CSI Effect

CSI Effect & Changes in Public Perception In the 21st century, from the average person to the media expert or professional, people are aware of the affects media has on culture. In the late 20th century, it was very popular for experts to blame certain kinds of music and certain kinds of film and television programming for the increasing acts of violence perpetuated by youth in America and around the world. Media Studies is a respected and reputed academic discipline.

Media Studies is the science by which scholars and artists prove and demonstrate the variety of ways in which media affects perception. Film, television, and media in general affect the consuming public in various ways. Film and television can open audiences to new perspectives or inspire their imaginations. Film and television also fully retain the power to affect consuming audiences and other communities in a negative or unintentionally harmful ways.

The television program "CSI" and thus the entire "CSI" franchise (Las Vegas, Miami, & New York City) have affected the law enforcement community in a confusing and mostly adverse way. The affect/effect that "CSI" has had on law enforcement and on audiences in general has been dubbed "The CSI Effect." This paper will discuss the CSI Effect and propose the manners in which the efficacy of the law enforcement community has changed because of it.

"Crime Scene Investigation" (CSI) has been a highly successful and popular show for over a decade. Podlas writes: "CSI, which debuted in October 2000, is a top-rated drama on network television. Closing the 2004-05 season as the second highest watched program, it has an average audience of 26.4 million viewers.

As further testament to its popularity, the program has spawned a number of spin-offs, and can now be seen on cable and in syndication." (Podlas, "Teaching to Avoid the 'CSI Effect' -- Keeping the Science in Forensic Science," Page 432) Audiences enjoy the program for several reasons. The theme song for each of the CSI shows/spinoffs is a famous rock anthem by the classic rock band, The Who. The cinematography and editing are modern, inventive, and vibrant.

The production staff on this show work hard to make the world of the CSI's interesting and "rockin'." The reader may question how this affect could be negative. The show makes science, investigation, and the legal system thrilling and adventurous. It is not often, especially in the United States of America, for one of the most watched programs on television to be centered on science, particularly forensic science.

The average American audience does not have the attention span, the interest or scientific inclination, or mental capacity to understand, let alone enjoy a program primarily about science. Somehow, the talented production staff of "CSI" along with the financial backing and resources of the television station Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS), make it work. They make it work very well for a long time. Yet the affects this show has on public perception are not all positive; in fact, some of the affects are detrimental.

Podlas describes the multilayered "CSI Effect" as follows: "The CSI Effect" has been defined in three different ways. The best-known definition states that CSI creates unreasonable expectations on the part of jurors, making it more difficult for prosecutors to obtain convictions. The second definition, which runs contrary to the first, refers to the way that CSI raises the stature of scientific evidence to virtual infallibility, thus making scientific evidence impenetrable. The final definition focuses on CSI's increasing lay interest in forensics and science.

Thus, viewers who serve as jurors will be more interested in and able to follow scientific evidence. They may even become interested in academic training and careers in the forensics field." (Podlas, "Teaching to Avoid the 'CSI Effect' -- Keeping the Science in Forensic Science," Page 433) Thus, the effect has several ramifications. Juries have unrealistic expectations of the legal process.

They may be overzealous in their interest in forensic science and coupled with the desire for a "CSI moment," this could prove to hinder law enforcement and officers of the law in performing their duties effectively. Imagine a hypochondriac who is obsessed with medical television shows and has access to several medical library/databases. Then imagine this person going to the doctor's office for a check-up.

How have this person's expectations been skewed? This person's doctor will have quite a bit of interference to go through when trying to treat this person. It is similar to audience members who end up as jurors who are avid fans of "CSI." "CSI" does not portray an accurate depiction of the forensic lab reality. Many labs are understaffed. There are many kinds of evidence that on the show, immediately secure a conviction, yet in real life, are open to multiple interpretations.

(Roane, "The CSI Effect -- On TV it's all slam-dunk evidence and quick convictions. Now juries expect the same thing -- and that's a big problem," usnews.com) DNA evidence are not the type of evidence that has the first priority in reality because of the cost and time it takes to process it.

This is not the case for "CSI." There are labs across the country, particularly at the federal level, such as those of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), that "have come under attack for lax standards and generating bogus evidence. One problem is that crime labs don't have to be accredited." (Roane, "The CSI Effect -- On TV it's all slam-dunk evidence and quick convictions.

Now juries expect the same thing -- and that's a big problem," usnews.com) Not only are the expectations of the forensic scientists/investigators skewed, the quality of and the priorities of the labs are distorted. In bogus labs, those people working at the.