Reflections on the reporting of fraud in Australia

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to reflect on the reporting of cybercrime in Australia, specifically the reporting of fraud.Design/methodology/approachUsing an evaluation of the (former) Australian Cybercrime Online Reporting Network (ACORN), this paper provides a commentary on the report findings, including both positive and negative aspects of the reporting mechanism.FindingsThe paper focuses on three key challenges that were identified in the evaluation: victim satisfaction; quality of data; and unintended consequences. Each of these topics is outlined and located within a broader context to better understand the evaluation findings.Research limitations/implicationsThis viewpoint paper is a commentary based upon an evaluation of ACORN which itself has several limitations of its methodology. Despite this, the evaluation provides important insights into the challenges that currently exist with the online reporting of fraud offences both in Australia, and worldwide.Practical implicationsThis paper emphasises the structural and systemic issues that exist for the reporting of fraud in Australia. It therefore warns against placing blame exclusively on police agencies as responsible for these results. Instead, it advocates the need for society to take a more coordinated and collaborative approach to the policing of fraud, which includes law enforcement, government and industry partners.Social implicationsThe paper documents some of the underlying reasons for additional trauma and harm experienced by victims of fraud in their efforts to report their incident and receive what they perceive to be an appropriate criminal justice response. These must be acknowledged in order to make the required change.Originality/valueThis paper is a commentary and reflection on the current way in which fraud is reported in Australia. It points to a need to rethink this approach in some key areas. It highlights the critical need for an education campaign to dispel some of the myths that exist in relation to realistic police responses to fraud, and also calls for the need to consider alternatives to the exclusively online system currently in operation, as well as larger questions about notions of justice and appropriate responses to fraud victims.