use of technologies that allow investigators to simply see what the evidence
has to show. The evidence is thus mediated and rendered visible through the application of
forensic science, as the work of the investigator seemingly disappears into the backdrop.
On CSI, then, it is through forensics that the evidence can truly speak. Despite the
investigators involvement in speaking on behalf of the evidence by rendering it visible,
the evidence always appears to speak for itself. And, since all suspects have the ability to
lie about their true identities, whereabouts or activities, the evidence is the only witness
that speaks the truth.
Truth is therefore always equated with objects of evidence. More importantly, the
presence of forensic evidence discovered in accordance with the basic principles of
the scientic method allows justice to be served. So, unlike shows such as Law & Order,
justice is no longer connected to the work of police ofcers, lawyers and judges; it is not
a social endeavour that is open to the possibility of human error, but something that can
be done quickly, automatically and accurately within the laboratory.
THE CSI EFFECT
Although it would be easy to dismiss it as just another TV program that romanticizes
the work of those in law enforcement, many critics are claiming that CSI is profoundly
affecting its audience and their perceptions of forensics. This, in turn, is supposedly having
a major effect in both the classroom and the courtroom: the show is being blamed for
everything from the spike in applications to forensic science programs to the acquittal of
a former Hollywood celebrity on trial for the murder of his wife.
1
In the USA, various news outlets have reported a growing anxiety among lawyers about
the effect that CSI is having on criminal cases. A number of defence attorneys claim that
CSI is producing jurors who rely too heavily on scientic ndings and, conversely, are less
sceptical about the potential for human or technical error or fraud (Cole and Dioso, 2005).
Likewise, the show is said to be turning jurors into science sleuths who demand that the
prosecution provide the same type of irrefutable evidence they see on TV (Lovgren, 2004).
by Jean Segata on April 21, 2009 http://cmc.sagepub.com Downloaded from
112 CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 3(1)
Nevertheless, Anthony Zuiker, the shows creator, believes that CSI serves an educational
purpose, as people know science now (Cole and Dioso, 2005). He proudly claims that,
for the rst time in American history, youre not allowed to fool the jury anymore (CBS
News, 2005). Yet, some question what viewers really learn from the show. Cole and
Dioso (2005) cite forensic scientist, Thomas Mauriello, who asserts that approximately
40 per cent of the forensic science on CSI does not exist. Even when the forensic tools
and techniques are real, they contend that the neatly perfect depictions of collecting,
processing and analyzing evidence are not (p. 13).
Arguably, this distinction between what is real and what is not is linked to a broader
ontological demarcation. To claim that the forensics on display are real implies that they
exist in reality. That is, they are tools and techniques that are being used by real-life
forensic investigators. In contrast, representations deemed ctitious do not have this
basis or grounding in the real world of forensics and, instead, are thought to be socially
constructed and the gments of the writers imaginations. Thus, to say that the depiction
of forensics on CSI is real assigns the science and technology an entirely different
ontological status by removing them from the social and political contexts in which they
were produced. In essence, the forensic tool or technique gets black boxed and is no
longer connected to the work of human beings; it has achieved an objective status
and now resides out there in the natural world. On the other hand, to declare that the
representations are unreal suggests that they are entirely human creations and remain
within the realm of the Social.
CSI ACTORS AND FORENSIC NETWORKS
Researchers interested in exploring the inuence of television in the courtroom can now
turn to this new genre of crime drama to consider the ways in which shows like CSI shape
viewers perceptions about the place of science and technology in criminal justice. Indeed,
many scholars are already beginning to ask whether CSI truly inuences jury decision
making and, if so, how or in what way(s)?
While these questions need to be addressed in future research, the potential danger
here is that we may start to engage in a project of purication (Latour, 1987, 1993) and
become overly preoccupied with how the forensic science and technology presented on
CSI depart from reality. Yet, in trying to highlight the things that are not real, we run the
risk of dismissing these depictions of forensics as being purely ctional and, in so doing,
fail to consider how these representations can be mobilized to generate certain effects.
Actor-Network Theory (ANT) is one approach to the study of science and technology
that offers a working solution to this problem. Commonly associated with the work of
Bruno Latour, Michel Callon and John Law, ANT is different from other constructionist
branches of S&TS in its refusal to create binary distinctions between Nature and Society.
