Polysemic Text in Television- How People Perceive Mental Illness in Criminal Minds

Polysemic Text in Television: How People Perceive Mental Illness in Criminal Minds

Anakaren Ureño Spring 2016

Department of Communications California State University, Fullerton

Polysemic Text in Television

Ureño 2

Abstract

John Fiske’s polysemic text theory argues that television is an open text and that the “structure of

the narrative and its presentation allow for a multitude of interpretations by different audiences”

(Sullivan, 2013, pp. 133-160). Using observation of a live media audience as they watch an

episode of Criminal Minds and the application of the polysemic text theory, this paper examines

how viewers perceive and interact with mental illness when it is associated with criminal

behavior. Findings of this observation suggest that audiences utilize humor as a “coping”

mechanism to deal with the onscreen violence when it comes too close to reality. In addition, the

observation reveals that audiences who have personal experience with mental illness are able to

sympathize with the criminal, but not the criminal actions that result from the mental illness.


Ureño 3

Introduction

Media consumption has managed to infiltrate almost every aspect of our lives. We are

consistently being served information through various forms of media that surround us. We piece

together these different bits of information and combine them with personal experiences to form

our opinions and develop an understanding or interpretation of reality.

Television shows, movies, newspaper articles, social media campaigns and more are

consistently at work in an attempt to accurately depict mental illness. Television shows like

American Horror Story, which dedicated a season to mental illness in its short series, “Asylum,”

and FOX’s Empire, which showcases bipolar disorder and a history of familial mental illness,

focus on highlighting the effects of mental disorders and they attempt to provide us insight into

how those who are living with the various disorders feel. However, shows like Criminal Minds

and Law & Order: Special Victims Unit consistently tie crime back to mental health and never

intend to give us insight into the mental struggles of the criminal.

Newspaper articles discussing mental illness are often in response to gruesome crimes

that make for attention-grabbing headlines. Mass shootings, especially in recent years, have

taken over the headlines and mental illness often has its moment in the political spotlight during

international press conferences discussing how a series of events could have been prevented and

in discussions about gun control.

Furthermore, each individual’s personal experiences with mental illness are unique.

While some are living with mental illness, others have watched loved ones struggle with

illnesses that have taken over their lives, some have lost relatives to crime involving mental

illness while others have only seen it on television.


Ureño 4

This paper seeks to understand how television audiences, specifically of the show

Criminal Minds, interact with mental illness as depicted in association with crime throughout an

episode.

Literature Review Stuart Hall’s (1980) encoding/decoding model introduced an influential development and

understanding of media audience behavior. Hall (1980), alongside a group of scholars from the

Birmingham University Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS), advocated against

textual determinism. Hall and the Birmingham group argued that because audiences approached

media texts with individual experiences and unique cultural backgrounds, their interpretation of

mainstream media content could not be predetermined (Sullivan, 2013, pp.133-160).

Fiske (1986) argued that television was an open (polysemic) text that allowed its diverse

audiences to produce individual meanings based on their own experiences and identities.

“Despite generations of life under the hegemony of capitalism there is still a wide range of social

groups and subcultures with different sense of their own identity, of their relations to each other

and to the centers of power” (Fiske, 1986). For example, in an analysis of the portrayal of

feminism in Sex and the City, Southard (2008) notes that “polysemic texts in which many salient,

conflicting perspectives interact simultaneously” (p.150) have the ability to play out multiple

meanings that resonate with individuals based on their own personal experiences.

Fiske (1986) noted that central to his polysemy television text theory was the “notion that

all television texts must, in order to be popular, contain within them unresolved contradictions

that the viewer can exploit in order to find within them structural similarities to his or her own

social relations and identity.” (p. 392) Furthermore, “these contradictions provide opportunities

for readers to construct alternative interpretations of what they see” (Gillespie, 2000). These


Ureño 5

television shows are able to “recognize differences, oppressions and privileges as they pertain to

race, class, sexuality and nationality” (Southard, 2008) seamlessly through accomplished

storytelling.

