Moral panic is the new buzz word for those at the Weave Shed intent on defending the indefensible.
Yesterday it was Helen Daley rambling on and on about “moral panic.” This morning it’s Giuseppi Ciprianno and Michael Neville.
It made no sense to me. I googled “moral panic” this morning and here we go….
From Wikipedia. Read the entry in its entirety. A few excerpts
– A moral panic can be defined as “the intensity of feeling expressed by a large number of people about a specific group of people who appear to threaten the social order at a given time.”[1] Stanley Cohen, author of the seminal Folk Devils and Moral Panics (1973), says moral panic occurs when “[a] condition, episode, person or group of persons emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests.”[2] Those who start the panic when they fear a threat to prevailing social or cultural values are known by researchers as “moral entrepreneurs”, while the people who supposedly threaten the social order are known as “folk devils.” Moral panics are by-products of controversies that produce arguments and social tension, or aren’t easily discussed as some of these moral panics are taboo to many people.[3] The media have long operated as agents of moral indignation, even if they are not self-consciously engaged in crusading or muckraking. Simply reporting the facts can be enough to generate concern, anxiety or panic.[4]
– Characteristics
Moral Panics have several distinct features. The process by which these are created is best explained with Cohen’s Deviancy Amplification Spiral:
Concern – There must be awareness that the behaviour of the group or category in question is likely to have a negative impact on society.
Hostility – Hostility towards the group in question increases, and they become “folk devils”. A clear division forms between “them” and “us”.
Consensus – Though concern does not have to be nationwide, there must be widespread acceptance that the group in question poses a very real threat to society. It is important at this stage that the “moral entrepreneurs” are vocal and the “folk devils” appear weak and disorganised.
Disproportionality – The action taken is disproportionate to the actual threat posed by the accused group.
Volatility – Moral panics are highly volatile and tend to disappear as quickly as they appeared due to a wane in public interest or news reports changing to another topic.[1]
– Jewkes states that the reactions to pedophilia in the Western world have been cited as “the most significant moral panic of the last two decades.”[11]
Moral drivel! No more – no less. But, I must say I could work out a hypothesis that those howling “moral panic” are the “moral entrepreneurs” and the “folk devils” are those intent on protecting children from sexual predators. I can see this “public” inquiry as a $50 M “moral panic.”
Interesting, looks and sounds to me as if moral entrepreneur Michael Neville is seriously off stride today. He’s back at Perry Perry Perry (“folk devil”?), but looks and sounds as though the wind has been let out of his sails.
Oh, he’s just thrown Garry Guzzo into the mix. Another “folk devil” I presume?
Oops!! Looks like Dallas Lee is a “folk devil” too!!!
Yes. Moral panic reigns supreme!
****
I have a new page for Submissions. I have a number of the submissions posted and will wrap up over the next hour or two. For ease of access I have made the page accessible from the Home page.
Lots of media articles to get up. Will carry on as this pathetic ploy of moral panic plays out.
Enough for now,
Sylvia
Each new submission is a rebuttal of the Dallas Lee Submission. It looks like a Moral Panic all right at the weave shed. It seems that the first day was all the groups calling for reform of the institutions and these institutions have the opportunity of rebuttal in their submissions. Dallas Lee should have a second submission to give him a chance to rebut these submissions. Who gets the last word becomes the question.
Yes, Moral Panic in the Weave Shed, and I would guess emanating well beyond. Dallas Lee’s submission set them on their collective derriers!
As for one and all now shredding and dissecting Dallas’submission, it looks like when it comes to child sex abuse that must be the modus operandi of the currnet Moral Panic reeigning in the Weave Shed and beyond – pride of place and privilege for those “moral entrepeneurs” who fear their social order is threatened by those who want to protect children from sex predators.
Hey Myomy – who gets the last word???
CPS – Cornwall Police Service.
You know – the “Blame Perry Dunlop for all our Troubles Collition”.
Just watch! hehehe!
BTW – if you read the CPS submission it’s a joke! It makes clear – “While individuals are part of the story as to how institutions responded, they should not be the focus nor should findings of misconduct of the individuals be the focus”.
Lets all laugh out loud!!!
Cause while they cite different inquiries or case law in the submission – the first thing they did was vilify one of their own and his assumed co-horts!!!
Nah but we aren’t focusing on individuals – are we???
How 2 faced can they be???
All over for the day with the AG submission wrapping up around 3:20 pm. All the same old same old. Certainly none of the Crowns did wrong, and now it even gets into a little broterly love with the AG looking kindly upon Detective Inspector Pat Hall. Even though Hall stuck a knife into Shelley Hallett’s back and lodged it squarley between her shoulder blades – no big deal! By the look of it the OPP can dismember a Crown and hang him or her out to dry any time – the Crown may be upset but the AG certainly won’t take offence. I suppose from the Premier and AG’s perspective it’s six of one and half a dozen of the other when it comes to deciding who to hang out to dry to let an “alleged” paedophile/ephobophile/pederest/molester/homosexual-paedophile/heterosexual-paedophile/bisexual-paedophile/sexual predator “walk”? an OPP officer? or a Crown?
It’s looking yet again like they’re all just one big close-knit loving, sharing and caring and very very happy family 🙂 I would hope Shelley Hallet is at the least a little offended that her boss wasn’t a little more indignant over the manner in which she was tossed to the wolves by the OPP.
I didn’t think I would live long enough to see this day but here we are. Michael Neville and Sylvia are agreed!!!
Did you catch the part of Neville’s submission where he basically warned Glaude that if he adopted any of Dallas Lee’s suggestions implying that the victims were really victims and the accused were guilty that he ( Glaude) would be breaching his mandate and throwing another cloud over the community. This confirms many of the things Sylvia has said about the flawed mandate to this inquiry. Are the real conclusions ruled out by the mandate?? It seems that experts on both sides of the question are agreed on this point!
I missed that one Myomy 🙂