Talk:Moral panic

Examples section (again)

In the past this section has suffered from wiki-bloat, with many people adding their favourite idea of a moral panic. What resulted was a compendium of original research. After some discussion on this page, it was decided to use narrative, rather than list, style and to request, in a commented out note, that editors ensure that examples of "moral panic" are supported by reliable sources. That solved the problem, at least for awhile. Now the section has again accumulated a number of examples that do not seem to be supported by reliable sources.

I've gone through the section, verifying citations. Here a tally:

• White slavery and sex trafficking - citations do not support moral panic related to white slavery, only the paragraph on "sex trafficking" is supported by reliable sources.
• 1920s film industry - citations do not support moral panic
• 1950s comic book industry - source given is Goode and Ben-Yehuda. These authors specifically refer to this phenomenon as a "moral crusade" and distinguish it from a moral panic.
• War on Terror - no sources given
• Cartoon Crisis - no sources given
• Obesity - one source states: "The exponential increase in mass media attention to obesity in the US and abroad seems to have many of the elements of what social scientists call a ‘moral panic’." The author discusses the question of whether it is a moral panic vs. a health crisis and doesn't reach a conclusion.

Here's what I am proposing to do about the foregoing:

1. Remove paragraphs on white slavery until specific sources can be presented confirming this as a moral panic.
2. Retain the paragraph on sex trafficking. It is short, so should, perhaps, be combined into another section.
3. Remove sections on "1920s film industry," "1950s comic book industry," "war on terror" and "cartoon crisis." If someone can find reliable sources to support any of these, lets discuss.
4. Retain the section on obesity but rewrite it to represent what the sources say.

I've boldly made the changes and also combined short sections and expanded the section on crime in Japan to refer to crime rates generally and give Japan as an example. If anyone disagrees, let's avoid an edit war and discuss these changes here. Sunray (talk) 18:32, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

This article is prime real estate for original research. Lists are especially problematic.Kcchief915 (talk) 20:19, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

What the lad above says. In its current form (May 2011) it starts Ok, then quickly wanders off into puerile discussions of backwards recording and fat people. I can't be arsed to try and fix it though, seeing as all that rubbish keeps creeping back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.144.86.143 (talk) 13:25, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Western response to 9/11 in the "Pogroms, purges and witch-hunts" section

I am not sure why the section the sentence "Various actions in Western countries following the September 11 attacks ... have been referred to as moral panics" is in the "Pogroms, purges and witch-hunts"? It seems hardly relevant to that section. In addition, I am not sure that the source is very reliable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.142.8.48 (talk) 22:23, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Sexting?

Seems to me it should be in examples. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.67.113.65 (talk) 20:44, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

comic books?

An editor added this material, which was then reverted:

In the 1950s, a well-respected psychiatrist Frederic Wertham published Seduction of the Innocent, a book which argued that comics were dangerous to children and a major cause of juvenile crime. This led to a national outrage, resulting in laws, ordinances, censoring, banning and mass burnings against comic books and later to the Comics Code Authority. Frederic Wertham further suggested that Batman and Robin were gay partners and that Wonder Woman was a lesbian who had a bondage subtext.

---

---

I'm not saying that this material belongs, but I'm not sure that it doesn't, either. From the Coville ref: quotes him as saying ""effects of these pulp-paper nightmares is that of a violent stimulant...hypodermic injection of sex and murder..." and then that "law makers were goaded and prodded into action, and many did their best to please and appease the angry torment which had been unleashed" and so forth. Not having investigated further, does this not describe a kind of moral panic type event? Willing to be instructed otherwise. Herostratus (talk) 17:05, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

To my knowledge, the comic book mess was a moral panic. Pretty much addressed in the movie Comic Book Confidential, if I recall. I've never come across any journal articles to this effect, though. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 02:04, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

It may have been a moral panic, though I've never come across a reliable source that documented that. I've removed the entry: The section has plenty of examples. If someone comes up with a RS, we can add it back in. Sunray (talk) 12:23, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

BTW, as I mentioned above, Goode and Ben-Yehuda (1994) discuss the comic book phenomenon as a "moral crusade" and distinguish it from a moral panic. Sunray (talk) 12:30, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Global Warming Neutrality