Thus, the polysemic text theory, introduced by Hall and solidified by Fiske, argues that

television is an open text and that the “structure of the narrative and its presentation allow for a

multitude of interpretations by different audiences” (Sullivan, 2013). Often, a television show is

set up so that the audience has an opportunity to execute a “creative process of associated

meaning with information on the screen” (Sullivan, 2013) and “invites the participation of the

audience in completing the picture” (Sullivan, 2013) before the conclusion of the television

episode or series. The polysemy of television encourages an active audience that is consistently

associated meaning and symbolism to different aspects of the show. More often than not, these

associated meanings are derived from personal and unique experiences.

However, the author must be acknowledged in the relationship between television and

audience. “This implies a power relationship between text and reader that parallels the

relationship between the dominant and subordinate classes in society. In both instances authority

attempts to impose itself, but is met with a variety of variously successful strategies of resistance

or modification that change, subvert or reject the authoritatively proposed meanings” (Fiske,

1986). These strategies of resistance are in part successful because the “television audience is

not a social category like class, or race, or gender” (Fiske, 1989), but rather composed of a

myriad of people who “constitute themselves quite differently as audience members at different

times” (Fiske, 1989). In other words, the same audience member will elicit different responses

based on the subject matter presented—they may be one person at the opera house and a

completely different member at a football game the following weekend. “What the set in the


Ureño 6

living room delivers is television, visual and aural signifiers that are potential provokers of

meaning and pleasure. This potential is its textuality which is mobilized differently in the variety

of its moments of viewing” (Fiske, 1989). With this, Fiske argues that it is neither the content nor

the context that assign meaning to a television show but rather the breadth of personal

experiences that the viewer contributes to the viewing. The potential of its text is unique to the

viewer and his/her experiences.

Hall (1980) looks at the process between source (author) and reception (audience) as a

series of a moments in the television production process that all contribute to the realization of

the message. “Production and reception of the television message are not, therefore, identical,

but they are related: they are differentiated moments within the totality formed by the social

relations of the communicative process as a whole” (Hall, 1980, p.129). Going beyond the

moments of production and reception, are the moments in which the author must encode the text

with meaningful language and discourse. However, the meaning cannot be realized unless it is

also meaningfully decoded. It is at this moment that the message takes its own form depending

on the viewer and the different socio-economic structures that surround them, allowing for the

meanings to “acquire social use value or political effectivity” (Hall, 1980, p.129).

In an age of such diversified television, it can be argued that viewers no longer exert any

effort in decoding the text. If the literal language and representation that a specific television

show produces do not appeal to the viewer, they can simply choose a different program that

caters to their niche interests. It can be argued that the era of post-network television, with its

myriad of viewing options catering to niche cultural, social and political interests has rendered

the necessity for audiences to decode television messages irrelevant. However, the changes “do

not eliminate the need for attention to the ways that television continues to play a part in


Ureño 7

struggles for power. The medium need not speak in a single voice to be a factor in the exercise of

dominant interests, nor do its audiences need to engage in a single experience of television to

make their negotiations with it central to current social, cultural, and political debates” (Levine,

2011). The value of the commentary that television makes on society is not diminished in the

polysemy of the text, rather it enhances the meaning by adding multiple layers of interpretation

riddled with the unique personal experiences of each viewer.

Finally, Levine (2011) addresses the diversity in American television: “How much has it

diversified the stories, the myths, the ideologies that it presents?” The new introductions of

television viewing options may add to the extent and dimensions in which its effects and

relationships can be researched, but it does “little to alter these fundamental workings of

television culture, even in a post-network age” (Levine, 2011). Even in a post-network age where

there exists an unlimited number of viewing options, the foundation of television culture remains

the same. The storylines may change, but plot lines have historically continued to mimic each

other.

“There is no degree zero in language” (Hall, 1980). The conclusions that are reached as a

result of the audios and visuals presented through television are a result of discussion and

interpretation, rather than a direct result of how the storyline is represented; the text is polysemic.

Research Questions

A polysemic text allows for a myriad of interpretations of a single television episode of

any given series. In Criminal Minds specifically, the behavioral profile of a criminal is unveiled

as a team of detectives uncovers key pieces of evidence relating to the personal and criminal

history of the individual. Given that each individual that will be involved in my observational


Ureño 8

process has a unique understanding and experience with mental illness, my research questions

are as follows:

RQ1: How do media audiences perceive and respond to mental illness depicted in

television shows in the form of criminal behavior?

