Moral Panic as a Form of the Cultural Field

Year 2023, Issue: 75, 355 - 372, 27.01.2023

Işılay Göktürk

https://doi.org/10.51290/dpusbe.1198893

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Moral panic is one of the important concepts used to explain social processes and cultural orientations, especially today. First theorized by Stanley Cohen in 1972, moral panic has built up an expanding literature today, with its advocates and opponents in much research and debate. Moral panic is the perception of an event, situation, person or phenomenon as a threat by the society or a part of the society. The primary driver of moral panic is the media. However, moral panic continues to operate in various aspects at all levels of social forms. In particular, the cultural field is both the creator of moral panic and the form of social structure that is most affected by the current situation. Fear, anxiety and risk-centered forms of action have taken a form that characterizes the social and the individual. In today's societies characterized by risk and fear and glorified security, panic has become the defining form of cultural structure. The 'panic' risk culture/risk society in the term moral panic has been the central concept of fear culture theories and has placed moral panic theories in a broader ontological context. In this study, the factual, theoretical and empirical orientations of the concept of moral panic will be discussed. The main claim of the study will be based on the shift of the theoretical positions of moral panic to a wider social context together with the theories of risk society and culture of fear, in which the social prevalence of panic is tried to be explained.

Keywords

Moral Panic, Culture of Fear, Risk Society, Social Anxiety

Kültürel Alanın Bir Formu Olarak Ahlaki Panik

Abstract

Ahlaki panik, özellikle günümüzde toplumsal süreçleri ve kültürel yönelimleri açıklamak için ele alınan önemli kavramlardan biridir. İlk olarak Stanley Cohen tarafından 1972 yılında teorileştirilen ahlaki panik, bugün pek çok araştırma ve tartışmada savunucuları ve muhalifleriyle birlikte genişleyen bir literatür inşa etmiştir. Ahlaki panik, bir olay, durum, kişi ya da olgunun toplum ya da toplumun bir kesimi tarafından tehdit olarak algılanmasıdır. Ahlaki paniğin itici gücü birincil düzeyde medyadır. Ancak toplumsal formların her kademesinde ahlaki panik çeşitli yönleriyle işlemeye devam eder. Özellikle kültürel alan ahlaki paniğin hem yaratıcısıdır ve hem de mevcut durumdan en çok etkilenen toplumsal yapı formudur. Korku, endişe ve risk merkezli eylemlilik biçimleri toplumsalı ve bireyi karakterize eden bir biçim almıştır. Risk ve korkunun karakterize ettiği ve güvenliğin yüceltildiği günümüz toplumlarında panik, kültürel yapının belirleyici formu haline gelmiştir. Ahlaki panik terimindeki ‘panik’ risk kültürü/risk toplumu, korku kültürü teorilerinin merkezi kavramı olmuş ve ahlaki panik teorilerini daha geniş bir ontolojik bağlama yerleştirmiştir. Bu çalışmada ahlaki panik kavramının olgusal, teorik ve ampirik yönelimleri üzerinden hareket edilecektir. Çalışmanın temel iddiası ise, panik’in toplumsal yaygınlığının açıklanmaya çalışıldığı risk toplumu ve korku kültürü teorileriyle birlikte ahlaki paniğin teorik konumlarının daha geniş bir toplumsal bağlama kaydığı üzerine kurulacaktır.