The rejection of this dichotomy is rooted in an argument against the modern framework
(see Latour, 1987, 1993). For Latour (1993), the word modern designates two sets of
opposite practices translation and purication that must remain distinct in order to
by Jean Segata on April 21, 2009 http://cmc.sagepub.com Downloaded from
MOPAS EXAMINING THE CSI EFFECT 113
be meaningful. On one hand, translation corresponds with networks and the creation of
entirely new types of beings that are hybrids of Nature and Society, while purication relates
to a modern critical stance that establishes two distinct ontological zones of humans and
non-humans (pp. 10, 12).
2
Latour (1993: 12) claims that, for us to truly be modern, we
must be faithful to what he calls the modern Constitution by keeping separate these
two practices. According to Latour, however, this modern Constitution never adequately
explains the existence of hybrids (or quasi-objects or quasi-subjects) that lie in between
the two poles of Nature and Society. Consequently, the practice of purication central
to the modern project can never be accomplished. Latour (1993) describes this problem:
But where are we to classify the ozone hole story, or global warming or deforestation?
Where are we to put these hybrids? Are they human? Human because they are our work.
Are they natural? Natural because they are not our doing. Are they local or global? Both
(p. 50). Hence, the difculty for social scientists trying to reach agreement about the
character of objects rests in the contradictions and asymmetry that are created when
relying on either Nature or Society as a source of explanation.
3
For Latour (1993: 78), the solution is to view all objects as hybrids. Instead of beginning
at the poles of either Nature or Society, we take as our starting point interaction and
assume that interaction is all that there is (Law, 1992). We can then consider how some
forms of interaction are stabilized and viewed, at a later phase, as scientic or natural
objects (Latour, 1993: 95).
ANT therefore studies science and technology in the making by following scientists
and engineers in the production of scientic and technical objects (see Latour, 1987).
ANT theorists look at how scientic facts and technological artefacts get black-boxed
and become stable entities, processes, or laws, dissociated from the circumstances of
their production. Instead of looking for intrinsic qualities that determine the objectivity
or subjectivity of a claim or the efciency or perfection of a machine, this kind of analysis
considers the later transformations that these objects undergo in the hands of others
(Latour, 1987: 258). As Latour (1987) argues,
By themselves, a statement, a piece of machinery, a process are lost. By looking only
at them and at their internal properties, you cannot decide if they are true or false,
efcient or wasteful, costly or cheap, strong or frail. These characteristics are only
gained through incorporation into other statements, processes and pieces of machinery.
These incorporations are decided by each of us, constantly. (p. 29)
The black-boxing of facts and machines is thus a collective process. When confronted with
a black box, we make a number of decisions as to whether or not we take it up, reject it,
reopen it or drop it through lack of interest (Latour, 1987: 29). These later decisions have
direct consequences: if we buy a machine or believe a fact without question, then we
make the black box more solid. But, if we reject the fact or machine, it is weakened and
its spread is interrupted.
ANT concentrates on this movement and focuses on how ideas and things are pro-
duced through a network of heterogeneous actors. Particular attention is paid to the
organizing and ordering processes whereby social action and material and technical
elements are brought together or translated into a coherent network out of which
by Jean Segata on April 21, 2009 http://cmc.sagepub.com Downloaded from
114 CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 3(1)
certain achievements are attained (Manning, 2002: 651). From this perspective, scientic
knowledge is the end result of heterogeneous engineering in which
Bits and pieces test tubes, reagents, organisms, skilled hands, scanning electron
microscopes, radiation monitors, other scientists, articles, computer terminals, and
the rest that would like to make off on their own are juxtaposed into a patterned
network which overcomes their resistance. (Law, 1992)
So, while ANT is similar to other branches of S&TS that recognize the importance of
networks and social linkages, it looks beyond the connections between human agents.
For ANT theorists, all objects both human and non-human are viewed as actors that
must be treated on the same analytical level.
CSI AS ACTOR
By adopting an ANT framework and staying away from the practice of purication,
we are able to take into account the messiness of hybridity and consider the various
heterogeneous elements that go into the production of forensic science and technology.
Moreover, we can start to take seriously what are often dismissed as purely ctional
portrayals of forensics found on CSI and analyze the ways in which these representations
are taken up by other actors into different networks to achieve certain ends. We can
start by using an ANT approach to re-examine the supposed impact that CSI is having on
criminal trials.
