POPULAR CULTUREANDPUBLIC PERCEPTION OF LAWYERS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION3RESEARCH METHODOLOGY4I. POPULAR CULTURE CHANGES OVER TIME5The Silver Screen5The Good6The Bad6The Ugly7The Idiot Box7II. IMPACT ON THE AVERAGE VIEWER9CONCLUSION11BIBLIOGRAPHY12

INTRODUCTIONImage is everything! says professional tennis champion Andre Agassi in a popular television commercial that exudes confidence or arrogance, depending on your perspective.[footnoteRef:1] Irrespective, a good public image is always a desirable goal for every profession and lawyers are no exception. Lawyers have always struggled with the way they are perceived. Though the legal profession has never really been loved, at least they were respected and sometimes admired in the past.[footnoteRef:2] However, that is not the case now. This is evident right from the countless lawyer jokes doing the rounds, movies portraying the lawyer in bad light and surveys reporting the declining popularity of the legal profession. [1: Gary A. Hengstler, VOX POPULI: The Public Perception of Lawyers: ABA Poll, 79 ABA Journal 60, 60 (1993).] [2: Michael Asimow, Bad lawyers in Movies, 24 Nova Law Review 533,537 (1999-2000).]

Lawyer bashing is, of course, not new. Saint Luke said in the New Testament: Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye laid men with burdens grievous to be borne..[footnoteRef:3] Shakespeares lets kill all the lawyers[footnoteRef:4] and Sir Thomas Mores exclusion of lawyers from his utopia because they are a sort of people, whose profession it is to disguise matters[footnoteRef:5] have only added to the list of authors who despise the profession. [3: Luke 11:46.] [4: W. Shakespeare, Henry VI, pt. 2, act 4, sc. 2, line 68.] [5: T. More, Utopia, 128 ( More, 1821).]

If we are to determine why the public perception of lawyers is so pessimistic and why lawyer bashing has become so popular, we must draw our attention to the media and more specifically motion pictures and television shows. But the question that arises is does popular culture shape the public perception of lawyers? Or does it simply mirror and reinforce the notions of the audience? Can the public distinguish fictional characters from real life situations? In other worlds can they separate reel life from real life?[footnoteRef:6] [6: David M. Spitz, Heroes Or Villains? Moral Struggles Vs Ethical Dilemmas: An Examination Of Dramatic Portrayals of Lawyers and Legal Profession In Popular Culture, 24 Nova Law Review 725, 728 (1999-2000).]

Through the course of this paper the researcher wishes to analyze the impact of popular culture on the public perception of lawyers. The first section of the paper deals with the changing popular culture. The cult movies and popular shows that played an integral part in influencing viewers are also examined in this section in order to illustrate this. The second section considers the influence of popular culture on the minds of the average viewer.RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

AimThe aim of this paper is to study the relationship between popular culture and the public perception of lawyers.ScopeThe scope of this paper is confined to the analysis of the effect of popular culture on the public perception of lawyers in the United States as the movies and television shows talked about are produced there. In addition to this, the popular culture spoken of is limited to the media of television shows and motion pictures.Research Questions1. How and why does popular culture change over time?2. How does popular culture influence the average viewer?Sources of DataThe researcher has placed reliance on primary as well as secondary sources of data.Style of WritingThis paper has followed a descriptive and analytical style of writing.Mode of CitationA uniform NLS mode of citation has been followed.

I. POPULAR CULTURE CHANGES OVER TIME

Firstly what is popular culture? The term popular culture refers to the values and opinions held by the ordinary people of the society. Popular culture also embraces culture in the sense of books, songs, movies, plays, television shows and similar mediums and more specifically to those works of imagination whose intended audience is the public as a whole.[footnoteRef:7] [7: Id. At 729.]

