The media have a significant influence on the general portrayal of crime in society. The images that permeate popular consciousness of crime are mainly generated by, and reflected in, the electronic and print media. In this way the media have a tremendous impact in terms of how crime is generally defined in society.

According to the media, in both fictional and factual types of programs and reportage, crime tends to be defined primarily as ‘street crime’. Such crime is thus associated with personal terror and fear, and violence is seen as central. Crime is sensationalised, with important implications for the fear of crime among certain sections of the population. This fear is heightened by the way in which crime is seen to be random in nature, with anyone and everyone a possible target for victimisation.

With regard to crime control, the usual implication is that, once a crime has been brought to the attention of the authorities, investigation will generally lead to detection and capture of the offender. This is a far cry from the reality of much police work, and in specific cases of serious street crime a significant proportion of cases do not get to the prosecution stage.

In fictional accounts of crime fighting, the police are usually endowed with special qualities (such as, big guns and martial arts abilities), and violence is central and always justified because of the nature of the ‘criminals’ at hand. The nature of actual policing is once again misconstrued, and the mundane aspects—interviewing, looking over file material, research, traffic regulation and so on—are generally absent.

Another facet of fictional accounts is that the police are not accountable to anyone; they can even step outside the bounds of the law, because we all know they are on ‘our’ side. Thus, the police are always honest and incorruptible, even though evidence in real life show that corruption of the police is a constant challenge. Notable examples include the Fitzgerald inquiry into police in Queensland (Fitzgerald 1989), and the Wood (1997) inquiry in New South Wales, which revealed widespread and systematic corruption.

It is important, therefore, to separate the images and realities of crime in society. The media shape our perceptions of crime, and in the process they define crime in particular ways. One aspect of this process is that the media often portray crime in terms of distinct crime waves. This refers to the way in which increased reporting of particular types of crime (usually street crimes, such as assault, rape, drug offences or homicide) increases the public awareness of this crime. Significantly, there need not have been an actual increase in the crime for a crime wave to occur. The increase exists only in public perception.

Nevertheless, ‘crime waves’ can and do have real consequences regardless of factual basis. For example, extensive media coverage of child abuse may lead to changes in the law, such as the introduction of mandatory reporting of suspected incidents. Or the fear generated by press coverage of assaults on elderly people may lead to calls for more police, tougher sentences and greater police power.

Given the close relationship between the police and the media, major questions can be asked as to who benefits from the selective reporting of specific crimes, especially around government budget time.