Keywords

Ahlaki Panik, Korku Kültürü, Risk Toplumu, Toplumsal Kaygı

References

• Adorno, T. W. ve Horkeimer, M. (2014). Aydınlanmanın diyalektiği felsefi fragmanlar. Ankara: Kabalcı.
• Ali, H. S. (1999). The search for a landfill site in the risk society. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 36(1), 1-19.
• Bauman, Z. (2018). Akışkan modernlik. İstanbul: Can Yayınları.
• Beck, U. (2011). Risk toplumu başka bir modernliğe doğru. İstanbul: İthaki.
• Becker, H. S. (2013). Hariciler (outsiders) bir sapkınlık sosyolojisi çalışması. Ankara: Heretik.
• Blumer, H. (1995). Social movements. S. M. Lyman (Ed.), Social movetnents critiques, concepts, case-studies içinde (ss. 60-83). London: Macmillan.
• Cohen, S. (2019). Halk düşmanları ve ahlaki panikler. Ankara: Heretik.
• Critcher, C. (2008). Moral panics analysis: past, present and future. Sociology Compass, 2(1), 1-18.
• Critcher, C. (2017). Moral panics. Erişim adresi: https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.013.155
• Douglas, M. (1985). Risk acceptability according to the social sciences. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
• Douglas, M. (2003). Risk and blame: essays in cultural theory. London and New York: Routledge.
• Douglas, M. ve Wildavsky, A. (1983). Risk and culture: an essay on the selection of technological and environmental dangers. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.
• Furedi, F. (2001). Korku kültürü: risk almamanın riskleri. İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
• Giddens, A. (2010). Modernite ve bireysel-kimlik geç modern çağda benlik ve toplum. İstanbul: Say Yayınları.
• Goode, E. ve Ben-Yehuda, N. (1994). Moral panics: culture, politics, and social construction. Annual Review of Sociology, 20, 149-171.
• Goode, E. ve Ben-Yehuda, N. (2009). Moral panics the social construction of deviance. Singapore: Wiley-Backwell.
• Hall, S. Critcher, C., Jefferson, T., Clark, J. ve Roberts, B. (1978). Policing the crisis: mugging, the state, and law and order. Great Britain: The Macmillan Press.
• Hayle, S. J. (2013). Folk devils without moral panics: discovering concepts in the sociology of evil. International Journal of Criminology and Sociological Theory, 6(2), 1125-1137.
• Hier, S. P. (2003). Risk and panic in late modernity: implications of the converging sites of social anxiety. The British Journal of Sociology, 54(1), 3-20.
• Hier, S. P. (2008). Thinking beyond moral panic: risk, responsibility, and the politics of moralization. Theoretical Criminology, 12(2), 173-190.
• Hier, S. P. (2011). Introduction. S. P. Hier (Ed.), Moral panic and the politics of anxiety içinde (ss. 1–16). London and New York: Routledge.
• Hier, S. P. (2015). The cultural politics of contemporary moral panic studies: reflections on a changing research agenda. Sociologický Časopis/Czech Sociological Review, 51(3), 362-372.
• Hitlin, S. ve Vaisey, S. (2013). The new sociology of morality. The Annual Review of Sociology, 39, 51-68.
• Hunt, A. (1997). ‘Moral panic’ and moral language in the media. The British Journal of Sociology, 48(4), 629-648.
• Hunt, A. (2011). Fractious rivals? moral panic and moral regulation. S. Hier (Ed.), Moral panic and the politics of anxiety içinde (ss. 53-70). London and New York: Routledge.
• Luhmann, N. (2017). Risk: a sociological theory. London and New York: Routledge.
• Lupton, D. (2013). Risk. London, UK: Routledge.
• McRobbie, A. ve Thornton, S. (1995). Rethinking “moral panic” for a multimediated social world. British Journal of Sociology. 46(4), 559-574.
• Rigakos, G. ve Law, A. (2009). Risk, realism and the politics of resistance. Critical Sociology, 35(1), 79-103.
• Rohloff, A. ve Wright, S. (2010). Moral panic and social theory: beyond the heuristic. Current Sociology, 58(3), 403-419.
• Rohloff, A., Hughes, J., Petley, J. ve Critcher, C. (2013). Moral panics in the contemporary world: enduring controversies and future directions. C. Critcher, J. Hughes, J. Petley, ve A. Rohloff (Ed.), Moral panics in the contemporary world içinde (ss. 1-29). New York: Bloomsbury.
• Rowe, D. (2009). The concept of the moral panic: an historico-sociological positioning. D. Lemmings ve C. Walker (Ed.), Moral panics, the media and the law in early modern england içinde (ss. 22-40). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Smelser, N. J. (1965). Theory of collective behavior. New York: The Free Press.
• Tatari, M. (2013). Moral panic and ritual abuse: where’s the risk? findings of an ethnographic research study. C. Critcher, J. Hughes, J. Petley ve A. Rohloff (Ed.), Moral panics in the contemporary world içinde (ss. 193-213). New York: Bloomsbury.
• Tezcan, A. M. (2022). Ahlak. S. Sezer (Ed.), Kurumlar sosyolojisi içinde (ss. 176-193). Erzurum: Atatürk Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Thompson, K. (1998). Moral panics. London, UK: Routledge.
• Ungar, S. (2001). ‘Moral Panic Versus the Risk Society: The Implications of the Changing Sites of Social Anxiety’, British Journal of Sociology, 52(2). (ss. 271–292).
• Waddington, P. A. J. (1986). ‘Mugging as a moral panic: a question of proportion’, British Journal of Sociology 37(2): 245–59.
• Waiton, S. (2008). The politics of antisocial behavior: amoral panics. New York & London: Routledge.
• Walsh, J. P. (2020). Social media and moral panics: assessing the effects of technological change on societal reaction. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 23(6), 840-859.
• van Ginneken, J. (2003). Collective behavior and public opinion: rapid shifts in opinion and communication. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Young, J. (1971). The role of the police as amplifiers of deviance, negotiators of drug control as seen in Notting Hill, S. Cohen (Ed.), Images of deviance içinde (ss. 27-61). England: Penguin Books.
• Young, J. (2007). Slipping away-moral panics each side of ‘the golden age’. D. Downes, P. Rock, C. Chinkin ve C. Gearty (Ed.), Crime, social control and human rights from moral panics to states of denial essays in honour of stanley cohen içinde (ss. 53-65). USA: Willan Publishing.