How do moral panics help form or fragment cultural identity?

A society is moulded by influential trends which, in turn, enable other members of the public to follow, or rebel in another trend. A moral panic is a negative reaction to a trend as the general public feel it is a threat to the society’s values. As a result of these moral panics, cultural identity shifts as the folk devil and initial crisis either merge into the standards of the social order or are resolved by bringing in new laws or measures.

As a result of these moral panics, two appropriate models were made in order to monitor the process of the crisis and decide whether or not it should be classed as a moral panic. They both contain a number of stages, each specifying what is to be expected within in a moral panic. The first to be put into practice was the ‘Processual Model’ created by Stanley Cohen. This model consists of seven stages, for example, the first; ‘Emergence – when a form or behaviour becomes a threat.’ Throughout the model, it explains how the moral panic is handled before being resolved and finally, ‘submerging into the culture’ and creating a legacy of changing people’s views, thus our cultural identity. This ‘Processual Model’ could be seen as the more formal and structured model as it states the usual conventions of the moral panic’s process. The second model is the ‘Attributional Model’ by Goode & Nachman. This includes only five points of criteria for a moral panic and mainly expresses the reaction of the public rather than the process of the resolution. For example, the fourth stage is ‘Disproportionate - the reaction by the public is out of proportion to the cultural harm’, which is representative of the tendency of this particular model. As each model has different criteria, depending on the process of the moral panic, one model may apply to a given crisis better than the other. These models will come in useful when deciding how each moral panic affects and alters our cultural identity as the path they each follow lead to different outcomes.

A key example of a moral panic is the uprising of child abuse. Although child abuse has unfortunately happened throughout time, one of the most important cases was in 1973 when Maria Colwell who, aged 7, was beaten to death by her stepfather, came to trial. As a result, awareness began to slowly spread throughout the public. Nevertheless, as the case didn’t gain as much coverage as expected – most likely due to the horrific concept being so new, thus unbelievable – this was not yet seen as a majorly threatening issue. Therefore there wouldn’t have been a shift in our cultural identity, but just the beginning of a gradual process to change. Sir Keith Joseph, Minister for Social Security, played a key role in resolving the ordeal. However, it was only when the media became involved, having used the criticism of the social work system as a lead, that the moral panic appeared to be well under way. This was due to the media’s typicality in over-exaggerating the situation, and choosing to further the decision to blame social workers.
As a result of all this, parents and the public in general were shocked and rightfully scared, but for two reasons. Firstly, suspicions grew for parents as to whether their child’s safety was in jeopardy. This suspicion would most likely fragment our cultural identity as people become less trusting, thus creating friction as any abnormal behavior would generate doubt in their ability to care for children. Secondly, in relation with the first fear, and consequentially, parents and child minders in general would fear for their status as reliable carers. This reaction would most likely bring people together as those who see the epidemic as being over exaggerated would fight together to bring a sense of reason back to society. So overall in this epidemic, fragmentation and form are inextricably linked in that the mass media solidifies the public’s cultural image of a “typical” mother. This results in cultural forming – as those who appear to be a “typical” mother come together – and fragmentation in which within society people can become hostile, or overly concerned when people do not conform to this specific identity.

