DOCSLIB.ORG

Law's Haze, Police Ways, and Tech's Maze: Relationships Between

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Law's Haze, Police Ways, and Tech's Maze: Relationships Between University of Connecticut OpenCommons@UConn Doctoral Dissertations University of Connecticut Graduate School 12-11-2017 Law's Haze, Police Ways, and Tech's Maze: Relationships between American law, crime, and technology Meghan Peterson University of Connecticut - Storrs, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://opencommons.uconn.edu/dissertations Recommended Citation Peterson, Meghan, "Law's Haze, Police Ways, and Tech's Maze: Relationships between American law, crime, and technology" (2017). Doctoral Dissertations. 1687. https://opencommons.uconn.edu/dissertations/1687 Law’s Haze, Police Ways, and Tech’s Maze Relationships between American law, crime, and technology Meghan B. Peterson, PhD University of Connecticut, 2017 In this dissertation, I explore the role of law in policing operations targeting cyber sex offenders in the United States. Specifically, I examine enforcement in this crime arena as part of an ongoing expansion within the carceral, surveillance, risk-based state. I argue that imprecision and lack of clarity within American law – particularly in the evolving world of online interactions – generate hazy, arbitrary applications in law enforcement. On this point, I submit that absence of legal clarity undermines law enforcement efforts to address crimes – both within and beyond the cyber world. Distinctive spaces of online and tech-based socialization, paired with the rapid evolution of technology, produce complex conditions for law enforcement. These components are further nourished – indeed, created – by a pervasive lack of clarity within the law. In short, law is unable to keep pace with the evolving nature of crime, the technologies of crime, and finally, the technologies of crime response, deterrence, and prevention. In chronicling the history of American sex crimes law enforcement broadly and cyber sex crimes specifically, I trace the role of unclear law in the ongoing project of carceral state development. Through my work on a State-mandated taskforce reviewing the Connecticut Sex Offender Registry, I also document impetuses of carceral state construction in the criminal justice apparatus for cataloging, monitoring, tracking, and surveilling of offenders. Moreover, I detect within the shift toward risk-assessment criminal justice sanctions the move to predict and identify not-yet- offenders among the civilian population – a premise of the carceral state drive to subsume the legal into those rendered illegal; the nonpunitive into the punitive; the civil into the penal. Law’s Haze, Police Ways, and Tech’s Maze Relationships between American law, crime, and technology Meghan B. Peterson B.A., Political Science, William Smith College, 2011 B.A., Religious Studies, William Smith College, 2011 M.A., Political Science, University of Connecticut, 2014 A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Connecticut 2017 i Copyright by Meghan B. Peterson 2017 ii APPROVAL PAGE Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation Law’s Haze, Police Ways, and Tech’s Maze Relationships between American law, crime, and technology Presented by Meghan B. Peterson, B.A., M.A. Major Advisor ___________________________________________________________________ Jeffrey R. Dudas Associate Advisor ___________________________________________________________________ Jane A. Gordon Associate Advisor ___________________________________________________________________ Kristin A. Kelly University of Connecticut 2017 iii Acknowledgements I thank Him for the fortitude, determination, and patience when I needed it the most. I thank Dave for his constant, loving support throughout the obsessive research and writing stages. You are my everything. I thank Papa and Mama for their tough love and listening ears. I thank Spence for his vibrant interest in the project and always peppering me with humorous questions about it. I thank Jeffrey Dudas, Jane Gordon, Kristin Kelly, David Yalof, and Kimberly Bergendahl for their ongoing support and attentive mentoring over these six years. I thank Paul Passavant and Jodi Dean for their unwavering faith in me. I could not have walked this journey alone. iv Table of Contents Prologue 10 Chapter One / Law’s Haze, Police Ways, and Tech’s Maze: Relationships between American law, crime, and technology 13 Chapter Two / Law’s Imprecision and Indecision: Sex Crimes and Law Enforcement in the United States 48 Chapter Three / Walking the Beat on the 21st Century Cyber Block: Police and Cyber Sex Offenders 75 Chapter Four / Behind Bars, On Screens: The Sex Offender Registry as a Microcosm for Understanding Law-Crime-Policing-Technology Connections 118 Chapter Five / Law’s Haze, Tech’s Maze: Seeing through law’s haze and tech’s maze 159 Appendix 174 Bibliography 178 v Prologue 1 In preparation for dissertation work, I had the opportunity to take Dr. Andrew Deener’s Sociology Qualitative Methods I Seminar during the Fall of 2013 at the University of Connecticut. For the course, I conducted semi-structured interviews with a primary contact, “Trooper A,” who at the time was a state police detective and twenty-one-year veteran on the force. We held weekly meetings and conversations in public spaces usually lasting upwards of two to two and a half hours. Trooper A put me into touch with another state Trooper B, with whom I was able to speak on several occasions via phone and on occasion in-person. The following exchange comes from one of those conversations with Trooper A. “So you still focusing on computer crimes?” “Well, I think that the focus will remain on technology-assisted, technology-based crimes, but that I am more flexible to shifting the focus to major crimes policing as well.” “Yeah, good choice. I mean, most of the crimes today do revolve around some sort of technological device: phone, IPad, laptop. You name it. Besides, the computer crimes lab doesn’t even work with phones. They don’t have the equipment or training really to do so. We usually send our guys up there to process the evidence on some of the equipment there. But again, it’s our own guys. It’s not the computer crimes people doing it. I mean, look around and think about it. Would you say you spend time on the phone more than your laptop?” “Oh, yeah, I would say it’s probably more in favor of the phone actually in terms of the breakdown. Maybe only when I am writing do I rely on my laptop more.” “Exactly, so there you go. Same with people who commit crimes. They are going to use the convenience of the phone. It’s like the alpaca case. I’ll never forget the kid in that one. I sat him down for questioning and all he was doing was texting, thinking that I couldn’t see his thumbs moving on the phone keypad. Trying to be covert. I shut him down right away.” “The alpaca case? Oh, the one from a couple of years ago when the two kids allegedly murdered all those alpacas on that farm in No-Name-Town?”1 “Yep, that’s the one. And so anyway, here this kid is sitting before me for questioning and he’s trying to be all like ‘oh, you can’t see me texting my partner in crime, ha!” Well, after I question him, I tell him that I am seizing his phone. He gets all arrogant and says, ‘You can’t take my phone, you need a warrant for that!’ I tell the punk, actually, I don’t need a warrant for this item. So you’re going to hand it over.” “And what did he do?” I ask with bursting curiosity. “He did. He did it reluctantly, but he handed it over. And boy, did I have to quickly make sure I got that to the lab for processing. Didn’t want to give him and his buddy time to disconnect the 1 Pseudonym used to protect anonymity of law enforcement source. 2 phone and erase information. You know, you can do that with an IPhone. Erase any information, data, remotely. It’s horrible for us as police. I mean, it’s a privacy thing for the phone’s owner. But it really makes it hard for us police to make sure we get the evidence we need right then and there before it disappears. And you know, here he is trying to tell me how to do my job. Can’t stand that, I wanted to tell him not to tell me how to do m job. Little did he know that there are seven exceptions to the search warrant mandate. Seven exceptions that we can apply – like, for example, in exigent circumstances – situations where we have strong reason to believe that if we don’t get the item now, important evidence may be lost forever. But even then, I could only take his phone. I could only seize it for processing. It’s not like I could go through it and start scrolling for information. I had to then write up a search warrant for the contents of the phone after his questioning.” This manuscript is about law, police, sex, crime, and technology. It is about how American law enforcement – and American society – is positioned in the crosshairs of Information Age law and order. It is about how law – along with its enforcers and breakers – operates in the wending rabbit-hole that is the online world. It is about how law, police, sex crimes, and technology come together to fuel the fire and fan the flames of the expanding carceral, surveillance-obsessed, risk-based state. And maybe, just maybe, it is about how citizens can do something about it. 3 Chapter One 4 Law’s Haze, Police Ways, and Tech’s Maze Relationships between American law, crime, and technology Sex offenders are our modern-day monsters, producing tidal waves of public demand.2 As the Internet filled with people, people filled the Internet with everything that was the worst and best about humanity…[i]n response, all police became the Internet police.3 2 Simon, Jonathan.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Internet Freedom in China: U.S. Government Activity, Private Sector Initiatives, and Issues of Congressional Interest
    Internet Freedom in China: U.S. Government Activity, Private Sector Initiatives, and Issues of Congressional Interest Patricia Moloney Figliola Specialist in Internet and Telecommunications Policy May 18, 2018 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R45200 Internet Freedom in China: U.S. Government and Private Sector Activity Summary By the end of 2017, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had the world’s largest number of internet users, estimated at over 750 million people. At the same time, the country has one of the most sophisticated and aggressive internet censorship and control regimes in the world. PRC officials have argued that internet controls are necessary for social stability, and intended to protect and strengthen Chinese culture. However, in its 2017 Annual Report, Reporters Without Borders (Reporters Sans Frontières, RSF) called China the “world’s biggest prison for journalists” and warned that the country “continues to improve its arsenal of measures for persecuting journalists and bloggers.” China ranks 176th out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2017 World Press Freedom Index, surpassed only by Turkmenistan, Eritrea, and North Korea in the lack of press freedom. At the end of 2017, RSF asserted that China was holding 52 journalists and bloggers in prison. The PRC government employs a variety of methods to control online content and expression, including website blocking and keyword filtering; regulating and monitoring internet service providers; censoring social media; and arresting “cyber dissidents” and bloggers who broach sensitive social or political issues. The government also monitors the popular mobile app WeChat. WeChat began as a secure messaging app, similar to WhatsApp, but it is now used for much more than just messaging and calling, such as mobile payments, and all the data shared through the app is also shared with the Chinese government.
    [Show full text]
  • The Realignment of Incarcerative Punishment: Sentencing Reform and the Conditions of Confinement Ken Strutin
    William Mitchell Law Review Volume 38 | Issue 4 Article 4 2012 The Realignment of Incarcerative Punishment: Sentencing Reform and the Conditions of Confinement Ken Strutin Follow this and additional works at: http://open.mitchellhamline.edu/wmlr Recommended Citation Strutin, Ken (2012) "The Realignment of Incarcerative Punishment: Sentencing Reform and the Conditions of Confinement," William Mitchell Law Review: Vol. 38: Iss. 4, Article 4. Available at: http://open.mitchellhamline.edu/wmlr/vol38/iss4/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at Mitchell Hamline Open Access. It has been accepted for inclusion in William Mitchell Law Review by an authorized administrator of Mitchell Hamline Open Access. For more information, please contact [email protected]. © Mitchell Hamline School of Law Strutin: The Realignment of Incarcerative Punishment: Sentencing Reform an THE REALIGNMENT OF INCARCERATIVE PUNISHMENT: SENTENCING REFORM AND THE CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT † Ken Strutin I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 1313 II. BY THE NUMBERS ................................................................. 1315 III. BROWN V. PLATA: PRISON CONDITIONS REVEALED............... 1324 A. The Majority ................................................................... 1326 B. The Dissents.................................................................... 1332 C. The Appropriateness of the Majority’s Holding .................. 1336 IV. BEYOND
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom on the Net 2016
    FREEDOM ON THE NET 2016 China 2015 2016 Population: 1.371 billion Not Not Internet Freedom Status Internet Penetration 2015 (ITU): 50 percent Free Free Social Media/ICT Apps Blocked: Yes Obstacles to Access (0-25) 18 18 Political/Social Content Blocked: Yes Limits on Content (0-35) 30 30 Bloggers/ICT Users Arrested: Yes Violations of User Rights (0-40) 40 40 TOTAL* (0-100) 88 88 Press Freedom 2016 Status: Not Free * 0=most free, 100=least free Key Developments: June 2015 – May 2016 • A draft cybersecurity law could step up requirements for internet companies to store data in China, censor information, and shut down services for security reasons, under the aus- pices of the Cyberspace Administration of China (see Legal Environment). • An antiterrorism law passed in December 2015 requires technology companies to cooperate with authorities to decrypt data, and introduced content restrictions that could suppress legitimate speech (see Content Removal and Surveillance, Privacy, and Anonymity). • A criminal law amendment effective since November 2015 introduced penalties of up to seven years in prison for posting misinformation on social media (see Legal Environment). • Real-name registration requirements were tightened for internet users, with unregistered mobile phone accounts closed in September 2015, and app providers instructed to regis- ter and store user data in 2016 (see Surveillance, Privacy, and Anonymity). • Websites operated by the South China Morning Post, The Economist and Time magazine were among those newly blocked for reporting perceived as critical of President Xi Jin- ping (see Blocking and Filtering). www.freedomonthenet.org FREEDOM CHINA ON THE NET 2016 Introduction China was the world’s worst abuser of internet freedom in the 2016 Freedom on the Net survey for the second consecutive year.
    [Show full text]
  • The Internet: a New Tool for Law Enforcement Todd Kirchgraber
    The Internet: A New Tool for Law Enforcement Todd Kirchgraber Abstract In the past five years personal computers and the Internet have revolutionized how people are now obtaining information they feel is important in their daily lives. With this “on-line” information explosion comes the ability for law enforcement world wide to share information with citizens, local communities and other police agencies. As this ability grows, are law enforcement agencies taking advantage of all that the Internet has to offer? Is this a useful technology or just a passing fad? This research paper will help to identify which law enforcement agencies in the state of Florida are using the Internet to post web sites as well as their perceived benefits (if any), and the agencies’ goal in developing these sites. Introduction On June 21, 1998, a search of the Internet on the single keyword “police” using the INFOseek sm. search engine located 1,126,036 pages relating to that topic. A similar search conducted on June 16, 1998 within the WebLUIS library system on the key words “Police and Internet” produced only 44 citations prior to 1988 and listed 5000 citations from 1988 to 1998. These numbers alone indicate more and more criminal justice and law enforcement agencies are using this technology to some degree. But how effective is it? With more than 40 million users, the World Wide Web offers boundless opportunities. It reaches a limitless audience, providing users with interactive technology and vast resources. No other medium can achieve this as easily or inexpensively (Clayton, 1997). Today, more and more people are getting online.
    [Show full text]
  • Child Pornography on the Internet by Richard Wortley Stephen Smallbone
    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services Problem-Oriented Guides for Police Problem-Specific Guides Series No. 41 Child Pornography on the Internet by Richard Wortley Stephen Smallbone www.cops.usdoj.gov Center for Problem-Oriented Policing Got a Problem? We’ve got answers! Log onto the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing website at www.popcenter.org for a wealth of information to help you deal more effectively with crime and disorder in your www.PopCenter.org community, including: • Web-enhanced versions of all currently available Guides • Interactive training exercises • Online access to research and police practices • Online problem analysis module. Designed for police and those who work with them to address community problems, www.popcenter.org is a great resource in problem-oriented policing. Supported by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. Problem-Oriented Guides for Police Problem-Specific Guides Series Guide No. 41 Child Pornography on the Internet Richard Wortley Stephen Smallbone This project was supported by cooperative agreement #2004CKWXK002 by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to specific companies, products, or services should not be considered an endorsement of the product by the author or the U.S. Department of Justice. Rather, the references are illustrations to supplement discussion of the issues. www.cops.usdoj.gov ISBN: 1-932582-65-7 May 2006 About the Problem-Specific Guides Series i About the Problem-Specific Guides Series The Problem-Specific Guides summarize knowledge about how police can reduce the harm caused by specific crime and disorder problems.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Initiatives to Promote Global Internet Freedom: Issues, Policy, and Technology
    U.S. Initiatives to Promote Global Internet Freedom: Issues, Policy, and Technology Patricia Moloney Figliola, Coordinator Specialist in Internet and Telecommunications Policy Kennon H. Nakamura Analyst in Foreign Affairs Casey L. Addis Analyst in Middle Eastern Affairs Thomas Lum Specialist in Asian Affairs April 5, 2010 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R41120 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress U.S. Initiatives to Promote Global Internet Freedom: Issues, Policy, and Technology Summary Modern means of communications, led by the Internet, provide a relatively inexpensive, open, easy-entry means of sharing ideas, information, pictures, and text around the world. In a political and human rights context, in closed societies when the more established, formal news media is denied access to or does not report on specified news events, the Internet has become an alternative source of media, and sometimes a means to organize politically. The openness and the freedom of expression allowed through blogs, social networks, video sharing sites, and other tools of today’s communications technology has proven to be an unprecedented and often disruptive force in some closed societies. Governments that seek to maintain their authority and control the ideas and information their citizens receive are often caught in a dilemma: they feel that they need access to the Internet to participate in commerce in the global market and for economic growth and technological development, but fear that allowing open access to the Internet potentially weakens their control over their citizens. Legislation now under consideration in the 111th Congress would mandate that U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Client Alert Ministry of Public Security Issued Rules on October 2018 Supervision and Inspection Internet Security
    Technology, Media & Telecommunications/ Data Privacy China Client Alert Ministry of Public Security issued rules on October 2018 supervision and inspection internet security Since the Cybersecurity Law of the PRC ("CSL") took effect in June 2017, the Public Security Bureaus (the police and security authority in China, "PSB") in many Chinese provinces and cities have been one of the most active government authorities in the enforcement of the CSL. Despite that many provisions of the CSL are too general and need to be detailed and clarified through implementation rules and regulations, many of which are yet For further information, please contact: to be finalized, the PSBs (mainly their Cybersecurity Protection Division or Zhenyu Ruan commonly known as the "Internet Police") have, by drawing upon the Partner statutory powers and responsibilities stipulated under the Law on People's +86 21 6105 8577 Policy of the PRC and other regulations and rules issued by the Ministry of [email protected] Public Security Bureau ("MPS") concerning protection of security of computer network systems that became effective long before the issuance of the CSL and their extensive law enforcement organization and manpower across the country, rigorously (and in some instances, aggressively) taken enforcement actions on companies and individuals that violated the CSL. For instance, although the MPS issued the draft regulations concerning multi-level (cybersecurity) protection scheme ("MLPS") in late June of 2018 with the intent to implement the "new" MLPS proposed under the CSL, in some provinces and cities, the PSBs had referred to the 2007 version of the MLPS rules and required network operators located within their respective jurisdictions to conduct security protection certification.
    [Show full text]
  • Cybercrime and Digital Law Enforcement
    ICT 552, Section 001, Fall 2017 Cybercrime and Digital Law Enforcement Instructor: Dr. Bryce C. Newell Office address: 350 Lucille Little Fine Arts Library Email: [email protected] Office phone: 859.218.3415 Office hours: By appointment (online or in person) Virtual office hours: Same as above. Preferred method of contact: Email Contact me via e-mail to schedule an appointment to meet: I will try to respond as soon as possible, usually within 24 hours during weekdays, or on Monday for emails sent over weekends. COURSE DESCRIPTION The global reach of the Internet, the low marginal cost of online activity, and the relative anonymity of users have contributed to a wide escalation in cybercrimes. Consequently, information and communications technologies (ICT) are being increasingly employed to instigate threats to global civil society. This course provides an overview of cybercrime and the digital law enforcement practices put in place to respond to them. The course will focus on the types and extent of current cyber crimes, how the justice system responds to these crimes, the various constitutional protections afforded to computer users, the law and policies that govern cybercrime detection and prosecution, and related technologies. PREREQUISITES None. STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES Students completing the course will be able to: Define and describe the nature and scope of cybercrime; Develop knowledge of major incidents of cybercrime and their resulting impact; Analyze and discuss national and global digital law enforcement efforts; Critically consider specific laws and policies governing cybercrime detection and prosecution; Identify and evaluate the specific technology that facilitates cybercrime and digital law enforcement; Critically evaluate the impact of cybercrime on information professions.
    [Show full text]
  • 1969 Journal
    : II STATISTICS Miscella- Original Appellate neous Total Vumber of cases on dockets. _ __ — 15 1, 758 2, 429 4, 202 ?ases disposed of_ _ 5 1, 433 1, 971 3, 409 Remaining on dockets. __ 10 325 458 793 Cases disposed of—Appellate Docket: By written opinions 105 By per curiam opinions or orders , 206 By motion to dismiss or per stipulation (merit cases) 1 By denial or dismissal of petitions for certiorari 1,121 Cases disposed of—Miscellaneous Docket By written opinions , 0 By denial or dismissal of petitions for certiorari 1,759 By denial or withdrawal of other applications 121 By granting of other applications , 3 By per curiam dismissal of appeals 36 By other per curiam opinions or orders 22 By transfer to Appellate Docket 30 dumber of written opinions 88 Number of printed per curiam opinions 21 Number of petitions for certiorari granted ( Appellate ) 73 Number of appeals in which jurisdiction was noted or post- poned (Appellate) 46 Number of admissions to bar 3,965 GENERAL: Page Court convened October 6, 1969, and adjourned June 29, 1970 1 and 510 Court recessed to attend President's State of Union Message 211 Justice Hugo L. Black's Birthday, noted. Comments by the Chief Justice 252 Reed, J., Designated and assigned to U.S. Court of Claims. 295 : : ; in GENERAL—Continued Page Clark, J. Designated and assigned to USCA-7 424 Designated and assigned to USCA-2 424 Designated and assigned to USCA-9 , 485 Designated and assigned to U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California 485 Retirement of John F.
