Conclusion: Breaking Up and Breaking Down the Fight

  • Mark A. Wood
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Crime, Media and Culture book series (PSCMC)


This chapter considers how social media have generated new modes of crime-watching and shaped the way we understand and culturally construct crime. Through doing so, I survey some of the key issues relating to the research of online crime-watching and antisocial media including, notably, the constantly changing architecture and algorithms of (anti)social media. With the rise of the Internet and other digital environments, I argue that criminologists must cast a critical eye on software and its role in shaping cultural understandings of crime. I therefore propose a critical criminology of software that might examine how the values inscribed into software have implications for the way we understand, perceive and respond to crime.


  1. Antony, M. G. (2015). Audience responses to real media violence: The knockout game. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  2. Atkinson, R., & Rodgers, T. (2016). Pleasure zones and murder boxes: Online pornography and violent video games as cultural zones of exception. British Journal of Criminology , 56(6): 1291–1307.Google Scholar
  3. Berry, D. M. (2012). The social epistemologies of software. Social Epistemology, 26(3–4): 379–398.Google Scholar
  4. Bogost, I., & Montfort, N. (2009). Platform studies: Frequently questioned answers. Paper presented at Digital Arts and Culture 2009, Irvine, TX, December 12–15.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, S. (2013). Virtual criminology. In E. McLauglin & J. Muncie (Eds.), The SAGE dictionary of criminology: 3rd edition. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Castells, M. (1996). The information age 1: The rise of the network society. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Castells, M. (2007). Communication, power and counter-power in the network society. International Journal of Communication, 1: 238–266.Google Scholar
  8. Castells, M. (2009). Communication power. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Castells, M. (2011). The rise of the network society: The information age: Economy, society, and culture. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  10. Chadwick, K., & Scraton, P. (2013). Critical criminology. In E. McLauglin & J. Muncie (Eds.), The SAGE dictionary of criminology: 3rd edition. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Chan, J., & Bennett Moses, L. (2016). Is Big Data challenging criminology? Theoretical Criminology, 20(1): 21–39.Google Scholar
  12. Clarke, R. (1988). Information technology and dataveillance. Communications of the ACM, 31(5): 498–512.Google Scholar
  13. Clarke, R. V. G., & Mayhew, P. (1980). Designing out crime. London, UK. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.Google Scholar
  14. Cockfield, A., & Pridmore, J. (2007). A synthetic theory of law and technology. Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, 8(2), 475–513.Google Scholar
  15. Cunneen, C. (2001). Conflict, politics and crime: Aboriginal communities and the police. Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  16. Facebook. (2015). Community standards: Keeping you safe. Facebook. March 16, Retrieved June 14, 2015, from
  17. Fagan, G. G. (2011). The Lure of the arena: Social psychology and the crowd at the roman games. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Feeley, M. M., & Simon, J. (1992). The new penology: Notes on the emerging strategy of corrections and its implications. Criminology, 30(4): 449–474.Google Scholar
  19. Feenberg, A. (1991). A critical theory of technology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Feenberg, A. (2002). Transforming technology: A critical theory revisited. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977. Brighton, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  22. Fowles, J. (1974). On chronocentrism. Futures, 6(1): 65–68.Google Scholar
  23. Frabetti, F. (2015). Software theory: A cultural and philosophical study. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  24. Goldsmith, A. J., & Brewer, R. (2015). Digital drift and the criminal interaction order. Theoretical Criminology, 19(1): 112–130.Google Scholar
  25. Gray, R. (2015). ‘Tinder for fighting’ app lets you challenge people to brawls: Rumblr pits users against each other in bare-knuckle clashes. The Daily Mail, November 9. Retrieved October 16, 2016, from
  26. Greer, C. (2010). Introduction. In C. Greer (Ed.), Crime and media: A reader. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Hansen, M. B. N. (2000). Embodying technesis: Technology beyond writing. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Howard, P. N. (2011). Castells and the media. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
