Moral panic is a concept in sociology that describes a phenomenon in which society becomes disproportionately alarmed over a perceived threat to societal values, norms, or morals. During a moral panic, public discourse, media coverage, and social reactions intensify, often leading to increased social control measures.
Moral panic is characterized by exaggerated fear, concern, and public outrage over a particular issue or group that is perceived as a threat to societal values, norms, or morals. This perception often leads to a heightened level of anxiety and a sense of urgency among the public.
Amplified Media Coverage
Media plays a significant role in amplifying moral panics. News outlets and social media platforms may intensively cover the perceived threat, often sensationalizing the issue and contributing to public anxiety.
Rapid Social Reaction
During a moral panic, there is often a swift and collective societal response. This response can involve calls for legal and social measures to address the perceived threat, such as increased law enforcement, policy changes, or public campaigns.
Stigmatization and Scapegoating
Moral panics often result in the stigmatization and scapegoating of a specific group or behavior. The perceived threat is typically associated with a particular social category, such as youth, immigrants, or a subculture, which becomes the focus of blame and fear.
Characteristics of Moral Panic
Trigger Event or Catalyst
Moral panics are usually triggered by a specific event or incident that captures public attention. This event serves as a catalyst, igniting fears and concerns within society. For example, a high-profile crime committed by a member of a particular group may trigger a moral panic about that group.
Moral Entrepreneurs
Moral entrepreneurs are individuals or groups who actively promote the moral panic. They may include politicians, advocacy organizations, or media figures who use the issue to advance their agendas or gain public support.
Construction of Folk Devils
During a moral panic, the group or behavior seen as the threat is often constructed as “folk devils.” These folk devils are portrayed as dangerous, corrupt, or immoral, further fueling public anxiety and fear.
Exaggeration and Distortion
Moral panics often involve exaggeration and distortion of facts and statistics related to the perceived threat. Media coverage may magnify the issue, leading the public to perceive it as more widespread and harmful than it actually is.
Calls for Control Measures
One of the defining features of moral panic is the call for control measures to address the perceived threat. These measures can range from increased policing and legislation to public awareness campaigns and moral education.
Historical Examples of Moral Panic
The “Red Scare” in the United States (1950s)
During the Cold War era, the United States experienced a moral panic known as the “Red Scare.” Fueled by the fear of communist infiltration, particularly by the Soviet Union, the government and media launched campaigns to identify and root out suspected communists, resulting in the blacklisting of individuals and the erosion of civil liberties.
The Satanic Panic (1980s-1990s)
The Satanic Panic was a moral panic that emerged in the 1980s and 1990s in the United States and other countries. It involved widespread fears of satanic cults allegedly engaged in ritual abuse, child molestation, and other criminal activities. Many of the allegations were later discredited, and experts concluded that much of the panic was unfounded.
The “War on Drugs” (1980s-Present)
The “War on Drugs” in the United States is another example of a long-standing moral panic. Fueled by concerns over drug addiction and drug-related crime, this moral panic has led to harsh drug laws, mass incarceration, and punitive policies, with lasting social and racial consequences.
“Video Nasties” in the United Kingdom (1980s)
In the 1980s, the United Kingdom experienced a moral panic related to “video nasties,” which referred to violent and gory horror films available on VHS tapes. Concerned parents and politicians called for stricter censorship and regulation of these films, leading to the Video Recordings Act 1984.
Criticisms of the Concept
Social Constructionism
Critics argue that the concept of moral panic is rooted in social constructionism, which emphasizes how social problems and threats are constructed and defined by society. Some contend that what is labeled as a moral panic may simply be society’s reaction to real social problems.
Moral Relativism
Critics also question the idea of moral panic, suggesting that it implies moral relativism. They argue that labeling something as a moral panic may downplay genuine moral concerns and the need for societal responses to address them.
Exaggeration vs. Legitimate Concerns
Distinguishing between legitimate concerns and exaggerated fears during a moral panic can be challenging. Critics argue that dismissing all concerns as moral panics may hinder efforts to address real issues, such as public safety or social justice.
