Failure to launch

Introduction to moral panic

• Moral Panic Definition: A moral panic is defined by sudden public concern over a perceived threat to societal values, usually involving a novel and rapidly growing danger. This panic often leads to an exaggerated media frenzy, with various social groups (such as politicians, experts, and the media) all expressing the same fears.

• Key Characteristics:

  • Novelty of the Threat: A new or emerging menace.

  • Explosive Growth: Rapid increase in the perceived scale of the threat.

  • Threat to Moral Standards: The danger is seen as undermining societal values, particularly targeting vulnerable groups like children.

  • Media Sensationalism: Media representations typically exaggerate the threat’s growth, spreading fear.

• Classic Framework (Stan Cohen, 1972):

  • Societal Reaction: Moral panic occurs when a person, group, or event is labeled as a threat to society, and responses from mass media, experts, and authorities focus on solutions.

  • The Cycle of Moral Panics: Panic peaks and then fades, either submerging or becoming more visible with time.

• Stuart Hall’s Expanded View (1978):

  • Disproportionate Reaction: The official reaction to a moral panic is often out of proportion to the actual threat.

  • Stereotyped Representation: The media emphasizes a sudden, dramatic increase in the menace.

  • Convergence of Opinions: The media, experts, and officials tend to align in their views, presenting a unified front.

The Failure of Some Issues to Generate Moral Panics

• Not All Threats Lead to Panic: While some issues seem to meet all the classic characteristics of a moral panic, they fail to trigger one. This raises questions about how certain problems are overlooked or fail to dominate public discourse.

• Predicting Moral Panics: Understanding why some issues fail to generate panic helps in predicting which issues will or won’t rise to prominence in societal debates.

  • Issues May Fail to Capture Attention for Various Reasons:

    • Lack of salience or public interest.

    • Political, technological, or social barriers.

    • Competing issues drawing attention away.

• Limitations of Traditional Moral Panic Theory:

  • Implicit Value Judgments: Traditional moral panic theory assumes that panics are often based on irrational fears or exaggerations.

  • Ideological Bias: Researchers often focus on disproving or deconstructing panics linked to socially conservative or criminalizing issues, but issues tied to progressivism (e.g., police misconduct, racial violence) are less likely to be framed as moral panics.

Social Constructionism Approach

Shifting Focus: Moral panic theory has evolved into social constructionism, which examines how social issues are created or constructed, rather than assuming they are exaggerated or irrational.

• Constructionist Perspective: Social problems are not inherently harmful or exaggerated; rather, they are framed and understood through social processes and the actions of "claims-makers" (e.g., activists, experts, politicians).

• No Assumptions about Legitimacy: Unlike moral panic theory, constructionism does not assume that the issues are either exaggerated or legitimate.

Case Study: Internet Child Pornography

• Internet Child Pornography as a Potential Panic:

  • The Scale of the Problem: The child pornography trade on the internet is vast and increasingly sophisticated. It involves hard-core materials, some of which are new and involve ongoing abuse.

  • Key Evidence: Images from "KG" (kindergarten) and "KX" series, which involve very young children (ages 3-6) in explicit and abusive situations.

  • Dramatic Growth: The volume and scope of child pornography trading on the internet surged during the 1990s and continues to grow.

• Potential for Panic: Despite these alarming facts, internet child pornography has not generated the level of moral panic expected. Several elements would make it a suitable candidate for moral panic:

  • Victimization of Children: Exploitation of vulnerable children is a universally sympathetic cause.

  • Globalization: The international nature of the issue undermines national sovereignty and laws.

  • Technology Fears: Concerns about the role of new technologies (internet, webcams, P2P networks) in facilitating child exploitation.

• Why No Panic?:

  • Technological Understanding: Law enforcement agencies, particularly in the US, are technologically ill-prepared to understand the scale of the problem. They do not grasp the complex methods of hiding, encryption, and use of proxies by offenders.

  • Lack of Expertise: The technological gap between law enforcement and offenders means that authorities struggle to break down the issue in public or actionable terms.

  • Media Silence: Unlike other moral panics, media coverage remains limited and episodic. Arrests are occasionally reported, but without the sustained coverage that typically fuels moral panics

Law Enforcement Challenges

• Technological Gaps: Law enforcement agencies, especially in the US, operate with outdated technology, hindering their ability to fully understand or address the issue.

