The media plays a variety of different roles in society, the major role being that of providing information. To what extent though does this role as an information provider influence moral panics? Is the media the puppeteer or is it simply a vehicle for the continuation of a moral panic? Firstly it is necessary to define moral panic and look at its roots. Some historical as well as current examples will be analysed and the role of the media in regards to moral panics will be determined.
Scott Cohen has defined a moral panic as “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 stylised and stereotypical fashion by the mass media; the moral barricades are manned by editors, bishops, politicians and other right-thinking people; socially accredited experts pronounce their diagnoses and solutions; ways of coping are evolved or (more often) resorted to.”1
An issue that can be characterised as a moral panic in historical times was the fear of witches and the trials and executions that erupted from that fear. These are said to have been a result of Exodus 22:18, “You shall not permit a sorceress to live.”2 However this cannot be called a media inspired moral panic, the Bible verse in question is not a form of media in the modern sense of the word, and would only have been read by those who were literate, generally only the elites. Witches were seen as folk-devils, highly dangerous to the community, and needing to be stopped. Victims are estimated from the hundreds to the millions since many of the techniques used to find out if one was a witch or warlock was through burning or drowning, techniques which assumed guilt. The Crucible is a literary example of what a moral panic taking over a community can do and the results that can occur. To better understand what a moral panic entails it is necessary to look at the five defining features, as devised by Goode and Ben-Yehuda.3
The main outlet for media coverage is concern, bringing to light behaviour that may affect society negatively, causing public awareness and concern for the issue at hand.4 The media writes emotively on such issues, using stories that will get an emotive response from readers. Statistics are used if appropriate but a journalist will steer away from writing a story too factual in nature. Stories involving child abuse often come under this category, the public reacting with outrage and hostility. This hostility towards a particular group brings forth the old notion present in the witch trials, the folk-devil.5 This can also be illustrated through the current hostility towards terrorism and all those associated with it, which is displayed from communities around the world.
One person cannot create a moral panic on his or her own, there needs to be a consensus. A group may then have the power to influence the opinions of others.6 The current moral panic, while widespread, does not appear to affect everyone and as people perceive what is threatening and what is not, or what may be threatening but should not be feared in different ways, it would be very unlikely for a whole society to share the panic.
Society’s knowledge about crime comes from the media and exaggerated statistics often fuel a moral panic. The panic is then disproportionate to the real threat of the issue in question.7 An illustration of this is the fact that the level of law and order in society is often judged by crime statistics and if these have been exaggerated, society is lead to the mistaken belief that the rate of crime is higher than it really is. For example, one is much more likely to have a car accident than to have their plane hijacked, but the panic regarding the latter is much more evident and seen as more threatening than the former.
Moral panics are volatile and characteristically arise without warning, with a limited duration. However, they may have an underlying cause that makes the panic arise depending on the circumstances of each event.8 Newsworthiness is a key aspect of volatility – fear and interest in an issue will die if something more newsworthy occurs. Hence, a moral panic could begin and end in a short space of time if a more pressing news item comes to light and the media focus sways to that, the initial issue becoming buried amidst the new issue. A further three theories on moral panics seek to identify where the initial root lies and the subsequent effect on society.
The grassroots model is a moral panic at its most basic level, caused by public concern about an issue.9 This theory explicitly removes media involvement in creating the panic.10 The concern comes from society itself and therefore no media influence exists to create it. This removal of the media may be present in many human-interest stories that occur when a group or an individual tells their story, stirring the concern of the greater community on the issue. The media involvement will occur only after the concern has been created, taking the issue further if it is an issue that is deemed informative and in the public interest. Members of the public who feel they have been wronged in some way often go to the media as a vehicle in order for their story to be heard, knowing that the publicity generated could help them get the result they are looking for.
The elite-engineered model is a deliberate attempt by the elite to create public concern and fear to cover up the real issues that may be causing a problem.11 This is a ‘government conspiracy’ type of theory, where power is both the cause and effect. Politicians and the media play a vital role, although it could be said that the media are used as vehicles to engineer the panic. The role of what is considered newsworthy is vital here, for a news item to become buried and be deemed less important than another issue, something more newsworthy needs to occur. Hence, creating public fear and concern about an issue that is not really important or threatening will deflect attention from the issue that is the real problem on the scale of newsworthiness.
