Cohen’s influential study commenced primarily with two youth groups of the 1960’s, the ‘Mods’ and ‘Rockers’. The Mods were neat, chic and cool. The Rocker was mean, moody and masculine (Teenage Kicks. n.d.). Burns mentions in her study that on Easter bank holiday, 1964 in Clacton, Essex, the groups clashed. The conflict caused a number of beach huts to be damaged, windows broken and ‘scuffles’ to break out resulting in ninety-seven arrests. During the following week, national newspapers grabbed attention of readers with headlines such as “Day Of Terror By Scooter Groups” and “Wild Ones Invade Seaside - 97 Arrests”. Phrases such as ‘orgy’, riot’ ‘siege’ and ‘screaming mob’ were included. Thus, sensationalised by the press with exaggeration of facts and numbers, came a supposition by society that the event was a more violent incident than the facts supported (Burns, 2000). Burns states that Cohen criticised the media for the amplification of the situation, which caused Mods and Rockers to be seen as a threat to law and order. He named this theory ‘control culture’, an incident whereby the media purposely sensationalise an event and then call for punishment of the perpetrators, creating ‘folk devils’ amongst society (Burns, 2000.). Richard Ives (n.d.) argues that on following bank holidays, public panic came to be out of all proportion to the size of the problem. Young people were turned away from the beaches; youths were reported to the police and punitive measures such as fines were put into place, which were disproportionate to offences committed. These reactions caused more arrests, more tension between the groups and further incidences throughout the country (Ives, n.d.). It may be stated that this moral panic therefore had a direct impact upon crime and criminality, causing a ‘self fulfilling prophecy’. Ives mentions that ‘eventually, the moral panic over Mods and Rockers died away. What stopped it? From the point of view of the public and mass media, it was largely a waning of interest. Mods and Rockers as folk devils were replaced by other new and newsworthy phenomenon.’ (Ives, n.d.).
Before looking more closely at three further incidences of moral panics, it could be considered important to look at the way in which moral panics can be broken down into five elements, which define it: concern, hostility, consensus, disproportionality and volatility (Goode and Ben-Yehuda 1994, p.33-40). Goode and Ben-Yehuda explain the indicators; Concern develops a heightened level over the imagined threat and those associated with it. It may be measured by methods such as opinion polls, media attention or proposed legislation. Hostility follows concern, which increases and intensifies towards those central to the threat. From this, a consensus is formed among society that the threat exists and is serious. Disproportionality occurs because the degree of public concern over the behaviour, problem or condition is far greater than is factually true. Goode and Ben-Yehuda state that this is an important element in determining a moral panic. It decides upon whether a moral panic is occurring or alternatively it is more simply an episode of public concern. This disproportionality element is exacerbated by information such as number of victims or deaths, which are often greatly exaggerated (Sands, 1998, p.3). The fifth element is one of volatility; it erupts suddenly and almost as quickly subsides or disappears (Goode and Ben-Yehuda, 1994. p.33-40). However, it may be stated that lasting impacts are often formed, such as in change to legislation or policy.
It could be said that for decades, drugs have caused various moral panics. These may be argued to include the amphetamine drug use of the sixties and seventies, alarm over glue sniffing in the eighties and through the nineties via panic over designer drugs. Take the example of one such case; that of Ecstasy use. Saunders (1996) writes on the subject, that following the death of eighteen-year-old Leah Betts in November 1995 from Ecstasy, a moral panic ensued. The parents cooperated with the media to produce powerful emotive anti Ecstasy images of their unconscious daughter, with the aim of getting the message across that Ecstasy is highly dangerous and can kill. This was followed up by billboards showing Leah in intensive care with the caption, ‘Sorted. Just one Ecstasy tablet killed Leah Betts’. However, the risk of death has been calculated at one in six million - a considerably smaller risk of dying from a normal dose of aspirin (Wood, 1997).
Saunders mentions that the media, having thrown the problem into disproportionality, then took a pious tone. Overheating being the main danger of taking Ecstasy, they provided harm prevention advice, which concentrated on drinking plenty of water. However, Saunders states that what was not mentioned, was that water could be harmful if more is drunk than can be removed by sweating or urinating. The blood, diluted, causes tissue cells to swell. The brain cannot swell inside the skull and it was this pressure, which caused Leah’s death. This accurate cause of death was not given for two weeks and then only at the bottom of page 5 of The Times. The media preferred to keep the message simple: Leah died from taking a single tab of Ecstasy. To say she died from drinking water is not a good story (Saunders, 1996). It may be stated that therefore, the media not only created a moral panic over the issue by reporting the ecstasy culture as worse than it actually was, it exacerbated the possible incidences further by providing advice which was not factually correct.
It could be argued that the media were also instrumental in the moral panic over ‘video nasties’ in the early 1990’s. The incident in question concerned the trial of two 10-year-old schoolboys, who abducted and killed young 2-year-old James Bulger, in Liverpool in 1993. The website, Childs Play 3 (n.d.) notes that the judge at the trial made a remark after passing sentence, saying, "Whilst there has been no actual evidence of this, I suspect that exposure to violent movies had something to do with your actions”. Eager to cash in on the publics shock and disgust, the press had a field day. Articles were published about horror films, in particular the film ‘Child's Play 3’, claiming that the stepfather of one of the two boys had rented it prior to the murder. However, it was revealed soon after that neither child had actually seen the film. Nevertheless, the scare mongering press did not stop there. Stories continued to be published about the film of how ‘sick’ and ‘evil’ it was, going to great lengths to try and draw parallels between some of the killings in the film and how Jamie was murdered, of which there where none! (Childs Play 3. n.d.). Sands (1998) states that a national panic was created and the drama heightened by the Sun Newspaper, who organised a ‘Burn your video nasty, for the sake of our children’ campaign, calling on people to destroy their horror videos. Stricter controls were called for, which resulted in a change in the 1984 ‘Video Recordings Act’, requiring stricter censorship for home video use. (Childs Play 3. n.d.).