  • Technological Lag: Agencies often fail to keep up with the latest developments in internet technology, such as proxies, anonymizers, and encrypted communications.

  • European Agencies: Some European countries, particularly the UK, are more advanced in electronic law enforcement, but this does not always lead to widespread public concern.

• Challenges in Investigating the Trade:

  • Decentralized Structure: The child pornography subculture is decentralized, with no central leadership or hierarchy. This makes it difficult for law enforcement to dismantle the network as they would with more organized crime syndicates.

  • Deceptive and Concealed Activities: Offenders use advanced technology to hide their activities, making them harder to track and arrest.

  • The “War of the Flea”: Rather than a traditional hierarchical crime network, the internet child pornography trade resembles a guerrilla war—decentralized, vast, and difficult to infiltrate.

Lack of Public Reaction and Media Coverage

• Absence of Moral Panic: Despite the horrific nature of the issue, internet child pornography does not spark widespread public moral panic.

  • Limited Media Focus: When the topic does make headlines, it is often in isolated cases involving high-profile arrests or celebrities.

  • No Media Sensationalism: Unlike other issues, there are no major true-crime books or dramatic films covering the issue, reducing its potential to generate public panic.

Key Takeaways:

• Moral panics are driven by exaggeration and media sensationalism, but not all social issues trigger such reactions, even when they meet the criteria.

• Technological limitations of law enforcement agencies have hindered the response to internet child pornography, preventing it from becoming a widely recognized social crisis.

• The failure of some issues to spark moral panics highlights the evolving nature of social constructionism, which focuses on how problems are defined and perceived.

Reasons for the Failure of the Child Pornography Panic

In understanding why certain social problems, like child pornography, fail to escalate into moral panics, several key factors emerge. These include technological limitations, official control, media access, and the invisibility of the problem. Below is a detailed breakdown of the reasons why child pornography did not lead to a moral panic, framed within a broader discussion of media and law enforcement challenges.

1. Lack of Technological Understanding

• Problem Complexity: The core of the child pornography issue involves technologically advanced practices that are beyond the capacity of law enforcement, legislators, and media at the time.

• Law Enforcement Limitations: Traditional law enforcement agencies lacked the tools and expertise to fully comprehend or tackle new forms of deviant behavior emerging through the internet.

  • Technological Shortcomings: Agencies relied on familiar criminal paradigms (e.g., child abuse) to understand what was happening online, rather than recognizing the unique nature of the child pornography sub-culture facilitated by the internet.

• Failure to Represent the Problem: Law enforcement failed to communicate the distinct features of the emerging problem, offering no clear guidance to media or legislators, thereby inhibiting broader awareness or response.

2. Comprehensive Official Control

• Federal Oversight: In the U.S., the issue of child pornography was primarily handled by federal law enforcement agencies, especially the FBI, which had control over investigations and enforcement.

• No External Pressure: These agencies were insulated from public or political pressure to reform or enhance their response to the problem, meaning no major push for technological upgrades or more effective responses.

• Institutional Culture: The culture of these agencies discouraged innovation or expansion beyond traditional methods. The focus remained on traditional forms of criminal investigation, such as intelligence gathering and interrogation, which were less effective in addressing internet-based child pornography networks.

• Traditional Paradigms: The FBI and similar agencies focused more on dismantling hierarchical criminal organizations, which did not align with the decentralized, internet-driven nature of child pornography networks.

3. Lack of Media Access

• Legal Restrictions on Journalistic Access: In the U.S., the media had no legal means to access or verify child pornography material due to strict federal laws prohibiting its distribution or viewing. This lack of access meant the media could not independently investigate or report on the issue.

• Other Countries' Slightly More Lenient Access: While some countries allowed limited access for researchers under police supervision, this was rare, and the ability to study the problem was severely restricted.

• Inability to Verify Claims: Without access to original materials, the media had to rely on law enforcement agencies for information, leading to a skewed understanding and portrayal of the issue.

4. The Invisibility of the Problem

• Self-contained Sub-culture: Child pornography operates within a relatively closed and encrypted universe. Unlike other forms of crime that are more accessible or visible to the public, individuals are unlikely to "stumble across" such material by accident.

