Article Analysis
Moral Panics: Culture, Politics, and Social Construction

Introduction:
One might heard about threats, warnings and illegal actions that are influencing the society at their peak. No matter which culture an individual is belonged to, the thing that matters is the panic he has been influenced by, through various ways. Such panic is simply termed as moral panic and it has been the cause of cultural conflicts, social disturbances and political issues. Moral panic has been a hot topic of discussion that considered through several different perspectives; emphasizing on this aspect, various scholars and researchers have illustrated the society with the instances of social, culture and political problems and more specifically the moral panics. Cohen (1972) defined moral panic as societal threat whereas Furedi (1994) described moral panics as a threat to happiness and health. Continuing the research in same domain, Goode and Ben-Yehuda also contributed in defining the concept of moral panics in relation to the cultural, social and political problems. Focusing on the broader spectrum presented by Goode and Ben-Yehuda, the given paper has been written. The main aim of the current discussion is to highlight the study or research conducted by Goode and Ben-Yehuda about a specific issue and major public concern that is none other than moral panics. The given paper has been categorized into the following sections in order to develop an understanding what the researchers have done in terms of constructionism, moral crusades and social problems.
Main Theme: Action and concern is apparent within the communal control culture; it has been observed that law enforcement should be considered to do something remarkable regarding the perceived threat. In this regard, it is said that it is the role of legislators and politicians who grab a prospect to the recommend the possible punishments and solutions and line up themselves defining the quality of moral panics with the groups alongside the supposed threat. On the other hand, action groups have also been created as the result of moral panic. Considering the existing measures and remedies insufficient, the action groups are coped with the new threat. In addition to it, two features are considered to portray the moral panic and to notify the witness that community is in the rule of moral panic; thus expansion disaster mentality and creation of construction of folk devils have been considered those two features. Describing the folk devil a deviant, Goode and Ben-Yehuda state that an individual is a folk devil of he is involved in misconduct or crime and his actions reflect harm to the community. They are considered evil and selfish and some generous measures should be taken to normalize their actions. In this way, in spectrum of moral panic, the establishment of disaster mentality has strong connection with the measures taken before, after or during a natural disaster. These involve likelihoods of awaiting doom, threat’s institutionalization, false alarms and overreactions.
Social Problems and Moral Panics:
Entering the concept of social problems, it is said that social problems can be looked through constructionist or objectivist approach. According to the objectivists, social problem is an object that harms or damages the wellbeing and human life; a condition that can be the cause of disease or death and harmful for the quality of life is considered social problem (Manis, 1976). These social problems include sexism, oppression and racism (Merton et al, 1976). On the other hand, the constructionist perspective says that social problems have no physical existence; rather these problems exist in the human minds. These problems can be expressed and reality can be measured through voting on issues, activism and involvement in social movements. Meanwhile, it is important to observe the social dynamics that are the cause of social problems. Continuing the debate on social problems, it has been said that when the social problems become a threat to the societal interests and values then these are considered the moral panics. Concern, hostility, consensus, disproportionality and volatility are the basic attributes of moral panics; these are the characteristics of social problems that can generate moral panics.
Goode and Ben-Yehuda (1994) have tried to convey to the world that social problems should be considered as assembled phenomenon; what contains an issue is the apprehension that sectors of the society sense regarding a particular condition. Through constructionism, that apprehension should not be stand a strong relationship with tangible harm or damage that the scenario causes or postures. At times, the societies sense the intense feelings of threats and harms; such critical periods are for some time and this is the reason, sociologists like Goode and Ben-Yehuda refer these periods to moral panics and nominate deviants as the agents that are responsible for folk devils. Considering this aspect, they have proposed significant theories including interest group, elite engineered and grassroots theories; it has been proved that moral panics leave institutional and informal legacy.
Claims Makers and Claims-making Activity:
According to the Spector and Kitsuse (1977), social problem is the group making declarations of claims and activities of people. They believe that social problems are generated by particular sociocultural circumstances, societies, social structures, classes, individuals, historical eras, categories and groups. Claims making is related with constructionism as the constructionists emphasizes on the level of claims-making. It has been analyzed that not necessarily all problems are considered crucial problems; some of these problems may be handled in relation to the particular conditions or instances. It should be noted that circulating and generating numbers are considered important in moral panics in relation to the victims, crimes, illness, dollars, addicts, deaths, figures and injuries quoted by the claim makers of moral panic; these attributes are excitedly overstated. The concept of claims and claims makers can be best described with different models related to varying model panics. The grassroots offer raw material or fuel for the moral panic when the issues of organizational activists of interests offer the timing and morality offers the moral panic’s content. The grassroots model is to observe the concerns and fears. (Best, 1995)
Coming to the concept of moral entrepreneur, it is said that public attention and attendant media are the products of moral entrepreneurs that are related with the law enforcements. As discussed earlier, claims making activities are associated with the actions and public behaviors; meanwhile, movement activists, do-gooders and organizers push for the specified cause. This is all about moral crusade and it has been observed that without moral entrepreneur there is no moral crusade while moral crusade is important for the law enforcements. With the help or moral entrepreneurs; it is easier to identify the area of misconduct or wrongdoings; in this regard it is said that moral entrepreneurs produce moral crusades.
