Mediaboss Marketing

The effort proved fruitless, but 20 years later, we're seeing the impact of having stretched the word "reality" to accommodate this popular genre, and being reminded that with television, seeing is often believing, even if what's being presented isn't precisely true.

Another reminder came this week, as news anchors such as CNN's Don Lemon and MSNBC's Brian Williams observed Monday that the president's return to the White House appeared choreographed for the cameras -- as Williams said, reflecting the "first-ever president who came from a 14-season reality-show hosting career."

Producer Mark Burnett, the mastermind behind "Survivor" and "The Apprentice," artfully built the latter around then-citizen Donald Trump, casting him as the ultimate example of jet-setting corporate success. It was a persona Trump had cultivated throughout his adult life, but one uniquely seared into the public consciousness through exposure to millions each week on NBC. (Jeff Zucker, who oversees CNN as WarnerMedia Chairman of News and Sports, was President of NBC Entertainment when the show premiered.)

As a viewer, the artifice that went into producing reality TV always bothered me. On "The Apprentice," for example, I remember Trump asking to get Joan Rivers on the phone, followed by a cut to Rivers answering and chatting with him.

How convenient that the comic somehow had a camera crew with her at the very moment when Trump decided to call.

Such criticisms, though, were generally dismissed, and critics who bothered to question those practices could easily be branded as scolds and worrywarts. Everyone knew this was just entertainment, the refrain went, and as the boilerplate disclaimers stated, the editing didn't affect the outcome.

Still, the assumption that the public was wise to the tricks of the trade always sounded unduly optimistic. That point has been driven home over the years by media coverage of "reality TV" (just putting it in quotes was another imperfect solution), chronicling the latest developments on major hits like breaking news when a closer analogy would be plot twists on a scripted soap opera.

In the early days of "reality TV," there were also a number of scandals, where producers were caught staging or manipulating situations in a questionable way.

So it went, but people grew accustomed to the genre, and nothing seemed to shake its appeal. In September, Fox's "The Masked Singer" returned, creating the appearance of a studio audience by digitally inserting crowd shots -- a case of unreality if there ever was one.

A Fox spokeswoman noted that the network acknowledged the practice in advance interviews, and included an on-air disclaimer saying that "Due to health restrictions, visuals of audience featured in this episode included virtual shots as well as shots from past seasons." Even so, many viewers expressed confusion on social media about whether the show had ignored Covid-19 protocols.

Is that a problem? Broadly speaking, perhaps not. Yet whatever the facts are about Donald Trump's history as a businessman, it seems undeniable that many people knew him as the Donald Trump they saw on "The Apprentice."

Trump has always been a showman, even before becoming a TV star or politician, and as the latest flurry of events illustrated, his presidency has exhibited an acute consciousness of how things look on TV. Yet to the extent "reality TV" has blurred the line between perception and reality, Burnett and the modern version of the genre he helped pioneer served, in a sense, as the president's too-rarely-credited running mates.

See the rest here:
'Reality TV' helped shape Donald Trump's image as it blurred the lines of reality - CNN

Mike Conner Jr., Iowa View contributor Published 10:16 a.m. CT Oct. 6, 2020

Jake Porter, Libertarian candidate for governor, meets with the Register's editorial board. Des Moines Register

The mainstream media may not publicize it often, but America is fed up.

Of course, this comes as no surprise to me. Ive been hearing it from voters from all sides for years. Iowa and Americas voter registration numbers show it with an increase in independent and third party voters over the past fouryears. This despite the best efforts from both Democrats and Republicans to strengthen their political tribes through legislation and other bullying means.

The frustration that America is feeling was reinforced following the debacle that was the first presidential debate this past Tuesday. For two hours, Donald Trump and Joe Biden displayed their amazing ability to dodge questions or issues that affect citizens, while turning the debate into no more than an infantile Twitter argument.

This is what American politics has devolved into 167 years of two parties being in power has culminated in a hyper-partisan tug of war for power over the people.

