TV images of criminal defendants being led into court create significant and unconscious bias, according to a study published last week by Elon University Professor Brooke Barnett.
The new study shows that television news portrayals of accused criminal defendants in prison clothes and being restrained by law officers can prejudice the general public more than reporting a person’s prior criminal record.
Barnett, assistant professor of communications, found that people who saw accused criminals in a biased visual manner, such as being dressed in an orange jump suit and wearing handcuffs, evaluated the accused as more dangerous, threatening and guilty than others who saw defendants in plain street clothes.
Barnett’s study found that even brief video appearances of the accused may cause bias. In the study, the video clips of defendants lasted between 8 and 14 seconds. The bias was retained for two weeks without any more information or images of the accused, and the impression of a defendant viewed in a biased manner remained in long-term memory even when subjects could not remember anything else about the defendant or crime.
Biased visual portrayals are more damaging to a defendant than the disclosure of a prior record, Barnett found. Her study confirms earlier research that suggests reporting of a prior record makes the defendant seem more guilty and threatening than when no record is reported. However, Barnett’s study reveals a more powerful visual bias that causes higher ratings of guilt and threat than reporting a prior record.
The study concludes that:
- 1. Common portrayals of the accused in television news cause bias
- 2. The bias comes from brief exposure to the images
- 3. The bias is retained in long-term memory
- 4. The people who are biased are unaware that they are.
“This bias seems to occur unconsciously from brief exposure before the trial takes place and to remain in long-term memory,” Barnett said. “This means the steps that a judge might take to ensure a fair trial–sequestering a jury or a continuance to allow time to pass between the crime and the trial–don’t work because the bias has already been ingrained in people because of media images. Sequestration wouldn’t help either, because the visual portrayals are seen in early crime coverage before a person is called to jury duty. Also, because the bias appears to be unconscious, potential jurors may easily say they have not been biased by media coverage because they do not realize it,” she said.
Barnett suggests policy changes that might curb the potential for bias in the media and the courtroom. For example, jails could offer photo opportunities where the defendant could be photographed wearing street clothes in a nondescript room. Further, allowing cameras in the courtroom could offer journalists more suitable images of the accused unrestrained and wearing street clothes.
“The bench, bar and press have been hung up on the reporting of a prior record, which does create bias, but this is something that biases even more and nobody is paying attention to it,” Barnett said.
-30-