  • Invisibility to the General Public: The very nature of the problem—hidden within password-protected online communities—meant that it was not readily apparent or comprehensible to the general population. This invisibility made it difficult for the issue to gain traction in the media or among the public.

5. Pre-emption by Other Causes and Interest Groups

• Competing Issues: Without a broad media or public panic around child pornography, other groups took symbolic ownership of the issue, often framing it within the context of children’s exposure to pornography online rather than focusing on the trafficking of child pornography itself.

  • Anti-pornography Groups: These groups shifted the narrative to concerns about children accessing adult pornography online, which diverted attention away from the distinct issue of child pornography.

  • Cyberstalking and Other Concerns: Federal agencies and media outlets often conflated child pornography with other related issues like cyberstalking, online seduction, or children accessing adult porn, thus failing to focus on the more serious crime of child pornography trafficking.

• Absence of Pressure: As these issues became more generalized or intertwined with broader concerns, there was no concentrated effort to tackle the specific problem of child pornography distribution. Consequently, it remained under the radar.

6. Bureaucratic and Legal Environment

• Lack of Public Visibility: Without strong claims-makers—individuals or organizations actively pushing for change—the issue remained underexplored. Even when the problem was recognized, legal and bureaucratic hurdles often kept it from becoming a public issue.

• Limited Understanding Among Officials: Bureaucratic and institutional limitations, such as a lack of expertise or interest in modern technological problems, compounded the difficulty of addressing child pornography effectively.

• Technological Mismatch: Law enforcement agencies, while focused on traditional forms of crime, were ill-equipped to deal with the new forms of deviant activity emerging online, making it hard to comprehend or address the problem adequately.

7. Media Reliance on Law Enforcement

• Sources of News: Media coverage of crime often relies on law enforcement as the primary source of information, given their access to data, surveillance, and investigative resources.

• Leaked Information: Journalists typically depend on "off-the-record" leaks from law enforcement agencies, which often shape their reporting. However, when the law enforcement agencies do not understand or prioritize the issue, it leaves journalists without the material to investigate or publicize the problem.

• Political Constraints: Police and law enforcement agencies may be politically constrained in their willingness to expose sensitive or uncomfortable issues, such as the scale of child pornography trafficking, leading to a lack of media coverage or public awareness.

8. Historical Precedents and Comparative Analysis

• Similar Issues: The child pornography issue shares similarities with other problems that were not able to become moral panics, such as organized crime or money laundering.

• Lack of Public Interest: Despite sophisticated criminal activities, such as money laundering, going unreported or underreported, mainstream media continued to focus on more visible forms of crime, which were easier for the public to understand.

• Complexity of Financial Crimes: Just as U.S. law enforcement struggled to understand and act on money laundering practices in the 1980s, they faced similar difficulties in recognizing and addressing the complex technological dynamics of child pornography trafficking. These problems were often overlooked or misunderstood by both officials and the media.

Conclusion:

The failure of the child pornography issue to escalate into a moral panic can be attributed to a combination of factors, including technological misunderstanding, official control and lack of media access, and the invisibility of the problem. Additionally, the lack of strong claims-makers and competing issues from interest groups contributed to the problem remaining under the radar. In sum, a mixture of bureaucratic inertia, limited media access, and legal barriers prevented the child pornography issue from gaining the attention it might have otherwise warranted.

Unconstructed Terror

The concept of unconstructed terror explores how certain violent events, especially those categorized as terrorism, may fail to escalate into moral panics or broader social issues. Despite seeming obvious, many forms of terrorism remain largely ignored or underreported due to social, political, and media-related factors. The phenomenon is shaped by the ways in which terrorism is defined, constructed, and framed by authorities and the media.

1. Abortion-Related Terrorism in the U.S. (1980s)

• Abortion-Related Violence: During the 1980s, the United States experienced a significant number of violent attacks on abortion clinics and personnel. These incidents were carried out by anti-abortion extremists and were seen by some as a clear example of terrorism.

• Underreporting as Terrorism: Despite the severity and organized nature of the attacks, the word terrorism was not used in media or political discourse to describe these acts until after a change in national administration in 1993. Instead, these attacks were viewed as isolated events, and no collective label like "abortion-related terrorism" was used to describe them.