All over social media, Americans expressed their embarrassment for the pathetic exhibition. Even the mainstream media found it next to impossible to spin this in a way to make it palatable.

Libertarian Party candidate for President, Jo Jorgensen, addresses the crowd during a campaign stop in Westfield, Ind., at Grand Park Sunday, Sept. 27, 2020. A few hundred people attended her only scheduled campaign stop in Indiana.(Photo: Doug McSchooler/for IndyStar)

Google search trends for Jo Jorgensen, Libertarian Candidate, and Third Party shot through the roof after the debate. Jo Jorgensens campaign website received so much traffic that it temporarily crashed. Third party social media pages and groups were flooded with new likes and follows. The appetite for another option is definitely there.

Personally, I spoke with multiple friends who were disheartened by the display. They are sick and tired of the status quo, but still couldnt yet justify wasting their vote on a third party candidate.

To me, I see it the other way around why waste your vote on the status quo?

A vote for Jo Jorgensen can do so much more than a vote for either Biden or Trump. If she is able to get 2% in Iowa, that means Libertarians are considered a major party in Iowa, which immediately gives Iowa LP candidates credibility. If she can collect 5% of the vote, that means the 2024 LP candidate would qualify for public matching funds. That would be a game-changer and instantly makethe Libertarian Party a contender.

You can vote for the status quo and continue to get the sideshow that you saw this past Tuesday, or your vote can actually have an impact on the political direction of the country and get us one step closer to a legitimate third option.

So I agree. As proven by the appalling debate, this election is far too important to waste your vote on Trump or Biden next month.

Mike Conner Jr.(Photo: Special to the Register)

Mike Conner Jr. is the state chair of the Libertarian Party of Iowa.

Read or Share this story: https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/iowa-view/2020/10/06/iowa-libertarian-party-chair-change-america-political-direction/3628684001/

See the article here:
Election politics have devolved. The Libertarian Party has something different to offer. - Des Moines Register

New Zealands election is coming down to a simple contest between the Labour-Green bloc on the left and the National-ACT bloc on the right. Although the right is behind in the polls, if it were to gain the majority, ACT Party leader David Seymour could become deputy prime minister.

Either way, ACT is newly assertive. Although Seymour owes his Epsom seat to Nationals grace and favour, he seems less inclined nowadays to be their political lapdog. He wants people to support ACT on its own terms.

Remarkably, the party has risen in opinion polls from below 1% to recently as high as 8%. That would give ACT up to ten seats in parliament. Would Seymour also negotiate to bring one or more first-time MPs into cabinet alongside him?

In the past two elections, ACT held on with only one electorate seat, thanks to the National Party deal: Epsoms National supporters agree to vote for the ACT candidate as their local representative but give their party vote to National.

This arrangement goes back to 2005. It paid a handsome dividend in 2008 when ACT won Epsom and achieved 3.65% in the party vote. This delivered the party a proportional share of five seats, despite being below the 5% party-vote threshold.

With ACTs support on the right, and two other parties in the centre, John Key formed a National-led government that lasted three terms. Then ACTs party vote fell below 1% in 2014 and 2017, with only the Epsom seat keeping it in parliament.

In 2020, however, after a term in opposition and no longer overshadowed by National, ACT is flourishing again.

Seymour has held his own, speaking up for freedom of speech and opposing the banning of semi-automatic guns following the mosque shootings in March 2019. He introduced a members bill to permit euthanasia that is likely to come into force after a decisive referendum to be held alongside the general election.

However, National leader Judith Collins has bluntly stated she sees ACTs job as being to win Epsom and to help eliminate the populist New Zealand First Party, which on recent polling is likely to be ousted from parliament on October 17.

Read more: The missing question from New Zealand's cannabis debate: what about personal freedom and individual rights?

ACTs rise in the polls does come partly from those conservative erstwhile New Zealand First voters who are disillusioned with Winston Peters for forming a coalition government with Labour.

But Collins must be worried that some centre-right voters have given up on National winning and are exercising their freedom of choice by defecting to ACT and she wants them back.

