NCJ Number
179911
Journal
Current Issues in Criminal Justice Volume: 10 Issue: 1 Dated: July 1998 Pages: 37-51
Date Published
1998
Length
15 pages
Annotation
An Australian newspaper's campaign against an experiment that would have provided heroin to drug addicts is examined, with emphasis on the difficulties associated with determining exactly what represents reliable public opinion and the pitfalls of the responsive approach to policy and law-making.
Abstract
Plans for a study into the controlled availability of opioids (the Heroin Trial) to reduce the harm associated with illicit drugs were discussed starting in the late 1980's. A feasibility study concluded that the experiment was feasible in principle. The second stage of the analysis was to examine logistical issues related to the implementation of a randomized controlled trial. Support from elected officials and government agencies was initially forthcoming. However, the country's largest newspaper, The Daily Telegraph, stated its determination to defeat the proposed experiment. This tabloid had initially presented some columns and letters supporting the experiment. However, it changed its editorial policy in July 1997 and subsequently published only articles, letters, and editorials opposing the experiment. It also personalized the issues, gave simplistic descriptions of the problem and potential solutions, highlighted the costs, suggested that the experiment would sanction crime, misrepresented the experiment's purpose, and used cartoons to reinforce its messages. Subsequently, it praised the government's decision to withdraw its support for the project. This case demonstrates the need for governments to move beyond responding to newspaper reports and the latest polls and therefore to consult with all those whose interests are directly affected by proposed change, not merely the loudest, the strongest, and the richest. Illustrations, footnotes, and 34 references