User:NavinN95/sandbox

= DRAFT =

Criticism
Many criminologists have voiced concerns regarding the challenges facing this emerging discipline. Christopher Uggen, and Michelle Inderbitzin highlight the structural disincentives towards practicing public criminology, including concerns about the "out-left political agenda of many public sociologists, which is a perceived retreat from scientific standards and methods, and the perception that public sociology is ineffectual as organized and practiced." There have been differing opinions on the scope and aims of public criminology, as some question whether or not it could be aimed at policy change, aim at informing the general public about criminological issues, or focus on the underlying socioeconomic process that shapes criminal justice. British Criminologist Paul Rock has voiced concerns regarding criminologist's lack of experience in policy-making, as well as questioning the integrity of public criminology if it is to be subject to the political spectrum. Rock addresses the public misconception of victim precipitation as victim blaming. “It might be far less important that criminologists endorse a measure than that, at the outset, the judiciary, or heads of other government departments, or chiefs of police, and then later, politicians on both sides of the Houses of Parliament do so.” In contrast, criminologist Emma Bell takes issue not with public criminology itself, but with the system under which it would operate. Believing that in order for public criminology to be effective it must shed light to the problematic criminal justice system itself. Criminologist Kenneth Land argues there are limited resources for public criminology to ideally reach the public, outside of the academic territory. He states that there are few chances to study and learn about public criminology outside of the academic area. Land stresses his concern that there are few employment opportunities for public criminology in regard to staying employed and staying relevant for a full-time career. In addition, criminologist Daniel Mears writes that there is little evidence to support the need for public criminology research. He believes that research should not be publicized. He relates public criminology to political dimensions and with wrong information given to the public, it can create a political backlash.

In addition, many scholars have struggled with the best ways to reach the public in a meaningful way. Criminologists Carrie Sanders and Lauren Eisler found it hard to engage the public when they opened a college course on criminology up to the public. In addition, public criminologists have taken issue with how little criminologists engage in news reporting. For example, Daniel Crépault acknowledges that while criminological news and research is frequently reported, it is often being picked through to serve a partisan agenda and then reported by non-criminologists. In a similar way, anthropologist Sindre Bangstad recognizes social media as an easy way to perform public scholarship, but worries that the soul of academic disciplines who engage will be lost in the vast sea of information. Others, like French Sociologist Loïc Wacquant, believe that the "public" label of public criminology is nothing more than an American sideshow. Hindrance on the debate on knowledge and politics, and confusing professional politics with normal citizen life.

Contemporary examples
Since there have been several instances of public criminology, these examples provide more valuable and reliable research towards the topic. News stations and academic articles provide the public with different ways to learn about topics relating to criminal justice.

Furthermore, many groups and organizations are dedicated to connecting the public with debates in the criminal justice system. For example, The Marshall Project was founded in 2014 by Neil Barsky and Bill Keller as a way to utilize journalism, public forum, and work with news outlets to report on recent articles relating to topics, people, and events of concern to the Criminal Justice System in America. Another example is a blog on public criminology created by Michelle Inderbitzin, Chris Uggen, and Sara Wakefield, which intends to inform the public on crime, law, and justice in the contemporary United States. Finally, The Center for Public Criminology, which is a segment at the Arizona State University School of Criminology, is dedicated to breaking the veil between the public and those professionals in the criminal justice field. They do this by educating both the public and professionals, while also addressing the stigmas and concerns that each group may have.

