4 ms·

Why are names and pictures published before one even know if the person is guilty? And even if found guilty, why does the media use so much personal information

Why are names and pictures published before one even know if the person is guilty? And even if found guilty, why does the media use so much personal information? In my country it's always anonymous in the media, unless it's a person the media deems as the public having an interest in knowing about (political figure or so).

Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
It's a dirty little, not so secret, shameful pastime of America. For the same reason that we love Dr. Phil, live pd, or judge Judy we love feeling better than stupid, ignorant, uneducated, abused, neglected, diseased, impoverished, drug addicted, poor people the narratives crafted to fit the mugshots and clips we see in the news or online. I highly recommend listening to the latest two parter from Behind the Bastards, about Dr. Phil. Part 1 https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-one-dr-phil-is-even-82410850/ https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236... Part 2 https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-two-dr-phil-is-even-82492562/ https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236... The whole darn podcast is great too. I'm not associated, or donating, nor do I even listen to the ads, I'm just a satisfied listener.
moshmosh 6y ago
I think the idea is that making charges & arrests public keeps the system transparent, and makes it harder for the government to disappear people or otherwise do crazy despotic stuff. In practice I'm not convinced it was net-beneficial before the Internet, and I'm almost certain it's not in an Internet-equipped world.
- _jal 6y ago
  This is the reason. The US justice system is meant to operate in the open, to serve the interests of the public who finances it. Same reason it is generally very difficult to litigate under seal. Observations about the difference between theory and practice omitted.
  - thatcat 5y ago
    The justice system forbids individuals recording the judge but records and could publish every interaction you have with them. That is not operating in a system of openness and transparency.
  - herbst 5y ago
    I doubt the system really is much more transparent than more usual systems that do not blame every potential 'criminal' publicly. Or in another world, if that openness does anything good how comes the US has one of the biggest issues with police violence from all the developed world?
- BitwiseFool 5y ago
  I also think that in the pre-internet world the amount of effort to obtain such public information acted as an effective filter. You actively had to go looking for this information and that involved in-person visits to government buildings and filing paperwork. That gave average people a reasonable degree of cover.
- watwut 5y ago
  That don't explain mug shots.
- seoaeu 5y ago
  I think that being public about the "who is currently being imprisoned by the government?" question is still a net positive. No so sure about the rest

Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago

It's a dirty little, not so secret, shameful pastime of America. For the same reason that we love Dr. Phil, live pd, or judge Judy we love feeling better than stupid, ignorant, uneducated, abused, neglected, diseased, impoverished, drug addicted, poor people the narratives crafted to fit the mugshots and clips we see in the news or online. I highly recommend listening to the latest two parter from Behind the Bastards, about Dr. Phil. Part 1 https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-one-dr-phil-is-even-82410850/ https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236... Part 2 https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-two-dr-phil-is-even-82492562/ https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236... The whole darn podcast is great too. I'm not associated, or donating, nor do I even listen to the ads, I'm just a satisfied listener.

moshmosh 6y ago

I think the idea is that making charges & arrests public keeps the system transparent, and makes it harder for the government to disappear people or otherwise do crazy despotic stuff. In practice I'm not convinced it was net-beneficial before the Internet, and I'm almost certain it's not in an Internet-equipped world.

_jal 6y ago
This is the reason. The US justice system is meant to operate in the open, to serve the interests of the public who finances it. Same reason it is generally very difficult to litigate under seal. Observations about the difference between theory and practice omitted.
- thatcat 5y ago
  The justice system forbids individuals recording the judge but records and could publish every interaction you have with them. That is not operating in a system of openness and transparency.
- herbst 5y ago
  I doubt the system really is much more transparent than more usual systems that do not blame every potential 'criminal' publicly. Or in another world, if that openness does anything good how comes the US has one of the biggest issues with police violence from all the developed world?
BitwiseFool 5y ago
I also think that in the pre-internet world the amount of effort to obtain such public information acted as an effective filter. You actively had to go looking for this information and that involved in-person visits to government buildings and filing paperwork. That gave average people a reasonable degree of cover.
watwut 5y ago
That don't explain mug shots.
seoaeu 5y ago
I think that being public about the "who is currently being imprisoned by the government?" question is still a net positive. No so sure about the rest