The Dynamics of Criminality Changing in England and Wales

Introduction

Effective use of statistics published in government reports is a basic media necessity that is often neglected. In an attempt to attract the reader’s attention with sensational stories, writers may resort to only partial use of data or rephrase conclusions in a way that changes the perception of the agenda (The Open University, 2022a; The Open University, 2022b). Campbell’s (2021) article investigating rape and domestic violence patterns during the lockdown is a textbook example of this distortion. In this article, the author describes the dynamics of criminality changing due to the forced confinement of residents in England and Wales due to restrictive health measures related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Campbell reports a 15% increase in attempted domestic rapes of women compared to pre-lockdown rates. It also indicates that only one in six women will report a rape to the police, which leads the author to conclude that about one million rapes occur in the home. Additionally, the article talks about the number of reported domestic violence cases: this amounted to 850,000 in the last year (2020), which Campbell also attributes to being forced to spend time at home.

Thus, the general conclusion that the journalist draws in the article is that there is a link between the pandemic lockdown and increased rates of rape and domestic violence. Notably, at the end of the article, Campbell reports on the dynamics of computer hacking and theft but placing this information at the end of the article without discussion suggests that the data is not the central message of the paper.

Critique of the Newspaper Article

One of the points of divergence is the incorrect use of statistical data, ignoring essential details. The journalist writes about a sharp increase of 13 million crimes in the 12 months to June 2021 compared to a year earlier (Campbell, 2021). At the same time, government figures report an increase of 12.7 million in computer-related fraud offenses during this period but a decrease in general crime, excluding computer-related situations (ONS, 2021).

The difference between the two facts is that Campbell only uses an increase in crime but does not indicate that this increase is due to computer crime since when excluding this type of criminal technology, the number of crimes reported to the police decreased. It follows that it was important for Campbell to report only a public figure which would have increased the emotional impact of the reading and then provide a more detailed description of the tragic situations, but this line of narration reveals an error in the detailed analysis. Furthermore, Campbell ignores that the number of reported crimes, in general, is on an upward trend, as it is associated with an increase in population and the effectiveness of law enforcement services (The Open University, 2022b).

Although the number of crimes has increased, this is only due to the increased use of computers, which is the second detail that the author omits. Due to the deliberate omission of specific details, a similar distortion is true about domestic violence.

When discussing patterns of domestic violence, Campbell roundly points out the increase and immediately quotes Thompson that this may be due to being forced to stay at home. Following the information on the rape of women, this section in the journalist’s piece reads identically, that is, a direct link is made between lockdown and an increase in domestic violence. However, reference to government statistics shows a slightly different pattern.

Office for National Statistics (2021) reports that the increase is due to public campaigns to report and uncover such crimes by victims: while the ONS only suggests a link between lockdown and domestic violence, the journalist postulates it with a Thompson quote. Hence, the journalist makes the mistake of perceiving the risks of such an event. As Cooper and Cross (2017) suggested, domestic crime has one of the lowest risks of occurrence: however, it is actively discussed in the media because of its popularity and high interest.

Campbell’s message about the epidemic of domestic violence during lockdown can be read through the lens of such a mistake, which can cause fear when the risk in question is low. Thus, in reporting the dynamics of domestic violence, Campbell is not entirely accurate and does not provide the accompanying information that helps to read these facts critically. In addition, the journalist’s discussion of the data also does not accurately describe the situation concerning the rape of women.

Campbell confidently postulates that the number of rapes during the pandemic increased by 15% compared to pre-lockdown figures. However, government statistics give a different figure: it shows that the dynamics were inconsistent (ONS, 2021). Although the number of rapes increased in the summer of 2020, rapes fell sharply by 2,690 cases in the second quarter, when the lockdown began, and subsequently returned to baseline levels.

It does not follow from the ONS data that the number of rapes is associated with being forced to stay at home, and upon some consideration, even refutes the link; but the reporter ignores the general dynamism of such crimes and discusses only the inter-quarter increase. The number of rapes increased in the last quarter of the reporting year, but ONS again attributes this to public campaigns and advocacy for disclosure of such situations and only cautiously mentions lockdown. Campbell again commits the error of gender representation when they indicate that it is women who are victims of rape, which, however, is not supported by ONS data that does not name the gender of victims (Cooper and Cross, 2017).

Intentionally ignoring essential details, including showing a single fragment rather than the whole picture, leads to a more emotional reading. As a consequence of the three statements made by the journalist, it can be postulated that the title of the article itself turns out to be not entirely correct, as government data did not make the connection between the lockdown and the increase in the number of crimes described, which, however, the journalist herself did.

Discussion of the Government Report

The government data published in the ONS captures crime trends for the year ending June 2021 and allows comparisons with earlier years or between quarters. ONS (2021) used information gathered from police data and information from telephone surveys in England and Wales to generate the results. The report is conveniently divided into sections that statistically describe different forms of crime, from homicide to anti-social behavior, so the reader can quickly refer to only the relevant information. Such a division serves the purpose of differentiating information and being more consciously aware of it without mixing up data on different crimes. This reflects a careful approach to organizing the material and makes it much easier to work with. ONS follows a similar strategy when discussing sources of information.

As reported, the two primary sources for ONS were police report data and telephone survey results. However, ONS (2021) always quotes where the data came from before reporting specific figures, so there is clarity between police reports and telephone survey results when read carefully. The information obtained from each source may indeed differ because of the mechanism by which they are collected: victims are not always willing to report crimes by telephone but may contact the police, and vice versa. Given the use of the two sources of information, combined with a longitudinal view of the dynamics, these data can be seen as reliable and academically credible. The author is equally cautious in interpreting the findings.

As the past year has been associated with a pandemic, the data could easily be associated with a lockdown, leading to incorrect results. ONS (2021) avoids such a strong correlation when he carefully points out a potential association but never postulates it directly. Since it was not ONS’s intention to examine causal patterns, the author did not try to explain the dynamics of rape or domestic violence but could speculate about potential links between these. Such caution is the key to effective academic research, which understands the measure of responsibility and maintains neutrality. This makes the ONS report credible and cautious and worth using.

Conclusion

This paper investigated a Campbell journalistic article discussing the link between increased crime and lockdown. The article was based on the findings of a credible ONS government report and used the published data. However, the critical analysis showed that the journalist had resorted to ignoring important details or omitting the big picture when reporting on crime. Such representational errors could have led to misinterpretations of data and false conclusions, affecting the practical implications for law enforcement services and the public agenda.

Reference List

Campbell, K. (2021) ‘Crime epidemic in your own home: lockdown leads to surge in violence and sex offences in the home’ The Moon.

Cooper, T., and Cross, S. (2017) ‘Media representations’, in Vossler, A., Havard, C., Pike, G., Barker, M.J., and Raabe, B. (eds.) Mad or bad? A critical approach to counselling and forensic psychology. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp. 37-50.

Office for National Statistic (2021) Crime in England and Wales: year ending June 2021. Web.

The Open University. (2022a) ‘Week 4 Media representations of crime and therapy’. DD310-22J: Counselling and forensic psychology. Web.

The Open University. (2022b) ‘Week 3 The historical context’. DD310-22J: Counselling and forensic psychology. Web.