Numerous public polls in recent years found crime and public safety are near the top of Portlanders’ concerns. There’s plenty of external validation and fuel for those concerns, namely media outlets near and far making hay of Portland’s perceived struggles with crime.
However, media coverage of crime often paints an inaccurate or incomplete picture, according to Melissa Thompson, a criminologist and PSU sociology professor who teaches a class on crime in media.
This is Part 3 of a 3-part series examining data regarding Portland crime rates. Read Part 1 and Part 2 here.
“It’s one of those well-known truisms in those who study crime, and especially those who study the media and crime, is that ‘if it bleeds, it leads,’ meaning that if it’s a violent crime, if it’s a homicide, it’s going to lead, it’s going to be the main story in the media,” Thompson said. “I think it’s pretty fair to say that it is absolutely the inverse of reality, in terms of what gets the most attention in the media — and from politicians too — is usually the most rare … type of crime.
“The more serious crime is what people are generally the most afraid of and most worried about. So in that sense, it makes sense that it gets a lot of attention … but those are by far the least likely to occur.”
This ethos leads news outlets to prioritize the most shocking or serious stories, Thompson said, adding it’s not simply what media outlets tend to run with, but who they talk to for their crime reporting. Oftentimes, police are the only source media outlets speak with about crime.
“My understanding of media is if there are two sides of a story, you want someone from both sides to get a quote from,” Thompson said. “And there isn’t usually that assumption that there’s going to be two sides to a crime story. You just get a quote from the (police) media information officer about the crime-related story, and then move on.”
While the Portland Police Bureau, or PPB, city leaders and even local business lobbies recently began discussing the subsiding crime wave in Portland, PPB’s data shows overall crime never really increased. By some metrics, it even decreased.
Over the last four years, 2020-2023, the annual average of emergency and non-emergency calls resulting in police dispatch is 11% below the annual average established from 2016 through 2019, according to PPB data. Arrests declined by 44% in that same time. Other than a few notable exceptions — vandalism, car thefts, burglaries and assaults, in that order — even unconfirmed reports of crime are fairly flat comparing 2020-2023 to 2016-2019.
And yet, many believe crime increased substantially in recent years. As a criminologist with decades of experience, Thompson sees a substantial difference between data and public perception.
“I have been at PSU for over 20 years now,” Thompson said. “People know that I study crime, and so I’ll get friends and acquaintances say, ‘Oh, aren’t you so terrified of going to downtown Portland?’ And no, I actually am aware of the crime trends, and I don’t see a significant increase in crime. I think my risk is about the same as it has always been, if not lower. But that is not the public perception, whether it’s media, whether it’s social media.”
The perception Portland is overrun with crime is as prevalent as it is inaccurate. Even recently sworn-in PPB Chief Bob Day said reducing crime and fear of crime is his main goal, though he and city leaders continue to discuss “crime” as a major issue for the city. If police are solely responsible for narratives about crime, will the fear subside when police simply change what they tell the public?
Correlation without causation and the power of perspective
Thompson said while crime decreased in recent decades, media coverage of crime, and the public awareness it creates, have only increased.
“Overall, since the 1990s (crime) has been on this sort of downward decline that we’ve seen less crime, maybe a slight increase in the covid years, but overall, it’s down considerably, and that’s especially true for the most serious forms of crime,” Thompson said. “Crime is down, but the amount of media attention has only continued to increase in those same years.
“So there’s been these two competing trends, one on a downward slope and one on an upward slope, with crime on the downward slope and media attention to especially the more serious forms of crime, which are the least likely to occur, on an upward slope.”
Aaron Roussell, PSU associate sociology professor and an expert on policing, believes a convergence of several factors can explain the disconnect between PPB’s data and its personnel’s statements, as well as why a crime wave narrative can gain so much ground on reality with so little grounding in reality.
First, police departments are acting in a form of self-interest in trying to secure more funding from total municipal budgets like any other bureau or department.
“Police are entirely self-interested, and they are more than willing to lie, or tell the truth, or tell some mix of the two in order to retain funding, power, authority,” Roussell said.