Methodology

For this study, qualitative research methods were employed in the form of observational

audience analysis and informal interviews in order to gather insight into how media audiences

interact with the representation of mental illness in television shows.

The research will involve the observation of 16 individuals, 12 females and four males,

between the ages of 12 and 56 as they watch an episode of Criminal Minds. This audience

regularly consumes the news, participates in social media and consistently views other television

series. This observational aspect will be necessary and essential as it will allow the researcher to

take note of how and when the audience engages and reacts to certain criminal behavior that is

associated with a mental illness. The observation will include the interaction of the audience with

the television episode and the researcher will record any commentary on the episode and the

attitude with which criminal behavior associated with mental illness is received.

After the episode has concluded, each participant will be asked two questions

surrounding the episode. In conjunction, both questions will seek to gain an understanding of the

perspective that the viewers have of the criminal’s behavior.

Participants

Individuals in the study consisted of 12 females and four male participants, all living in

Orange County. Ages of the participants ranged from 12 to 56 years. For this study, each of the


Ureño 9

participants had declared personal experience with mental illness, some more intimately than

others.

Procedure

Participants were not given any specifics beyond informing them that they would be

observed throughout the television episode. The researcher did not include additional

information surrounding what they were looking for in specific, in an effort to keep the

observation as organic as possible. There were two structured questions used to assess perception

after the episode viewing. The list of questions is provided in Appendix A.

Analysis

The observations were transcribed and analyzed for themes pertaining to the research

question that attempts to understand how viewers perceive and respond to mental illness when

depicted in conjunction with a gruesome crime.

Results

Q1: How do media audiences perceive and respond to mental illness depicted in television shows

in the form of criminal behavior?

The Criminal Minds episode that was used to observe the audience was “Hostage,” from

season 11. The Criminal Minds Behavioral Analysis Unit travels to Missouri when an 18-year

old woman escapes from a house where she and two other women were held captive for a

decade. The episode opens with the 18-year old woman, Gina, in a dark room wearing worn and

dirty clothes while she is sawing away at an iron-barred window, clearly trying to escape from an

unfortunate situation. As this opening scene played on the screen, viewers began making

commentary calling the woman “Carrie part three,” referencing a popular American horror film

that centers on a 17-year old outcast with telekinetic powers that she ultimately aggressively uses


Ureño 10

in self-defense to murder classmates. As the scene revealed additional victims, a second viewer

commented, “This is going to be a good one. There’s more than one hostage.”

Rather than focus on the gravity of the situation, viewers began to comment on Gina’s

physical appearance and several of the viewers inject alternative ways in which they would have

escaped. The viewers begin to make jokes about the victim’s situation as the episode begins to

reveal additional information about the circumstances and the room in which they are being held.

There is continued commentary on Gina’s physical appearance from viewers.

As the episode progresses, viewers inject themselves into the scenarios and resolve them

by presenting humorous hypothetical scenarios. As Behavioral Analysis Unit becomes involved

in the situation, viewers begin to comment on the effectiveness of law enforcement and the

viewers begin to participate in the decoding of the episode. As the show progresses and more

details are revealed, viewers take turns calling out certain specifics and labeling them as potential

clues. At this point, several viewers have vocalized different guesses as to who the “unknown

subject” might be.

The detectives identify the weapons that the victim was tortured with and a viewer makes

a joke about in reference to 50 Shades of Grey, a 201l novel that became popularized due to its

elements of sadism, masochism, dominance and submission. The episode shares a flashback that

shows an eight-year old Gina being kidnapped and a viewer makes a comment about the age at

which she was kidnapped, explaining that she doesn’t find it believable that an eight-year old

could be so easily kidnapped.

At this point, the episode has begun the characterization process of the “unknown

subject,” showcasing an apartment with carefully folded clothing, all the same, allowing him to

wear the same clothes day after day; a viewer comments, “hashtag routine.” As more details are


Ureño 11

shared with the audience, there is an audible increase in commentary, each viewer interjecting

with opinions on how they believe the crime will be solved.

