To Catch a Predator: what's wrong with it?

To Catch a Predator, one of the highest rated shows on television. You got a clear cut good guy, a clear cut bad guy, a confrontation, and somebody goes to jail. In other words there is no thinking required, which makes it perfect for most American households. Here's what I got a problem with in terms of this program, and no I'm not for pedophiles.

• Journalists working with the police How could this be wrong? Doesn't Cops work the same way? One big difference; in Cops, the journalists that are riding along don't take an active role. They are merely along for the ride. Dateline sets up the people, and then the police swoop on in. It's the difference between passive observer and active decoy. To put it in terms that are less sickening than pederasts, imagine this: let us suppose NBC decided to do a special called "To Catch a John", wherein they lure men to a hotel room, Chris Hansen interviews them and then the cops swoop in for the kill. Would any of you want to see that? But old Chris seems to enjoy being the investigator and getting a confession out of these people. I suppose next we'll see Deputy Chris Hansen with a badge and a gun swooping in with the rest of them.


• Two: the cops drawing guns on the pedophile. Maybe this isn't abuse of power, but it seems a little overblown. Some of you may say it's a felony, requires a felony take down. There are a lot of felony cases where cops do not go into a neighborhood with guns drawn. Did US Marshals rush the White House with guns drawn to arrest Lewis Libby? Did they slam Martha Stewart to the ground with more firepower drawn than the entire Canadian army?


• The lack of context. I've been searching the archives for where they actually solicit these people. While I have heard some are on kid-friendly chats like Myspace and Yahoo, I have heard that others are actually solicited on IRC (Internet Relay Chat). If they do solicit off IRC it's kinda like trolling in the red light district with a Catholic school girl. IRC has a much smaller base than the rest of the Web, and a lot of people that are slimy in the first place. Not all IRC chatters are like this, but you get a much more specialized audience. Yet the general population thinks that the entire web is no more safe than IRC. And when the common man gets bad ideas, politicians often push them into law.
  


• Dateline. And lest we not forget, Dateline has not had quite a stellar record in regards to ethical journalism. Before "To Catch a Predator", their infamous GM truck piece and "Cataract Cowboys" both skirted ethics.


• It gives excuses for idiots like McCain and that one senator from Illinois excuses for regulating the internet. Since we are not afforded any context as described above, McCain and others can seek to put onerous requirements on all web sites, not just the chat rooms where they pick these people up. They can treat sites that are perfectly legitimate just the same as the "Lolita" room on EFnet.


• The potential tainting of a jury pool. Yeah, yeah, you may say; and that person COPS just taped breaking into that house is "innocent until proven guilty". But not everything is so clear cut. Chris Hansen has admitted that some of the men who show up are talking about things that are improper but not legal. Yet he only leaves us the assurance that "probably" those people are not shown? Probably? How about until you find out what the district attorney has filed or will file, you probably don't show them.

• Dateline paying anti-pedophile watchdog group Perverted Justice a consulting fee. Does anybody here know the phrase "checkbook journalism"? A quick web search and you'll find out why it is so reviled in the world of reporting.
• We get the point already. I think the first fifty times you showed it drove home the point that the internet is not a safe place. Turn the page already. Or is that one too many tricks for you to learn, Chris?
  

And last but not least, if you think that I'm alone in these concerns and a nut for them, google "Chris Hansen" and "ethics" and see what you are finding.

For instance
http://www.digitalduke.duq.edu/article.asp?id=1253
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15592444/ (note the comments at the end. The mayor doesn't seem like the type to embrace pedophiles, but I guess he's not so down with the idea of his town being used as the honeypot for sexual predators).
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_diane_ma_070220_no_more_tabloid_jour.htm
http://www.ethicsscoreboard.com/list/dateline.html

[/list]

powered by performancing firefox