9.1: Moral Panic

Reality is the creation of mankind as the result of elaborate processes in social learning through, language, symbols, and interactions of other people. A set of shared values, beliefs, practices, rituals and myths forms a culture (Kraska & Brent, 2011). That which society deems to be outside of the cultural rituals is deemed deviant according to Howard Becker (1963). Perception is deemed to be reality. If a person does not feel safe, then they are not safe regardless of empirical data. Hence one can observe the leisure those in authority (Media, Government, Industry, and Ultra Wealthy) may pray upon the fears of lessor status in society. Those that may direct policy through financial support may do so to increase an industry, for example the Prison-Industrial Complex https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...omplex/304669/. Either an intended or unintended result of the War on Drugs and public policy required tougher sentencing legislation, the U.S. experienced a growth in private sector prisons to keep pace with the rapidly expanding prison population (Mason, 2012).

Moral Panic was defined by Cohen (1972) and remains the salient standard:

Societies appear to be subject, every now and then, to periods of moral panic. A condition, episode, person, or groups of persons emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests; its nature is presented in a stylized and stereotypical fashion by the mass media; the moral barricades are managed by editor, bishops, politicians, and other right thinking people; socially accredited experts pronounce their diagnoses and solutions; ways of coping are evolved or (more often) restored to; condition then disappears, submerges or deteriorates and become more visible (p.9).

In other words, the key to this definition social problems such as crack cocaine may be linked to violent crime that in turn are socially constructed and perhaps overblown myths. The social contractors as described above are those that are referred to as social engineers or social entrepreneurs that craft a need for harsher penalties, thus increasing the Prison Industrial Complex, thereby increasing investors’ financial gains. This thought is teased out further on in this section.

Roberts & Indermaur (2005) assert that “It is now widely accepted that the naming labeling and discussion of vilified behaviors play a vital role in the definition and sense of community. In this vein, the focus on ‘moral panics’ outlined by Cohen (1972) placed a strategic and perilous focus on the way issues are highlighted and used by those in authority for social purposes. The media value of a single incident or short lived incident outweighs the actual value of the offense but in the long run and generally will increase the reporting of incidence thus creating its own importance or crime wave (Roberts & Indermaur, 2005; Marion & Oliver, 2012:2006).

An increased use of empirical data could decrease sensationalism over reality. This requires informing the public of what they are actually afraid of or more so what they need to be afraid of. Therefore in addition to the Media’s Code of Ethics (link attached) https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp which should be better publicized with the addition of actual bonafide data. Current data may be obtained from annual government reports such as the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) that may or may not provide a contextual optic. Not everyone may understand the statistical data presented. As an illustration a UCR report may show that crime went up by 20%. On the surface this appears inexcusable and someone needs to take responsibility. The fact may be that crime went up by five incidents, which may account for the 20% increase. What type of crimes are represented in the increase, where did it occur in the reporting locale, and what might be social events that are associated with the increase. The ‘fear of crime’ is more realistically aligned with the public’s ‘concern for crime’ (Marion & Oliver, 2012; 2006). The media has (through its own Code) an obligation to represent the facts in a fair and honest manner. However in fairness to the media, they can only report what is offered to them. Media, in any approach (print news, social, television, or video just to provide a few), is generally in business to make money, rather than for public good alone. The news media is at the center of this discussion, however the social media has an increased and significant role in factual distribution of information. One only has to recall the 2016 political debacle to justify this statement.

As a means of policy to protect the credibility, bureaucracies, both public and private, responsible for Criminal Justice should maintain a “Fact Checker”. The existence of such a unit is for the sole purpose of combating the ‘Fear of Crime’ over the ‘Concern for Crime’ at a local, state and national level. Specifically, in today’s high speed electronic world, crime data is available daily if not hourly and therefore the incident based moral panic should and could be averted. Of course, unlike the serial killer or child abduction or actual gang war activity that may be impacting a community will deserve the strictest immediate attention and cooperation between law enforcement and the news media.

The proposed policy to establish a fact checker unit, the panel should consist of CJS members and media members paid for by their respective organization and publicly funded in part (staff personnel, office space, and daily expense of research) in return for a more balanced report. The ultimate goal of this policy is that hopefully it could prevent scarce resources spent on needless ghost chases. This will require collaboration of interest groups, media and CJS bureaucrats to educate the public in a public relations campaign sharing and fact checking data (Marion & Oliver, 2012:2006).

As a means to address moral panic has been increased penalties for law breakers. America has seen legislation such as mandatory sentencing, zero tolerance, truth in sentencing, and habitual offender. All of which have provided fodder for prison systems. Perhaps, those in control saw this as a means to provide numbers for private prisons or to bolster an already growing economy lodged within the Prison Industry. Have prisons now replaced some industry as an economic engine for the benefit of those at the top of a food chain and at the expense of the less fortunate at the opposite end of the chain?