Selective Attention
Some critics argue that the concept of moral panic may be selective in its focus, often examining how society reacts to perceived threats posed by marginalized groups while overlooking how it responds to threats from more powerful entities, such as corporations or governments.
Contemporary Relevance of Moral Panic
Social Media and “Cancel Culture”
In the age of social media, moral panics can spread rapidly, with online platforms amplifying fears and concerns. Issues related to “cancel culture,” online shaming, and public outrage campaigns have sparked debates about the role of social media in moral panics.
Immigration and Nationalism
Moral panics related to immigration, nationalism, and identity continue to shape political discourse in many countries. Concerns over cultural preservation, national security, and demographic changes often fuel these panics.
Public Health Crises
Public health crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, have also triggered moral panics, leading to fears, misinformation, and calls for drastic measures. Responses to public health crises may be influenced by moral panic dynamics.
Youth and Technology
Moral panics related to youth and technology are prevalent in contemporary society. Concerns about the impact of video games, social media, and online behavior on youth have led to debates about regulation and parental control.
Race and Social Justice Movements
Issues related to race, policing, and social justice have generated both moral panics and calls for change. Protests and public discourse surrounding racial disparities and police violence have ignited debates about societal responses.
Conclusion
Moral panic is a concept that sheds light on how societies react to perceived threats to their values and norms. It highlights the role of media, social construction, and collective anxiety in shaping public discourse and policy responses. While the concept has faced criticisms related to moral relativism and selective attention, it remains relevant in understanding contemporary issues and the dynamics of societal reactions. Analyzing moral panics can help us navigate the complexities of public opinion, media influence, and social control in an ever-changing world.
Convergent thinking occurs when the solution to a problem can be found by applying established rules and logical reasoning. Whereas divergent thinking is an unstructured problem-solving method where participants are encouraged to develop many innovative ideas or solutions to a given problem. Where convergent thinking might work for larger, mature organizations where divergent thinking is more suited for startups and innovative companies.
The concept of cognitive biases was introduced and popularized by the work of Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman in 1972. Biases are seen as systematic errors and flaws that make humans deviate from the standards of rationality, thus making us inept at making good decisions under uncertainty.
Second-order thinking is a means of assessing the implications of our decisions by considering future consequences. Second-order thinking is a mental model that considers all future possibilities. It encourages individuals to think outside of the box so that they can prepare for every and eventuality. It also discourages the tendency for individuals to default to the most obvious choice.
Lateral thinking is a business strategy that involves approaching a problem from a different direction. The strategy attempts to remove traditionally formulaic and routine approaches to problem-solving by advocating creative thinking, therefore finding unconventional ways to solve a known problem. This sort of non-linear approach to problem-solving, can at times, create a big impact.
Bounded rationality is a concept attributed to Herbert Simon, an economist and political scientist interested in decision-making and how we make decisions in the real world. In fact, he believed that rather than optimizing (which was the mainstream view in the past decades) humans follow what he called satisficing.
The Dunning-Kruger effect describes a cognitive bias where people with low ability in a task overestimate their ability to perform that task well. Consumers or businesses that do not possess the requisite knowledge make bad decisions. What’s more, knowledge gaps prevent the person or business from seeing their mistakes.
Occam’s Razor states that one should not increase (beyond reason) the number of entities required to explain anything. All things being equal, the simplest solution is often the best one. The principle is attributed to 14th-century English theologian William of Ockham.
The Lindy Effect is a theory about the ageing of non-perishable things, like technology or ideas. Popularized by author Nicholas Nassim Taleb, the Lindy Effect states that non-perishable things like technology age – linearly – in reverse. Therefore, the older an idea or a technology, the same will be its life expectancy.
Antifragility was first coined as a term by author, and options trader Nassim Nicholas Taleb. Antifragility is a characteristic of systems that thrive as a result of stressors, volatility, and randomness. Therefore, Antifragile is the opposite of fragile. Where a fragile thing breaks up to volatility; a robust thing resists volatility. An antifragile thing gets stronger from volatility (provided the level of stressors and randomness doesn’t pass a certain threshold).
