Roger Lancaster, in his article “How to End Mass Incarceration,” introduces the readers to the history of prison reform, the limitation of popular views of prison reform nowadays, and potential direction that the reformists can proceed. He explains the development of the prison system in the U.S. which leads to the country’s incarceration rate being at the top among all developed countries. He also analyzes how activists often focus too narrowly and only pay attention to the inequalities black people have suffered in terms of criminal injustice while in fact all races undergo the same punitive turn in the prison system. Instead of abolition of prison which he argues to be irrational, Lancaster stands for a correctional system, calls for a reform of prison aiming its goal to reeducate and reintegrate prisoners rather than dehumanizing and outcast them.

Meanwhile, Frank R. Baumgartner focuses mainly on death penalties in the criminal judicial system of the U.S. His approach is concentrated on media coverage and its impact on public opinion in regards to death penalties. He demonstrates how innocent frame greatly influenced the public view on death penalties and resulted in a decline in courts’ decision and execution of death penalty.

The two authors share similarities in their topics as they both focus on the shifts in the criminal system. However, while Lancaster speaks on a broad spectrum and identifies the transformation of the system itself, Baumgartner takes a much narrower approach focuses more on the public opinion shift and its consequences within the system. On the other hand, Lancaster mostly narrates on the facts when he talks about prison reform while Baumgartner puts his emphasis on reasons behind the shift of public opinion on death penalties. In my opinion, Baumgartner’s analysis on media coverage and its power to shift public opinion can potentially be one of the reasons why many people view the problems in prison system in narrow manners as Lancaster points out. Living and studying in the States for seven years, I feel the cautiousness and sensitivity when people mention race. I understand such reaction as black people in American history suffered greatly from chattel slavery and its related consequences. The media, together with schools, emphasize a lot on the sufferings of African Americans when talking about racial discrimination. The massive media coverage on criminal injustice that African Americans suffer, although raised awareness among the public, indirectly formed people’s instinct of associating criminal injustice with only African Americans and neglecting the fact that problems within criminal system are not just along racial lines. Although I do understand the need to humanize the prisoners, I cannot help to worry: How can we shift the criminal system from dehumanizing prisoners to rehabilitating them without giving the public signals that the criminal system is getting loose? Do prisoners violating others’ human rights, murdering or torturing others with inhumane wills still deserve rehabilitation? If they do, how about the victims? How can the government appease the victims and their families? Where is the balance between justice for victims and justice for criminals?