The episode reveals a compelling scene in which one of the three victims succumbs to

her injuries and dies. The audience responds to this scene sympathetically, commenting on the

sadness and on how “messed up” it was that the victim was not able to fully reunite with her

family. As this scene ends, the screen changes to a third victim, still with the criminal. The

criminal has been identified as a white, heavyset male in his late 50s with dirty blond hair. He is

on the run, knowing that his time is limited because his victims have escaped and he throws a

cheeseburger to his hostage in the back of a van. A viewer in the audience makes a joke about it,

commenting about how they’d appreciate it if someone threw a cheeseburger their way.

The criminal is apprehended by the Behavioral Analysis Unit and is being interviewed by

a lead detective who presents him with a list of crimes and waits for an explanation from the

criminal. The detective describes the torture and rape to which the criminal responds, “Children

need discipline.” The viewers laugh at the reasoning that the criminal provides for each of his

crimes. However, when an additional crime is mentioned, the viewers respond with disgust and

negative reactions.

The episode, “Hostage,” goes on to reveal two additional victims that are being held

hostage in a dark, seemingly abandoned house. The victims are two young girls that appear to be

rationing droplets of water. While the audience had expressed sympathy for a dying victim 30

seconds prior, a viewer now makes a joke about the conditions in which the victims are being

held. However, when additional information is revealed surrounding the gravity of the situation

the viewers respond sympathetically.


Ureño 12

The scene ends and switches to one where the criminal is in the presence of one of his

victims who is demonstrating signs of Stockholm syndrome and has asked to speak with her

captor. He reaches out to hug her and the audience responds in disgust, almost as if they

themselves are repelled by his touch. Later, as a victim is reunited with her biological family and

the father embraces his daughter, the audience responds with tones of sympathy and

contentment.

In a closing scene, the criminal is shot down and killed as he is being taken into custody

and the audience begins a line of commentary centered on how he deserved it. The audience

takes turns offering up other scenarios in which the criminal would have suffered more before

death. They absolve the woman who killed him, saying she is not to blame for wanting to bring

her daughter’s captor to justice.

At the conclusion, each participant was asked to answer the following two questions:

- Could you understand the criminal’s behavior in any way?

- What do you think is the cause of the criminal’s behavior?

These questions were asked because each Criminal Minds episode clearly provides a

psychological analysis of the criminal in which they provide the cause and effects of their

psychological trauma.

Among the responses there was a prevalent theme that spoke to an understanding of

mental illness. Viewers commented on how the criminal’s traumatic childhood contributed to his

actions and they commented on how they were able to sympathize once they learned about the

horrors that he was exposed to as a child. However, some continued to comment that while they

understood why he had done the things he had done, there was still no justification for inflicting

the same pain on others.


Ureño 13

The responses to the second question included commentary on the criminal’s upbringing,

his childhood development, the trauma he was exposed to, his history and his mental illness.

Others attributed his actions to poor impulse control, poor socialization and calling him “just

plain psycho.” The implications of these responses will be discussed further in the analysis of the

results that follows.

Analysis of Results

An analysis of the observations revealed that there were three types of scenes to which

the audience responded most avidly: moments of action showcasing torture or horrible captive

conditions (type A), moments that demonstrated the effects of the torture (type B) and moments

in which the detectives uncovered additional details about the “unknown subject.” Each of these

moments elicited a high response from the audience, albeit each unique.

The predominant theme in the scenes where the torture and hostage conditions were

showcased was humor. Throughout the scenes in which torture was depicted, the audience

frequently made comments with varying degrees of humor sprinkled throughout. Their focus was

on the details that were not relevant to the crime, such as the physical appearance of the victim

and connections to popular culture. While further research would be required, this pattern

indicates a use of humor to deal with the discomfort of coming face-to-face with the criminal

effects of mental illness. This can be viewed as a coping mechanism amongst viewing audiences

to figuratively avert their eyes from the terrors that they are witnessing firsthand.

A theme that was identified in the commentary made during scenes that demonstrated the

effects of the torture or criminal activity was sympathy. After the audience “survived” the

torture, they responded sympathetically either demonstrating sadness for the loss of a life,

happiness when a family was reunited or relief when the criminal was murdered.