The Silver ScreenThe law and cinema have had a lengthy love affair. While movies making reference to lawyers or intertwining the law into the main plot are plenty in number, there has been a declining trend in the way lawyers are characterized.In the period before the 1970s, lawyers were portrayed as honest, moral beings with immense regard for the law. However after the 1970s, there was a distinct ideological shift in the way lawyers were illustrated. Many associate this decline in public esteem with the Watergate scandal[footnoteRef:8], where most of the protagonists were lawyers.[footnoteRef:9] Hence, the Watergate scandal proved to be a turning point, as movie portrayals of lawyers post 1970s took a turn for the worse. This trend was exacerbated by the O.J. Simpson trial[footnoteRef:10] in 1995, which was perceived as a miscarriage of justice and further dropped the image of lawyers in the eyes of the public. In such a situation, cinematic depiction of lawyers went from bad to worse. [8: TheWatergate scandalwas a United Statespolitical scandal in the 1970s wherein the break-in at theDemocratic National Committee office and the subsequent cover up by the Nixon administration regarding their involvement led the U.S PresidentRichard Nixon to resign. The scandal also resulted in theconviction of Nixon's top administration officials.] [9: William G. Hyland, Jr., Creative Malpractice: The Cinematic Lawyer, 9 Texas Review of Entertainment & Sports Law 231, 236 (2007-2008).] [10: People of the State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson, 1995 WL 2176 (California Superior Court)]

The GoodThe pre-Watergate lawyer was skilful, ethical and devoted to his clients. To Kill a Mockingbird,[footnoteRef:11] a cult movie of its era, depicted Atticus Finch as a righteous and selfless lawyer defending the rights of a black man wrongly accused of raping a white woman in the racism infused society of the 1930s. There isnt a more lauded portrayal of a heroic lawyer. An epitome of strength and fairness, lawyer portrayals like Atticus Finch inspired public confidence towards the profession. Anatomy of a Murder[footnoteRef:12] is another such movie that portrays pre-Watergate lawyers favourably. It is considered to be one of the most compelling courtroom dramas enticing the audience with articulate attorneys and an authentic law based plot.[footnoteRef:13] Apart from this, movies like Inherit the Wind,[footnoteRef:14] A Man for All Seasons[footnoteRef:15] and 12 Angry Men[footnoteRef:16] showed the audiences that the legal profession is a noble one and that lawyers are willing to fight for justice, no matter what the price. [11: Universal International Pictures (1972).] [12: Columbia Pictures Corp. (1959).] [13: Hyland, supra note11 at 242.] [14: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayor (1960).] [15: Columbia Pictures (1966).] [16: United Artists (1957).]

The BadThe themes of movies post the1970s shifted from justice, equality and morality to corruption, dishonesty and institutional bribery.[footnoteRef:17] The role of the Watergate scandal in this scenario cannot be overstated. All public officials, including lawyers, were looked down upon by the masses. This image was further aggravated by movies like The Verdict[footnoteRef:18], And Justice for All[footnoteRef:19], Absence of Malice[footnoteRef:20] and Body Heat.[footnoteRef:21] The Verdict was one such movie that features its protagonist, Frank Galvin, as an alcoholic ambulance casing attorney. Such portrayals reinforce the publics perception that lawyers are predatory, selfish and incessantly in search of the almighty buck.[footnoteRef:22] And Justice for All portrays a lawyer coerced into defending an arrogant judge charged with rape due to his own misconduct. This movie brings out ethical violations on part of both, the judge and the attorney. Retrospectively, movies of this era put forward a dark, complex and often disturbing image of lawyers and this negatively impacted the way lawyers were perceived. [17: Hyland, supra note at 247.] [18: 20th Century Fox (1982).] [19: Columbia Pictures (1979).] [20: Columbia Pictures (1981).] [21: Warner Bros. (1981).] [22: Spitz, supra note 6 at 745.]

The UglyIn the 1990s, with the highly publicized O.J. Simpson trial[footnoteRef:23] cinematic portrayals of lawyers went from bad to worse. Movies of this category include, but are not limited to The Firm[footnoteRef:24], The Rainmaker[footnoteRef:25], The Devils Advocate[footnoteRef:26], Guilty as Sin[footnoteRef:27], Philadelphia.[footnoteRef:28]The Firm portrayed a corrupt law firm to be a cover for organized crime and murder forcing young associates to either join their cult or lose everything. In Philadelphia, another movie with the law firm playing a villainous role, gay lawyer Andrew Bucket is fired because he has AIDS. In the law suit that follows, Andrew is outnumbered by an array of cold, arrogant and hard-nosed defence attorneys. Movies of this time stamped lawyers and law firms as evil and this image is imprinted in the mind of the audience even today. [23: People of the State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson, 1995 WL 2176 (California Superior Court).] [24: Paramount Pictures (1993).] [25: Paramount Pictures (1997).] [26: Warner Bros. (1997).] [27: Buena Vista Pictures (1993).] [28: TriStar Pictures (1993).]

The Idiot BoxTelevision shows dealing with lawyers, more often than not, portray them in much better light than the movies. Following the trend in movies, television shows early on in the 1950s and 1960s like Perry Mason[footnoteRef:29], The Defenders[footnoteRef:30] and Owen Marshal[footnoteRef:31] presented a positive image of lawyers by depicting them as heroic criminal defenders in their profession lives and happy family men in their private lives. [29: Perry Mason originally aired on CBS.] [30: The Defenders originally aired on CBS.] [31: Owen Marshal originally aired on ABC.]

In recent times, shows like L.A Law[footnoteRef:32] portrays its lawyers to be young, powerful and physically attractive creating an exaggerated image of lawyers, not by portraying them negatively but by creating unjustified expectations. Then comes Suits[footnoteRef:33], easily the most popular fictional legal show on television today. Set in an upscale law firm in New York City, the lawyers here are suave, witty and always ready with a solution. They sugar coat the legal world, making it look like a glamorous profession. The portrayal of a well heeled attorney combined with the high salaries of young associates at law firms creates the image that lawyers are greedy and motivated solely by monetary gains.[footnoteRef:34] This is not to say that there arent any negative portrayals of lawyers on television, it just so happens that the suave and silver tongued lawyer portrayal is more prevalent in the television industry. [32: LA. Law originally aired on NBC. ] [33: Suits originally aired on USA network.] [34: Leonard E. Gross, The Public Hates Lawyers: Why Should We Care?, 29 Section Hall Law Review 1405, 1424 (1998-1999).]

Though the television illustrates lawyers in a better light, more often than not they glorify them to an exaggerated extent. This is prevalent right from the time of Percy Mason and the current favourite Suits. One of the possible reasons why lawyers are portrayed more favourably on TV could be the fact that the characters must be relatable for the general public; otherwise they will not follow the show. The audience should be able to empathize with the characters. They require the audience to connect with the protagonist. It is not the same in the case of movies, as they are more plot driven and less character-centric. While movies and television portray lawyers in a different manner, the effect remains the same. Movies blatantly portray lawyers negatively whereas television does so by creating unrealistic images of lawyers, disappointing the masses when they find such an image to be false.

II. IMPACT ON THE AVERAGE VIEWER

The media of popular culture are the most powerful and persuasive teachers apart from actual personal experience. If this was not the case, advertisers would not be wasting large sums of money on inserting ideas in the minds of the masses through television commercials.[footnoteRef:35] The message put across by such media has a dramatic effect on the audience, irrespective of its authenticity. At the same time, just as repetitive promotion has an effect on the minds of the consumers, if viewers are constantly exposed to media portraying negative stereotypes of lawyers; it is bound to have some impact, even if it is on a subconscious level. [35: Asimow, supra note 2 at 550.]

We are constantly forming our opinions based on the popular culture that surrounds us. More often than not people base their opinions not on facts but the popular culture that they are exposed to. A lay persons knowledge about the law and lawyers is limited and most of them have never consulted a lawyer and never had a first-hand experience of how the legal system works. Their information is second hand.[footnoteRef:36] For a lay man who has never had a brush with the legal system, he forms his opinion about the law as well as lawyers based on the television shows and movies that he watches, which more often than not portray lawyers negatively. [36: Lawrence M. Friedman, Law, Lawyers and Popular Culture, 98 Yale Law Journal 1579, 1593 (1989).]

This theory is supported by the cultivation effect which contends that heavy viewers of television and movies believe the world to be a meaner place compared to light viewers.[footnoteRef:37] They also think that there are far more police officers, lawyers or prostitutes, and far more alcoholism or drug abuse.[footnoteRef:38] Psychologists believe there is a strong correlation between belief formation and heavy television watching. This is related to what they call a heuristic process model which involves snap judgement by a consumer which does not discriminate between real events and fictional portrayals.[footnoteRef:39] The more vivid the description more is the likelihood of it being remembered. As well edited movies and shows tend to be vivid, such images tend to be imprinted in the minds of the viewers. In such a situation, popular culture moulds the way lawyers are thought of at a conceptual level and heavy exposure to popular culture has the potential to change ones opinion. [37: Asimow, supra note 2 at 554.] [38: Asimow, supra note at 554.] [39: Asimow, supra note at 554.]

