Bøger af R.J. Maratea

A history of the McCleskey v. Kemp Supreme Court ruling that effectively condoned racism in capital casesIn 1978 Warren McCleskey, a black man, killed a white police officer in Georgia. He was convicted by a jury of 11 whites and 1 African American, and was sentenced to death. Although McCleskey's lawyers were able to prove that Georgia courts applied the death penalty to blacks who killed whites four times as often as when the victim was black, the Supreme Court upheld the death sentence in McCleskey v.Kemp, thus institutionalizing the idea that racial bias was acceptable in the capital punishment system. After a thirteen-year legal journey, McCleskey was executed in 1991. In Killing with Prejudice, R.J. Maratea chronicles the entire litigation process which culminated in what has been called "the Dred Scott decision of our time.” Ultimately, the Supreme Court chose to overlook compelling empirical evidence that revealed the discriminatory manner in which the assailants of African Americans are systematically undercharged and the aggressors of white victims are far more likely to receive a death sentence. He draws a clear line from the lynchings of the Jim Crow era to the contemporary acceptance of the death penalty and the problem of mass incarceration today. The McCleskey decision underscores the racial, socioeconomic, and gender disparities in modern American capital punishment, and the case is fundamental to understanding how the death penalty functions for the defendant, victims, and within the American justice system as a whole.

In The Politics of the Internet: Political Claims-making in Cyberspace and Its Effect on Modern Political Activism, R.J. Maratea examines the Internet's effect on political claims-making and protest action to show how online technology is helping to shape popular opinion about political issues. The Internet hosts a vast collection of interconnected public cyber-arenas where political claims are continuously disseminated to audiences and social reality is in a perpetual state of negotiation. Unlike more static forms of print and television communication, cyber-arenas can be expanded to carry a nearly infinite amount of claims in a variety of multimedia formats, which can be rapidly disseminated to global audiences for relatively little cost. The corresponding rise of citizen journalism and emergent forms of cyber-activism seemingly reflect how the Internet is revolutionizing the ways claimants attract audiences, acquire resources, and mobilize support, as well as the ways that mainstream journalists report on matters of political importance. Maratea suggests that the Internet has not fundamentally changed how political activists attain cultural relevance. The press still largely determines what issues and activists are recognized by the public, and historically powerful claims-making groups, such as corporate lobbyists, are best positioned to succeed in a supposedly democratized new media world. The analysis offered in The Politics of the Internet will be of particular value to students and scholars of sociology, communications, and political science.