What hysteria? A systematic study of newspaper coverage of accused child molesters

Abstract

Objective: There were three aims: First, to determine the extent to which those charged with child molestation receive newspaper coverage; second, to analyze the nature of that coverage; and third, to compare the universe of coverage to the nature of child molestation charges in the criminal justice system as a whole. Method: Two databases were created. The first one identified all defendants charged with child molestation in Rhode Island in 1993. The database was updated after 5 years to include relevant information about case disposition. The second database was created by electronic searching the Providence Journal for every story that mentioned each defendant. Results: Most defendants (56.1%) were not mentioned in the newspaper. Factors associated with a greater chance of coverage include: cases involving first-degree charges, cases with multiple counts, cases involving additional violence or multiple victims, and cases resulting in long prison sentences. The data indicate that the press exaggerates “stranger danger,” while intra-familial cases are underreported. Newspaper accounts also minimize the extent to which guilty defendants avoid prison. Conclusions: Generalizing about the nature of child molestation cases in criminal court on the basis of newspaper coverage is inappropriate. The coverage is less extensive than often claimed, and it is skewed in ways that are typical of the mass media.