The Association of Consumers and Taxpayers was founded in 1993 by former National cabinet minister Derek Quigley and Sir Roger Douglas, formerly minister of finance in David Langes Labour government and engineer of the economic deregulation that became known as Rogernomics.

The party stands for less government, more private enterprise and freedom of choice. It is therefore a child of neoliberalism indeed, its only legitimate child.

Read more: Assisted dying referendum: people at the end of their lives say it offers a 'good death'

For example, Seymours referendum bill to allow assisted dying (euthanasia) was officially named the End of Life Choice Bill, asserting its ideological origins with the word choice. He is proposing much more radical cuts to public spending and taxation than his only possible coalition partner, National.

We gained an insight into how ACT supporters think from the online reader-initiated Stuff/Massey opinion poll in July. Compared with the other parties in parliament, ACT supporters stand out as:

most likely to rate the New Zealand governments overall response to COVID-19 as unsuccessful: 29.5% compared with 9.9% for the whole sample

most strongly in favour of abolishing the Mori electoral roll: 68.2% compared with 36.6% overall

more likely to prefer that the government take a cautious and sceptical approach on climate change: 72.5% compared with 36.4% overall

more in favour of the country getting back to business as usual rather than reforming the economic system itself during the post-pandemic rebuild: 75% compared with 31% overall.

ACT supporters values are largely diametrically opposed to those upheld by Green supporters, as might be expected of a libertarian party that stands for individualism and deregulation.

In the past, though, the party has resorted to populist law-and-order and anti-welfare policies. In 2011 it deployed the one law for all slogan to attack policies addressing indigenous rights.

As ACT leader since 2014, Seymour has steered the party back towards free-market liberalism. But there is still an element of right-wing populist thinking among ACTs supporters.

Sizeable minorities of them agree with conspiracy theories about COVID-19 (25%) and hope Donald Trump is re-elected in November (32%) more than among National supporters who stood at about 20% on both points.

Read more: NZ election 2020: survey shows voters are divided on climate policy and urgency of action

If current polling holds true, Seymour will bring with him into parliament a caucus of freedom-loving individuals, none of whom has any previous representative experience.

Among them is a firearms enthusiast, a former police officer and a farmer. At number seven on the list is a self-employed mother of four who the party claims is better than ten ivory tower experts when it comes to beating poverty.

So far, ACTs best election result was in 2002 when it gained 7.14% of the party vote and nine seats in the 120-seat House of Representatives. If it repeats that in 2020, Seymour will go from being a lone voice for his party to the leader of a small but inexperienced caucus.

Managing that team of individualistic newbies may well be the first test of his libertarian instincts.

See the rest here:
The rise of ACT in 2020 highlights tensions between the party's libertarian and populist traditions - The Conversation AU

Eight candidates incumbents Bob Doroshewitz and Chuck Curmi;and newcomers Audrey Monaghan, Nabeleh Ghareeb, John Stewart, Christal Corliss, Marisa Downs and Joseph LeBlanc arevying for four (four-year term) positions on the Plymouth Township board of trustees in the Nov. 3 general election.

Doroshewitz, a 58-year-old Republican, is an information technologyexecutive and attorney. He has earned bachelor's and master's degrees from Michigan State University and a juris doctor degree from Wayne State University Law School.

Curmi, a 65-year-old Republican, is an automotive engineering program manager. He earned a bachelor of science degree in mechanical engineering from Michigan Technological University and a master's degree from the University of Detroit Mercy.

Ghareeb, a 65-year-old Democrat, is a business consultant and project manager for a non-profit organization. He earned a bachelor's degree in business administration from Wayne State University and a master's degree in education leadership from the University of Toledo.

Stewart, a 71-year-old Republican, has been a self-employed attorney for 36 years. He earned a bachelor of science degree from Eastern Michigan University, a master's degree in public administration from Wayne State University, and a juris doctorate from Michigan State University.