The interest group theory indicates that rather than elites, in this case, the power is held by middle class groups, from professional bodies to church groups.12 There is a vested interest in the issue at hand, a belief or cause that the group feels strongly about. The concern comes from the group itself before spreading into the community through publicity. The interest group theory also focuses on who will benefit from a moral panic and the reasons for this.13 For example, an organisation may have a moral cause they seek to achieve, while elites may be interested in making a profit or taking attention off something they are involved in which is not going well, while the media are interested in high ratings and high profits.
Sometimes the terms ‘moral panic’ and ‘media hype’ seem interchangeable but there is a clear difference. Media hype is sensationalism;14 moral panic always has a basis in a societal concern of some sort, whether this concern comes from the elite, an organisation or the average person. The media often sensationalise issues which do not entail a moral panic, for example the lives of celebrities or large criminal trials, such as the O.J. Simpson trial.
A threat to society can be very real or it can simply be a perception not grounded in reality. Real threats are often criminal acts, social changes or different behaviour patterns. An Australian example of a moral panic is the Tampa incident involving boat people in 2001. A Norwegian Captain rescued more than 400 asylum seekers who would have otherwise drowned and what followed seemed to be a tug of war between Australia and Indonesia. Australia refused permission for the asylum seekers to be taken to Christmas Island, the closest port to the accident and the rightful place in accordance with international law. Australia’s request was for the asylum seekers to be taken to Indonesia, the refugees threatening to jump overboard and drown rather than be taken back to a country that would immediately put them in jail. The Captain bowed to their demands to be taken to Christmas Island and the Australian government acted quickly, using force to take over the ship.15
Clearly, a problem has existed with boat people in Australia’s history, making politicians and the public wary of such situations. However, it was a panic that led to Australia handling the issue in a manner that was seen as harsh. Initially the public backed the government’s stance, but as the media made regular emotive reports about the conditions on board the ship and the plight of the asylum seekers, some members of the public began to question whether the right decisions were really being made. However, it is important to note that this emotive reporting by the media did not sway the majority, as opinion polls showed that 90% of the public supported the stance taken by the government.16 The incident displayed all five defining features of a moral panic – concern, hostility, consensus, disproportionality and volatility. The panic itself seems to have been begun at a political level, with the media then fuelling the panic that had already begun. A moral panic that began shortly after the Tampa incident, then died down, resurfaced, and today remains a cause for concern, is terrorism.
Terrorism has been around for a long time but came to a very shocking head on September 11, 2001. A date everyone around the world knows and is associated with what has become a very real threat. The initial panic subsided but has re-ignited, through unfortunate events at several stages. Just over a year later, the Bali bombings on 12 October 2002 brought the underlying panic back into the spotlight. The same occurred after the 12 March 2004 Madrid train bombings and London attack on 7 July 2005.
These are issues that the media has been very involved in, using news reports to present the public with the facts, emotive stories and statistics on what had occurred and who was behind it. The five features of a moral panic are evident, the presence of volatility being a volatile one itself as it goes through various stages, from settling down to re-emerging, stronger than when it began. The moral panic regarding terrorism has resulted in a number of changes around the world, most of these through the introduction of conventions and legislation. The most notable change on an international scale is the USA PATRIOT Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act) and the Charter of the United Nations (Anti-terrorism Measures) Regulations 2001. On a more local scale the most notable are the Terrorism (Commonwealth Powers) Act 2002, Terrorism (Community Safety) Amendment Bill 2004 (Qld), Commonwealth Government’s Anti-Terrorism Act (No 2) 2005 and changes to the Criminal Code.17 These are a direct result of the current moral panic and government’s around the world continue to propose and discuss anti-terrorism legislation.