Systems thinking is a holistic means of investigating the factors and interactions that could contribute to a potential outcome. It is about thinking non-linearly, and understanding the second-order consequences of actions and input into the system.
Vertical thinking, on the other hand, is a problem-solving approach that favors a selective, analytical, structured, and sequential mindset. The focus of vertical thinking is to arrive at a reasoned, defined solution.
Maslow’s Hammer, otherwise known as the law of the instrument or the Einstellung effect, is a cognitive bias causing an over-reliance on a familiar tool. This can be expressed as the tendency to overuse a known tool (perhaps a hammer) to solve issues that might require a different tool. This problem is persistent in the business world where perhaps known tools or frameworks might be used in the wrong context (like business plans used as planning tools instead of only investors’ pitches).
The Peter Principle was first described by Canadian sociologist Lawrence J. Peter in his 1969 book The Peter Principle. The Peter Principle states that people are continually promoted within an organization until they reach their level of incompetence.
The straw man fallacy describes an argument that misrepresents an opponent’s stance to make rebuttal more convenient. The straw man fallacy is a type of informal logical fallacy, defined as a flaw in the structure of an argument that renders it invalid.
The Streisand Effect is a paradoxical phenomenon where the act of suppressing information to reduce visibility causes it to become more visible. In 2003, Streisand attempted to suppress aerial photographs of her Californian home by suing photographer Kenneth Adelman for an invasion of privacy. Adelman, who Streisand assumed was paparazzi, was instead taking photographs to document and study coastal erosion. In her quest for more privacy, Streisand’s efforts had the opposite effect.
As highlighted by German psychologist Gerd Gigerenzer in the paper “Heuristic Decision Making,” the term heuristic is of Greek origin, meaning “serving to find out or discover.” More precisely, a heuristic is a fast and accurate way to make decisions in the real world, which is driven by uncertainty.
The recognition heuristic is a psychological model of judgment and decision making. It is part of a suite of simple and economical heuristics proposed by psychologists Daniel Goldstein and Gerd Gigerenzer. The recognition heuristic argues that inferences are made about an object based on whether it is recognized or not.
The representativeness heuristic was first described by psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky. The representativeness heuristic judges the probability of an event according to the degree to which that event resembles a broader class. When queried, most will choose the first option because the description of John matches the stereotype we may hold for an archaeologist.
The take-the-best heuristic is a decision-making shortcut that helps an individual choose between several alternatives. The take-the-best (TTB) heuristic decides between two or more alternatives based on a single good attribute, otherwise known as a cue. In the process, less desirable attributes are ignored.
The bundling bias is a cognitive bias in e-commerce where a consumer tends not to use all of the products bought as a group, or bundle. Bundling occurs when individual products or services are sold together as a bundle. Common examples are tickets and experiences. The bundling bias dictates that consumers are less likely to use each item in the bundle. This means that the value of the bundle and indeed the value of each item in the bundle is decreased.
The Barnum Effect is a cognitive bias where individuals believe that generic information – which applies to most people – is specifically tailored for themselves.
First-principles thinking – sometimes called reasoning from first principles – is used to reverse-engineer complex problems and encourage creativity. It involves breaking down problems into basic elements and reassembling them from the ground up. Elon Musk is among the strongest proponents of this way of thinking.
The ladder of inference is a conscious or subconscious thinking process where an individual moves from a fact to a decision or action. The ladder of inference was created by academic Chris Argyris to illustrate how people form and then use mental models to make decisions.
Goodhart’s Law is named after British monetary policy theorist and economist Charles Goodhart. Speaking at a conference in Sydney in 1975, Goodhart said that “any observed statistical regularity will tend to collapse once pressure is placed upon it for control purposes.” Goodhart’s Law states that when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.
The Six Thinking Hats model was created by psychologist Edward de Bono in 1986, who noted that personality type was a key driver of how people approached problem-solving. For example, optimists view situations differently from pessimists. Analytical individuals may generate ideas that a more emotional person would not, and vice versa.
