«Everything that appears in the press about the police tends to be negative»

I wouldn't see it so much as a failure because there are many places where the relation with the police is based on fear and, despite this, they are democratic systems. In some of them the police are seen as a tool of the government while in others they are perceived as an organization much more independent from the executive. For example, in Santa Barbara County, where I live, citizens democratically choose the sheriff and candidates for becoming police officers have to pass a series of exams, even the polygraph, but in the end some members of the community have the legal authority to decide whether or not they are in favor of the police candidate. More and more there is the tendency to apply community police action, which consists of cooperation between police forces and civil society. We've realized that when there is a problem in a neighborhood cooperative action with residents is much more efficient than purely police action. It depends on the city. At times having police officers from ethnic minorities is worse because they may be seen by members of their community as people who have sold out to the system. And in addition, the police officers often have a cultural basis regarding how police from their countries act, which is quite different from how it is done in the United States, as occurs with Mexican or Vietnamese immigrants. Bilingual officers have more points for being promoted up the police ladder, and for this reason some learn another language but, by contrast, don?t show any interest in the culture that is behind this language. And sometimes this factor may be more important than simply speaking another language. On the other hand, it is also important that newcomers show willingness to adapt to the culture and norms of the welcoming country and that it not always be the police force that adapts to them. For that reason the case of bilingual police officers may make things worse because as long as police try to adapt themselves to that culture, these ethnic minorities won't make any effort to respond in kind. There are other data that affirm that Hispanics trust the police even more so than Anglo-Americans. Regarding blacks, the Rodney King case was very complicated. King was no saint, but those events destroyed the good work done by thousands of police officers. It's also true that everything that appears in the press about the police tends to be negative, while there are many more positive aspects that never appear in the media. I can't give you an opinion on this case but I can about The Golden Girls, the popular comedy starring four older women. Many students commented to me that it was a program that presented a positive image of old people, however if you analyze it in greater depth you realize that many people perceived it as mockery, that those old women were actresses and that the butt of most of the jokes were, precisely, old people. Therefore, it's difficult to evaluate the effect of series like Hill Street Blues. Other programs, such as Cops, a reality show that gives a sensationalist image of the police, are just horrendous. The Santa Barbara Police Department, where I work, doesn't want to participate. But deep down, Cops shows what the people want to see: confrontation, drama, action and violence, and all of this involves presenting an authoritarian and violent image. If they showed the day to day police routine people would get bored. The problem is that even the police themselves have internalized this media message and they also want to give this image. In David D. Perlmutter's excellent book Policing the Media, Street Cops and Public Perceptions of Law Enforcement, the author spent a long time patrolling with police officers and taking photographs of them. And the officers themselves told him what he had to show and not show because they were concerned with giving this image of action. So, from the police themselves there is an ambiguous attitude regarding how they are portrayed by the media. At the time it had a very positive impact but now this has largely dissolved because there is no longer the threat to safety that existed at that time. And I would say that it was the firefighters who walked away with the greatest glory, something habitual in these cases. On the other hand, in moments of crisis in the United States, such as September 11, a typical reaction occurs among the community consisting of closing ranks and joining together. Thus, those attacks had a positive impact but this proved to be of limited duration. Indeed, the United States is more dangerous because there are more weapons. And we are not only dealing with firearms. It is quite common for youth gangs to use sharp instruments, such as switchblades, because they know that if they are arrested the sentence is less severe. All in all, it is a widespread problem that complicates matters. The dangerousness of the situation comes to the fore, for example, when a police officer stops a car since it is more complicated to approach a suspect if they are armed. But Americans aren't the only ones who are armed. My country, the United Kingdom, has very restrictive laws concerning the possession of weapons and, by contrast, as of a short time ago police officers began carry arms because there is the danger that civilians may dispose of a weapon. In principle this should have been the case but I don't see this happening. On the contrary, both communities have become conscious of the fact that this rivalry is hurting them and that what they have to do is stand up for themselves as minorities. For this reason they are beginning to join forces, to work together as people of color. The same thing occurs with the different Asian communities that competed with each other in the past and now, by contrast, increasingly display Pan-Asian community sentiment. There have been immense changes in the position and influence of women, but these attitudes continue to be present in society even though now people are more cautious about displaying them. A short while ago my wife lost her voice and several men made this comment to me, "talk with my wife and maybe she'll lose her voice to!". So, the stereotype is maintained that women talk too much. This is one example that indicates that men still feel the need to act this way. And the same occurs with women. We will be able to answer this question in the future, but yes; a certain qualitative change can be detected in the sense that the new generations have the capacity to do several things simultaneously. It's the case of a young officer who was writing an SMS while receiving orders from a superior. For him this was normal because he was writing and listening at the same time. There is, therefore, a dysfunction between generations. Another difference is the subject of privacy. The moment that a conversion takes place by e-mail it is no longer as private as a normal conversation. Thus, it is undeniable that there is a qualitative change and much evidence points out that we are truly faced with a new paradigm. On the other hand, when e-mail first appeared it seemed to be the panacea of communication among equals. However, there are studies that suggest that in reality it is worse, because from the moment that you don?t know who you are talking with, your desire to know is even greater: you need to know whether that person is man or woman, black or white, married or not, etc...