It could be stated that legislation has also been affected by the continuing moral panic over paedophiles. After the abduction and murder of eight-year-old Sarah Payne by a previously convicted paedophile, parallels may be observed from the James Bulger case, of the media uproar that occurred. The News Of The World sensationally called for a Sarah’s Law to be passed (For Sarah. n.d.), which it could be said, mirrors the law passed in America, Megan’s law, allowing American parents access to information on paedophiles living in their local area (The story of Megan's Law. 2001). It may be argued that this law may encourage acts of vigilantism, causing crime itself, by otherwise non-criminally minded members of the public, who have been whipped up into a frenzy of panic. Waterson (n.d.) states that far from protecting children, the results are often opposite. The illusion is that something is being done with politicians and newspapers calling for longer custodial sentences. Yet the most high profile and unpleasant – but rare-cases are targeted while ignoring the arena in which a greater amount of child abuse takes place, the family. In Britain, an average of three children die at the hands of a stranger every year, whilst a child dies every three days at the hands of a family member (Waterson. n.d.).
Sands (1998) mentions that the paedophile furore can be seen as a classical moral panic. Public concern is heightened, worry of harm for their children; hostility towards the paedophiles as folk devils becomes more aggressive. A consensus is reached that the perceived threat is real and the media create disproportionality, by misrepresenting the facts and sensationalising the incidences. The News of the World began a "naming and shaming" campaign in the wake of Sarah Payne’s murder, outing known paedophiles and smothering any rational debate under a climate of fear. This type of reporting leads to a volatility, as seen in the ‘Paulsgrove Estate riots’ of 2000, in which members of a community began a witch hunt for local paedophiles that resulted in acts of vigilantism, false accusations and vandalism (Paulsgrove Estate. n.d.).
Burns concludes that ‘it is society’s inability to accept responsibility for its failures and problems, which results in the creation of these panics and society’s resistance to place blame upon itself, which incriminates ‘scapegoats’, those who do not fit into the normal world around themselves.’ (Burns, 2000). It may be summarised that a moral panic is a societal reaction to an incident that has been blown out of all proportion, most usually by the media or politicians. The reaction often strongly sparking a witch-hunt of an identified folk devil, by people who have become caught up in heresy. A case of ‘deviancy amplification’ ensues, in which the labelling and social control sets a spiral of ever-increasing deviance - creating the self-fulfilling prophecy (Croall, 1998. p.63). As mentioned, although often legislative or societal changes are made as an outcome of the panic, the fear itself is often short-lived and attentions may turn to the next perceived threat to societies and values.
References.
Abercrombie, N., Hill, S., Turner, B. (2000). The Penguin Dictionary Of Sociology. (4th Ed.). London : Penguin Books Ltd.
Burns, H, (2000). What are ‘moral panics’? Retrieved March 2 2004 from
Childs Play 3. (n.d). Retrieved March 2 2004 from
http://website.lineone.net/~darkangel5/moral.htm
Cohen, S. (1972). Folk Devils and Moral Panics. London: Mcgibbon and Kee.
Croall, H. (1998). Crime and Society in Britain. Essex : Addison Wesley Longman Limited.
For Sarah. (n.d.) Retrieved March 10 2004 from
http://www.forsarah.com/html/sarahslaw.html
Goode, E and Ben-Yehuda, N. (1994). Moral Panics: The Social Construction Of Deviance. Oxford: Blackwell.
Ives, R. (n.d). The Rise And Fall Of The Solvents Panic. Retrieved March 2 2004 from
Paulsgrove Estate: How The Hysteria Erupted. (n.d.) Retrieved March 10 2004 from
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/1710/sw171010.htm
Sands, L. (1998). Moral Panics. March 6 2004 from
http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Students/lcs9603.html
Saunders, N. (1996) The Leah Betts Story. Retrieved February 24 2004 from http://www.ecstasy.org/info/dangers.html
Teenage Kicks. (n.d.) Retrieved March 2 2004 from
The story of Megan's Law. (2001). Retrieved March 10 2004 from
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1706396.stm
Waterson, J. (n.d.) The abuse of power. Retrieved March 5 2004 from
http://www.swp.org.uk/SR/244/SR1.HTM
Wood, M. (1997). Moral Panics. Retrieved March 6 2004 from
http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Students/mtw9403.html
Bibliography.
Haralambos, M and Holborn, M. (2000). Sociology, Themes and Perspectives. (5th Ed.). London : HarperCollins Publishers Limited.
Jupp, V., Davies, P. and Francis, P. (2000). Doing Criminological Research. London : Sage Publications Limited.
Macionis, J. and Plummer, K. (2002). Sociology, A Global Introduction.(2nd Ed.). Essex : Pearson Education Limited.
Maguire, M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (1997). The Oxford Handbook Of Criminology. (2nd Ed.) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Moral Panics On The Net. (n.d.). Retrieved March 5 2004 from
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/journo/cyberpanic.html
Nash, M. (1999). Police, Probation and Protecting The Public. London: Blackstone Press Limited.
University of Portsmouth. (2003). Introduction to criminology (Level one DL unit). Uk: University of Portsmouth
