CSI Affective Essay: An Analysis Of 'The CSI Effect'
Running head: THE CSI EFFECT
The CSI Effect
Kelly Einan
Kaplan University
CM223
November 23, 2011
The CSI Effect
On a cold rainy day, I was flipping through my 800 channels, when I found a marathon. It was about 9:00am. We don’t have many of those days in Phoenix, Arizona. So I grabbed my grandmother’s quilt that she had worked so hard on, wrapped myself up, and brewed another cup of tea, with lemon and honey.
As I sat glued to my television set, morning grew to afternoon, then to sunset, and finally into evening. I was hooked. I found myself watching episode after episode of NCIS, and never thought that the “Miami Vice” guy from the 80’s could actually come back and really become an actual FBI agent! I also knew that I wanted to do whatever it …show more content…
took to have a job just like Abby. She is so smart and unique. The best part is…they always figure it out, no matter what, and just in the knick of time!
As for the fact and fiction part of this show, I realize that this is Hollywood.
Anything is possible in Hollywood, but I tried to find information on whether or not the information presented in the show was actually accurate. Through my research, I did not. Although I did find that there is an actual NCIS that does exist and they are doing episodes on the ID Channel of actual cases that happen, thirteen of them to be exact. So I feel in order to keep myself from falling into the NCIS effect, I will probably view those, just to be …show more content…
safe.
Although I have never watched CSI, I found it amazing to see that over 30 million people view it nightly, which also would explain why the “CSI effect” is quite controversial.
The CSI effect, also known as the CSI syndrome [1] and the CSI infection,[2] is any of several ways in which the exaggerated portrayal of forensic science on crime television shows such as CSI: Crime Scene Investigation influences public perception. (Wikipedia, n.d.)
Anthony E. Zuiker, creator of the CSI franchise, claimed that "all of the science is accurate" on the shows;[10] researchers, however, have described CSI's portrayal of forensic science as "high-tech magic".[11] Forensic scientist Thomas Mauriello estimated that 40 percent of the scientific techniques depicted on CSI do not exist.[12] In addition to using unrealistic techniques, CSI ignores all elements of uncertainty present in real investigations, and instead portrays experimental results as absolute truth.[13] The notion that these inaccurate portrayals could alter the public perception of forensic evidence was dubbed the "CSI effect", a term which began to appear in mainstream media as early as 2004((Wikipedia, n.d.)
Do you think jurors who watch these programs expect to see more forensic evidence presented at trials?
As far as trials, forensic evidence and jurors are concerned, I believe that these shows do not really effect what decisions are made based on a television show.
I think that we as people have made advancements in technology, and I believe that depending on the seriousness of a crime can place a higher regard on the forensic evidence that a juror might consider important. I also feel that eye witness testimony and fingerprints are especially important in criminal cases, as well as DNA to a large majority of people. But when it comes to bringing down verdicts, and the lives of people, I believe most of us can differentiate between reality and
fantasy.
In conclusion, I feel that these crime shows are for entertainment purposes. Of course they get things wrong, because cases do not get solved in an hour’s time. But it is nice to slip away for an hour, or as I said in the beginning, for an entire day…It’s Hollywood, and anything is possible in Hollywood!
Reference
Wikipedia (n.d.). CSI Effect. Retrieved November 22, 2011, from http://www.wikipedia.com
The CSI Effect
Kelly Einan
Kaplan University
CM223
November 23, 2011
The CSI Effect
On a cold rainy day, I was flipping through my 800 channels, when I found a marathon. It was about 9:00am. We don’t have many of those days in Phoenix, Arizona. So I grabbed my grandmother’s quilt that she had worked so hard on, wrapped myself up, and brewed another cup of tea, with lemon and honey.
As I sat glued to my television set, morning grew to afternoon, then to sunset, and finally into evening. I was hooked. I found myself watching episode after episode of NCIS, and never thought that the “Miami Vice” guy from the 80’s could actually come back and really become an actual FBI agent! I also knew that I wanted to do whatever it …show more content…
took to have a job just like Abby. She is so smart and unique. The best part is…they always figure it out, no matter what, and just in the knick of time!
As for the fact and fiction part of this show, I realize that this is Hollywood.
Anything is possible in Hollywood, but I tried to find information on whether or not the information presented in the show was actually accurate. Through my research, I did not. Although I did find that there is an actual NCIS that does exist and they are doing episodes on the ID Channel of actual cases that happen, thirteen of them to be exact. So I feel in order to keep myself from falling into the NCIS effect, I will probably view those, just to be …show more content…
safe.
Although I have never watched CSI, I found it amazing to see that over 30 million people view it nightly, which also would explain why the “CSI effect” is quite controversial.
The CSI effect, also known as the CSI syndrome [1] and the CSI infection,[2] is any of several ways in which the exaggerated portrayal of forensic science on crime television shows such as CSI: Crime Scene Investigation influences public perception. (Wikipedia, n.d.)
Anthony E. Zuiker, creator of the CSI franchise, claimed that "all of the science is accurate" on the shows;[10] researchers, however, have described CSI's portrayal of forensic science as "high-tech magic".[11] Forensic scientist Thomas Mauriello estimated that 40 percent of the scientific techniques depicted on CSI do not exist.[12] In addition to using unrealistic techniques, CSI ignores all elements of uncertainty present in real investigations, and instead portrays experimental results as absolute truth.[13] The notion that these inaccurate portrayals could alter the public perception of forensic evidence was dubbed the "CSI effect", a term which began to appear in mainstream media as early as 2004((Wikipedia, n.d.)
Do you think jurors who watch these programs expect to see more forensic evidence presented at trials?
As far as trials, forensic evidence and jurors are concerned, I believe that these shows do not really effect what decisions are made based on a television show.
I think that we as people have made advancements in technology, and I believe that depending on the seriousness of a crime can place a higher regard on the forensic evidence that a juror might consider important. I also feel that eye witness testimony and fingerprints are especially important in criminal cases, as well as DNA to a large majority of people. But when it comes to bringing down verdicts, and the lives of people, I believe most of us can differentiate between reality and
fantasy.
In conclusion, I feel that these crime shows are for entertainment purposes. Of course they get things wrong, because cases do not get solved in an hour’s time. But it is nice to slip away for an hour, or as I said in the beginning, for an entire day…It’s Hollywood, and anything is possible in Hollywood!
Reference
Wikipedia (n.d.). CSI Effect. Retrieved November 22, 2011, from http://www.wikipedia.com