  29. Jameson, F. (1981). The political unconscious: Narrative as a socially symbolic act. New York, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Jewkes, Y. (2015). Media and crime. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Kitchin, R., & Dodge, M. (2011). Code/space: Software and everyday life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kittler, F. A. (2013). There is no software. In J. Johnson (Ed.), Literature, media, information systems: Friedrich A. Kittler Essays. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Lacan, J. (2006). Écrits. London, UK: W.W Norton.Google Scholar
  34. Lessig, L. (1999). Code and other laws of cyberspace. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  35. Lessig, L. (2006). Code Version 2.0. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  36. Lyon, D. (2007). Surveillance studies: An overview. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
  37. McCulloch, J. (2008). Key issues in a critical approach to policing. In T. Anthony & C. Cunneen (Eds.), The critical criminology companion. Sydney, Australia: Hawkins Press.Google Scholar
  38. Michalowski, R. J. (1996). Critical criminology and the critique of domination: The story of an intellectual movement. Critical Criminology, 7(1): 9–16.Google Scholar
  39. Moore, S. E. H. (2014). Crime and the media. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Morgans, J. (2015). Some genius has made an app to help angry douchebags fight each other. Vice, November 9. Retrieved October 16, 2016, from
  41. Morozov, E. (2013). To save everything, click here: The folly of technological solutionism. New York, NY: PublicAffairs.Google Scholar
  42. Ng, A. (2015a). Rumblr, the ‘Tinder for Fighting’ app, to launch its beta trial on November 9; This application is 100% serious, team says. Daily News New York, November 8. Retrieved October 16, 2016, from
  43. Ng, A. (2015b). Rumblr, the ‘Tinder for Fighting’ app is fake, turned out to be a marketing stunt. Daily News New York, November 9. Retrieved October 16, 2016, from
  44. Parikka, J. (2012). What is media archaeology? Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
  45. Powell, A. (2015). Seeking rape justice: Formal and informal responses to sexual violence through technosocial counter-publics. Theoretical Criminology, 19(4): 571–588.Google Scholar
  46. Rainie, L., & Wellman, B. (2007). Networked: The new social operating system. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  47. Ricoeur, P. (1970). Freud and philosophy: An essay on interpretation. London, UK: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Rock, P. (2005). Chronocentrism and British criminology. British Journal of Sociology, 56(3): 473–491.Google Scholar
  49. Rogers, R. (2013). Digital methods. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  50. Rumblr. (2015). Rumblr webpage. Retrieved October 16, 2016, from
  51. Rushkoff, D. (2011). Program or be programmed: Ten commands for a digital age. Berkeley, CA: Soft Skull Press.Google Scholar
  52. Salter, M. (2013). Justice and revenge in online counter-publics: Emerging responses to sexual violence in the age of social media. Crime Media Culture, 9(3): 225–242.Google Scholar
  53. Salter, M. (2016). Crime, justice and social media. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  54. Sassen, S. (2006). Territory, authority, rights: From medieval to global assemblages. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Scraton, P. (1991). Recent developments in criminology: A critical overview. In M. Haralambos (Ed.), Developments in sociology: An annual review, No. 7. Ormskirk, UK: Causeway Press.Google Scholar
  56. Shelton, A. A. (1994). Cabinets of transgression: Renaissance collections and the incorporation of the new world. In J. Elsner & R. Cardinal (Eds.), The cultural of collecting. London, UK: Reaktion Books.Google Scholar
  57. Standage, T. (2007). The Victorian Internet: The remarkable story of the telegraph and the nineteenth century’s on-line pioneers. New York, NY: Walker & Company.Google Scholar
  58. Surette, R. (2011). Media, crime, and criminal justice: Images, realities, and policies. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  59. Trayner, D. (2015). Rumblr: ‘Tinder for fighting’ lets you play Fight Club for real. Daily Star, November 9. Retrieved October 16, 2016, from
  60. van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wall, D. S. (2007). Cybercrime. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
  62. Winthrop-Young, G. (2013). Cultural techniques: Preliminary remarks. Theory, Culture & Society, 30(6): 3–19.Google Scholar
  63. Yar, M. (2016). Toward a cultural criminology of the Internet? Rethinking Cybercrime, The University of Central Lancashire, June 28.Google Scholar
  64. Young, J. (2003). Merton with energy, Katz with structure: The sociology of vindictiveness and the criminology of transgression. Theoretical Criminology, 7(3): 389–414.Google Scholar
  65. Zedner, L. (2007). Pre-crime and post-criminology? Theoretical Criminology, 11(2): 261–281.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark A. Wood
    • 1
  1. 1.CriminologyUniversity of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations