The power of the media should never be underestimated. It reports truths, half-truths and non-truths. However it is an important medium by which the public receive information about many items, including crime. The manner in which the media reports events leads the general public to conclusions that may be ill informed. This is especially true in the instance of well-publicised serious crimes. The public as a result, become awfully cynical about sentencing policy, and often feel that it is way too lenient. This leads to pressure to change sentencing policies and hence brings about he question do we change policy or educate the public about current policy.

The public have a right to be cynical about sentencing laws, because all too often, the information that they receive about criminal cases is inaccurate, placed out of context and also presented in a sensationalistic manner, designed to heighten public outrage.

With reference to Ashworth and Hough's claim that "explaining sentencing policy may be a more rational way of responding to public cynicism than changing current policy", it would appear to be a viable consideration. If the public were aware of the legalities surrounding sentencing, then they may be more receptive to the sentences dealt to offenders. The task of the law professionals is a mammoth one, in that they must seek to follow incredibly tight restrictions, of which the general public would have no perception. Therefore it is a dangerous notion that public opinion be taken too seriously when sentencing practices are being adhered to.

A more rational way of responding to public cynicism would be to educate the public. Whilst this may be a difficult option, it is suggested that the media be used as the vehicle in which to do this. Broadsheet journalism (preferably) could publish a special lift-out compiled by legal professionals, with an informative but concise explanation of sentencing policy in Victoria. However there are problems inherent with this approach in that the information will only reach the part of the population who are broadsheet readers. This may also have no influence at all, and failing this, the responsibility of educating the public should lie with the media whose power to reach the public is limitless.

If we decided to change sentencing policy due to public cynicism, it does not mean that we will have a fairer system of sentencing. We should not change the current system just to appease the ill informed public. This would be a highly inappropriate response. If the public were educated about sentencing policy, then their opinions about criminal cases would not be swayed by sensationalistic media representation. If the system were to be changed, it would not mean that the public would be any better informed about how sentencing policy works. It is important to remember that the media are a business; they are more concerned with the dollar value of their news items, than representing unaltered truths to the public. An ideal situation would be one where the public in general, were supportive of sentencing policy in their current form, based upon being educated about these policies, and disregard the thought that changing policy will make the public more informed.