I am no conspiracy theorist. Let us put that out there from the get go. However during all the dissemination and constant barage of information and global ‘crisis’ that has been coming at us over the past 9 months alongside recent events where the role of the media is being called into question and Royal Commissions seem to be being called for investigations into the moral compass that media has a responsibility for in our society, I find my inner cynic beginning to rise to the surface of my perception.
So, keeping in mind the balancing act of how the cynic and the realist plays against the creative and the believer, I’ve come to the point of questioning and wanting to understand the mechanics of how crisis create change in our society. In doing some reading about this, I’ve come across the works of Stanley Cohen, a well known sociologist and criminologist who founded the Centre for the Study of Human Rights at the London School of Economics and his work on what he terms MORAL PANIC.
Moral panic comes about when ‘a feeling of fear spread among many people that some evil threatens the well-being of society.’ In times of uncertainty and a threatening situation such as war, terrorism or genocide, a fear that spreads across a mass of the population can often result in hysteria of evil, usually followed by violence and hostility towards those thought responsible. Examples of this in history include The Red Threat in American Macarthyism, the advent of “Devils Music” in the form of R&B, blues and jazz in the 1920’s and Satanic Rock in the 1970’s and most famously the Salem Witch Trials in the 17th Century. The process of arousing social concern falls on two groups: the ‘moral entrepenuers’ (those who are report the issue and fuel the concern) and the mass media. It is interesting to note that in contemporary culture, the mass media have become much more powerful and important in fuelling the mass panic and even the hysteria that follows. Cohen along with Christian Joppke, a respected German Sociologist, talk of the role of media in focussing attention on issues and the ability to influence the decline and rise of certain movements through its narrative.
According to Cohen, there are 5 stages of Moral Panic:
someone/thing is defined as a threat to social norms or community interests
the threat is depicted in a simple and recognizable symbol/form by the media
portrayal of the symbol arouses public concern
response from authorities and policy makers
moral panic results in social changes within the community
Cohen also talks about the role that mass media play in the influence of these reactions and its role in setting the agenda of the panic, transmitting the actual images and the rhetoric of the panic and also breaking the silence on claims or the fear.
Scott.A.Bonn, an American author, criminologist and speaker talks about the role that mass media plays in dispersing the messages of moral panic and the hand in hand role that media plays with law enforcement and politicians in spreading the messages that can be beneficial to a certain cause. “The relationship between state officials and the media is symbiotic in that politicians and law enforcement need communication channels to distribute their rhetoric and the media need tantalizing news content to attract a wide audience which, in turn, attracts advertisers.” Bonn talks in his book Wicked Deeds about the distorted media campaigns that reinforce stereotypes and exacerbate pre-exisiting divisions in society. He also talks about how this fueling of public hysteria can ultimately result in legislation that is punitive, unnecessary and often only serves the purposes of those in positions of power and authority.
The labelling of folk devils is a well known attribute of these campaigns, creating a fear of a certain specific of citizen or protagonist. They are the visual reason for a situation and they are built up as the evil that is causing the social unrest or issue. News media plays a large role in attempting to vilify these fold devils via distortion and exaggeration of the identity and creating a fear based threat. In this way the news media play the vital role in getting the message out to the public and whipping up furore and rhetoric that ultimately catches like a wildfire and becomes a moral panic.
Dr Gaye Truchman talks about news frames and how news media may focus on certain aspects of a story, or indeed the public perception of the history of a story and influence that by framing the reporting of information in a certain way. He talks about the choice media may make in reporting a story or information to achieve a desired result. This relies heavily on how the public will interpret new information that has relevance in history. Think of the Lindy Chamberlain case and how she was framed by the media to influence a certain result. Its all about using news like a photographers lens, focusing on certain elements to create a desired storyline.
Priming is another example of manipulating the publics perception of an issue. Priming involves activating pre-existing opinions or information that is the public sphere and using that to influence how new information may be interpreted. This mechanism explains how a news frame may be used to trigger an already exisiting opinion or belief about a subject. Again whipping up unhelpful and opinionated rhetoric.
SO what happens when the avenues of media begin to not play along into the desires of the power base? We have discourse and a battle of who controls content and who gets to silence whom. Looking at the trend of social media platforms, Milton Mueller in an article published with the CATO Institute talks about censorship and governmental control over social media as being the new battleground of control. Hyper-transperancy and freedom of expression become the new bastions of the social media groups and the fight to ensure free transfer of information is being waged across democracies and political platforms the world over. It should be about serving the public values Mueller claims and also about protecting ourselves from having content dictated to us by regulation and restriction of opinion that doesn’t match the proferred status quo. Whilst fake news needs to be routed out and identified for what it is, it does come down to the public to disseminate information and interpret from as broad a variety of sources our news content without buying into the moral panic.
It’s a huge pandoras box of information and commentary to begin investigating this concept and understanding the various perspectives of who we should be trusting and how we should be reacting to news information and the passing on of news material. So many academics and commentators offer a much more informed opinion and discussion than I could ever hope to convey. However I truly believe this is a discussion we should be part of. I think in our current climate, it is important for we the public to be critical of the avenues of our information and the role they play in manipulating public opinion and perception. Choosing not to buy into the public moral panic may be more difficult and require a more reserved and investigative nature, but one I think it worth investing in… for all sakes.