Corliss, a 62-year-old Democrat, is an owner/artist at Grafham Studio Creations. She has earned degrees in office management and computer sciences, and is a certified professional information technology project manager.

Downs, a 44-year-old Democrat, is a teacher with a bachelor of science degree from Eastern Michigan University and an associate's degree from Schoolcraft College. She is a graduate of the Plymouth-Canton Community Schools.

LeBlanc, a 57-year-old member of the Libertarian Party, is a local business owner with IBM technical certifications.

Following are the candidates' responses to a questionnaire distributed by Hometown Life:

Corliss(Photo: Submitted)

Corliss:I am running to be a representative of the diversity of citizens who live here. A resident of this community for the past 25 years, I want to seeall of our citizens receive equal quality support for their needs and to assure our beautiful green Township remains an example of safe, healthy, and green places to live. As a business owner within our community, I feel a kinship with small, minority, and women-owned businesses and want to work with you to see that everyones concerns are heard.

Curmi:To improve life in Plymouth Township by continuing my strong record as a leader driving efficient and transparent government with integrity and knowledge. I love Plymouth, my birth place, and I want to ensure it continues to be the wonderful place it has always been.

Doroshewitz:I am asking you for another term, as I would like to continue to work to better this awesome community. I love public service and hope you have been happy with my work, through the good times and the bad. I have been called a voice of reason and fiercely independent. I bring balance as I do not vote with a block, but I listen to all sides before I decide how I will vote.

Downs(Photo: Submitted)

Downs:Im running because I love this community I have lived in nearly my entire life. I know a strong and connected community benefits every resident, but this is especially true for the young and the old, and they are the most vulnerable. I care about them. Growing up here and working all over town, Ive met so many wonderful people, each who have touched my life and taught me something. I want to give back.

Ghareeb:I am running for Plymouth Township Trustee because I believe that any governing body of a Township needs to represent the community it serves. Our community is remarkably diverse, and it is important that the Board of Trustees closely reflects that diversity of experience, perspective and thoughts. In addition to my consulting business, I have held several leadership roles in the public and non-profit sectors with accomplishments in many aspects of business.

LeBlanc:Voters deserve a choice that is not part of the two party system. The Libertarian platform is in a nutshell, be kind to your neighbor, don't hurt him/her, and the same back to you. Don't spend money you don't have. Taxpayers are not an endless source of more money. Cast a vote for the Independent, Libertarian. Filling the board with all R's and D's is not the best path.

Monaghan(Photo: Submitted)

Monaghan:My entire life has been devoted to service and come from a family with strong political beliefs. This election cycle provides a unique opportunity for greater diversity on the board. I am committed to bringing a voice for transparency, growth and fiscal responsibility.

Stewart:I am running for Plymouth Township Trustee to be a liason for Services to our Community: Police, Fire, and Trash. I want to enhance the quality of life, and, our property values for all residents.

Stewart(Photo: Submitted)

Stewart:I am the best candidate for Trustee because of my experience working as a former Trustee and a State Legislator for 3 terms. I am deeply involved in many areas of our community.

Monaghan:Looking at the credentialsof each of this year's candidates, each brings a unique and diverse set of skills. I will be happy to serve with any one of them. My experience in the fields of law, medicine, private business, andcorporate governance are skills that I expect will make me an excellent addition to the board. My independent nature coupled with a natural curiosity makes me well suited for this position.

LeBlanc:I have been self employed since 1987, I employ local people at my companies. I know how to balance a set of books and meet payroll on time. I have almost 10 years experience as Sec/Treasurer of a 501c3 educational non-profit. I will bring a Christian perspective to the job.

Ghareeb:An executive professional with diverse skills in the areas of operation management and assessment, project management, strategic planning, procurement and contract administration, professional development and real estate transaction. Prior to starting her own business, Nabeleh served in various leadership roles in non-profit organizations and Higher education institutions, most recent roles as Chief Strategy and Administrative Officer at the Children Center of Wayne County, and Associate Vice president of Business and Auxiliary Operation at WSU.

