Theories of Social Disorder in the UK Society - Essay Example

Theories of Social Disorder in Contemporary UK Introduction Every society has a certain way of life that is generally arranged according to a certainorder and the United Kingdom is not an exception. People living in the United Kingdom are accustomed to this society’s social order and they consider anything that disrupts it as a disorder and a threat to their way of life. But what is social order? In simple terms, social order is a process whereby people are accustomed to a certain way if life and they get used to knowing that things work in certain way in their society (Taylor et al. 2009). Various theories have been advanced by social scientists such as Buchanan and Monderman to explain social order and they include; the modernist approach and flexible approach (Taylor et al. 2009). Social disorder is the direct opposite of social order. In other words, it is, as noted earlier, a situation such as an act or a process that the society considers disruptive of its normal way of life. Social disorder is usually in contravention of the normal beliefs in a society and it usually attracts attention and calls of actions to counter it. Taylor et al. (2009) gives an example of the Dangerous Dog Act of 1991 that was passed by the United Kingdom’s parliament in reaction to several incidents of severe injuries inflicted by aggressive dogs mostly on children. The social order, which is the normal way life in the United Kingdom is that dogs live with people in that society in a friendly way without biting. But when the same dogs turn against their masters, then the normal way of life is disrupted and this is the social disorder. This prompts the government to act by passing a law that aims at preventing such future acts that amount to social disorder. From the above example, social disorder is an undesirable situation. This is a direct opposite of social order. For these reasons, the latter is acceptable by the society as compared to the former. Contemporary United Kingdom considers various behaviours as disorderly and they include drunkenness, violence, littering, sale and use of illegal drugs, use of threatening behaviour, crimes, shouting in public, hooting in a quiet residential area at night, just to mention but a few. These disorderly behaviours are indicative of social disorder and a clear indication that social disorder is not necessarily what other people do not entertain. To explain social disorder, various social scientists have come up with various theories such as moral panic, policing the crisis and media effects research approaches. The foregoing discussion compares and contrasts two theories of social disorder namely policing the crisis and the media effects approaches. Differences Policing the crisis approach realises the fact that disorderly behaviour is a cause of distress and disruption in people’s lives (Taylor et al. 2009). According to the theory, the contemporary United Kingdom society has people who are individualist and as a result, they rarely come into direct contact with their neighbours nor do they have full knowledge of their neighbours. For this reason, they look up to the government to intervene in cases of social disorder such as noise and mugging. Contrary to this, the media effects approach does not intervene in cases of social disorder and where it does, the intervention is minimal (Taylor et al. 2009). The media simply displays the disorderly behaviour for the people to see and be aware of it. Because the government has the responsibility to protect its people, it comes in and responds to the social disorder depicted by the disorderly behaviour for the safety of all. Policing the crisis approach takes into account the causes of social disorder. The approach reflects a particular view of causes of disorderly behaviour just like the Anti-social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) which put emphasis on the culpability of the individual and tended to ignore the socio-economic pressures of living such as unemployment and social deprivation and as result stressed on punishment and control instead of help and support (Taylor et al. 2009). On the other hand, the media effect approach stresses the use of preventive measures to such as identification of vulnerable children at an early age and providing support systems to ensure that the children live in a healthy environment for healthy growth and development (Squires and Stephen 2005; Kennedy 2005). A good example of these programmes is the Sure Start Programme in the United Kingdom (Taylor et al. 2009). Policing the crisis approach looks at the role of government in mediating disorderly behaviour. The government sets an agenda through the actions that it takes to resolve social disorder and this agenda takes different forms in the media. The portrayal of social disorder in the media might have negative effects such as creating moral panic in society at large whereby people are terrified and outraged (Cohen 1973). This has much to do with the way social disorder is presented in the media which is a direct responsibility of the same. Many times, the media portrays people associated with disorderly behaviour as evil rather than human beings who live in the real society with others and do things for certain reasons (Taylor et al. 2009). Therefore, the media has a key role to play in fostering irrational worries about social disorder. Policing the crisis approach tends to resolve social disorder but the media effects approach only castigates more of the same. The issue is that the media is a direct cause of social disorder as a result of how disorderly behaviour is portrayed by the same. Policing the crisis approach, as noted earlier, aims towards addressing social disorder by putting up measures such as the Anti-social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) which, though criticised, offer solutions to disorderly behaviour. On the other hand, there are negative effects of the media on people’s behaviours. The government of the United Kingdom has over the years been concerned with the influence of media, in particular the Internet, television and commercial advertising on children. Taylor et al. (2009) and BBC News (2007) give the example of 2007 when the British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown stated that the government was concerned about the biggest influences on children such as television and the Internet and that they had asked a clinical psychologist and an expert on television parenting programmes in 2004 to 2006, Dr. Tanya Byron to look at how families can exploit the opportunities of new technology while at the same time doing their duty to protect children from harmful material. Research has shown that most children who watch violent movies and programs end up being violent in school and other social settings in adulthood which only promotes social disorder. Much as the policing the crisis and the media effects theories have differences in various aspects as discussed above, the two approaches are similar in a number of ways as discussed below. Similarities To some extent the two theories play a key role in the process of mediation. The media has a powerful role to play in mediation but this role is not exclusive. The media, such as television and radio, mediate ideas that come from the government, social groups and other groups that fight social disorder. For this reason, the media creates awareness on the goings-on in the society and this helps the people to take certain individual measures such as avoiding walking late at night. This is a positive effect of the media on moulding people’s lives. The media effects approach, therefore compliments the work of the government hence complimenting policing the crisis approach. Another similarity is that both approaches are a cause of social disorder. As noted earlier, the government acts in the interest of the public to address disorderly behaviour and as such it sets the agenda which the media takes in different forms. In addressing social disorder, the government comes up with various definitions of disorderly behaviours such as ‘muggers’ and ‘thugs’ (Cohen 1973). Thereafter, the media airs out these definitions passing them on to the public. This might result in creating a sense of crisis which might further result in social disorder such as crime which disrupts the same social order it was meant to uphold. Conclusion In conclusion, it is evident that the two theories are different but they compliment each other. The media effect approach only focuses directly on the disorderly behaviour itself. The approach does not put into consideration the causes of the disorderly behaviour and it does not consider the fact that how the public perceives the behaviour is a significant part of disorderly behaviour. Policing the crisis approach entails how the state responds to a certain disorderly behaviour and the agenda it sets around the same through interventions such as the use Anti-social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs). The media, as the link between the people and the state, takes up a certain form of the agenda and the people respond in a certain way which might influence behaviour either positively or negatively. References BBC News, 2007 Gordon Brown’s speech in full. Retrieved 27 September 2010 from http:// news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7010664.stm. Cohen, S 1973, Folk devils and moral panic, London Paladin. Kennedy, H 2005, Just law, London, Vintage. Squires, P & Stephen, DE 2005, Rougher justice: Anti-social behaviour and young people, Cullompton, Willan. Taylor, SS, John HC & Simon, B 2009, Making social lives, The Open University, Walton Hall. Read More