Comparison of Cohen's Study of Disorderly Behaviour with that of Hall - Essay Example

Comparison of Cohen’s Study of Disorderly Behaviour with that of Hall Et Al Introduction Humans are social creatures sincethey create social environments such as communities, and try to live in an orderly way. The people in certain socialites creates laws and other authoritative statements to achieve an orderly state. As members of the society, the people learn to abide by the law. When a person breaks a law, the society punishes the individual through organized channels like the police or judiciary processes. The people in a certain social environment may have contradicted ways of life; one may find it hard to move from one society to another, due to the way the other communities deal with every day’s business. The diversity in the differences of behavior in different societies is so immense, that one can find it hard to migrate from one community to another. The common thing in almost all societies is the authoritative figures, the government, who are in-charge of overseeing the improvement of the living conditions in the society. Behavior can be a tremendous boost to ease the work of the government. An orderly society can be governed easily as compared to a disorderly society. Many societies today have setup different institutions and infrastructure for the benefit of the people within or around it. They range from hospitals, schools to roads and sports facilities. However, with all the efforts that the authoritative figures in a given society try to enforce an orderly society, the people will behave in a disorderly manner at times. Orderly Behavior In order for one to understand the studies done to explain disorderly behaviors one must have an idea of studies that have been done on orderly social lives. The way people behave in a day-to-day basis depends on the process of orderly behavior (Stephanie, Steve & Simon, 2009, 299). Sometimes guidelines and rules govern how a person thinks and behaves. The impact of this becomes obvious in that everything they do is practically programmed. This programming is the orderly governing system within an institution. This system is usually written down in rules and regulations to form guidelines that create an orderly management system. It is essential to understand why such guidelines are essential to people in specific places. This is explained as a state that; each society has its own order: whether this concerns how traffic is ordered, how people go shopping, or how different positions or roles in society are interrelated (Stephanie, Steve & Simon, 2009, 299). An example of this is the level of respect an employee has towards their employer. Social order can however, not run for as long as expected when disorderliness begins to corrupt the government and mindset of a community. Examples of disorderly behavior are corruption, crime and, community disturbances. Hence, social order needs to be taken care of and evaluated from time to time to ensure that there is a continuous flow of peace in the community. In order to control the population in a given community, governments use censuses in order to determine the number of law enforcement personnel. This leads to the establishment of an orderly community. Understanding people, their goals and expectations, ensure that the confusion that comes with disorderliness is not there. In a community, where people know one another by name, relationships are likely to be established, and this comes with friendship and therefore, orderliness. Disorderly Behaviors According to (Cohen, 1972, 9) disorderly behavior is moral panic, where groups of people behave in a way that is seen as a threat. From crimes, to misuse and abuse of drugs, every society has had disorderly behavior portrayed by the members. Favoritism or hatred to a group of people in a community may also lead to disorderly communities. In societies where the leader comes from a certain group of people, favoritism might be an issue. Such a leader can create hatred between the people in his community and others. Disorderly Behavior may vary in communities, depending on their beliefs and value systems. In this case, culture comes in handy. Disorderly behaviors can be a result of social status (poverty), low intelligent levels or even the minorities in a community. Elderly people however, do not understand how and why such people practice these seemingly ‘evil’ deeds. The fascinating thing is that these people are from ancient times and they tend to believe that the modern generation is disorderly even though times have changed. What they do not understand is that development comes with selfishness, greed, jealousy and dissatisfaction. These factors lead to corruption, crime and therefore, disorderliness. In order for behavior to be orderly, there must be a sense of mutual connection among everyone. Verifying expectations and understanding a person’s capability is also extremely beneficial. In such cases, conflicts will rarely come up, and the unrest that came with disorderliness may disappear. Stanley Cohen’s Approach Stanley Cohen is a native of South Africa, where he did his undergraduate degree of sociology at the University of Witwatersrand, before travelling to London. He argued that when the media highlights the thugs in the community and highlight what they did, there is a moral panic where the members of the community are afraid of what might happen. He also added that these thugs’ are depicted as evil people and not as human beings who have a reason why they do what they do. Stuart Hall Born in 1955, Stuart Hall is a criminology professor at the University of Teesside in the United Kingdom. Stuart Hall et al had the same ideas, but they focused more on how the media amplified these atrocities. They dig deeper into reason the people involved were arrested, the causes of this social unrest went unnoticed. Similarities of Cohen and Hall’s Approach They both agree that although the violent disorder was finally exposed, the media were also a reason why social conflict arose. This can be seen when people, especially children watch violent television shows, they end up having an urge to fight. Children are an excellent example because they are vulnerable and according to Huesmann these violent traits stick with the children and manifest themselves during adulthood. Both approaches also concerned about mediation. This is because mediation can reduce disorderliness but can also generate antisocial perceptions. They focus on the negative effects of the media and do not even mention the positive effects that the media can also have. Both Cohen and Hall also have social factors that they claim affect antisocial behaviors. They also argued that time when everyone agreed that the role the government played was related to the British society was slowly coming to an abrupt end. Hall and Cohen both believe that social unrest is usually used as a scapegoat for the state, but the underlying causes that vary from social conflict and equality are not usually investigated. Cohen and Hall also believe that although the media highlighted these atrocities, the media blows them out of proportion and magnifies these problems to the extent that fear and indifference is created in the minds of the members of the society. Differences of Cohen and Hall’s Approach While Cohen is talking about the media causing fear and irrational behaviors, Hall et al is talking about how the media created a belief that there was a crisis in the society. This was apparently in a bid to disguise the inequality that already existed in the state to (Cohen, 1972, 9). While Hall et al talk about the state diverting the entire attention from what the underlying effects of what most people would call crime, Cohen is claiming that culture is what determines whether a person will engage in disorderly behavior or not (Hall et al, 1978). Disorderly behavior causes unrest not only in the society but also in the individual homes; such conflicts can displace harmony in a family and create distrust and fights among family members. Although the media plays a crucial role in amplifying the disorderliness, it also informs and educates its’ audience, it should however, not exaggerate some of the information to the extent of instilling fear in people. I also believe that all the information highlighted by the media should include both sides of the coin and not just magnifying one angle. In as much as Cohen and Hall et al claimed that the media was the main source of disorderly behavior, times have changed, and people are now educated and informed. They rarely take the violence’ in the media that is broadcasted in the form of movies. Nowadays the best movies or shows are the ones with fictional violence; everyone should treat such productions, as they are entertainment and leave it at that (Hall et al, 1978). Today disorderly behavior is nothing new. It however, depends on the nature vs. nurture theory, where a persons’ genetic makeup and the place they have been brought is what creates the different personalities. Corruption and crime will always exist in some countries, depending on the system of government. Conclusion It is crucial for the youth of every country to know that they are the next leaders , and I believe that change should start with the youth and be passed on to the next generations. Orderliness deserves to be valued as much as it was in the past fifty decades. Having orderliness in a society starts with an individual decision and continues with the mutual understanding of the members of the society. We need not to blame everything we term as evil on the media. The media only gives the public what it wants. Bibliography Cohen, S., (1972), Folk devils and moral panics: London, MacGibbon and Kee. Hall, S., et al, (1978), Policing the crisis: mugging, the state and law and order: London: Macmillan. Stephanie, T., Steve, H., & Simon, B., (2009), Making social lives, London: the Open University Walton hall. Read More