There’s perhaps no better indication that a particular topic or pursuit has gained culture importance than when a movie or TV show is made about it. When popular media grabs hold of an idea, it gives that idea a mainstream audience – and with that audience comes credibility. Case in point: In the 1970s, there was an Italian clothing brand whose leaders were attempting to put it on the map. The craftsmanship behind the brand was great – as was its pristine tailoring – but it still hadn’t found the mass audience that its quality of craftsmanship deserved. But that changed in 1980, when writer/director Paul Schrader put the then-pinup icon actor Richard Gere in a series of suits by the designer. The film was American Gigolo, and the designer was Giorgio Armani. For Armani, having his brand-name suits up on the screen brought him a legitimacy that arguably no other form of marketing could. To occupy popular media is what helped lend Armani the credibility it enjoys today.

There’s nothing contradictory about the concept: Popular media makes things popular. And it’s not just decorative things either. For all the Armani suites and “Rachel” haircuts that TV brought to the foreground, mainstream media has also lent visibility to big industries and practices that might otherwise go unnoticed by most people. In 1987, for example, Oliver Stone turned his skeptical cinematic eye to “Wall Street,” in a film that skewered the world of finance. For a generation of young people, it was largely that movie – and not Wall Street itself – that informed their ideas about how the American financial machine churned. As The Financial Times pointed out, the film “Wall Street” changed the actual street, arguably helped usher in an era of greater greed and ruthlessness, as up-and-coming brokers styled themselves after the film’s antagonist, Gordon Gekko.

What the “Wall Street” example illustrates is that popular media has the potential not only to call attention to facets of contemporary life that might otherwise fly under the radar, but also has the significant ability to influence belief. When people see something on screen, they’re likely to romanticize it – whether that was the creator’s intention or not. These days, there’s a new television and cinematic trend emerging that aims to illuminate and characterize a very specific culture: that of the computer hacker. While visual media has dealt with hackers in the past – the 1983 movie “WarGames” and the 1995 film “Hackers” come to mind – the examples are few and far between. Now, however, the hacker drama is emerging as a popular subcategory in its own right. But the growing popularity of cyber crime-based entertainment prompts an important question: Is popular media getting it right? To answer that question, let’s examine the most popular offerings in the hacker sub​genre, focusing on plausibility and potential influence (Note: The following entries contain minor spoilers for the television shows and films discussed):

“Mr. Robot”

What is it: A drama-thriller TV series on USA Network

Plot overview: During his days, Elliot Alderson works as a cyber security engineer (as an aside, this is an increasingly lucrative job for young people, with an average salary of $84,000 as of June 18, according to Glassdoor). But Alderson isn’t content merely working as another desk-bound techie, so he spends his evenings immersed in the high-stakes, dangerous world of hacker vigilantism. Basically, he uses his hacking prowess to bring down bad guys, and in doing so emerges as a complex hero uniquely crafted for the twenty-first century.

Critical reception: Critical reaction to the series has been almost uniformly positive, and the show is currently enjoying a “Certified Fresh” 97 percent rating on Rotten Tomatoes. As Vanity Fair stated in its rave review, “‘Mr. Robot’ has the makings of the most entertaining watch of the summer.”

Notable scene: The main character, Elliot, talks about the idea that there’s a very small group of individuals – “the top one percent of the top one percent” – who are “secretly running the world.” Their power, as Elliot tells us in a conspiratorial voiceover, is only amplified by the fact that they operate in the shadows, “without permission.” Elliot then reveals in his voiceover that he believes these people are now following him. We then see Elliot, on a subway train, looking at two men who appear to be monitoring him. The scene then cuts to the previous night, when Elliot confronts the owner of a coffee shop, informing him that he’s hacked the network and has discovered that the shop’s owner is involved in highly illegal activity online.

Plausibility: The idea of a covert band of hackers slowly bringing down a massive, faceless enterprise is, well, the stuff of suspenseful TV. But that doesn’t mean it’s outside of the realm of possibility. As show creator Sam Esmail told Fast Company in an interview, he was inspired to create the show by learning firsthand about the psychology of hackers – their general isolation and sense of loneliness, and their desire to connect with the world around them in the only way they know how: via the cyber sphere. In this way, “Mr. Robot” is more of a character study than a commentary on real events. That said, in the same way that he wanted to be true to hacker psychology, Esmail also wanted to be faithful to the process of hacking itself. Therefore, the various hacks that the show depicts are all based on ones that have happened in the real world. In this way, “Mr. Robot” is true to the facts.

Potential influence: As Esmail emphasized, the show isn’t meant to provide a window into the mechanics of cyber crime. Rather, it’s interested in the people who carry it out. Because it’s an in-depth character study, the show – if it succeeds – could influence general viewers to learn more about the particular characteristics of the hacker: What motivates them, what makes them tick. This humanization of hackers – putting a face to an inherently shadow enterprise – could lead to more widespread awareness about what needs to be done to lessen the flood of cyber crime.

