Suchergebnisse

It is suggested that the reader consider an earlier publication by the same authors with a similar theme: "Perceptions of criminal justice in society" (Dobryninas, A., Dobrynina, M., Česnienė, I., Giedraitis, V., Merkevičius, R. "On Perceptions of Criminal Justice in Society." Sociologija: Mintis ir veiksmas. 2012. Issue 2. pg. 222–238). This article empirically illustrates how criminal justice principles are used to understand different social groups' perspectives, what are the similarities and differences between these groups, how the intergroup communications about criminal justice issues form, and so on. The authors analyzed and summarized qualitative data (focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews with Lithuanian criminal justice experts, politicians, journalists, community leaders) and quantitative data (using a Lithuanian representative survey of the population and Lithuanian mass media content analysis), which was collected during 2012–2014. The first chapter is devoted to the social normative perceptions of criminal justice, the second – the economic and political aspects which influenced the understanding of criminal justice in society, and the third chapter – examines the influence of mass media on the Lithuanian Criminal Justice system's public image. It is concluded that a consensus on the implementation of the principles of criminal justice among different groups is possible only in part. While the needs are the same as the criminal justice system, decisions must be impartial, objective, humane, equal for all, but how to achieve such a consensus of opinions is very divided. The study participants indicated a variety of reasons that impede the achievement of a mutual understanding: financial constraints, lack of inter-institutional cooperation, party or individual interests take precedence over the interests of society, the role of the media and so on. It is also proposed to improve the current situation in the organization and promotion of communication and alignment of interest between different social groups that have to be done in cooperation with the mass media and other governmental and nongovernmental institutions.

It is suggested that the reader consider an earlier publication by the same authors with a similar theme: "Perceptions of criminal justice in society" (Dobryninas, A., Dobrynina, M., Česnienė, I., Giedraitis, V., Merkevičius, R. "On Perceptions of Criminal Justice in Society." Sociologija: Mintis ir veiksmas. 2012. Issue 2. pg. 222–238). This article empirically illustrates how criminal justice principles are used to understand different social groups' perspectives, what are the similarities and differences between these groups, how the intergroup communications about criminal justice issues form, and so on. The authors analyzed and summarized qualitative data (focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews with Lithuanian criminal justice experts, politicians, journalists, community leaders) and quantitative data (using a Lithuanian representative survey of the population and Lithuanian mass media content analysis), which was collected during 2012–2014. The first chapter is devoted to the social normative perceptions of criminal justice, the second – the economic and political aspects which influenced the understanding of criminal justice in society, and the third chapter – examines the influence of mass media on the Lithuanian Criminal Justice system's public image. It is concluded that a consensus on the implementation of the principles of criminal justice among different groups is possible only in part. While the needs are the same as the criminal justice system, decisions must be impartial, objective, humane, equal for all, but how to achieve such a consensus of opinions is very divided. The study participants indicated a variety of reasons that impede the achievement of a mutual understanding: financial constraints, lack of inter-institutional cooperation, party or individual interests take precedence over the interests of society, the role of the media and so on. It is also proposed to improve the current situation in the organization and promotion of communication and alignment of interest ...

The perception of criminal justice in society is a controversial social problem. Traditionally, criminal justice issues have ban treated as a matter of professional interest for criminologists, criminal justice experts and other profesionals from related fields. But is expert knowledge the only valid kind when it comes to criminal justice topics? This question, though rhetorical, is aimed at stimulating discussian about the co-existence of different types of social knowledge on criminal justice, and their impact on various discourses concerning crime and punishment in society. In this article a group of researchers from Vilnim University makes use of phenomenological methods to analyse three different types of discourse on criminal justice: professional, political and public. The professional discourse of criminal justice is scrutinised from tbe perspective of penal law, the political discourse from the point of view of macroeconomics, while the public discourse is analysed using ideas drawn from psychology and media studies. The analysis of these discourses seeks to examine the social construction of criminal justice, and the particularities of its reception among professionals, politicians and a wider public.