Ureño 14

Evidence of a polysemic text emerged in the scenes in which the detectives uncovered

additional details about the crime and the “unknown subject.” It was during these moments that

each viewer shared different conjectures and made calculated guesses as to who the criminal was

or how they would capture him based on the information that the episode had thus far provided.

It is interesting to note that while everyone was simultaneously watching the same episode,

viewers each identified different pieces of information that they felt were of value to the

investigation. It is at this point of the decoding process that the audience makes use of their

unique experiences and knowledge of mental illness to identify pieces of information that would

be of value to the team of detectives. To each of these individuals, a different piece of the puzzle

is more important than others because of what they have been exposed to in mainstream media,

life and alternate forms of entertainment.

The audience responded with humor to the moments in which the mentally ill criminal

exposed his victims to torture or displeasing hostage conditions. However, when asked for their

thoughts surrounding the criminal’s behavior in the questions posed after the episode viewing,

several demonstrated an understanding of mental illness and acknowledged sympathizing with

the criminal. They acknowledged that childhood trauma could be to blame for his mental illness

and thus the cause of his behavior, but made it clear that they still did not find the behavior

acceptable or excusable.

Finally, while the details of the episode explained the reasons for the behavior of the

criminal, when each individual was asked to identify the cause of the criminal’s behavior, each

response varied. The detectives clearly identified a traumatic childhood in which he was

abandoned by his mother and continuously exposed to inappropriate sexual behavior by his

father. In their responses, the audience attributed his behavior to a variety of reasons including an


Ureño 15

inability to accept his “history” or past, an attempt to seek something he desired, bad parenting or

a traumatic upbringing, childhood development, mental disorder and an attempt to regain control

of his life. The audience, all having been exposed to the same episode and the same pieces of

“evidence,” still managed to reach different and varying conclusions surrounding the behavior of

the criminal.

Conclusion

Three response themes emerged in the analysis of the observation notes. These themes

included humor in response to violence, sympathy in response to the effects that violence had on

the characters and a theme that involved the unique decoding of the television text that supports

the polysemic text theory.

The predominance of humor in audience commentary during the scenes where violent

and horrific conditions were showcased can speak to a form of coping amongst audience

members. Each of the participants involved in the viewing declared having had some personal

experience with mental illness prior to the episode viewing, however the extent and form in

which they experienced was not clarified. The use of humor during these horrific moments

speaks to the audience’s need to avert their attention from the “reality” on the television. Rather

than focus on the pain or torture, they focused on petty details such as the fashion sense of the

victim, her age and other minute details.

The conclusion that humor was used as a coping mechanism is supported by the second

theme that emerged in the analysis of the results. Once the moments of torture had passed and

the episode showcased the effects of the torture, the audience relaxed and responded

sympathetically to death, post-traumatic stress disorder and family reunions. They were able to

more realistically interact with the characters on the screen once a resolution had been reached.


Ureño 16

This study reveals that there are moments in the text of Criminal Minds that lend

themselves to polysemy, while others are intended to guide the audience towards a shared

thought. The facts are laid out by the episode script, including the criminal’s childhood

background, his habits as an adult and the reasons for which he kidnapped and held those girls’

hostage. Those facts were clear. However, despite the plot line clearly outlining the cause of the

criminal’s behavior, audience members interpreted and decoded the cause of his actions

independently. Each attributed the criminal’s mental illness to different aspects of life that went

beyond the details. Their explanations went beyond the psychological and incorporated reasons

involving upbringing and an inability to accept his childhood while in his adulthood.

Furthermore, while the audience demonstrated an understanding of the criminal’s mental illness

and the cause, they did not go as far as to justify his actions or excuse him. Instead, in their

viewing commentary, they applauded his murder and offered up crueler ways in which he could

have been killed.

Limitations

Due to the qualitative nature of the study, there were limitations in terms of sample size

and diversity. In addition, because the methodology was limited to audience observation and

semi-structured interviews, there is conjecture involved in the conclusions reached that could

benefit from further research.

All of the audience members observed shared that they had personal experience with

mental illness, however the extent to which they experienced it in their personal lives was not

explored.