  • Lack of Labeling: This failure to label the attacks as terrorism is a key example of how certain forms of terrorism can remain unconstructed by the public and media.

  • Government Agencies' Role: The FBI, for instance, did not categorize abortion-related violence as terrorism for many years, and this influenced the media's coverage, which followed the FBI's framing of events.

  • Media Dependency on Authorities: The media often defines issues based on what government agencies say and do. If the authorities do not classify an event as terrorism, the media will not do so either, resulting in missed opportunities to properly address significant threats.

2. The Influence of Political Ideology on Terrorism Labeling

• Partisan Definitions of Terrorism: The term terrorism is often highly partisan, with definitions shaped by the political climate and the administration in power.

  • Conservative vs. Liberal Focus: Conservative administrations tend to focus on left-wing or international terrorism, while liberal administrations are more concerned with far-right terrorism.

  • Impact on Media Coverage: This political bias affects how terrorism is defined and reported. For example, right-wing extremism (such as anti-abortion terrorism) received less media attention under conservative administrations than under liberal ones.

  • Failure to Address Right-Wing Terrorism: Under conservative administrations, incidents such as anti-abortion violence were not framed as terrorism, and thus, these acts remained outside the mainstream discourse on terrorism.

3. The 1970s Terrorism Wave in the U.S.

• Unprecedented Terrorist Violence: Between 1973 and 1977, the U.S. experienced a wave of terrorist activities, including bombings, hijackings, and assassinations. Groups involved included Cuban, Puerto Rican, Jewish, Croatian, Palestinian, African-American extremists, and far-left organizations like the Symbionese Liberation Army.

• The Lack of a "Terror Panic": Despite the intensity of these events, there was no widespread societal panic or construction of the events as part of a larger terrorist threat.

  • Discreet Media Treatment: While sensational events like the kidnapping of heiress Patricia Hearst gained media attention, they were treated as isolated incidents rather than part of an emerging terrorist crisis.

  • Media Framing: The media treated these events as isolated, without identifying them as components of a broader, more systematic terrorism problem.

4. Factors Contributing to the Lack of Terrorism Construction (1970s)

• Distrust of Law Enforcement: During the mid-1970s, there was significant public skepticism towards government agencies like the FBI and CIA, especially following reports on their involvement in illegal activities and intelligence failures.

  • Intelligence Scandals: The Church and Rockefeller Commissions uncovered numerous intelligence abuses, leading to distrust of law enforcement agencies. The media’s focus on these issues, such as the FBI’s disarray and their failures, meant that the focus shifted away from domestic terrorism.

  • Rogue Intelligence Agencies: Popular American films from the period depicted CIA agents as villains, further eroding the credibility of law enforcement and making it politically challenging to discuss certain terrorism issues, particularly those linked to African-American extremists.

• Racial and Political Sensitivities: In the 1970s, discussing terrorism linked to African-American extremist groups, such as the “Zebra killings,” was politically sensitive and contentious. Given the historical context of civil rights struggles and racial tensions, it was difficult for authorities to publicly frame these activities as part of a broader terrorist movement.

  • Political Constraints: For political reasons, authorities avoided discussing the possibility of coordinated extremist groups, especially when those groups were racially or ideologically tied to movements that challenged the status quo.

5. Consequences of Non-Construction of Terrorism

• Absence of Public Memory: Because the terrorist activities of the 1970s were not constructed as a public threat, they faded from national memory. Even significant incidents like the 1975 bombing at LaGuardia Airport, which killed 11 people, were largely forgotten.

• Lack of Long-Term Impact: The failure to construct terrorism as a serious, ongoing problem in the 1970s meant that it did not serve as a foundation for future panic or policy responses. Public memory and media framing play crucial roles in shaping how issues are later revisited, and without the construction of these events as a crisis, they did not contribute to future terrorism narratives.

6. Modern Parallels: Terrorism and New Forms of Communication

• Technological and Organizational Changes: Today, terrorism is still primarily understood through traditional forms of organized violence. However, modern terrorism is often organized and facilitated through new technologies and decentralized methods of communication, such as the internet and social media.

