Media is an inseparable part of our life. The connection between media and crime has been theme of many sociological research. Media can lead to create moral panics and folk devils. As Cohen (2015, p.1) defined, moral panics are “A condition, episode, person or group 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”. This report critically evaluates Cohen’s (2015) Folk Devils and Moral Panics. First, it examines youth culture, then it examines deviance, finally it examines moral enterprise.
According to Cohen (2015) suggestion, youth culture is the main type moral panic in Britain. He said that, youth culture mostly occurs in middle class or student based and has deviant behaviour, such as vandalism, hooliganism, drugs taking, violence and organizing demonstrations. The definition of deviance is included in next paragraph. As an example of youth culture, Cohen (2015) present Rockers and Mods, popular subcultures in 1960s. Author states, that those groups became violent and deviance, because they felt marginalized from mass culture by social media. On the contrary, Jewkes (2015) claim, that Rockers and Mods lead to create fashion of 1960s and has been not marginalized from mass culture, rather optimistic welcome. Jewkes (2015) states, that overall those ‘spectacular’ subcultures, which promoted moral panics in the past, are not that evident nowadays. The author, also argue, that old fashioned theory, show that young people need to follow specific requirements to be part of subculture, while postmodernist criticist promote, that nowadays self-creation is occur and is spread rapidly through internet. Cohen (2015, p.2) states, that Mods and Rockers were not only subculture, but also distinct as a separate case, something totally new, although Jewkes (2015,) said, that in current world, where young people have access to wide range of subcultures and multimedia, they can smoothly grow from childhood to adulthood using lots of different and coexisting subcultures. Jewkes (2015) also states, that nowadays subcultures are no determined by age and less visible than in 1960s. Jewkes (2015) also argues that current generations are less distinguish with parents’ generation and show more morality and code ethics in their culture, in example fighting for animal’s rights more than the youth cultures of their parents. Jewkes (2015) also states, that nowadays youth cultures are shown as attitude and promote by media rather than label them as deviant. Nonetheless, the arguments above presents, that media might create moral panics.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Another important term of Cohen's book is deviance. Cohen (2015, p.5) definition of deviant is “The deviant is one to whom the label has successfully been applied; deviant behaviour is behaviour that people so label”. In this case, deviant mean problematic behaviour by specific group of people. Cohen (2015) also states that main promotor of deviance are social medias, which creating specifics rules for specific groups. If any of the group is not following the rules, then social groups labelling them as a deviant, and treating as something separate, an outsider. Jewkes (2015) argue that, the media might create speculations and overstatements of violence or further danger in order to isolated incident, creating moral panic. Jewkes (2015) also states, that deviance labelling is mostly overshowed by media as behaviour or lifestyle of those groups. Cohen (2015) therefore argues that civil reactions in this case are rather ‘effective’, which mean they are just reaction to deviance, that the source of deviance. Very important are also types of deviation which states their nature. As Cohen (2015), there are two types of deviation, found in Lemert notes which are primary deviation and secondary deviation. Primary deviation occur, when the behaviour might be inconvenient to single case and have no impact at level of ‘self-conception’ , while secondary deviation appear, when the deviance individual apply his deviance to wider group, or creating another deviance and using it as an assault for those, who reacted to his deviance, or as an adaptation tool to problems created by his deviance and respond to it, Cohen (2015). Cohen (2015) states to support his idea, that media creates moral panics said, that media allocate a lot of expanse for deviance, unethical behaviours, violation, and other shocking and scary news, which might be tool to create panic. Nevertheless, the arguments above shows, that media can create moral panics.
Last paragraph looks at moral enterprise. Cohen (2015, p.3) defined “the creation of a new fragment of the moral constitution of society’. Cohen (2015) states, that moral enterprise is made by specific groups of societies and right-thinking persons such as newsman, legislator etc. through the media. To support this opinion, Cohen (2015, p.9) states, such as media act as an moral agents, on their vision of what is right and what should not take place, creating kind of campaign against everything what goes over what they created. In some cases, they are aware of it, while in other this is not obvious. This shown that media are using their power, to provoke specific reaction and generate panic. However, Critcher (2006), see the problem with Cohen (2015) arguments and states, that Cohen have ‘linear model of moral panics’. To confirm this argument, Chritcher (2006) argues, that in Cohen (2015) work, the difference between media, moral entrepreneur and cultural control are hard to recognize. Cohen (2015) proclaim, that moral barricades has been made by media tools and media are shaping social problems. Critcher (2006, p.,17) therefore is coming off with following questions, “Who are the significant moral entrepreneurs, whether groups or individuals?” and “Do they lead, follow or operate alongside the media?”, to make reader critical think of Cohen (2015) work. Those two questions can lead to think in different way about moral enterprise presented by Cohen and look for evidence, which has been not shown by the author. After all, the arguments listed above shows, that media may have impact on creating moral panics.
To conclusion, all of three arguments states, that media have incredible impact in creating our reality and could create moral panics. While nowadays media are different and offer wide range of news, subcultures and might be less bias, still can create range of folk devils, and unnecessary panics on single incidents, in the way they present that. To sum up, many arguments listed above shows, that Cohen work is old fashioned and full of errors, however might be applicable to current reality and image of media.
Bibliography
- Carrabine, E., Cox, P., Fussey, P., Hobbs, D., South, N., Thiel, D., and Turton, D., (2014) Criminology: a sociological introduction (3). New York: Routledge.
- Cohen, S., (2015) Folk Devils and Moral Panics(3). New York: Routledge.
- Crither, C., (2006) Moral Panics and the media .Glasgow: Bell & Bain Ltd.
- Jewkes, Y., (2015) Media & Crime (3). Croydon: CPI Group.
Stuck on your essay?