“CSI: Cyber”

What is it: A network TV show on CBS with a 13-episode first season, and the newest franchise installment in the CSI family

Plot overview: A specially designated group of FBI cyber crime fighters work to scour the deep Web in order to bring virtual crime to justice. True to its CSI roots, the show runs like a police procedural, with the team working to solve murders, blackmail and other infractions – with the distinction that there’s a central cyber component to their investigations.

Critical reception: Far from the glowing reviews of “Mr. Robot,” “CSI: Cyber” has received middling critical feedback, and currently sits at a 45 percent rating on Metacritic. In a fairly representative review, Entertainment Weekly’s Joe McGovern stated that, “Watching CSI is like eating Gummi Bears. There’s no nutritional value, but the franchise has created a yummy, empty-calorie world.” But the mixed critical reception didn’t stop the show from being picked up for a second season.

Notable scene: A man hops into a car that’s tied to a fictional ride-sharing app called ZoGo. But for the man, who’s a government contractor with a high security clearance, this is to be no ordinary ride. Rather than get taken to his destination, the man ends up strangled to death by his driver. Dispatched to deal with the case, the cyber team must use their virtual skills to find out why this murder happened.

Plausibility: The show seems intent on tackling hot-button topics (the ZoGo episode debuted weeks after popular ride-sharing service Uber suffered a data breach) in a way that never risks losing the attention of the viewer. Whereas “Mr. Robot” allows its paranoid central character to dictate the narrative, “Cyber” relies on a tight narrative structure that’s crafted for primetime network entertainment value. In this way, its plausibility is limited, since it’s focused more on sustaining an exciting narrative.

Potential influence: That said, the show’s lack of plausibility doesn’t mean it’s without influence. As a primetime TV show about cyber crime fighters, “CSI: Cyber” has the unique distinction of being a show that makes heroes out of those who fight hackers. In the same way that “Law and Order” inspired many young viewers to pursue legal professions, it’s likely that “CSI: Cyber” will get some viewers looking in the direction of a career in cyber security.

“Blackhat”

What is it: A Michael Mann-directed hacker thriller starring Chris Hemsworth

Plot overview: A nuclear power plant in Hong Kong is targeted by a hacker working via a remote access tool. Through this means of intrusion, the attacker is able to cause a major disaster situation at the power plant. This is part of a broader criminal plan orchestrated by an ambitious and highly elusive hacker. In order to bring this cyber criminal to justice, an ex-hacker is brought in to beat him at his own game.

Critical reception: It’s not just that the critical reception was largely negative for this film – it’s that it was an unmitigated box office disaster. When it opened in January, it was immediately clear that the marketing campaign for the film had largely left prospective viewers confused about exactly what kind of movie this was. Was it a cerebral hacker drama? A social political commentary? A breakneck action thriller? In reality, it was a bit of all of these things, but audiences didn’t really find that out, since they didn’t turn up to the theaters. That said, there was some qualified praise for the movie, such as Matt Zoller Seitz of RogerEbert.com who, in his 3.5/4 review for the movie, called it “often ludicrous,” but added, “Slick and sometimes goofy as it is, ‘Blackhat’ is an odd, fascinating movie: a high-tech action thriller about the human condition. I can think of no better current illustration of the notion that, to quote this site’s founder, it’s not what a movie is about, it’s how it’s about it.”

Notable scene: In his hunt for the villainous hacking group, Hemsworth is drawn into a trap. He must therefore fight three people.

Plausibility: As the above notable scene indicates, the adrenaline-charged moments of physical combat in the film were less than believable, given that the warrior instinct with most hackers ends at the keyboard. But requisite Hollywood moments of brawling aside, the film has been lauded for its plausibility by the individuals whose opinion on the issue matters the most: cyber security experts. As Parisa Tabriz, head of Google’s Chrome security team, told WIRED, a scene in “Blackhat” in which a good hacker uses a USB drive to infiltrate a bank’s network is entirely plausible.

“It’s not flashy, but it’s something that real criminals have tried—and highlights the fundamental security problems with foreign USB devices,” Tabriz said. Additionally, the inciting incident behind “Blackhat’s” narrative – a remote attack on a power plant – is something that’s not only possible, but a reality: In December, South Korea experienced a hack of its state-owned Korea Hydro, according to The Wall Street Journal. Korea Hydro encompasses a network of 23 nuclear reactors. In March, investigators in South Korea stated that they believed North Korea was behind the remote intrusion.

Potential influence: While “Blackhat” was a box office bomb, the fact that it was made at all sets an important precedent for hacker-focused movies. Far from being a small film, “Blackhat” was a major motion picture with a top director and an A-list star. Its failure at the box office, therefore, may deter others from making similar films, but it may also influence filmmakers to look for different and better ways to market a cyber-based thriller, which could lead to more successful films.

These three popular media depictions of the cyber criminal sphere are only early entries in what will likely become an increasingly popular sub​genre. Given the influence TV and film have in shaping public sentiment, it will be interesting to see how media representations of hackers evolve – and if this changes the practice of hacking itself.