• Failure of Law Enforcement and Media: As with issues like child pornography, law enforcement and the media often fail to fully understand and report on new forms of deviant organization that emerge through digital technologies. These modern forms of terrorism are often invisible or poorly understood, contributing to the challenge of constructing them as public threats.

• Underreporting of Cyberterrorism: Similar to how abortion-related violence was initially underreported, newer forms of terrorism, such as cyberterrorism or terrorism orchestrated via social media, struggle to gain attention due to a lack of understanding from authorities and media.

7. Conclusion: The Role of Media and Political Influence in Constructing Terrorism

• Media Dependency on Law Enforcement: The media often rely heavily on law enforcement agencies to define and report on issues, particularly when it comes to crime and terrorism. If these agencies do not define something as a serious threat, the media is unlikely to do so either.

• The Politics of Terrorism: The definition of terrorism is not neutral; it is shaped by political ideology and the priorities of the ruling administration. The lack of a broad, consistent definition can allow certain forms of terrorism to remain unnoticed or unconstructed, even when they pose significant threats to public safety.

• Impact on Public Perception: Without the media framing an issue as a significant social problem, the public remains unaware, and the problem fails to escalate into a full-blown panic or sustained policy concern. This underscores the importance of how issues are constructed in the media and the role of authority in guiding these constructions.

Summary:

The phenomenon of unconstructed terror illustrates how certain violent events that could be classified as terrorism fail to gain the necessary public, media, and political attention. Examples from the 1980s abortion-related violence, the 1970s wave of domestic terrorism, and modern issues with cyberterrorism highlight how terrorism can remain underreported or misunderstood. Political ideology, media dependence on official sources, and technological shifts all play key roles in the failure to construct terrorism as a pressing public issue.

Ideal panic

The concept of moral panic refers to a widespread societal reaction to a perceived threat that is often disproportionate to the actual danger. For a specific event or issue to escalate into a fully-fledged moral panic, several conditions must align, involving the media, political interests, and various societal agencies. The dynamics of how these panics unfold, what fosters them, and the limitations that hinder their full development are key elements to understand in this context.

1. Conditions for Creating a Moral Panic

• Diversity of Agencies and Interest Groups:

  • For a moral panic to emerge, there must be a diverse range of agencies, interest groups, and competing forces that can bring different perspectives to the issue. These groups must have access to the media and public platforms where their views can be heard.

  • Media Collaboration: The media plays a crucial role in disseminating information and narratives. If media outlets collaborate with these agencies, a critical mass of attention can form around the issue.

  • Contested Issues: Panics are more likely to flourish when the subject matter is contested between competing interest groups. For example, debates around drug use, crime, or certain health risks often provoke moral panics because they involve a variety of actors with opposing views and agendas.

• Comprehensibility of the Story:

  • The issue at the center of the panic must be comprehensible to both the agencies and the journalists reporting on it. Without a clear understanding of the issue, it cannot be effectively communicated to the public.

  • If the story is not easily grasped by journalists or agencies, it risks being either ignored or misunderstood, making it harder to create the necessary public and media traction for a panic.

• Accessibility of the Issue:

  • The subject matter should be sufficiently overt so that ordinary people can easily encounter what they perceive to be manifestations of the issue. In other words, the threat must feel immediate and tangible to the general public.

  • If an issue is abstract or distant (e.g., complex scientific issues), it is less likely to generate the public concern necessary for a full-scale panic.

• Narrative Construction (Heroes and Villains):

  • The issue must present a narrative that has identifiable characters: heroes and villains. This makes the issue relatable and understandable for the public.

  • Villains are typically easy to identify (e.g., "drug dealers," "serial killers," "immigrants"), and heroes may be portrayed as law enforcement, government agencies, or other protective figures.

  • This dichotomy of good versus evil simplifies the issue and allows it to be understood in moral terms, which fuels panic.

• Visual Representations:

  • The panic must be visually portrayable, meaning the issue should lend itself to visual representations that are easily recognized by the public.

  • For example, drug supermarkets, gang violence, or the faces of serial killers can be represented in media stories, which helps create a visceral, emotional response.

  • This visual portrayal amplifies the narrative by reinforcing images and symbols associated with the panic, making it easier to maintain and spread.

• Identification of Solutions:

  • For the panic to move forward, there must be plausible solutions offered, whether they are practical or not. These solutions may be proposed by authorities or interest groups and could involve changes in policy, increased law enforcement action, or public awareness campaigns.

