The value of data rather
than dogma and belief
41. Crime has fallen yet, as noted, the public

perception often differs from this reality.7 Like
other issues where scientific evidence is
debated, misused or discounted and complex
issues are reduced to simple, contradictory
positions, law-and-order issues―and the
ways to manage imprisonment―are infused
with advocacy and political posturing.
42. Populist, ‘eye-for-an-eye’, retributive justice

calls often relate to deeply distressing
events. 46 This militates against restorative
justice efforts, which are often more complex,
and have less easily derived slogans or media
appeal.
43. Most victimisations (around two-thirds) are

not reported to authorities (such as family
violence and sexual crime).6 Even more so, of
those crimes that are reported, media
coverage focuses primarily on homicides and
other rare, drug-, sex- or violence-related
crimes, especially involving high-profile or
high-status individuals, or children (whether
as victims or perpetrators).47
44. The longstanding media tradition of, ‘If it
48

bleeds,
it
leads’
highlights
the
‘newsworthiness’ of crime events that are
violent (bloody), extraordinary (and yet
implying risk of such harm to us all),
personified, emotional and local. 49 It is
noteworthy that mainstream media in New
Zealand have appeared to follow this trend,
with crime reporting making up 70% of some
day’s news coverage in a 2016 sample of the
New Zealand Herald, and averaging 31% of
daily news coverage (up from 21% in 1993).50
Coverage style has also changed, as resources
for specialist crime reporters or in-depth
journalistic inquiry dwindle, to emphasise
‘celebrity victims’, single source stories, and
social-media reports.50
45. News coverage portrays crime as caused by

individuals who need harsh punishment,
rather than as a complex issue with multiple
driving factors related to individual, social and
systemic contexts.51 Although highly unusual
cases may be portrayed as if they reveal
general truths about the state of society

(‘youth of today...’), data on the actual
patterns and causes of crime are rarely
covered47 nor communicated by officials in
‘newsworthy’ ways.52
46. As people have limited personal experience of

crime,
news media depictions can
disproportionately influence their views.53 For
example, NZ survey respondents in 2016
reported they relied on news media coverage
for information about crime (e.g., online and
hardcopy newspaper reports were the main
source of information for 81%), whereas only
12% had had a personal experience of crime.7
Lobby groups responding to specific cases also
engage with media directly, providing vivid
images and experienced media spokespeople
for victim’s stories, and developing alarming
themes such as ‘killer kids’ in relation to rare
events.54
47. Groups who are less likely to experience crime

(such as those aged over 50 years) can be
more likely to think it is increasing. In fact,
crime is concentrated among at-risk groups,
with 3% of victims experiencing more than
50% of all crime.6
48. Victimisation and offending behaviour are

closely linked, and strongly correlated to low
socioeconomic status (e.g., high rates of
victimisation for Māori).6
49. A feature of countries with low prison

populations (e.g., Sweden, Norway, Finland,
Germany) includes their adherence to ‘expert’
knowledge and robust evidence to influence
policy, and consequent rejection of populistdriven and emotive criminal-justice politics.55,
56 , 57
In Finland, for example, 3 out of 4
respondents endorsed a general survey
question, typical of populist ‘research’ that,
‘Offenders should be given harder sentences
than they currently are’. Yet more nuanced
research, which used vignettes to explore the
sentences that laypeople and a sample of
judges would recommend, saw more diverse
endorsements of community and preventive
measures, not just imprisonment.58 There was
also strong support by laypeople for judges to
make decisions independent of public
opinion, and trust that they were capable of
doing so.58

14

 50

International evidence irom countries that
have managed to reduce their prison
populations includes shifting the emphasis of
the criminaHustice system irom primarily
punishment to more rehabilitation and
reintegration, and therefore expanding
rehabilitation and reintegration options, 
intensive community superVision.37

Diverting more offenders into community/7
based alternatives (based on certain
requirements) has been successiul in Finland
lwith a 28% reduction in people sentenced to
prison over a 13 year period A particular
emphasis on the diversion, rather than
incarceration, of youth oitenders has also
been eflective; ior example, in Germany,
young adults until the age of 27 land routinely
between 18 and 21 years oldl can still be
sentenced under youth criminal law not adult
sanctions.Lo

Also, agreeing on principles to guide criminalr
justice policy loiten led by an independent
working group that engages the publicl can be
effective."