Social Problems and Moral Panic

 

Part A

Describe what Goode and Ben-Yehuda are talking about in this article

            The authors believe that in any given society, occasionally there is usually an explosion of fear and concern about a perceived fear and threat. They believe that during this time, a specific agent is usually deemed responsible for that particular threat and that each of these times, sober assessment of these threats will often yield exaggerated results. This means that if the situation were to be closely examined, then it would be found that the perceived threat was really no threat at all. Often, there is a tendency to blow things out of proportion.

            The authors believe that these episodes, referred to as moral panic, are because of specific social forces and dynamics. They believe that threats are a product of the human imagination, and are usually constructed socially and politically by our environment. The authors go ahead and give scenarios where small issues have been blown out of proportion by society while blaming it on some unseen force.

            They believe that there are three theories that explain this type of moral panic; grass-root engineered, elite engineered and interest group theories. These theories are looked at in two dimensions namely the morality vs. interests and elitism vs. grassroots dimensions.

Part B

What are social problems and moral panics?

Social problems

            According to the authors, social problems can be approached and defined in two perspectives; they can be either objective or constructive. Under the objective perspective, social problems are defined by the existence of an objective, real, damaging, or threatening condition. This school of thought believes that what makes a given condition dangerous is that it harms or endangers the human life or his well-being.

On the other hand, the people who subscribe to the constructive perspective school of thought believe that social problems should be defined according to degree of concern and attention given to the particular issue. According to this school of thought, social problems do not exist but are merely because of the human mind. Constructive theorists believe that social problems are manifested in a number of ways. Some of the members will in a organized and collectively manner do something, protest, or call attention to a condition, making the social problem social movements. They will make legislations that will deal with the individuals supposedly involved in the social problem. The ranking in hierarchy of the social problem is also put into consideration. Lastly, the discussion of the public on that given issue is what makes it a social problem.

Moral panic

            The authors believe that moral panic can be defined in five essential criteria. There have to be heightened concerns by the society over the supposed behavior of a certain group and the impact of that behavior on the larger community. The particular group that is deemed the perpetrators of the specific behavior receives heightened hostility by the community, which deems itself respectable and law abiding. The behavior of the group is seen as harmful to the existence of the community. There is usually a measure of agreement, no matter how small, in part or the whole society that the problem is real, serious and is caused by the wrongdoing of the group and their conduct.

            There is usually the tendency to blow the issue out of proportion. The nature of the particular threat in question is usually exaggerated than what a sober empirical evaluation would have supported. The community tends to make the proverbial mountains out of molehills of the issue.

            Lastly, moral panics tend to be very volatile. This means that these panics occur suddenly and die down as quickly as they surfaced, making them short term in nature. Often these panics had also previously occurred over a period back in community’s history. The community may either institutionalize these moral panics or forget them all together.

Part C

What is claims-making activity, who are the claims-makers, and how does this all relate to moral entrepreneurs and moral entrepreneurship?

            Claim makers are persons or individual who articulate and promote claims and who stand to gain in one way or the other if the target audience accepts their claim as true. On the other hand, claim-making activity is an action taken to draw action to a claim (Ferrante, 2011).Moral entrepreneurs on the other hand are individuals, groups or formal organizations that seek to influence a group to adopt or maintain a behavioral standard. They usually take the lead in labeling a particular behavior and spreading or popularizing this label throughout society.

            Moral entrepreneurs attribute negative labels to behavior as well as the removal of negative labels, positively labeling, or removing positive labels. They may press for the creation or enforcement of a standard for any number of reasons, altruistic or selfish. Such individuals or groups also hold the power to generate moral panic.

Moral entrepreneurship can in essence be termed as part of claim-making activities. This is because claim-makers are often seen as inventors of social problems, and the effects of their activities often lead to outcomes of considerable social significance. The main aim of their claim making is to identify subjective individual or groups’ values, perceptions and attitudes, make them into objective phenomena, which are believed by society, and make society believe that these phenomena need corrective actions or solutions (Jamrozik et. al, 1998). Moral entrepreneurs see some sort of evil in the society and decide to fight it, which is exactly what entails claim-making activities.

Part D

How does Stanley Cohen’s work on folk devils and moral panics fit into it?

Stanley Cohen, in his work, Folk Devils and Moral Panics, was the first person who first coined the term moral panics. He defined the notion as a sporadic episode, which, as it occurs, subjects’ society to bouts of moral panic, or in other terms, worry about the values and principles which society upholds which may be in jeopardy (Cohen, 1987). He describes its characteristics as "a condition, episode, person, or group of persons who become defined as a threat to societal values and interests. He went on to discuss the way in which the mass media fashions these episodes, or styled them, amplifying the nature of the facts and consequently turning them into a national issue, when the matter could have been contained on a local level.

Cohen believed that The amplification which took place through the media's work served to appeal to the public so that they could concur with ready-made opinions about the course of action to be taken, and these opinions were found from the members of what he refers to as the 'moral barricade', i.e. bishops, politicians and editors. Combined with the opinions of the 'experts' who are wheeled out to give their diagnosis, they reached an agreement about how to cope with the situation in hand, and the problem either disappeared or at least deteriorated.

Part E

What are the five stages of moral panic identified by Goode and Ben-Yehuda? What are the three models of moral panic that they discuss?  

Stages of moral panic

According to the authors, there are five stages of moral panic. For moral panic to be said to have taken hold in a given society, there are five main stages that the society has to go through.