The statements (and sources) about Global Warming are extremely dubious Kuke (talk) 04:29, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. This is very much POV, and stimulated by a recent editorial in the WSJ whose lack of scientific value has been denounced even by sister publication Forbes. It should be removed ASAP. 70.81.18.28 (talk) 15:05, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah no kidding. This is not appropriate material and I removed it. Herostratus (talk) 18:32, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Please provide a source for your assertion about the Forbes article. Also, please justify your statement that the scientists who wrote the WSJ article are unable to provide "scientific value." Until then, I will replace the deleted material. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blicious (talk • contribs) 04:00, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Also, the statement "some have said" is accurate sourced to the film referenced -- Bret Stephens explicitly compares global warming hysteria to moral panic, referencing the mad cow scare of the 1990s as another example. (Blicious (talk) 04:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC))

Since what you wrote is clearly POV, it will be removed. You putting it back in will only get you banned from editing this page. Here is a link to the Forbes article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/petergleick/2012/01/27/remarkable-editorial-bias-on-climate-science-at-the-wall-street-journal/ Here is an article about the economist cited in the WSJ who disagrees with how his work was interpreted in the editorial: http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/30/scientists-challenging-climate-science-appear-to-flunk-climate-economics/ And finally here is the Met Office saying that David Rose's article (allegedly based on their research) is "entirely misleading" : http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/ Please, stop using Wikipedia as your own personal propaganda outlet. Thanks. 70.81.18.28 (talk) 16:09, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I guess the thing about a "moral panic" is that it's only a panic if it's unjustified to some extent. I don't think any sane and knowledgeable and fair-minded and disinterested person holds that global climate change isn't a serious problem (not counting trolls and persons being deliberately contrarian for effect), so I guess it doesn't belong here. Thinking about this some more, it seems there are situations that are the converse of moral panic -- things that people should "panic" about but mostly don't. The prospect of global thermonuclear war for instance. I guess there's no word for this and so no article... Herostratus (talk) 17:43, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Agree with 70.81.18.28 and Herostratus. Sunray (talk) 23:59, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Homosexuality (org rel)

A better writer than I should consider an entry on Homosexuality, which, with its corollary subject, marriage law, has been engineered by the social order as the current moral panic to replace minorities, drug war, etc.

Also, perhaps there should be more information regarding the function of organized religion as pertains to creating or benefiting from the bolstering of moral panic. Tangverse (talk) 09:29, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Dungeons & Dragons - removed text

I removed the following text as it does not seem to conform to the article's demand for disproportionate acts towards the group in question:

At various times in its history, Dungeons & Dragons (a fantasy role-playing game) has received negative publicity for alleged promotion of such practices as Satanism, witchcraft, suicide, pornography and murder. In the 1980s especially, some religious groups accused the game of encouraging interest in sorcery and the veneration of Demons. Throughout the history of roleplaying games, many of these criticisms have been aimed specifically at Dungeons & Dragons, but touch on the genre of fantasy roleplaying games as a whole. It has been suggested that the recent drive to regulate video games is another instance of moral panic over the content of popular culture. The industry response has been to create a self-regulatory ratings system similar to that used by the film industry.

Narssarssuaq (talk) 16:34, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

In my reading, we can see Dungeons and Dragons as an example of a moral panic, as there was a fairly widespread outcry against it from a significant section of US society, with parents actively forbidding their children from playing this game as a result. Couldn't that be seen as an disproportionate action? I will therefore restore this text so we can has this out. Perhaps we can work on clarifying the "disproportionality" section? Martijn Faassen (talk) 21:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Steve Hall section

The Steve Hall criticism section is rather extensive compared to the rest of the article, expounding his particular arguments at great length. This seems to give it a lot of weight; is this weight justified? It also seems to come from a particular ideological perspective with a wide ranging criticism on society itself where the concept of "Moral Panic" is just a symptom. While an ideological criticism appears to be at the core of the argument, many of the statements are absolute statements instead of attributed directly to Hall, making this text seem to support these arguments instead of neutral. Could we perhaps include a summary of these arguments instead? Martijn Faassen (talk) 21:39, 7 October 2012 (UTC)