Stanley Cohen’s Work:
The main concern of Cohen (1972) is the reaction of social actors, on the minor events, that is the major cause of moral panics. Agreeing with two features presented by Ben-Yehuda and Goode; Cohen also supported folk devils and disaster mentality. According to Cohen (1972), a minor incident may become major event because of the over reacted behaviors and attitudes; moral panic is a larger threat to the societies and it should be overcome with the passage of time. Defining the broader spectrum of the terminology moral panic, Cohen has characterized the responses of police, politicians, public, action groups and media to youthful disturbances. Moral panics can make changes in legal and political aspects. In the moral panics, consequences of law enforcement and media give a threat to the community; in relation to it, folk devils have been produced to determine the evil and selfish wrongdoers and threats’ sources that are responsible for the problems and troubles. Cohen worked for the moral panics in which the sensitization happens by deviance, wrongness and harm; these factors are concerned with the behavior conditions and consequences. The effect of the conditions, law enforcement efforts, innovation of new methods and behavior conditions are greatly related with the moral panics. Cohen has determined the influence of reactions and interests of moral panics; the concept is the clear depiction for the students with reference to potential explorations.
Stages of Moral Panic:
One of the most important questions is that how the occurrence of moral panics will be appeared; for this purpose, the stages of moral panic have been introduced by the sociologists.
Concern: A degree of concern over supposed attitude of a certain social group could influence the society. With these social problems, the concerns are measureable through various ways including media attention, recommended legislation, public opinion and social activity.
Hostility: Improved hostility level is required to categorize the people involved in threatening behavior. The members’ behavior is considered harmful to the interests, values, and ways of life and existence of society.
Consensus: There should be acceptable level of agreement in the society with which the serious and real threat can be handled. It is no secret that moral panics have varying sizes and they should be categorized with the public concerns and elite interests. According to various researchers including Victor (1993) and Jenkins et al (1992), public concerns should be considered and level of consensus is important to illustrate the moral panic in an efficient and effective manner.
Disproportionality: The inherent assumption in moral panic is the concern that is connected to the threat and is greater than the empirical evaluation. It is used to calculate the problem scope; if the cited models are successfully determine the problem scope then it is said that significant level of disproportionality has been achieved.
Volatility: Moral panics vary in naturel some of them are volatile and few of the moral panics reappear by time. Whether the moral panics have an impact on the political, social, cultural and legal sectors or not; moral panics have an influence that can be measured in terms of hostility, concern and fear.
Models of Moral Panic:
According to Sacco and Kennedy (2011), three theories have been proposed to illustrate the concept of moral panic in its broader spectrum:
Grassroots: According to the grassroots model, general public is the cause of panics; when the concern about the specific threat is propagated, moral panic is created. Public concern is not generated by the special group rather it is uncontrollable factor. It has been stated that because of the public sentiment, latent concern or fear, feelings of isolated individuals and mutual awareness should be given an accurate expression or translate the concerns and fears to required expression.
Elite Engineered Model: There may exists a social group that generates the fear or public concerns to harm the society; at that time, there should be an elite group to handle the issue, find out the legislation content and dominate the media to direct the law enforcement. In this way, the social movements the social movements and action groups can play their part.
Interest Group: this is the most reliable model that should be considered in perspective of moral panics; as discussed earlier moral entrepreneurs and moral crusades are interlinked but in the meantime, the panic seems to be created. To overcome this issue, there is a need to follow certain sets of rules to solve the issue; the interests groups are intended to play an independent part and they are the shakers and active movers to dictate the timing, content or direction of panics.
Conclusively, it is said that panics may or may not have an influence on the society but they seems to influence the circumstances through various ways. It is important to overcome the societal issues by following the rules and regulations and considering the public concerns and fears on the meanwhile. Reducing the level of harm to the public, a society free of cultural differences or social problems can be developed.

References
Best, J. (Ed.). (1995). Images of issues: Typifying contemporary social problems. Transaction Publishers.
Cohen, S. Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of the Mods and Rockers (London: MacGibbon and Kee, 1972). The well-known first sentence reads, “Societies appear to be subject, every now and then, to periods of moral panic.
Furedi, F. (1994). A plague of moral panics. Living Marxism, 73(11).
Goode, E., & Ben-Yehuda, N. (1994). Moral panics: Culture, politics, and social construction. Annual review of sociology, 20(1), 149-171.
Jenkins, P., & Maier-Katkin, D. (1992). Satanism: myth and reality in a contemporary moral panic. Crime, Law and Social Change, 17(1), 53-75.
Manis, J. G. (1976). Analyzing social problems. New York: Praeger.
Merton, R. K. (Ed.). (1976). Sociological ambivalence and other essays. Simon and Schuster.
Sacco, V. F., & Kennedy, L. W. (2011). The criminal event: An Introduction to criminology in Canada. Toronto, Ontario: Nelson Education Ltd.
Victor, J. S. (1993). Satanic panic: The creation of a contemporary legend. Open Court Publishing.