  • The identification of a solution provides a sense of resolution and direction, even if the solution itself may not fully address the root cause of the problem.

• Alignment with Existing Fears:

  • The narrative will be most impactful if it meshes with previous public expectations or fears. If earlier movements or controversies have already laid the groundwork for a sense of anxiety or concern, the current issue can build on that momentum.

  • For example, fears about immigration may already be high, and a new panic about crime or terrorism related to immigration would resonate more easily with the public, reinforcing existing prejudices or anxieties.

2. Limitations on the Development of a Moral Panic

• Dominance of One Agency:

  • If the issue is primarily addressed or controlled by a single agency (e.g., a specific government department or law enforcement agency), the lack of competition can limit the growth of a panic.

  • Without diverse perspectives or rival claims, the issue may not gain traction in the media, reducing the potential for a widespread panic.

• Lack of Understanding by Agencies:

  • Agencies or experts may be unable to understand the issue themselves or may struggle to fit it into their existing intellectual frameworks. For example, new forms of deviance or crime that involve advanced technologies (such as cybercrime) may not be easily understood or classified by traditional law enforcement agencies.

  • Gaps in knowledge or technological understanding can prevent the issue from being communicated clearly and effectively, making it harder to rally support for a panic.

• Over-Complexity of the Issue:

  • If experts or agencies cannot simplify the issue into digestible, easy-to-understand terms, the narrative will become too over-complex. Complicated issues that require substantial background knowledge (e.g., biotechnology, information technology) are less likely to create a strong moral panic because they cannot be easily summarized in media-friendly narratives.

  • Issues that are difficult to explain or comprehend will not generate the public fear necessary to sustain a panic.

• Politically Embarrassing Issues:

  • Certain issues may be politically embarrassing for powerful agencies or interest groups. If an issue could have negative political implications or expose shortcomings of important stakeholders, it may be downplayed or ignored, preventing a panic from developing.

  • This could occur, for example, with issues involving government misconduct or corporate malfeasance, where public acknowledgment could lead to a loss of trust or significant political fallout.

• Absence of Direct Consumer Encounter:

  • If ordinary consumers do not perceive the issue as an immediate threat, or if they have little chance of encountering the problem in their own lives, the issue is unlikely to generate widespread panic.

  • For example, scientific debates on climate change, while potentially severe, may not trigger panic if most people do not directly feel the effects of environmental degradation in their daily lives.

• Fringe Aspects of the Issue:

  • In the absence of significant official concerns or mass media attention, any public response may focus on fringe or marginal aspects of the issue. Rather than addressing the core of the problem, the media may amplify less important or sensational aspects that do not accurately reflect the true scope of the threat.

3. The Gap Between Scientific Reality and Panic Image

• As social issues become more complex and based on scientific fields like information technology and biotechnology, there is a growing disconnect between the actual scientific reality and the images portrayed in the media.

• Interest groups may create problems that tap into public fears but are only tangentially related to the substantive issues at hand. This manipulation of public perception can lead to panics over issues that are either exaggerated or misrepresented.

• The widening gap between scientific knowledge and the panic image means that moral panics may increasingly be built on inaccurate or oversimplified representations, leading to a more significant divergence between the real problems and the public's understanding of them.

4. Summary: Key Characteristics of the Ideal Panic

• The creation of a moral panic requires multiple factors, including the collaboration of media, political agencies, and interest groups, the presence of clear villains and heroes, and the ability to provide visual and narrative cues that resonate with the public.

• Limitations such as over-complexity, political sensitivity, or lack of consumer engagement can hinder the development of a full-scale panic.

• The future of moral panics is likely to be shaped by scientific and technological issues that are increasingly difficult for the general public to fully understand, creating a growing gap between real threats and public perceptions.

Conclusion:

Moral panics thrive under specific conditions, where agencies, media, and political forces create a narrative that is simple, comprehensible, and relatable. While many issues could potentially escalate into moral panics, they often face limitations in terms of complexity, political sensitivity, and lack of understanding, leading to a disconnect between societal fears and actual risks. As issues become more scientific and technological in nature, this gap will likely widen, making it increasingly difficult to generate informed public reactions.