Although many critics would concede that the producers of the show have done a
tremendous job of making CSI as real to life as possible, many overlook the way law-
yers are using the popularity of the show in their own legal strategizing. For instance,
consultants are now being hired by criminal defence attorneys to help select jurors who are
familiar with shows like CSI and therefore assumed to be more likely to spot the absence of
forensic evidence in the prosecutions case (Willing, 2004). At trial, these lawyers are also
beginning to exploit the lack of scientic proof to plant doubt in the jurys mind, even when
eyewitness accounts, confessions or other forms of compelling evidence are presented
(Stockwell, 2005).
While anecdotal in nature, these examples help to illustrate how by using CSI watching
as a point of reference for jury selection and trial preparation, lawyers are transporting
the images of forensics into the courtroom and transforming the CSI effect into a legal
reality. Consequently, the articial distinction and separation between CSI on the screen
versus CSI in the courtroom becomes heavily blurred.
The work of the Crime Lab Project (CLP) provides another example of how CSI is being
taken up to produce particular results. According to their website, the CLP is a
group of crime writers and their friends and readers who are concerned about the gap
between the publics beliefs about the current state of forensic science and the reality
faced by the many under-funded, under-staffed labs and coroners ofcers throughout
by Jean Segata on April 21, 2009 http://cmc.sagepub.com Downloaded from
MOPAS EXAMINING THE CSI EFFECT 115
the country. We see the lack of support given to labs as a matter that has a growing
impact on law enforcement, justice, and national security.
The CLP is working together with forensic science organizations to raise awareness of
the needs of American crime labs.
4
In this case of life imitating art, the CLP is urging the
public to take action on behalf of crime labs, by requesting US Congress to continue to
fund the Coverdell National Forensic Sciences Act, noting that this is the only mechanism
which ensures that much needed money is available to all state and local laboratories, which
analyze over 90% of all forensic cases in the United States.
To gain public support, the CLP has used CSI as a point of comparison for real-life
forensic laboratories. As the top headline on the CLP homepage reads, Its NOT CSI
out there! American Crime Labs Need Your Help. Underneath this banner appears the
following:
The CSI shows are exciting, entertaining dramas and have done a lot to make the public
aware of forensic science, and its potential. Thats terric. But lets talk about reality, and
not television: the truth is, most American crime labs are under-funded, are in aging
facilities, do not have the latest computers and other equipment, and are not fully staffed.
More than one out of four labs do not have basic computers for processing evidence.
CSI is thus presented as being purely ctional. Yet, by drawing these comparisons, the
show has been translated and mobilized by the CLP in an attempt to turn these ctional
accounts into reality. The representation of forensics found on CSI the well-funded
laboratory, the state-of-the-art facilities and cutting-edge equipment is turned into the
ideal that should be realized. From an ANT perspective, one could argue that the CLP
and the ctional portrayals of forensics that it draws upon are as important actors in this
network of forensic science and technology as the scientists who conduct research in this
eld.
The CLP is not the only organization using CSI to gain public support. In 2002, the Nat-
ional District Attorneys Association (NDAA) announced that George Eads, one of the lead
actors on CSI, would lend his voice for a series of public service announcements (PSAs).
5
The
NDAA undertook this campaign to improve the image of prosecutors and the work that
they do. In a press release announcing the launch of these PSAs, the NDAA explains,
Since the time of Perry Mason, frequently and unintentionally, a negative perception
of prosecutors has been presented to the public. Shows like CSI are among the few
that demonstrate how important it is to provide prosecutors with the most accurate in-
formation and evidence possible so that prosecutors can establish guilt or innocence.
By using Eads as its spokesperson, the NDAA is able to align itself with the themes of truth
and justice that are presented on CSI. Prosecutors can now be viewed in the same light as
the idealized forensic investigators.
The PSA makes these comparisons quite clear. Over the image of a prosecutor at his
desk, Eads narrates,
Hes working late again on a real tough case . . . Sifting through police reports, talking
to witnesses, using the values of fairness and his common sense, hell get to the truth.
by Jean Segata on April 21, 2009 http://cmc.sagepub.com Downloaded from
116 CRIME MEDIA CULTURE 3(1)
Hell dig until he nds the facts and work to see that justice is done. Finding the truth.
Protecting all of us from crime. Doing whats right. Thats his job. Hes a prosecutor.
Many of the characteristics of the prosecutor the notions of fairness, common sense,
truth and justice are the same as those associated with investigators on CSI. The NDAA
has essentially mobilized Eads and his afliation with CSI to better its own image. More
importantly, the NDAA has enlisted forensic investigators as partners and forensic science
and technology as aids in the ght against crime, rather than as checks on prosecutorial
indiscretions or wrongdoings.