Downs:Ill bring a new perspective to the board. Im a woman, a wife, a mother, and a teacher. I care about others and will work to improve the quality of life for the folks that live and work in the township. Ill respect our citizens by being transparent, fiscally sound, and by making township information more accessible. Ill work to protect and improve our green spaces with the goal to increase opportunities for recreation.

Doroshewitz:Trustee since 2004; Zoning Board of Appeals, 2004-16; Planning Commission, 2016-Present; PARC, VP and General Counsel, 2014-2016; PTO Treasurer; HOA board; and Chair, July 4th picnic, 2009-2012. I am fiscally conservative and socially moderate. Reasonable people can disagree and we should be kind to each other when we do.

Curmi(Photo: Submitted)

Curmi:I have the temperament, engineering problem solving skills and financial acumen to drive good policy and cost efficient solutions. I foster open discussion and listen to the ideas and concerns of all residents, employees and stakeholders.

Corliss:There are those in our community who have slipped between the cracks. I believe they deserve support on issues such as hunger, health, and shelter for those living in hidden poverty right in our community. Along with 25+ years of Project Management, and being the sole creator of a small art business, I have been a member of several non-profit organizations.

Corliss:There are so many residents who are out of work or struggling to support their families with multiple jobs that provide little to no health care coverage or personal protection. Yet the Township chose to remove all data related to the Coronavirus from their website. An informed public is a safe public.

Curmi:Maintaining services and paying down legacy costs within the current tax rate. I closely monitor spending and control the size and scope of government. To lower costs and improve services, I will work to expand cooperative relationships/agreements with neighboring communities and the private sector. To achieve job growth and increase revenue, we are aggressively seeking new economic development.

Doroshewitz(Photo: Submitted)

Doroshewitz:The Salem Township water issue has reared its head again and we need to vigorously push back. Second, we need to continue to fund reduction of the long term legacy costs. We have done a great job thus far, but our work is not done. Third, we need to ensure we have a solid strategy for development of the Five Mile road corridor as we only have one chance to get it right.

Downs:The covid-19 pandemic has been a big challenge for every community and ours is no exception. We need leadership that decisively acts and informs its citizens with facts. Businesses and residents have new and different demands and needs, on top of the normal concerns. The township needs to be innovative and resourceful to be supportive. We cant predict the next crisis, but we need to be as educated, flexible, and as prepared as possible.

Ghareeb:Our community is experiencing incredible growth, making it necessary to create a facilities and services master plan to improve Township offices' efficiency and processes, and to assure financial stability. My experience in all these areas of management will have a major impact on our Township. I bring proven leadership that will be good for Plymouth Township.

LeBlanc(Photo: Submitted)

LeBlanc:After Covid, there is going to be a strong push by all local & state levels of government to raise taxes. If you elect only Rs and Ds, I'll pretty much bet, your tax burden is going up. If you believe that the government can solve every problem, I'm not your candidate. But if you know that less government is better, thenvote for the Independent, Libertarian.

Monaghan:I have stated on multiple occasions, we must live within our means. To suggest cuts to services at this point is premature absent an appropriate budget review and income projections. This recent global crisis has not left our Township immune from its crippling effects. The loss of revenue has been felt not only to our government body but also to our residents. We must be prepared to adjust as much as we would in our homes. Above all, as with any elected body, the welfare and protection of its citizenry is paramount bringing growth both in business and residents.

Stewart:Continue to support our excellent Police and Fire Services, as well as Trash Pickup. Work with Wayne County to prioritize roads in Plymouth Township. Bottom line is we must have fiscal responsibility in light of possible cuts to revenue - sharing.

Stewart:Implement continued training, of all police officers to deal with the most contentious individuals. Require regular checkups for all police officers regarding: mental & emotional health, and physical fitness. Work collaboratively with Police Unions to implement Continuing Education and Training Programs. These policies will enhance policing and police accountability.

