fear
Today I would like to talk about the recent news on the shadow home secretary Chris Grayling and the Tories ‘terror’ campaign on violent crime in the UK.
In Friday’s newspapers Sir Michael Scholar, chairman of the UK Statistics Authority, spoke against the “misleading” use of statistics data on violent crime by the Tories. The denounce comes after the MP for Milton Keynes North East’s decision to use leaflets to spread the message regarding an increasing level of violence in the region – “violent attacks had increased from 1,790 in 1999 to 6,015 last year”.
In January, the Daily Telegraph reported similar data from another Conservatories’ comparison of crime statistics. The article was titled “Rural crime wave exposed in new figures”, the results were daunting:
– Gloucestershire recorded a 143 per cent rise in total violent crime, including a 165 per cent rise in violence against the person
– Durham recorded a 96 per cent increase in sex crimes, and North Yorkshire saw an 85 per cent rise in the same category
– North Wales recorded a 137 per cent rise in violence against the person
Let’s discover why this communication is misleading towards the public! As reported in the Guardian, the recording of crimes has increased since 2002 due to a change in definition occurred after the introduction of the National Crime Recording Standard. With the essential help of Sir Michael Scholar, now it is possible to understand the nature of these ‘shocking’ data. Sir Scholar has taken part of the debate to restore the public trust in the UK Statistics Authority. In a letter to Grayling, Scholar explains that such a use of data “seems likely to mislead the public” in the first place, and after “damage public trust in official statistics.”
This episode is an example of propaganda. The use of half-truths to deceive common people. Especially, the use of emotional feelings like the fear of crime is something always well appealed by governments and politicians. In the chapter Recognizing Propaganda of the book Trust Us, We’re Experts, the authors write about the Institute for Propaganda Analysis born in the US in 1937. The IPA was formed by a group of social scientists, journalists and opinion leaders with the intent to inform the public on the way propaganda was diffused and used in the US and in the world.
They found a series of basic types of rhetorical tricks used by propagandists. Among them I would like to mention the “name-calling”, which involves the use of insult words when speaking about political opponents, and the one who appeals to the fear of the citizens. A great user of the first practice is the Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi who accuses political opponents and the trial judges of being “communists” and “unpatriotic”. An example of the “fear appeal” is the one of the Tories to represent the UK as an insecure place, which will be safe only by the advent of the Conservative party. Polls are open to measure the credibility of these politicians.
The Thrift Shop of Ideas 