Concern occurs when there is heightened level of concern over the supposed behavior of a certain group of individuals and the consequences of those behaviors on the society. This concern is voiced and articulated within that society by claim-makers.

There is an increased level of hostility towards the people seen as engaging in the threatening behavior. Here members of the perceived group are seen as enemies of the law-abiding society. Their behaviors are seen as harmful to the values of the society.

The society or some members of the society that the threat posed by the behavior of the group is indeed harmful to the society’s morals reach consensus. These sentiments need not be felt by the whole society, it is sufficient that the sentiment is wide spread.

There must be a minimum measure of consensus that the threat is real by the society as a whole or by a small segment that the threat is serious. This agreement must be widespread although not necessarily by every individual of the society will like it.

There is usually the tendency of disproportionality of the issue on the part of the society. The nature of the particular threat in question is usually exaggerated than what a sober empirical evaluation would have supported.

The moral panic always turns volatile. This means that the issue is ignited quickly and dies out after a short period. The panics also tend to resurface over a period the quickly die out again.

Models of moral panic

Grass root model

This model agitates that panic originates with the public. Concerns about the threat are widespread and genuinely felt by the society. An individual group of persons does not raise the concern but rather it is spontaneously felt by the whole society. Mostly this kind of panic arises after a quite anxiety is catalyzed and explodes into a full on panic. This kind of moral panic raises from deeply felt attitudes and beliefs of a broad sector of the society that particular phenomenon present a threat to their values and their existence.

Elite-engineered model

The model propones that a small and powerful group or groups deliberately and knowingly undertake a campaign to generate and sustain fear and panic on the part of the public over an issue that they are aware is not harmful to the whole society. These campaigns are usually used to divert the publics’ attention from the real issues at hand whose solutions would act against the interests of those elites.  

 

Interest group theory

This is the most accepted theory. Under this theory, rule creatore and moral entrepreneurs instigate moral panics to ensure that particular rules take hold and are enforced within the society.

Part F

After you have analyzed Goode and Ben-Yehuda’s article, you should show how it relates to the other course material

In current society, often there are events that occur that lead to moral panic in the community. Crime is at the top of this list of social events. The society has in so many years, handled crime in a way that would only be described as moral panic. Often this panic is triggered by a crime that occurs in the society that leads the people to panic. This panic when later analyzed will be found to have been exaggerated. However, during that specific time the community will look for some one to blame for the crime. In some cases, foe example, if an individual who fits a certain profile committed the first crime, then the community will immediately try to avoid people who may fit that profile. More over, the community will react to that crime and its offenders with increased hostility as well as ensuring that the penalty of that particular is made to be worse than it should have been.  

Part G

What do Sacco and Kennedy say in the textbook about social problems and moral panics?

In their textbook, the two authors link social problems with moral panic. According to the book, fear is affected by social disorder or what the authors term as incivility. These they believe refer to low level breaches of the social order that while not strictly criminal in nature always seem to be related to a sense of unease. The book also acknowledges that there are two types of incivilities; physical and social.

The social incivilities include things such as disorder, which often tend to raise the levels of fear in a society. The authors insist that social problems such as crime increase fear within a community, which in turn leads to moral panic. This moral panic makes people more cautious about other person, which allows them to exert greater guardianship over their persons and property. The authors believe that the publics’ reaction to social problems such as crime is usually very subtle and routine; however, sometimes the media, government and the public itself overreact in what would only be termed as moral panic.      

Part H

Why do they deal with this subject when talking about the aftermath of criminal events?

The aftermath of any criminal activity is often characterized by fear not only of the victim but of the larger community as well. The community becomes concerned of issues such as if the crime will increase in the community, the potential threat to their person and the risk that the crime might pose to those who were not victims of the crime. The response of the community is very crucial. Mostly the whole community or a part of the community will push for immediate and strong intervention by both the police and the criminal justice system. Moral panic represents an extreme response of the community to the crime: an intense reaction to crime problems that includes strident calls for action, even when the crimes being committed are few in number and not widely threatening to the public.

 

Part I

What does Unit 7 of the Study Guide say about these topics?

Unit 7 of the study guide acknowledges that indeed there is a close relationship between social problems and moral panic. The unit emphasizes on the repercussions of the state of panic in a given society to the social problems that face that particular society especially concerning crime. The unit explains how crime affects the community and how the community in turn reacts to that crime and the individual who commit the crimes. The unit links people fear of crimes with their media diets as well as their interactions in the society. The unit concludes that this fear brought about by threat brings out a kind of fever that is characterized by strong emotions such as fear and even strong feelings of righteousness.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Cohen, S. (2002) Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of the Mods and Rockers (third edition).London: Routledge.

Cohen, S. (1980). Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of the Mods and Rockers. Oxford: Martin Robertson

Ferrante-Wallace, J. (2011). Sociology: A global perspective. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Goode, E., Ben-Yehuda, N., & Wiley InterScience (Online service). (2009). Moral panics: The social construction of deviance. Chichester, U.K: Wiley-Blackwell.

Jamrozik, A., & Nocella, L. (1998). Sociology of social problems: Theoretical perspectives and methods of intervention. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Joyce , P. (2013) Criminal Justice: An Introduction. New York, NY: Routledge

Sacco, V. F., & Kennedy, L. W. (2011). The criminal event: An introduction to criminology in Canada. Toronto: Nelson Education.

Smith, P., & Natalier, K. (2005). Understanding criminal justice: Sociological perspectives. London [u.a.: SAGE.