Monaghan:All politics are local. Plymouth Township, due in large part to its current administration, has set an outstanding example of leadership as it relates to this subject. I am a strong supporter of our first responders and will always advocate for transparency with our public safety units.

LeBlanc:It is easy to break a law or rule you didn't even know existed. We have too many laws and regulations. If you decrease the amount of times where you interact with law enforcement, you will decrease the incidence of negative encounters. Police are needed, even in a civilized society, so I would not defund the police. But, if there is no victim, then it really should not be a crime.

Ghareeb:This is a very important issue facing our country, it derives from lack of understanding differences. When people begin to respect differences and stop stereotyping people and linking differences with negative stereotypes, we can begin to embrace, understand and respect cultural and ethnic diversity. The only way to overcome this is to introduce and enhance diversity and culture training.

Downs:I believe this is an important issue here and across America. Im a big proponent of quality information and education. Police sacrifice so much in their work, they deserve respect and the investment to be highly trained. I also believe we rely too heavily on police. We need to cultivate and strengthen other societal safety nets and resources that help with crime prevention, response, and rehabilitation. We need unity and positive leaders.

Doroshewitz:Our country is deeply divided and it is painful to see. I cant personally relate to some of the experiences others have had throughout their lives so I try to be sensitive and empathetic. We need to stop shouting at each other and just listen.

Curmi:Preventing all forms of police discrimination is very important in Michigan. Improve the hiring selection process to screen out racial bias in new officers. Increase ongoing bias/tactics training and improve officer accountability by modifying discipline language in future police labor contracts. Plymouth Township is using a community policing model and the department is not militarized in equipment or tactics.

Corliss:I have the highest respect for the officers in our township. I believe they need the best training and support that is possible when handling emotional and domestic-related issues.A careful revision of training across both the leadership and all first responders is desperately needed. The addition of special services personnel to help oversee hiring and firing practices should be a top priority.

Corliss:The women who are running for positions on the Plymouth Township Board this election have put together a list of issues we feel are of critical importance for the new board to address. They are:Supporting Diversity of Experience and Perspective; Prioritizing Public Health and Safety; Improving Recreation Opportunities for Families and Seniors; Respecting our Community through Fiscal Responsibility and Transparency; Balancing Development and Preservation; and Leading with Business and Community-Minded Solution.

Curmi:Keep Plymouth Township great by re-electing Charles Chuck Curmi Plymouth Township Trustee on November 3. Keep our local government in the hands of a leader with integrity and knowledge no special interests, no hidden agendas driving simple, transparent government that efficiently serves the needs of our citizens and community.

Doroshewitz:I am fiscally conservative and socially moderate. Reasonable people can disagree and we should be kind to each other when we do. Township history has had periods of calm and periods of turmoil. The current culture is calm, professional, results oriented and fee from personal attacks. Continue that. I will push the next board to improve collaboration and to remember that constructive dissent is a good thing. The best decisions come that way.

Downs:I will work hard for the citizens of Plymouth Township. I will serve respectfully, with good character and integrity. I will be honest and trustworthy. I will make decisions with the residents of today and the future in mind. I am a team player. This is my life track record and Im proud. If you dont know me, you probably know someone who does. Lets work together!

Ghareeb:When elected I will bring proven leadership that will be good for Plymouth Township. My priorities are: To create efficiency to assure fiscal responsibilities for Plymouth Township; To bring diversity of experience, perspective and thoughts to our Township; and to create programing to improve the Quality of life for our residents .

LeBlanc:An Independent.

Monaghan: We are blessed to live in such a special place called Plymouth Township. I intend to bring a firm and independent voice to the board while listening intently to the need of you the residents. I humbly ask for your support and vote.

Stewart:I am the only candidate for Trustee with experience in dealing with Lansing, and Wayne County to secure Road Funding. I am the only candidate (non-incumbent) to attend every Township Board Meeting for the last threeyears.

Contact reporter Ed Wright at eawright@hometownlife.com or 517-375-1113.