Finally, the viewing was limited to one episode and the commentary that ensued

throughout that episode. The reactions and interactions could have varied depending on the type


Ureño 17

of crime that was committed and showcased. In the future, multiple viewings, at different times

and on different days, would prove beneficial to the study.

Suggestions for Further Research

Based on the findings of this study, further research can be carried out surrounding the

use of humor as a way to cope with graphic depictions of violence and the effects of mental

illness in television. More specifically, when the events that are being depicted on television in

some way reflect reality.

The depiction of mental illness in criminal television can also be explored further using

participants with varying degrees of experience and understanding of mental illness to further

support the polysemic text theory.


Ureño 18

References Croteau, D., & Hoynes, W. (1996). The political diversity of public television: Polysemy, the

public sphere, and the conservative. Journalism & Mass Communication Monographs,

(157), 1-55.

Doran, N. (2008). Decoding 'encoding': Moral panics, media practices and Marxist

presuppositions. Theoretical Criminology, 12(2), 191-221.

Fiske, J. (1986). Television: Polysemy and popularity. Critical Studies in Mass Communication,

3(4), 391.

Fiske, J. (1989). Moments of television: Neither the text nor the audience. In E. Seiter, H.

Borchers, G. Kreutzner, & E. M. Warth (Eds.), Remote Control: Television, Audiences,

and Cultural Power (pp. 56-78). New York, NY: Routledge.

Gillespie, T. (2000). Narrative control and visual polysemy: Fox surveillance specials and the

limits of legitimation. Velvet Light Trap: A Critical Journal of Film & Television, (45),

36.

Hall, S. (1980). Encoding/decoding. Culture, media, language: Working papers in cultural

studies, 1972-79. London: Hutchinson.

Levine, E. (2011). Teaching the politics of television culture in a "post-television" era. Cinema

Journal, 50(4), 177-182.

Michelle, C., Davis, C. H., & Vladica, F. (2012). Understanding variation in audience

engagement and response: An application of the composite model to receptions of Avatar

(2009). Communication Review, 15(2), 106-143. doi:10.1080/10714421.2012.674467

Morley, D. (2006). Unanswered questions in audience research. Communication Review, 9(2),

101-121. doi:10.1080/10714420600663286


Ureño 19

Perks, L. G. (2010). Polysemic scaffolding: Explicating discursive clashes in Chappelle's Show.

Communication, Culture & Critique, 3(2), 270-289.

Perks, L. G. (2012). Three satiric television decoding positions. Communication Studies, 63(3),

290-308. doi:10.1080/10510974.2012.678925

Peterson, J., PhD, Kennealy, P., Phd, Skeem, J., Phd, Bray, B., & Zvonkovic, A. (2014). How

often and how consistently do symptoms directly precede criminal behavior among

offenders with mental illness? Law and Human Behavior, 38(5), 439-449. Retrieved from

http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/lhb0000075

Pillai, P. (1992). Rereading Stuart Hall's encoding/decoding model. Communication Theory,

2(3), 221-233.

Rabinovitz, L. (1991). Television criticism and American studies [Review of Comic Visions:

Television Comedy and American Television; Boxed in: The Culture of TV; Rocking

Around the Clock: Music Television, Postmodernism, & Consumer Culture; Television

Culture: Popular Pleasures & Politics]. American Quarterly, 43(2), 358–370.

http://doi.org/10.2307/2712935

Seiter, E., Borchers, H., Kreutzner, G., & Warth, E. (n.d.). Remote control: Television,

audiences, and cultural power.

Stillion Southard, B. A. (2008). Beyond the backlash: Sex and The City and three feminist

struggles. Communication Quarterly, 56(2), 149-167. doi:10.1080/01463370802026943

Sullivan, J. L. (2013). Media audiences: Effects, users, institutions, and power. Thousand Oaks,

CA: SAGE Publications, 133-160.


Ureño 20

Appendix A

Criminal Minds Response Questionnaire

Age:

1. Did you find that you understood the reasons criminal’s behavior?

2. What do you think was the cause of the criminal’s behavior?

Polysemic Text in Television- How People Perceive Mental Illness in Criminal Minds

Documents

Transcript of Polysemic Text in Television- How People Perceive Mental Illness in Criminal Minds