By Clare Ribando Seelke

An upsurge in lethal attacks against journalists in Mexico since the start of 2022 has renewed interest in Congress about violence against journalists and the state of media freedoms in Mexico. Since 2000, more than 150 journalists and media workers have been killed in Mexico, including seven in 2021 and eight in the first few months of 2022. Violence against journalists is occurring within the context of a broader security crisis in Mexico fueled by organized crime-related violence. Nevertheless, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) have asserted that “impunity in attacks against [or murders of] journalists fosters further violence against reporters and may inhibit the exercise of freedom of expression.”  In February 2022, Secretary of State Antony Blinken stated that he joined “those calling for greater accountability and protections for Mexican journalists.”  Some congressional concerns about the killings of journalists in Mexico have prompted letters to the Biden Administration and hearing questions to Administration officials regarding the extent to which the U.S. government is urging Mexico to better prevent, investigate, and prosecute cases of violence against journalists. Congress has appropriated foreign assistance to help the Mexican government and civil society better protect journalists and reduce impunity in cases of crimes committed against them. An oversight issue for the 117th Congress may be the extent to which the protection of journalists and other vulnerable groups is prioritized under the new U.S.-Mexico Bicentennial Framework for Security Cooperation signed in October 2021. Congress also may examine whether other tools, such as conditions on foreign assistance, sanctions, or legislation, could be used to improve the situation.  

Washington, DC:  Congressional Research Service , 2022. 15p.

By Elaine Hennig and Benjamin Greaves

Since Harris County’s misdemeanor bond system was first declared unconstitutional by a federal district court in 2017, the county has implemented several reforms as part of the resulting settlement. Before the resolution of the lawsuit, indigent defendants were detained pretrial solely based on their inability to pay bond, while their wealthier counterparts could post bond and expect prompt release. The county corrected this wealth-based discrimination by requiring the majority of misdemeanor defendants to be released on personal recognizance (PR) bonds, which do not require an upfront cash payment. By providing defendants with a new system for bonding out of jail that does not discriminate based on income, the implemented reforms ensure that defendants are not prematurely punished with jail time— upholding the principle of a ‘presumption of innocence’ for the criminally accused, and preventing taxpayers from footing the bill for unnecessary weeks or months of incarceration. Though these changes have only been applied to misdemeanor cases, several ongoing lawsuits have set the stage for reforms that could similarly improve the felony bond system. While these two systems are legally different, the rationale for reform remains the same: protecting constitutionally guaranteed rights and preventing wealth-based discrimination. Despite the more equitable reforms to Harris County’s misdemeanor system, opponents of bond reform frequently criticize the changes. Though many opponents still claim to support the principles of reform, they regularly scapegoat bond reform for the various failures of the criminal legal system. Through the use of misinformation, propagation of false narratives, and exploitation of race-based disparities, they portray bond reform as a threat to public safety. Unfortunately, this disinformation effort is facilitated by local media outlets, who amplify the voices of opponents and disseminate the narratives they promote. This report aims to examine media coverage of bond in Harris County, and to better understand the media’s role in shaping the narrative of bond reform. It draws on a content analysis of 226 news articles run by six Houston-area television stations between January 2015 and June 2021. Stories qualified for selection if they discussed bond reform, bond debates, and/or people who allegedly committed crimes while out on bond. While bias in coverage was the primary focus of this analysis, we also reviewed 15 other key variables, such as referenced ‘experts’ and the defendant’s race or ethnicity. This analysis reveals that many local media stations disproportionately publish biased articles in their reporting on bond. The media consistently provide a platform for opponents of bond reform to represent bond release as a threat to public safety, while frequently failing to contextualize opponents’ claims or feature an alternative view. In cherry-picking and sensationalizing stories about defendants who are arrested while out on bond, media outlets construct a distorted narrative of dangerous releasees, in effect exaggerating the risks of bond reform and minimizing its positive impact. These efforts continually undermine bond reform, serving only to generate fear of people released on bond pretrial. The shift in news coverage of bond is perhaps best seen through a comparison of coverage prior to and following the implementation of Harris County’s proposed settlement in 2019. Over the 48-month period from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2018, 42 total articles focused on bond in relation to  reform or released defendants. Of those articles, only 33 percent were found to be negatively biased. In contrast, over a shorter 30-month period from January 1, 2019, to June 30, 2021, not only did the number of bond-focused articles more than quadruple to 184, but the percentage of negatively biased articles nearly doubled to 61. Although bias in media coverage is one of the most—if not the most—alarming variables analyzed in this report, several other variables have revealed similarly concerning trends. With ongoing attacks against bond reform efforts in Texas and in Houston specifically, recognizing and correcting these trends in media coverage is critical to ensuring that Harris County residents have a more informed perspective of both misdemeanor bond reform and bond reform more generally.   

Austin: TEXAS CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND EQUITY, 2021. 34p.