Read or Share this story: https://www.hometownlife.com/story/news/2020/10/07/election-2020-plymouth-township-board-trustees/3492241001/

More here:
Election 2020: Eight candidates explain why they want to be Plymouth Township trustee - Hometown Life

The CSI effect is a myth, Donald Shelton tells me. Like the unicorn and the mermaid, the former Michigan judge adds. Just in case I didnt get his point.

Shelton is referring to the idea that juries in criminal trials have a high expectation that prosecutors will present scientific evidence to prove their cases and that defendants are sometimes wrongfully acquitted because of a lack of it. So, the theory goes, the jurors came to court expecting to see such evidence, on account of watching CSI: Crime Scene Investigation and other law-related television programs.

The CSI effect is sometimes put forth by prosecutors as a reason why they lost a case. But Shelton, who presided over felony trials in Washtenaw County for 24 years, wanted more than just tales from grumbling prosecutors before accepting that a television show could really be to blame.

I have a scientific bent that says, We are not going to draw conclusions from anecdotes, Shelton, 76, told me last week during a phone interview from his COVID workplace in his home in Salinethe 10,000-resident town in southeastern Michigan where he served as mayor for eight years.

Sheltons penchant for proof, coupled with an interest in statistics and forensicshe believes he is the first judge in Michigan to handle a case involving DNA evidenceled him to conduct surveys to determine if the CSI effect was real or just an excusemainly from losers.

The first episode of CSI aired 20 years ago today. The drama, which ran for 15 seasons on CBS, follows crime-scene investigators with the Las Vegas Police Department who use science and physical evidence to solve murders. The television program, named most-watched TV show in the world several times, spawned a genre of crime shows with a focus on forensics.

Shelton, who retired from the bench in 2014 and is now an associate professor of sociology and director of the Criminology and Criminal Justice Program at the University of Michigan-Dearborn, shared his views on the role that the wildly popular program, and others of its ilk, has had on the criminal justice system.

Sheltons studiesconducted in 2006 and 2008-2009 along with two professors of criminology at Eastern Michigan Universityrevealed that jurors do have a high expectation that they will be presented with scientific evidence, and sometimes demand it as a condition of guilt. But a television show was not the cause.

Sheltons belief in the nonexistence of the CSI effect remains unchanged since his earlier studies. But he is quick to make clear that the perception of a CSI effect, plus ever-evolving technology and social media, are altering the manner in which juries hear and decide cases.

In 2006, in the first empirical study of its kind, Shelton and his colleagues surveyed 1,027 randomly summoned jurors to Washtenaw County (Ann Arbor), Michigan, and asked them about their television watching habits, what types of evidence they expected to see presented by the prosecutor in various types of criminal cases and whether they would demand scientific evidence before finding a defendant guilty. Prospective jurors were assured the surveys were anonymous and unrelated to their potential selection as a juror.

The results revealed that 46.3% of jurors expected to see some kind of scientific evidence in every criminal case. In particular, 21.9% of jurors anticipate DNA evidence and 36.4% expect fingerprint evidence. Expectations and demands for scientific evidence were also determined for specific crimes, taking into account whether other evidence was available, such as victim or eyewitness testimony or circumstantial evidence.

On the all-important question, Shelton and his team concluded that there was no significant difference, in the demand for scientific evidence as a condition of guilt between watchers of CSI and related shows and nonwatchers.

In 2008-2009, Sheltons team, wanting to focus on an urban setting, conducted a similar study using 1,219 individuals summoned to jury duty in Wayne County, Michigan, which includes Detroit. Here, the absence of a CSI effect was even more pronounced.

In the Washtenaw County study, in only four of 13 crime scenarios was there a significant difference between CSI watchers and nonwatchers in their demand for scientific evidence before finding a defendant guilty. In Wayne County, for the same scenarios, there was no significant difference.

Donald Shelton. Photo courtesy of Donald Shelton.

Law review and journal articles abound, from Shelton and his colleagues, dissecting their studies and providing all manner of statistics that disprove a CSI effect.