The Mandela effect is a phenomenon where a large group of people remembers an event differently from how it occurred. The Mandela effect was first described in relation to Fiona Broome, who believed that former South African President Nelson Mandela died in prison during the 1980s. While Mandela was released from prison in 1990 and died 23 years later, Broome remembered news coverage of his death in prison and even a speech from his widow. Of course, neither event occurred in reality. But Broome was later to discover that she was not the only one with the same recollection of events.
The bandwagon effect tells us that the more a belief or idea has been adopted by more people within a group, the more the individual adoption of that idea might increase within the same group. This is the psychological effect that leads to herd mentality. What in marketing can be associated with social proof.
Moore’s law states that the number of transistors on a microchip doubles approximately every two years. This observation was made by Intel co-founder Gordon Moore in 1965 and it become a guiding principle for the semiconductor industry and has had far-reaching implications for technology as a whole.
Disruptive innovation as a term was first described by Clayton M. Christensen, an American academic and business consultant whom The Economist called “the most influential management thinker of his time.” Disruptive innovation describes the process by which a product or service takes hold at the bottom of a market and eventually displaces established competitors, products, firms, or alliances.
Value migration was first described by author Adrian Slywotzky in his 1996 book Value Migration – How to Think Several Moves Ahead of the Competition. Value migration is the transferal of value-creating forces from outdated business models to something better able to satisfy consumer demands.
The bye-now effect describes the tendency for consumers to think of the word “buy” when they read the word “bye”. In a study that tracked diners at a name-your-own-price restaurant, each diner was asked to read one of two phrases before ordering their meal. The first phrase, “so long”, resulted in diners paying an average of $32 per meal. But when diners recited the phrase “bye bye” before ordering, the average price per meal rose to $45.
Groupthink occurs when well-intentioned individuals make non-optimal or irrational decisions based on a belief that dissent is impossible or on a motivation to conform. Groupthink occurs when members of a group reach a consensus without critical reasoning or evaluation of the alternatives and their consequences.
A stereotype is a fixed and over-generalized belief about a particular group or class of people. These beliefs are based on the false assumption that certain characteristics are common to every individual residing in that group. Many stereotypes have a long and sometimes controversial history and are a direct consequence of various political, social, or economic events. Stereotyping is the process of making assumptions about a person or group of people based on various attributes, including gender, race, religion, or physical traits.
Murphy’s Law states that if anything can go wrong, it will go wrong. Murphy’s Law was named after aerospace engineer Edward A. Murphy. During his time working at Edwards Air Force Base in 1949, Murphy cursed a technician who had improperly wired an electrical component and said, “If there is any way to do it wrong, he’ll find it.”
The law of unintended consequences was first mentioned by British philosopher John Locke when writing to parliament about the unintended effects of interest rate rises. However, it was popularized in 1936 by American sociologist Robert K. Merton who looked at unexpected, unanticipated, and unintended consequences and their impact on society.
Fundamental attribution error is a bias people display when judging the behavior of others. The tendency is to over-emphasize personal characteristics and under-emphasize environmental and situational factors.
Outcome bias describes a tendency to evaluate a decision based on its outcome and not on the process by which the decision was reached. In other words, the quality of a decision is only determined once the outcome is known. Outcome bias occurs when a decision is based on the outcome of previous events without regard for how those events developed.
Hindsight bias is the tendency for people to perceive past events as more predictable than they actually were. The result of a presidential election, for example, seems more obvious when the winner is announced. The same can also be said for the avid sports fan who predicted the correct outcome of a match regardless of whether their team won or lost. Hindsight bias, therefore, is the tendency for an individual to convince themselves that they accurately predicted an event before it happened.
Gennaro is the creator of FourWeekMBA, which reached about four million business people, comprising C-level executives, investors, analysts, product managers, and aspiring digital entrepreneurs in 2022 alone | He is also Director of Sales for a high-tech scaleup in the AI Industry | In 2012, Gennaro earned an International MBA with emphasis on Corporate Finance and Business Strategy.