Has the media really had the power to create the current moral panic and in turn, create the changes that have occurred? The events that unfolded in September of 2001 had no affiliation with the media, the magnitude of the event was something that the public could see for themselves and the role the media then played was of furthering information already known through news reports and features that were both factual and emotive. It has been stated that “there could be a link between the degree of media publicity attached to a homicide, suicide or terrorist incident, and the incidence of subsequent conduct of a similar nature.”18
This leads to the issue of selective reporting, a common practice in journalism and one that has been blamed for causing a higher crime rate.19 Selecting the most newsworthy stories involves looking at the stories which have novelty; violence; a respectable victim; a child, or the elderly.20 There needs to be an impact of some sort for the item to be considered newsworthy and social deviants who are attempting to make a statement with their criminal activity take the subsequent publicity into consideration.
Public morality goes through varying cycles, with features quite akin to the five present in a moral panic. However, the panic itself is not present, it is a societal concern which the community wants to find out more information on and may use this information to form a stronger opinion. Concern, a certain level of hostility and consensus are the main identifying features of the issues present that are in the minds of the public and affecting their sense of morality. What the media reports on does not influence what society thinks but it does influence what it is that is on the minds of the community. Stories are selected on the basis of being able to hold the interest of the public and have the best video footage or photographs to ensure high ratings and a newspaper editor will decide which stories are the most important and will make a reader pick up the newspaper, wanting to read more.21
The media play a vital role in moral panics, certainly through fuelling the issue further. The power held by the media does not extend to the level members of the public may believe, that the media has the power to create a moral panic. While the media certainly would have created moral panics in the past, the modern examples used indicate that the media is often used as a vehicle to furthering a moral panic, rather than playing an active role in creating one.
An interesting relationship exists between the media, the creator or creators of a moral panic and the issue itself. The media plays several roles, that of the vehicle, the sensationalist, and the selective reporter to name a few. The characteristics of the moral panic itself shape the role the media will play. The media do play a vital role, that of publicity. The issue, already having begun at a basic level in the community and among the people touched by the issue, needs publicity to widen sufficiently. In most cases, the media is the vehicle for the moral panic, not the instigator.
1
Cohen, S. (1972) Folk devils and moral panics, Mac Gibbon and
Kee: London, p 9.
2Holy Bible – The New Revised Standard Version (1993) Catholic
Bible Press: Tennessee, Exodus 22:18, p 68.
3
Jones, M. and Jones, E. (1999) Mass Media, Macmillan:
Basingstoke, p 143.
4
Jones, M. and Jones, E. (1999) Mass Media, Macmillan:
Basingstoke, p 143.
5
Jones, M. and Jones, E. (1999) Mass Media, Macmillan:
Basingstoke, p 143.
6
Jones, M. and Jones, E. (1999) Mass Media, Macmillan:
Basingstoke, p 143.
7
Jones, M. and Jones, E. (1999) Mass Media, Macmillan:
Basingstoke, p 144.
8
Jones, M. and Jones, E. (1999) Mass Media, Macmillan:
Basingstoke, p 144.
9
Jones, M. and Jones, E. (1999) Mass Media, Macmillan:
Basingstoke, p 153.
10
Jones, M. and Jones, E. (1999) Mass Media, Macmillan:
Basingstoke, p 153.
11
Jones, M. and Jones, E. (1999) Mass Media, Macmillan:
Basingstoke, p 153.
12
Jones, M. and Jones, E. (1999) Mass Media, Macmillan:
Basingstoke, p 154.
13
Jones, M. and Jones, E. (1999) Mass Media, Macmillan:
Basingstoke, p 154.
14
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_hype
15
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=1947
16
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Tampa
17
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/intguide/law/terrorism.htm
18
Hurst, J. and White, S.A. (1994) Ethics and the Australian News
Media, Macmillan Education Australia, South Melbourne, p 88.
19
Hurst, J. and White, S.A. (1994) Ethics and the Australian News
Media, Macmillan Education Australia, South Melbourne, p 88.
20
Grabosky, P. and Wilson, P. (1989) Journalism & Justice: How
Crime is Reported, Pluto Press, Sydney, p 12.
21
Grabosky, P. and Wilson, P. (1989) Journalism & Justice: How
Crime is Reported, Pluto Press, Sydney, pp 14 -15.