The perception of criminal justice in society is a controversial social problem. Traditionally, criminal justice issues have ban treated as a matter of professional interest for criminologists, criminal justice experts and other profesionals from related fields. But is expert knowledge the only valid kind when it comes to criminal justice topics? This question, though rhetorical, is aimed at stimulating discussian about the co-existence of different types of social knowledge on criminal justice, and their impact on various discourses concerning crime and punishment in society. In this article a group of researchers from Vilnim University makes use of phenomenological methods to analyse three different types of discourse on criminal justice: professional, political and public. The professional discourse of criminal justice is scrutinised from tbe perspective of penal law, the political discourse from the point of view of macroeconomics, while the public discourse is analysed using ideas drawn from psychology and media studies. The analysis of these discourses seeks to examine the social construction of criminal justice, and the particularities of its reception among professionals, politicians and a wider public.

The perception of criminal justice in society is a controversial social problem. Traditionally, criminal justice issues have ban treated as a matter of professional interest for criminologists, criminal justice experts and other profesionals from related fields. But is expert knowledge the only valid kind when it comes to criminal justice topics? This question, though rhetorical, is aimed at stimulating discussian about the co-existence of different types of social knowledge on criminal justice, and their impact on various discourses concerning crime and punishment in society. In this article a group of researchers from Vilnim University makes use of phenomenological methods to analyse three different types of discourse on criminal justice: professional, political and public. The professional discourse of criminal justice is scrutinised from tbe perspective of penal law, the political discourse from the point of view of macroeconomics, while the public discourse is analysed using ideas drawn from psychology and media studies. The analysis of these discourses seeks to examine the social construction of criminal justice, and the particularities of its reception among professionals, politicians and a wider public.

The perception of criminal justice in society is a controversial social problem. Traditionally, criminal justice issues have ban treated as a matter of professional interest for criminologists, criminal justice experts and other profesionals from related fields. But is expert knowledge the only valid kind when it comes to criminal justice topics? This question, though rhetorical, is aimed at stimulating discussian about the co-existence of different types of social knowledge on criminal justice, and their impact on various discourses concerning crime and punishment in society. In this article a group of researchers from Vilnim University makes use of phenomenological methods to analyse three different types of discourse on criminal justice: professional, political and public. The professional discourse of criminal justice is scrutinised from tbe perspective of penal law, the political discourse from the point of view of macroeconomics, while the public discourse is analysed using ideas drawn from psychology and media studies. The analysis of these discourses seeks to examine the social construction of criminal justice, and the particularities of its reception among professionals, politicians and a wider public.

The perception of criminal justice in society is a controversial social problem. Traditionally, criminal justice issues have ban treated as a matter of professional interest for criminologists, criminal justice experts and other profesionals from related fields. But is expert knowledge the only valid kind when it comes to criminal justice topics? This question, though rhetorical, is aimed at stimulating discussian about the co-existence of different types of social knowledge on criminal justice, and their impact on various discourses concerning crime and punishment in society. In this article a group of researchers from Vilnim University makes use of phenomenological methods to analyse three different types of discourse on criminal justice: professional, political and public. The professional discourse of criminal justice is scrutinised from tbe perspective of penal law, the political discourse from the point of view of macroeconomics, while the public discourse is analysed using ideas drawn from psychology and media studies. The analysis of these discourses seeks to examine the social construction of criminal justice, and the particularities of its reception among professionals, politicians and a wider public.

The perception of criminal justice in society is a controversial social problem. Traditionally, criminal justice issues have ban treated as a matter of professional interest for criminologists, criminal justice experts and other profesionals from related fields. But is expert knowledge the only valid kind when it comes to criminal justice topics? This question, though rhetorical, is aimed at stimulating discussian about the co-existence of different types of social knowledge on criminal justice, and their impact on various discourses concerning crime and punishment in society. In this article a group of researchers from Vilnim University makes use of phenomenological methods to analyse three different types of discourse on criminal justice: professional, political and public. The professional discourse of criminal justice is scrutinised from tbe perspective of penal law, the political discourse from the point of view of macroeconomics, while the public discourse is analysed using ideas drawn from psychology and media studies. The analysis of these discourses seeks to examine the social construction of criminal justice, and the particularities of its reception among professionals, politicians and a wider public.