CONCLUSION
This Research Note has argued that the representations of forensics found on TV programs
like CSI are meaningful and should not be easily dismissed. With so much attention placed
on the CSI effect and what this appears to be doing to the criminal justice process, it has
almost become standard practice for legal commentators to argue that CSI is just a TV
show. This dismissal of CSI as mere ction, however, has meant that little to no research
is being done to consider how various actors use the show for certain purposes.
This Note has attempted to ll some of this void and add to the growing body of
scholarship in this area. Rather than separate fact from ction, I have drawn upon ANT
to help illustrate the dynamic relationship that exists between the images of forensics
found on CSI and what we often think of as the real world of forensics, law and criminal
justice. The changing legal practices of attorneys to take into account the popularity of
the show, and the work of the CLP and the NDAA and their respective campaigns to gain
public support, provide examples of how CSI and the various images, ideas and themes
found on it are being translated and mobilized by different groups to generate particular
effects.
Notes
1 Legal commentators often cite the murder trial of Robert Blake as an example of how the CSI
effect has entered the courtroom. One analyst claims that, despite more than one witness
testifying that he had asked them to kill his wife, the former Baretta star was found not
guilty because the prosecution could not show the jury blood evidence or conclusive gunshot
residue (CBS News, 2005). As jury foreperson, Thomas Nicholson, said after the trial, The
[the prosecution] couldnt put the gun in his hand . . . There was no blood splatter. They had
nothing. Coincidentally, it was reported that at least half of the jurors selected for the Blake
case said they watched shows like CSI on a regular basis (CBS News, 2005).
2 According to Latour (1993), this practice of purication sets out a clear division between a natural
world that has always been there, a society with predictable and stable interests and stakes, and
discourse that is independent of both reference and society (p. 12).
3 In one instance, objects are simply the products of society. At other times, however, these
same objects shape human society, as the social construction of science that produces them
becomes invisible. Thus, a scientic fact is not the simple representation of a natural reality
by Jean Segata on April 21, 2009 http://cmc.sagepub.com Downloaded from
MOPAS EXAMINING THE CSI EFFECT 117
made visible through empirical observation. But nor is it simply socially constructed and the end
product of agreement amongst scientists (Latour, 1987). The same problem facing objects exists
for society. On one hand, society is so powerful that it can create what is nothing more than an
arbitrary and shapeless matter (Latour, 1993: 53). Yet, in other cases, it is powerless and shaped
by objective forces that completely determine its action. Hence, science and technology cannot
determine the shape of society while, at the same time, being determined by society. Put simply,
social determinism cannot be used as an explanation in conjunction with one of scientic or
technological determinism.
4 The list of CLP supporters includes the writers and producers from Court TVs Forensic Files and
Stephen J. Cannell, writer and producer of crime shows like Hunter.
5 Coincidentally, George Eadss father is Arthur C. Eads, the prosecutor and district attorney in Bell
County for over three decades and a past president of the NDAA.
References
CBS News (2005) The CSI Effect, 21 March. Available at:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/21/earlyshow/main681949.shtml
Cole, S. and R. Dioso (2005) Law and the Lab, Wall Street Journal, 13 May.
Latour, B. (1987) Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. (1993) We Have Never Been Modern. Brighton: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Law, J. (1992) Notes on the Theory of the Actor-Network: Ordering, Strategy and Heterogeneity,
Systems Practice 5: 379 93.
Law, J. and A. Mol (eds) (2002) Complexities: Social Studies of Knowledge Practices. Durham, NC:
Duke University Press.
Lovgren, S. (2004) CSI Effect Is Mixed Blessing for Real Crime Labs, National Geographic News,
23 September.
Manning, N. (2002) Actor Networks, Policy Networks and Personality Disorder, Sociology of
Health & Illness 24(5): 644 66.
Stockwell, J. (2005) Jurors Want CSI-quality Forensic Evidence, Washington Post, 29 May.
Willing, R. (2004) CSI Effect Has Juries Wanting More Evidence, USA Today, 5 August.
MICHAEL MOPAS, Dapartment of Sociology and Anthropology, Carleton University,
Canada. Email: michael_mopas@carleton.ca
by Jean Segata on April 21, 2009 http://cmc.sagepub.com Downloaded from