Plan of action:

 * Contemporary Examples:
 * Find more types of contemporary examples to bring in, along side the ones already introduced.
 * Possibly take our Gregg Barak, unless we can find more than enough supporting evidence on why he should be in the article, since it is said to be a conflict of interest.
 * Criticisms:
 * expand or clarify within the articles we have read, EX. Paul Rock
 * Possibly add more people and their views of the idea of public criminology AWGraham14 (talk) 16:48, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Overall:
 * Focus on the Talk page for our two sections and focus on what the editors say to change.
 * Focus on finding links to bring in for evidence.
 * Make sure the authors we have read are in the sections and that their ideology is expressed as well. AWGraham14 (talk) 17:19, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Comments:
where is the plan? what are you going to change? Will you focus on one section over another? What will you be working on in that section? Will you be working on clarity and concision, for example, in the Criticisms section? Or will you be working on fleshing out the Contemporary Examples section, in line with the suggested revision in the Talk section DoctorKarpiak (talk) 16:30, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Criticisms
Rock addresses the public misconception of victim precipitation as victim blaming.


 * Made "victim blaming" a hyperlink
 * Possibly get rid of "victim precipitation"

“It might be far less important that criminologists endorse a measure than that, at the outset, the judiciary, or heads of other government departments, or chiefs of police, and then later, politicians on both sides of the Houses of Parliament do so.”


 * Hyperlinked "Houses of Parliament"
 * Remove the second "both" in "...politicians on both sides of both Houses of Parliament do so." - add in "the" before "Houses"

In addition, many scholars have struggled with the best ways to reach the public in a meaningful way. As well as Criminologists Carrie Sanders and Lauren Eisler found it hard to engage the public when they opened a college course on criminology up to the public.[32] In addition, public criminologists have taken issue with how little criminologists engage in news reporting. For example, Daniel Crépault acknowledges that while criminological news and research is frequently reported, it is often being picked through to serve a partisan agenda and then reported by non-criminologists.[33] In a similar way, anthropologist Sindre Bangstad[34] recognizes social media as an easy way to perform public scholarship but worries that the soul of academic disciplines who engage will be lost in the vast sea of information.[35] Others, like French Sociologist Loïc Wacquant, believe that the "public" label of public criminology is nothing more than an American sideshow and a hindrance on the debate on knowledge and politics. With it also confusing professional politics with normal citizen life.[36]


 * Fix the flow and grammar within this paragraph.

Contemporary Examples
For example, Criminologist Gregg Barak has recounted his experiences with his recurring segment on Ann Arbor's 107.1 WQKL news station, during which he covered the daily developments during the O. J. Simpson Trial.[37] He calls this process "news-making criminology".[38] Similarly, Sanders and Eisler, explore ways in which public criminology can be taken from a conceptual discussion into a plan of action. In their article, they discuss their experience with an experiment in public criminology, in which they opened their course to the larger public for free.[39] News stations, academic articles, online forums, and blogs, provide the public with different ways to learn about topics relating to criminal justice.
 * possibly get rid of this, if we cannot find enough evidence to get rid of the supposed bias.
 * Get rid of the online forums and blogs since they could be written from a non-reliable source.

Article Name w/link[edit]

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Yes everything in the article was relevant because it covered the main details of the topic including the definition, history and criticisms which provided a lot of insight. Nothing really distracted me because of its clearness and conciseness.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * Even though Public Criminology is a relatively new concept, its roots can be traced back to early 1700s, but still no information seemed out of date. I'm not sure if there are many more but I would like to see if there are more examples available that could be added.
 * What else could be improved?
 * The only thing I would improve is add more examples if there are more.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The article seems to lean toward the notion that public criminology is the right answer, for example the section titled "The Need for Public Criminology".
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I think the article does a good way in representing criticisms and stating the points in favor for public criminology.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * The links that I checked worked just fine. The information on those sources does support the claims.
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Most of the facts are tagged with a citation and seems to be reliable. That information comes from articles written by those authors. They seem mostly neutral.
 * Talk Page
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * On the talk page, there is some dissent voiced about conflict of interest with the page being about a single article.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * This article has interest of three WikiProjects: Crime, Law Enforcement, and Sociology. I'm not sure how exactly it is rated, however, I do see that there are many suggestions to make this page better.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Wikipedia did not really discuss the topic itself, but more how the page was setup and the actual content.