The media report on crime in a sensationalist manner. Following popular demand, they focus on the most spectacular representations of violence, to the extent, which is totally out of proportion with the actual amount of violent crimes committed. On the other hand, the media at times do not touch upon the most extreme forms of violence, in order to protect the illusion of integrity of certain individuals or social systems.

The overexposure of violence in the media, accompanied by outraged journalistic commentary on the inefficiency and leniency of the justice system in dealing with violent offenders, makes the public feel that the punitive policies are too mild and that there is a need for stricter measures to prevent crime. The public, feeling threatened and let down by the system, becomes more susceptive to vigilantist initiatives and other demands for self-help.

In light of these findings, the survey analyses the reporting on violence in Slovene print and television programmes. The results have shown that POP TV programming contains a significantly greater share of violent content and content depicting accidents than the programming of SLO 1, reflecting an obvious difference in the editorial policies. Slovenske novice, the highest selling Slovene daily, shows a 19 per cent share of violence in its content. Disregarding the supplements, the content of which is virtually always neutral or non-violent, violence makes for 29 per cent of the entire content of Slovenske novice. The front pages of Slovenske novice show an astonishing 66,7 per cent share of violent content. Comparatively, Dnevnik contains 8,6 per cent of violent content, while Delo contains 3,1 per cent.

Even though the survey has shown an overwhelming amount of violence in the Slovene media, the author feels it inappropriate to resort to censorship, seeing that in a world, interwoven with electronic systems and networks, it is impossible to dam the flow of information. There is a need for a cultural framework, within which the media audience will be able to distinguish between the good and the bad. The author understands the difficulties in trying to create such a framework. The process is hindered by the audience’s voyeuristic interest in violent content, as well as economic interests of its providers.

The author concludes by offering a partial solution. He proposes the establishing of expert bodies within television stations and newspaper publishing houses, which would deal with the representation of violence in the media.