Another example of a moral panic is the uprising of ‘Rave.’ This was an outbreak unlike anything else due to the main concept of it being more of a taboo rather than essentially breaking the law. Rave culture was very distinctive, they always used extensive lighting, wore eccentric clothes, and the music had around 120 beats per second. This chaotic theme is all very necessary once you understand why the mutiny was so looked down upon. Drugs were the main concern surrounding rave culture, and although manic dancing and eccentric settings aren’t illegal, drugs are. This is what caused the moral panic and sent the public wild with alarm, producing a formation of worried parents, those who were affected, and thus an army of resistance.
The police made many attempts to bring down the raves however they were up against several tactics used to keep them out. All the people who considered themselves as ‘ravers’ were, in principle, included in a huge cultural forming. Therefore, they fought for their revolution. Organisers argued that the raves were private functions leaving the police with no grounds to work with, and that’s if they could find the events - the venues were kept secret until the last minute, and were in rural places such as barns and airfields. Because the ‘ravers’ were in an unstable position of control, they were very tightly bound and thus became more detached from society. So although at the time there were two very motivated and strong formations of society, this evidently leads to an overwhelming split in our British culture. It was only when Leah Betts died on her 18th birthday due to water intoxication – a result from ecstasy – that the moral panic began to come to an end. This moral panic seems to follows the steps of the ‘Attributional’ model, and although the death of Leah Betts came as a blow to both groups, the public reaction still seemed disproportionate to the cultural harm, and so following the process of the model, the panic soon subsided.

A further example of a moral panic that hit the nation was AIDS. This differs from the previous two, as the shocking and life changing crisis had no one to blame. Most moral panics have a folk devil, as they play the role of the people who are threatening the rest of society and their culture. However it was only after the pandemic was over that the public realised AIDS was an exception due to the virus infecting unknowing suspects. When AIDS came about, panic broke loose as people could find no explanation. It was only when the media suggested it was a ‘gay plague’ that the true moral panic took place – as the public finally had a folk devil to hold responsible – and people generalised it with homosexuals and later drug users as knowledge spread that these were possible ways of contracting AIDS. Much like the rave rebellion, formations were created by the supposed folk devils being singled out as wrong doers. Quite understandably, those who received grief, as well as having to cope with the infection, started to run campaigns fighting to bring sense into the isolating calamity. This was a mass moral panic and so went on for a long period of time. Therefore as time went on, and as people began to learn more about the pandemic, views and opinions on the matter grew more and more diverse. The obvious risk of having so many outlooks on such a serious and culture-affecting issue is that sooner or later, people create confrontation and hence, cause fractures in society. So although like other moral panics, some people form a cultural identity in accordance with their beliefs, overall, our culture is dangerously fractured as there are too many apparent subdivisions.

Moral panics always come in different forms. This is evident from looking at the differences between the child abuse, rave, and aids epidemics. Child abuse is a harmful and worrying crisis as targets are unpredictable and helpless. The rise of rave was just a large youth subculture which was harmful in terms self infliction, and the influencing of others. The AIDS epidemic was purely a misunderstanding as because the infection was so new, the public felt the need to blame someone without knowing the facts. During all these moral panics, culture shifts regularly. There will always be formations of individuals wanting to fight to bring the crisis to an end, as well as those who group together as a result of feeling targeted. At least we can take comfort in the fact that all moral panics do fade, or at least become regulated, and all the groupings and segregations eventually loose their force.

Film Research

Today i found a truly British film that i decided would be useful in helping me to further my knowledge on the what makes a film British. The film was Doctor in Distress, directed by Ralph Thomas, and made in 1963.
I believe that films of this era were easier to decipher as British as this was the time that people base our cultural traits on; pompous men with mustaches, rounded classic cars, and proper British speaking. Funnily enough, this film includes all these conventions. Even from the introduction, the connotations of all the films aspects were pointedly British. The non-digetic music was formal and upbeat, typical of a film of this era. The characters shown were chugging along in there old fashioned British cars with rounded head lamps and chrome finishing. The reason for this being so apparent is in order to inform the audience the setting of the film making it an initial conclusion drawn.
The plot that runs through the film is also very British. It's a romance including Doctors as the protagonists. By using the profession of a Doctor is significant as it is seen to be a respected line of work, and these beliefs is a signifier of British culture. Despite the obvious English accent, even the way they talk is characteristic of a British person, whether it be a heavy londoner's chat or upper classed grousing. The genre is also archetypal of a British film as this was around the same time as the Hays Code adaption, making it very family friendly and thus noticeably British.
Overall i have gained a better insight into recognizing a British film as the more examples i research the more i familiarize myself with the characteristics.