Fiction versus Reality Many people rely a great deal on their entertainment to educate them about real life.

Even now with having both reality and fictional criminal justice shows on television many times people learn through the experiences of fictional characters. This unfortunately results in people having incorrect beliefs of the criminal justice system process and the people involved. Legal dramas have unrealistic representations of the daily work and overall process of the criminal justice system. There is a lot on television that could not happen in a real life courtroom. Some examples are; the length of time it takes to go to trial, the shows make it seem as it only takes short time where in real life it can take months or longer. People lash out at the defendant or at the attorney when they are testifying. If this were to happen in real life they would have been charged with contempt of court and brought to jail. In the shows there are witnesses or victims that refuse to testify or even show up for court, in reality they would have been subpoenaed to court and if they failed to be there or to testify that would cause the witness or victim to be charged with failure to appear, and though the trial may be postponed it could also be ruled as a mistrial. My last example is most real life trials will not have a sudden reveal of evidence or a sudden outburst that instantly reveals the defendant as not guilty. Both attorneys know every detail of the opposing partys argument. Most people are familiar with the television show Law and Order. This show portrays all of misconceptions listed above. The roles of some participants are often misrepresented. I have seen examples where they portray the prosecution and defense of good versus evil. Most instances the prosecutor is the good, caring, fair, honorable, all around good person, and the defense is the evil that will cheat the system take advantage of the law to find loopholes or any defense to exonerate the defendant. Though the good versus evil roles could also be switched around where the prosecution is the evil for prosecuting an innocent person. Both sides have

pressure on them that affect them professionally and personally. The side they are representing should not affect the kind of person they are assumed for; they are just doing their job. Ethical codes require them to try and pursue the case for the benefit of their client to the extent that the law allows. There are also roles in television that are rarely seen or do not show the importance in the court room the court administrator and staff are one example. These roles are very important as they provide administrative assistance to the judge, interact with the public, document dockets, and create reports. These roles are vital to a court room as they operate and run much of the court procedures and processes.

Each of these substantive areas represents important topics to analyze and consider separately and in combination, but to determine the accuracy of the fictional courtroom process as compared to that of one in reality. First a person should focus on entertainment programs, we look to track and document related programs over time in which the main themes and protagonists are concerned with various dimensions of crime and law enforcement (e.g., police, lawyers, and judges). Television programs concerned with crime and the criminal justice system, in order to obtain a perspective on portrayals of criminal justice and law enforcement, and transmission of related information, over time in the entertainment medium. An overall strategy that covers the period from the early 1950s to the present would allow a consideration of the development of the television industry along with changes in society and social attitudes in general. Analysis of the programs can look to a number of competing theoretical approaches (behavioral, functional, critical, and institutional), considering both explicit and implicit portrayals and messages regarding the various aspects of the television program in relation to depictions of the system of criminal justice in action. This would mean, in particular, attention to

and gathering descriptive information on the story lines and on the behavior, appearance, and relationships of the active characters, and others. The programs might also be assessed in light of target audiences. For example, who are the "good guys" and who are the "bad guys"; what are their profiles? To what degree do they reflect stereotypical portrayals (or not)? Analyses can provide a social cultural and political image of the "players" in the criminal justice system in relation to society. More to the point, they can also provide us with a comparative conception of the legal system to use as a foundation in examining public opinions and attitudes, which brings us to the next research objective.

Second, we look to the public. Extensive national survey research on knowledge of the legal system and an understanding of how it works, along with questions on general television viewing habits and on the specific related television programs, is clearly needed in this area. Moreover, a comprehensive survey would cover a variety of demographic factors and other social, cultural, and political elements (e.g., age, gender, race, ethnicity, education, occupation, family, place of residence, religion, political affiliation, region, etc.). Such survey data would allow us to determine general population profiles and perspectives, and to make inferences about those profiles and perspectives relative to their television viewing habits, and ultimately in relation to perceptions and knowledge of criminal justice and law enforcement in the United States.

The third strategy builds upon the cumulative findings of the other two, and provides a blanket, sweeping approach to the general problem. It is a combined comparative examination, presenting an integrative relational model that links media portrayals of the criminal justice system to general public perceptions. This kind of model ties the specific television portrayals and messages delineated in the first strategy to the population perceptions and profiles found in

the second. To more fully understand the relationship between criminal justice and society, we must ask a variety of questions concerning who learns what from where or from whom, under what conditions, and with what effects. Thus, we must look to compare that which is provided through the media with that which the public perceives in their consumption of the media along several dimensions, including knowledge of criminal legal procedures, and images of police and of the courts, in relation to crime and the role of the legal system in general.

Supplying clues to images of the criminal justice system and the impact of television viewing on public perception and knowledge, the combined aspects of these strategies provide for an investigation of the television program as a cultural product, both as a socializing, educating force and as a social reflection. The overall approach is aimed at delineation of and insight into the socialization of the public to the system of criminal justice and its related implications.

CONCLUSION

The current situation in the United States is one of a social structure undergoing relatively rapid change in a number of areas in which knowledge of the criminal justice system is a significant issue. Research has shown a strong relationship between heavy television viewing and the cultivation of television-biased perceptions of reality (Altheide 1985; Gerbner and Gross 1976a; Gerbner 1993). There is a large body of interesting and significant research addressing the issue of violence on television and its effects on the viewing population. Most of the work in this area concentrates on the question of whether or not portrayals of crime and violence affect viewers in terms of engendering, rather than merely reflecting, similar attitudes and behaviors. What I suggest here is a different issue. I propose that we use television programs to determine public

images of the criminal justice system itself and to determine how those images might or might not affect public learning, perceptions, and basic knowledge of the system and its operation. Moreover, we can compare those images and perceptions with "reality" in order to contribute to our understanding of the law and society relationship.

This does not necessarily mean, at this point, a perfect mapping of television portrayals onto public perceptions, or that the two are perfectly coupled, depending on what those portrayals are in relation to other sources of information. However, we might expect to find a relative match and a growing amount of influence on public knowledge. Ever increasing levels of television viewing by the "postmodern" individual may lead to more television-defined public perceptions of criminal justice and law enforcement. While the accuracy of these perceptions is another issue, it is also an especially important one since an increasing number of social scientists argues that the legal system may function best when citizens are not well informed about or interested in its operation (Sarat 1975). In addition to being separately interesting and suggestive, the substantive areas and research strategies proposed here, especially in terms of their interactive examination, can lead to a somewhat different and compelling investigation of the relationship between law and society, with important theoretical and empirical implications for related cultural, political, and criminal justice studies in general.

References

Altheide, D.L. (1985). Media power. Beverly Hills: Sage.

Gerbner, G., & L. Gross. "Living with television: The violence profile." "Support for the Legal System."

Surette, R. (1992). Media, crime, and criminal justice: Images and realities. Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole.