Making Crime TV: Producing Fictional Representations of Crime for Canadian Television by Anita Yuen-Fai Lam A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Centre for Criminology and Sociolegal Studies University of Toronto © Copyright by Anita Yuen-Fai Lam (2011) Making Crime TV: Producing Fictional Representations of Crime for Canadian Television Anita Yuen-Fai Lam Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Centre for Criminology and Sociolegal Studies University of Toronto 2011 Abstract Criminologists and sociolegal scholars have become increasingly interested in studying media representations of crime in popular culture. They have studied representations using content analyses, often examining their “accuracy” against academic research. Alternatively, these scholars have also studied media effects. In contrast to these studies, I focus on the television production process of making entertaining, dramatic representations of crime. In doing so, I empirically address the following research question: how do TV writers know about crime, and how do they transform that knowledge into fictional representations? I answer this question using a triangulation of methods to gather data – specifically, ethnography, archival research, and interviews with writers and producers – and through the juxtaposition of several case studies. My case studies include the following Canadian crime television programs: 1) the police drama The Bridge, 2) an original Canadian drama about insurance fraud, Cra$h and Burn, and 3) crime docudramas, such as F2: Forensic Factor and Exhibit A: Secrets of Forensic Science. Taking cues from Bruno Latour‟s actor-network theory, I focus on the site-specific, concrete, dynamic processes through which each television production makes fiction. I conceive of the writers‟ room as a laboratory that creates representations through collaborative action and trial and error. This research demonstrates that, during the production process, representations of ii crime are unstable, constantly in flux as various creative and legal entities compel their revision. Legal entities, such as Errors and Omissions insurance and broadcasters‟ Standards and Practices, regulate the content and form of representations of crime prior to their airing. My findings also reveal the contingency of (commercial) success, the heterogeneity of people who make up television production staff, and the piecemeal state of knowledge that circulates between producers, network executives and writers. iii Acknowledgments First and foremost, I want to thank the people who made my research possible. I am indebted to the men and women who allowed me to interview them, and observe them at work while they made television. I did not start this project with the objective of researching Canadian television; but over the two years during which I collected my data, I could not help but respect and admire the hard work and thoughtfulness that goes into making our nation‟s television dramas. Although my ethics protocol prevents me from fully naming these people in my dissertation and consequently in my acknowledgements, they are remarkable people who have shown me a kindness I wish I could fully repay. There have been so many writers and producers who have told me about their desire to get their representation of the world right. To them, I can only say that I hope I got it right as well. I hope that my description of their work is a fair and accurate representation of the work that they do. I also do not think that I could have written this particular dissertation without the enthusiasm and guidance of Mariana Valverde. I would have been a very different kind of scholar had it not been for Mariana. She encourages both my theoretical eclecticism, and my tendency to write in a somewhat quirky, unconventional manner. She is also the reason why I felt I could write an actor-network theory analysis of television production. I was also fortunate to benefit from the insightful feedback from my other committee members, Ron Levi and Shyon Baumann. I would also like to thank my external reviewer Desmond Manderson for his careful reading and extremely thoughtful appraisal of my work. I am also grateful to the other graduate students at the Centre for Criminology and Sociolegal Studies for their collegiality and support: Nicole Meyers, Tara Watson, Karrie Sandford, Rashmee Singh, Olena Kobzar, Vanessa Iafolla, Natasha Madon, and Akwasi Owusu- Bempah. To Zach Levinsky, thank you for all of our conversations on pop culture, research and teaching. To the late David Sealy, I owe a debt of thanks for his constant enthusiasm and interest in my work. This dissertation also benefitted from the proof-reading skills of Dru Jeffries. For listening to my brainstorming attempts and for having read almost every word in this dissertation, thank you. iv Finally, this dissertation is dedicated to my family. To my sister: you frustrate me as much as you make me laugh. Between the frustration and the laughter, however, you made me realize that there was more to my life than writing a dissertation. To mom and dad: For every moment that I doubted – whether it was about the (un)likelihood of getting access to my sample, the ability to finish my dissertation on time or anything else for that matter – you never doubted. You never wavered in your belief of me and what I could do. For your unshakeable support, this dissertation is for you. v Table of Contents Abstract………………………………………………………………………………......... ii List of tables………………………………………………………………………………. x List of figures……………………………………………………………………………... xi Introduction………………………………………………………………………………... 1 Chapter summaries………………………………………………………………………... 4 A brief note on writing style………………………………………………………………. 7 Chapter 1 – Setting the stage: A literature review and analysis…………………………... 9 The cultural turn…………………………………………………………………………... 9 Why study mass-mediated cultural representations?............................................................ 14 Law, film and popular legal studies……………………………………………………….. 17 Crime, media and culture………………………………………………………………….. 22 Adorno, Horkheimer, and the culture industry……………………………………………. 30 Studying “bread:” Representing crime and law…………………………………………… 34 Bread as art: Semiotic approaches to studying representations of crime and law… 35 Bread as unfulfilled promise: Correcting representations of crime and law……….. 37 Studying bread as “the stone of stereotype”: Symptomatic readings and historical forms of consciousness………………………………………………………………………………... 40 It‟s about the message, not the medium…………………………………………….. 41 The “stone of stereotype” and periodization………………………………………... 45 Studying (in)digestion: Media effects and reception research……………………………… 47 Effects research on antisocial behaviour and fear of crime…………………………. 49 Conclusion: Breaking bread………………………………………………………………… 51 Chapter 2 – On method: Trail-sniffing ants and bread crumbs of reflexivity………………. 57 Actor-network theory (ANT): On being a myopic, trail-sniffing ant……………………….. 58 Convergences and divergences: How ANT fits together with the “production of culture” perspective…………………………………………………………………………………... 63 Divergences: Studying “the culture industry”………………………………………………. 64 Capitalistic mode of production…………………………………………………….. 65 Mode(s) of industrial production……………………………………………………. 67 Actor-networks of production………………………………………………………. 69 vi Convergences: Themes, theories and findings……………………………………………… 72 Uncertainty…………………………………………………………………………... 73 Collaborative action…………………………………………………………………. 73 Dynamic movement…………………………………………………………………. 77 Doing television production studies in Canada……………………………………………... 78 Accessing television productions, deciding on a sample……………………………. 81 Being in “the right place”: Toronto…………………………………………………. 82 Coming in at “the right time”……………………………………………………….. 84 Getting “in the know”: How to gain access by mobilizing cultural capital…………. 85 Methodological limitations………………………………………………………………….. 88 My sample…………………………………………………………………………………... 89 Chapter 3 – Breaking The Bridge: Documenting the heterogeneous knowledge inputs into the laboratory of the writers‟ room………………………………………………………….. 96 Entering the writers‟ room, a lab intent on erasing traces…………………………………... 96 The writers‟ room as a Latourian laboratory………………………………………………... 98 Beating it out: The writers‟ room and breaking story……………………………………….. 100 The Bridge: From here and now to anywhere and to anytime………………………………. 103 Anywhere……………………………………………………………………………. 104 Errors and Omissions insurance…………………………………………………….. 105 Anytime……………………………………………………………………………... 111 Showrunner‟s storytelling preference and artistic vision for the show……………... 112 Making “bad apples” in Toronto: Breaking “Injured Cop”…………………………………. 114 Local knowledge…………………………………………………………………………….. 117 Newspaper articles…………………………………………………………………... 117 The technical consultant…………………………………………………………….. 117 Flashpoint…………………………………………………………………………… 126 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………… 129 Chapter 4 – The case of the missing “bad apples”: Transforming “Injured Cop” into “The Unguarded Moment”………………………………………………………………………… 135 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….. 135 Investigative procedure……………………………………………………………………… 138 Getting a clue: Entering the kitchen…………………………………………………………. 144 The “nice” Italian steakhouse restaurant: The beat sheet……………………………………. 146 vii The Mediterranean restaurant: The network outline………………………………………… 151 The breakfast diner: Network