Moral Panic Notes - Brief summary of theory and criticism. PDF

Preview

Summary

Brief summary of theory and criticism....

Description

Moral Panic Study Notes In his book ‘Folk Devils and Moral Panic,’ in which he researches social reaction to juvinile delinquency, Cohen defines moral panic as a condition, person or group of persons emerging to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests. One of the most recurrent types of moral panic in Britain has been associated with the emergence of various forms of youth culture, whose behaviour is deviant, and in many cases violent. Mods and Rockers, among this group, have been distinctive in being identified not just in terms of particular events or disapproved forms of behaviour, but as distinguishable social groups which society can hold up as an example of what should be avoided, or as ‘folk devils,’ as Cohen identifies them. Cohen proposes that there are five stages of moral panic: firstly, someone or something is identified as a threat. This threat is then depicted in an easily recognisable form by the media, which leads to a rapid build up of public concern. The next stage is a response from authorities or opinion makers. Finally, the panic recedes, or results in social change. (Cohen 2002) These stages of moral panic can be observed in Cohen’s case study of the conflict and violence between two subcultures, Mods and Rockers, on Easter Sunday in Clacton in 1964. Through methods of observation, Cohen’s study reveals interesting insights into the behaviour of Mods and Rockers, but also of the general public. In Cohen’s analysis, the role of the media in assisting in the creation of moral panics is revealed. Through exaggeration and distortion, the seriousness of events and incidents are over-reported in a ‘sensational’ way, with the use of emotive language. For example, in the Mods and Rockers incident, newspapers at the time had headlines about ‘battles’

and ‘knife fights,’ (Cohen 2002) when in reality the scale of violence was small. The media also predicted the likelihood of events reoccurring, which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. As a result there is a symbolisation of particular places and groups involved in the panic, for example ‘Clacton’, ‘Mods’ and ‘Rockers’ became negative symbols after the events of Easter Sunday 1964. Waddington (1986) argues that as an analytical concept, moral panic is less useful due to the value-laden terms of ‘moral’ and ‘panic,’ and that moral panic is in fact polemical, rather than an analytical concept. Waddington goes on to argue that the term has derogatory connotations: it implies that official and media concern is merely a “moral panic” without substance or justification, which could potentially have negative repercussions. In order for official reaction to crime and deviance to be analysed adequately, he believes that it is time to abandon such valueladen terminology. Cohen’s concept of moral panic is still valid today, as the five stages he lists can still be observed in modern examples, and can be used to test whether an issue is being distorted and exaggerated, resulting in an overreaction from the public. The media remain instrumental in creating moral panics, with all the exaggeration, distortion and overreaction this entails. In addition, the rise of technology and social media has resulted in media being more accessible to the public, which increases its influence. One contemporary example of moral panic is over the increase in refugees and asylum seekers moving into the UK, with media warning of terrorism, and in less extreme examples, overcrowding and loss of culture. However, figures from the British Red Cross show that only 0.18% of Britain’s population are refugees, and that in reality the

majority of refugees are settling in European countries. Cohen’s concept of moral panic can benefit from an extension from the work of other theorists. In their 1995 paper, McRobbie and Thornton have two main arguments for extending the concept. The first is that Cohen, in his initial conceptualisation, views society as monolithic, but this is not realistic. Society is not monolithic, and instead there is a plurality of reactions. Different fractions of society will react to moral panic in varying fashions. Additionally, Cohen fails to analyse the commercial exploitation of moral panics and how the demonisation of subcultures into folk devils, rather than warn members of society away from these subcultures, can have the opposite effect and spread subcultures. This is due to the fact that the demonisation of subculture becomes part of its appeal. An example of this can be observed with Acid House music in the 1980s, and the drug culture that surrounded it. A constant in any situation or episode identified as moral panic is that it almost invariably converges around a fear of ‘the other.’ The condemnation of the other creates the conditions for constituting a folk devil. The folk devil is constructed in any culture in opposition to the self; it is what we are not. (Cree 2016)...