By Mario Peucker, Thomas J Fisher, Jacob Davey

The media does not enjoy a high level of trust among Australians, as many people question the commitment of mainstream media to objective and nonpartisan reporting. While this mistrust is widespread, it manifests in particularly antagonistic ways within far-right milieus, where mainstream media is often seen through a conspiratorial lens as the ‘enemy of the people’ who actively conspire against the wellbeing of ‘ordinary’ or ‘white’ people. This almost unanimously hostile perception, however, does not stop people within far-right online spaces from posting mainstream media outputs to convey ideological messages in their online communities. Context This research report presents key findings from an analysis of far-right online communities on Facebook and the alt-tech fringe platform Gab, which has been described as a ‘right-leaning echo chamber’ (Lima et al. 2018:1). The study was conducted by researchers at the Institute for Sustainable Industries & Liveable Cities at Victoria University (VU), in collaboration with the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), within the research stream ‘Dynamics of Violent Extremism’ at the Centre for Resilient and Inclusive Societies (CRIS). What we did The research combines quantitative and qualitative methods. We analyzed around 11,000 Facebook posts and 45,000 Gab posts by Australian-based accounts and users who meet our working definition of far-right (see section 2). This quantitative analysis offers insights into the prevalence of mainstream media sources in their far-right online messaging and which outlets are particularly frequently shared. In addition, we conducted a qualitative multimodal in-depth analysis of a quasi-random sample of 224 Facebook and 298 Gab posts that contained an outbound link to a URL domain associated with a mainstream media outlet. This qualitative analysis allowed us to identify how mainstream media are (re)framed and (mis)appropriated within these far-right online space to deliver certain ideological messages.    

Melbourne; The Centre for Resilient and Inclusive Societies. August 2022. 26p.

By Elinor Carmi

"Forget everything you know about spam. Now, let's talk about spam. Digital Distortions is about the power behind producing deviant media categories. This book explores the politics behind categories we take for granted such as spam and noise, and what this power means for our broader understanding of media. Despite being an inseparable part of our lives, we know very little about these media categories. The book synthesizes approaches such as media theory, sound studies, feminist technoscience and software studies into a new composition to explore media power. Through the concepts of processed listening and rhythmedia, Digital Distortions draws on sound and sound's ability to cross boundaries as a conceptual framework to think and examine media power more productively. Drawing on repositories of legal, technical and archival sources, Digital Distortions amplifies three stories about media distortions. The book shows that spam received different names in different periods; it is part of a larger project to influence the way people think, understand, and engage with media. The book starts in the early 20th century with Bell Telephone's production of noise. The next story jumps several decades to the web metric standardization in the European Union and the production of spam. The final story focuses on the 2010s and the way Facebook constructs unwanted behaviours. These stories show how deviant categories re-draw boundaries between human and non-human, public and private spaces, and, importantly, social and antisocial"--

New York : Peter Lang, [2020] 270p.

By Joe Caluori, Violette Gadenne, Elen Kirk, and Beth Mooney

The National Crime Agency published its first intelligence assessment of county lines in 2015.  Ever since, there has been a growing interest in county lines from the media, public policy, and the world of research. Crest Advisory has published research that has contributed to the body of evidence, among other things, on the socio-economic determinants of individual vulnerability to exploitation, shining light on ways to mitigate those risks. This project, however, takes a different approach, by honing in on the specific role played by technology in county lines. In this report, ‘technology’ is used to refer to electronic or digital devices or services predominantly those used for personal communication. By including devices and services in our definition we incorporate both physical hardware such as mobile phones or smartwatches, and software such as applications provided by social media platforms. Technology plays an ever-increasingly important role in our day-to-day lives. Data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show that the proportion of adults who use the internet daily has increased from 35 percent of the UK population in 2006 to 89 percent in 2020. The nature of this usage has also changed dramatically, with social media increasing in influence significantly over the years. In 2021 TikTok, a social media platform designed for sharing short videos, overtook Google for the first time as the most popular site worldwide.5 Just as modern technologies are now an essential aspect of modern society, technology is intrinsic to the county lines model. The mobile phone, or the ‘line’ it facilitates, enables communications between those running the lines, those distributing the drugs, and those buying and using the drugs. Current approaches to disrupting county lines rely heavily on mobile communications technology (e.g. cell site analysis, or digital forensics gained from burner phones, personal smartphones, or other digital devices). However, the role of technology as an enabler of child criminal exploitation (CCE) is both under-represented and poorly understood in published research and literature. The Government has announced an intention to “cut the head off the snake” of county 6 lines. To understand what is required to do this, it is necessary to explore the dynamics of the country lines model, as well as examine its weaknesses. There is an acute need to better understand and monitor technological evolutions within county lines and analyze their implications for CCE. Only by understanding and responding to the role of technology can the Government and law enforcement leaders produce an effective national plan to ‘cut the head off the snake’ of county lines. Recent public policy developments have put the role technology plays in enabling crime in sharp focus. Social media and online platforms have seen perhaps the most dramatic rise in interest. Even though at the time this report is being drafted, the Online Safety Bill has been put on hold, much ink has been spilled on its value, its potential impact on privacy, and what should be included in such legislation. High-profile cases, such as the events leading to the 6th January attack on the United States Capitol in 2021, have shown the potential harm that can be caused by online communication. More generally, as we become more and more dependent on tech for all aspects of our lives, it is crucial that law enforcement keeps pace with its development concerning crime

London: Crest Advisory, 2022. 37p.