Thompson, while not speaking specifically about PPB, highlighted instances in other cities where police were found to have inflated, deflated or selectively highlighted crime statistics depending on the desired narrative. If a police department wants more funding or staffing, the data is used or manipulated to show increased crime. If a city needs more tourist dollars or wants to attract a large event like the Super Bowl, Thompson said, police may face political pressure to downplay crime.
“All roads lead back to more funding or more resources,” Thompson said.
Second, and often a distinction between police and other public bodies, police are almost entirely in control of statistics and metrics showing their need and efficacy, according to Roussell.
“When we talk about crime statistics, those are official statistics, and police are the officials who collect those statistics,” Roussell said, adding this allows police to determine what does or does not count in the statistics they generate. “So in a very literal sense, police generate crime statistics.”
Third, police and police departments are often perceived as inherently trustworthy, and more trustworthy than the average person, despite numerous studies indicating police and other people with powerful positions are actually more likely to be dishonest. Roussell said there’s a systemic function for dishonesty.
“(Law enforcement) has a general directional interest in increasing its power and authority and ability to do what it pleases,” Roussell said, noting there is a distinction in this between lower-level personnel and administrators. “The question is whether they’re lying at any given time or whether they’re telling the truth. The truth, when it supports them, they’re more than happy to tell, right? The fact that I don’t trust them as far as I can throw them is just because whatever they say is going to be the most expeditious thing for them. It has no relationship one way or the other with what is actually happening.”
Regarding trust in police and official narratives, Thompson points to media coverage often relying solely on police as part of the problem.
“We’re not getting the perspective of anybody outside the police, and so it results in this assumption that reports from the police are always accurate and can be trusted and reliable,” Thompson said. “There is not the same level of assumption, not the same assumption of trust with anybody else who’s being quoted, or anybody else who’s being interviewed for a story.”
Fourth, and finally, Roussell said these misconceptions intersect with individual biases about Portland’s growing homeless population, making people more prone to believe people are committing more crimes.
“I think people are really grounding that notion (of more crime) up against their experiences of more homeless people in the city,” Roussell said. “More visibly homeless people … your average middle-class person, they associate that with crime. And that is a thing that they see. So when someone says the crime rate is higher, they’re more than willing to believe it, even if it’s lower.”
All of this, combined with a widely held, yet incorrect, belief that more police equals less crime, creates a perfect storm in which police can advance an incomplete or incorrect narrative and benefit from public or political outcry, according to Roussell.
“The trick is — and it is kind of a trick, and they’re good at it — is to demonstrate that things are always getting worse and that the answer is always them,” Roussell said. “Even though if you just apply a microsecond of thought, you’re like, ‘Well, wasn’t that true last year too, and you didn’t do anything about it if this is all true?’ Somehow, they manage to maintain both of those things simultaneously in the public consciousness. ‘We can fix this problem, and the problem is getting worse.’
“The answer is always going to be more police.”
To Roussell, this all happens in a society broadly lacking context around the concept of crime, which is, in itself, a one-sided approximation of social harm excluding state violence. State violence, of which Roussell has also studied and published academic articles, refers to things like police brutality and deaths in law enforcement custody. Not only is there a non-linear relationship between the number of police and the number of alleged crimes, but police also commit acts that, while not included in crime statistics, would likely be considered a “crime” by the public.
Street Roots reporter Jeremiah Hayden contributed reporting to this story.
Street Roots is an award-winning weekly investigative publication covering economic, environmental and social inequity. The newspaper is sold in Portland, Oregon, by people experiencing homelessness and/or extreme poverty as means of earning an income with dignity. Street Roots newspaper operates independently of Street Roots advocacy and is a part of the Street Roots organization. Learn more about Street Roots. Support your community newspaper by making a one-time or recurring gift today.
© 2024 Street Roots. All rights reserved. | To request permission to reuse content, email editor@streetroots.org or call 503-228-5657, ext. 40
This article appears in August 21, 2024.