    [Show full text]
  • Undermining Freedom of Expression in China the Role of Yahoo!, Microsoft and Google
    UNDERMINING FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN CHINA The role of Yahoo!, Microsoft and Google Amnesty International ‘And of course, the information society’s very life blood is freedom. It is freedom that enables citizens everywhere to benefit from knowledge, journalists to do their essential work, and citizens to hold government accountable. Without openness, without the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers, the information revolution will stall, and the information society we hope to build will be stillborn.’ KofiA nnan, UN Secretary General Published in July 2006 by Amnesty International UK The Human Rights Action Centre 17-25 New Inn Yard London EC2A 3EA United Kingdom www.amnesty.org.uk ISBN: 187332866 4 ISBN: 978-1-873328-66-8 AI Index: POL 30/026/2006 £5.99 CONTENTS Executive summary 4 1. Freedom of expression 8 1.1 A fundamental human right 8 1.2 Internet governance and human rights 8 2. Human rights responsibilities of companies 10 2.1 Responsibilities of Internet hardware and software companies 11 3. The human rights situation in China: an overview 13 3.1 The crackdown on human rights defenders 13 3.2 Curtailment of freedom of expression 14 3.3 Internet censorship in China 16 4. The role of Yahoo!, Microsoft and Google 17 4.1 Mismatch between values and actions 17 4.2 Contravening their principle that users come first 23 4.3 Uncovering their defences 23 4.4 From denial to acknowledgement 26 5. Recommendations for action 28 EXEcutIVE SuMMARY Amnesty International has produced many reports documenting the Chinese government’s violations of human rights.1 The expansion of investment in China by foreign companies in the field of information and communications technology puts them at risk of contributing to certain types of violation, particularly those relating to freedom of expression and the suppression of dissent.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Communication Practices: a Toolkit for Police Executives
    Strategic Communication Practices: A Toolkit for Police Executives Darrel W. Stephens Julia Hill Sheldon Greenberg Strategic Communication Practices: A Toolkit for Police Executives Darrel W. Stephens Julia Hill Sheldon Greenberg Contents This project was supported by a Cooperative Agreement 2008-CK-WX-K008 awarded by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to specific agencies, companies, products, or services should not be considered an endorsement by the author(s) or the U.S. Department of Justice. Rather, the references are illustrations to supplement discussion of the issues. The Internet references cited in this publication were valid as of the original date of this publication. Given that URLs and websites are in constant flux, neither the author(s) nor the COPS Office can vouch for their current validity. ISBN: 978-1-935676-41-6 September 2011 Contents CONTENTS About the COPS Office . .4 Letter from the Director . .5 CHAPTER I—The Police Communication Imperative . .7 Communications Issues . .8 Crime . .8 Police Effectiveness . .9 Public Image and Perceptions of the Police . 10 Policing Approach . 10 Police Misconduct . 11 Budget—Staffing . 11 Terrorism . 13 Immigration . 13 Influencing Behavior . 14 Transparency . 15 Essential Audiences . 15 Elected Officials . 17 Community Leaders . 17 Neighborhood Leaders . 17 Public Interest Groups . 17 Non-English Speaking Communities . 18 Faith Communities . 18 Employees . 18 Communication Strategies . 19 CHAPTER II—Where and How People Get Information . 21 The Media Landscape .
    [Show full text]
  • How Censorship in China Allows Government Criticism but Silences Collective Expression GARY KING Harvard University JENNIFER PAN Harvard University MARGARET E
    American Political Science Review Page 1 of 18 May 2013 doi:10.1017/S0003055413000014 How Censorship in China Allows Government Criticism but Silences Collective Expression GARY KING Harvard University JENNIFER PAN Harvard University MARGARET E. ROBERTS Harvard University e offer the first large scale, multiple source analysis of the outcome of what may be the most extensive effort to selectively censor human expression ever implemented. To do this, we have W devised a system to locate, download, and analyze the content of millions of social media posts originating from nearly 1,400 different social media services all over China before the Chinese government is able to find, evaluate, and censor (i.e., remove from the Internet) the subset they deem objectionable. Using modern computer-assisted text analytic methods that we adapt to and validate in the Chinese language, we compare the substantive content of posts censored to those not censored over time in each of 85 topic areas. Contrary to previous understandings, posts with negative, even vitriolic, criticism of the state, its leaders, and its policies are not more likely to be censored. Instead, we show that the censorship program is aimed at curtailing collective action by silencing comments that represent, reinforce, or spur social mobilization, regardless of content. Censorship is oriented toward attempting to forestall collective activities that are occurring now or may occur in the future—and, as such, seem to clearly expose government intent. INTRODUCTION Ang 2011, and our interviews with informants, granted anonymity). China overall is tied with Burma at 187th he size and sophistication of the Chinese gov- of 197 countries on a scale of press freedom (Freedom ernment’s program to selectively censor the House 2012), but the Chinese censorship effort is by Texpressed views of the Chinese people is un- far the largest.
    [Show full text]