The purpose of cultural criminology is to examine and describe crime and forms of crime control as cultural products. Criminality and actors in crime control are seen as creative notions that can be expressed in symbolically mediated cultural practices. Thus, subculture members, politicians, media producers, commercial organizations, and other relevant actors provide meaningful explanations for their actions. Cultural criminology considers its task the analysis of the ongoing process of interpretation, reinterpretation, and deconstruction (Wickert, 2019). The theory does not see itself as a theory of crime in a narrow sense; instead, it is a paradigm or perspective approach of crime as a phenomenon, placing significant emphasis on the importance of images, symbols, and representations of self-staging. Cultural criminology qualitative relies on the social sense drawing meanings and methods of ethnography as well as textual and content analysis.
Thus, the main point of difference between cultural criminology and other theories of crime is that it places criminality and control over it in a specific context that can be interpreted differently when viewed from varied perspectives. That is, the theory views crime and the relevant agencies and institutions of crime control as cultural products or as creative constructs. As such, corruption must be approached from the standpoint of the meanings that it carries. To facilitate an understanding of cultural criminology, it is essential to consider such ideas as crime as culture, culture as crime, the media constructions of crime control and corruption, and political dimensions of culture, crime, and cultural criminology.
Crime as culture entails the characterization of deviant subcultures as systems of symbols, which may include the style and appearance of their members, slang expressions, as well as any signs, slogans, and other methods of differentiation. In this sense, crime as culture means that individuals belong to a subculture that requires one’s capacity to construct and deconstruct the system of collective codes and practices. Besides, within the subculture that considers crime among its defining culture, symbolic communication may also often occur besides face-to-face interactions.
Culture as crime is a thematic area of cultural criminology that entails the criminalization of cultural products and players. The analysis of the area depends, on the one hand, on the differentiation between the so-called high culture and, on the other hand, popular culture. Criminalizing cultural products and the various forms that it takes mainly influences popular culture. Although, it is necessary to note several isolated examples in which criminalization also influences the products of the so-called high culture. For instance, the photographs taken by Jock Sturges and Robert Mapplethorpe were deemed pornographic despite the fact that their intention was artistic expression. On the downside, the stigmatization and criminalization predominantly affect artists that belong to social minorities and subcultures, such as black rap musicians, punk musicians, LGBTQ artists, and others.
The third thematic focus area, media constructions of crime control and crime, is focused on the analysis of reciprocal action mechanisms of the judicial system and the media. Drawing from the works of Cohen and Becker, such constructs as moral panics and folk devils have been heavily covered in media. An example of the media construction of crime and crime control pertains to the Satanic panic, a national hysteria episode that dominated the media in the 1980s (Hughes, 2016). The event involved the severe moral panic associated with more than twelve thousand unsubstantiated satanic ritual abuse cases in the 1980s in the United States (Hughes, 2016). The issue with satanic panic relates to the extreme media coverage of the alleged abuse of satanic rituals, with the information not being verified or taken from unreliable sources. Therefore, due to the relationship of dependence between media coverage and crime, especially when it comes to the determination of which crime phenomena should be covered and which should not get any attention. In the thematic area of media constructions of crime control and crime, it is essential to consider media’s construction of crime as a product of entertainment.
The thematic area of focus, which entails the political dimension of culture, crime, and cultural criminology, is concerned with the analysis of power relations in which social control, media, and crime stand. Specifically, deviant subcultures become targets of stately surveillance and control or are subject to a process of commodification. In the sense of “cultural wars,” the art establishment that includes alternative artists argues about the aesthetic value of works. However, the opponents of such art declare this alternative art a crime and take criminal justice actions against artists. The censorship that affects artists that are politically motivated provides an extreme case of the arguments regarding artistic interpretation from the hegemonic perspective. Mass media has succeeded in focusing on the crime and social control by focusing on or ignoring specific themes. For example, there is currently a large number of a large number of TV shows (e.g., Making a Murderer, the Night Stalker, Tiger King, The Jinx, and others) in which crime is viewed from a cultural perspective. In Making a Murderer, for example, life in rural Manitowoc is depicted as full of crime due to the low quality of life and poor education levels of the population. In The Jinx, a commentary on the norm of the rich and powerful being able to get away with murder for a long time is made.
Cultural criminology is distinct from the general theory of crime due to its key terms. For example, the theory gives attention to such terms as transgression, carnival of crime, and edgework. At the time of festivities, the valid norms of power relations are not considered, including class differences, gender differences, with the social order being disregarded, with no sanctions expected for irrational and senseless behaviour. Criminological verstehen, drawn from the work of Max Weber, is concerned with the understanding of social action as an imperative component of social development (Ferrell, 1997). The emphasis is placed on actors and their relevant constructions of meaning underlining their actions. Finally, the term style is also given significance as appropriate to the theoretical tradition of symbolic interactionism. According to the theory, interactions are characterized by specific symbols used for expressing themselves, mainly in relationships, social objects, and situations.
While cultural criminology does not claim that it is an independent and self-contained approach to exploring crime, it has been subjected to some criticism. For example, it is considered too general while the methodological approach is too arbitrary, with crimes supposedly being played down. Despite the criticism, in the current climate, especially with the increased interest of media in crime, cultural criminology provides an interface for exploring the interplay between crime and culture in modern society.