But even if the CSI effect is a myth, it can still loom large in courtrooms. One of the things that influences jurors, the former jurist tells me, is that prosecutors, and in some cases judges, act like there is a CSI effect when they question jurors and sometimes in instructions or arguments. Shelton explains that talking in terms of the CSI effect is an influence on jurors. If they didnt think about it before, they did after they went through the trial process.

The CSI effect made its way into Emmanuel Robinsons trial in Montgomery County, Maryland. A jury found him guilty of conspiracy to commit first-degree burglary. In 2014, the states highest court reversed his conviction on account of a flawed jury instruction. Robinsons attorney had stated, during his opening argument, that there was no evidence that his clients fingerprints or DNA were found on any paper, tape, weather stripping or screwdriver. The judge instructed the jurors that there is no legal requirement that the state utilize any specific investigative technique or scientific test to prove its case.

The court of appeals held that this charge, sometimes referred to as an anti-CSI effect instruction, was not warranted. On account of the inconclusive state of research whether a CSI effect existsciting, among the sources, Sheltons workthe court concluded that such an instruction is only necessary to correct an overreaching by the defense. This the defendants lawyer had not done. He merely pointed out what procedures may have been available to investigators and did not insinuate that the state had any obligation to perform such testing.

Instead of the CSI effect, which Shelton says was just too simple to blame for wrongful acquittals, he points to what he calls the tech effect as the reason for jurors high expectationsand in some cases demandsfor being presented with scientific evidence.

They are being influenced, Shelton posits, by rapid advances in science, as well as the information revolution and exposure to DNA and its ability to both convict and exonerate. Support for a tech effect was found in the Wayne County study, which revealed that participants who used more tech gadgets had a higher expectation that the prosecutor would present scientific evidence. This was not tested in the Washtenaw County study.

By its nature, the impact of the tech effect on jurors expands with advances in technology. It is much greater than it was back when we first studied it because of the difference in technology and information, Shelton says. Now jurors have more information on their phones than they ever learned in school.

Shelton acknowledges that television crime dramas and documentaries play a role in the tech effect and can influence jurors. However, he says that they are simply one of the many inputs that jurors experience from the variety of information that is presented to them

True to the tech effects ever-evolving nature, Shelton says that the biggest change, the biggest challenge, of jurors and technology and their perception of science comes from social media. The problem here is that facts gets filtered through political and social lenses, he says. Even scientific facts are simply denied and social media treats facts as disposal. This, Shelton says, has led to a growing skepticism of scientific testimony that we didnt have before.

This sounds contradictory, I tell Shelton. It is. Knowledge of technology and availability of information is a two-edge sword, he says. On one hand, jurors know that there is a lot of science out there that is available and relevant and probably very useful in deciding whether a person committed a crime or not. By the same token, the social media influence tends to say, Well, we cant even believe the scientific evidence anymore.

To be sure, Shelton is not critical of jurors increasing demands for scientific evidence. To the contrary, it goes hand-in-hand with the prosecutors burden of proof. Where there is an available scientific test that would produce evidence of guilt or innocence, Shelton says, and the prosecution chooses not to perform that test and present its results to the jury, it may not be unreasonable for the jury to doubt the strength of the governments case.

Indeed, Shelton goes further, calling it is both appropriate and constitutionally expected that jurors and their verdicts will reflect the changes that have occurred in popular culture.

I suspect that some prosecutors, feeling victimized by the CSI effect, do not take kindly to hearing it compared to the stuff of childrens stories. They dont, Shelton tells me, and they often shrug off his conclusions as academic mumbo-jumbo. Maybe your figures dont show that, Shelton says that prosecutors tell him. And then they add, in a tone of absolute certainty: But I know it happens. I know what jurors do.

Randy Maniloff is an attorney at White and Williams in Philadelphia and an adjunct professor at the Temple University Beasley School of Law. He runs the website CoverageOpinions.info.

Continue reading here:
'CSI effect' remains a myth, retired judge says on 20th anniversary of popular forensic science show - ABA Journal