Lawyers are considered to be unethical, immoral and greedy creatures, looking out only for themselves, not giving their client much priority. Popular culture reinforces this image. These images remain long after the plot is forgotten. Since millions more are exposed to popular culture than those who will ever witness the legal system in its actuality, the public believes the portrayals to be true and fails to make a distinction between fiction and reality. Even personal experiences with lawyers do not do much to change this image. If the experience is favourable, it is considered to be an exception and if it is unfavourable it adds to the negative belief.[footnoteRef:40] [40: Asimow, supra note 2 at 552.]

The fact that lawyer based movies and television shows turn out to be commercially successful is witness to the fact that people are curious about lawyers. The tension of a court room scene, the glamorous lives of hot-shot corporate lawyers and intricate plots bringing forward moral questions that lawyers face in their daily lives arouse the interests of the viewers. As lawyers are often already disliked by people, film makers cash in on this notion by producing movies with lawyers in bad light so as to draw the attention of the public and make it a box office success. This formula has worked on more occasions than one and in all probability shall continue to work in the future.

CONCLUSION

Writing in the 1830s, Alexis de Tocqueville stated: as the lawyers form the only enlightened class whom the people do not mistrust, they are naturally called upon to occupy most of the public stations.[footnoteRef:41] Nobody would even think of saying that today. While the sharp ideological drop in the way lawyers are perceived could be attributed to a variety of reasons, the role of popular culture is undeniable. [41: Alexis De Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 279 ( Bradley ed. 1945) as cited in Michael Asimow, Bad lawyers in Movies, 24 Nova Law Review 533,543 (1999-2000).]

Lawyer portrayals have shifted from the ethical, heroic lawyer fighting for the rights of the suppressed to unscrupulous liars hungry for money. With the passage of time, this image has gotten from bad to worse. Such portrayals have major implications on the public perception of lawyers as movies and television shows form an integral source of the legal system for the average viewer. This has caused the audience to not hold lawyers in high esteem and regard them to be as negative as their portrayals.Popular culture seeks inspiration from deep rooted beliefs of our society. So while the story lines and plots of movies and television shows are works of fiction, the movie makers, part of the public themselves, attempt to portray the reality, albeit in a distorted and exaggerated manner. So, while the popular culture influences the public perception, the public perception also makes its impact on how popular culture is portrayed. In such a vicious circle of interdependence, the two mirror and reinforce ideas put forth by either sides.Entertainment does more than just provide entertainment. It is a source of information that assists in moulding the image of the subject matter that it seeks to portray. This creates a responsibility on behalf of the creator of such entertainment. So while these creators reflect the negative perception of lawyers, there must be a limit to their creative licence, on their liberty to exaggerate for the sake of collections, otherwise lawyers are doomed for life. As discussed in the paper, the masses depend heavily on popular culture to form their opinions, so as long as there is negative portrayal of lawyers there will be negative perception of lawyers.

BIBLIOGRAPHYARTICLES:1. Gary A. Hengstler, VOX POPULI: The Public Perception of Lawyers: ABA Poll, 79, ABA Journal, 60 (1993)2. David M. Spitz, Heroes Or Villains? Moral Struggles Vs Ethical Dilemmas: An Examination Of Dramatic Portrayals Of Lawyers And Legal Profession In Popular Culture, 24, Nova Law Review, 725, 728 (1999-2000)3. William G. Hyland, Jr., Creative Malpractice: The Cinematic Lawyer, 9, Texas Review of Entertainment & Sports Law, 231, 236 (2007-2008)4. Leonard E. Gross, The Public Hates Lawyers: Why Should We Care?, 29, Section Hall Law Review, 1405,1424 (1998-1999)5. Michael Asimow, Bad lawyers in Movies, 24, Nova Law Review, 533,550 (1999-2000)6. Lawrence M. Friedman, Law, Lawyers and Popular Culture, 98, Yale Law Journal, 1579, 1593 (1989)7. Ronald D. Rotanda, The Legal Profession and the Public Image of lawyers, 23 J. Legal Prof. 51 (1999)8. Robert C. Post, On the Popular Image of the Lawyer: Reflections in a Dark Glass, 75, California Law Review (1987)9. Naomi Mezey, Mark C. Niles, Screening the Law: Ideology and Law in American Popular Culture 28 Columbia Journal of Law and Arts (2004-2005)

BOOKS:1. Thomas More, Utopia ( Louvain: More, 1821) 2. Alexis De Tocqueville, Democracy in America (London: Saunders and Otley 1835)

6