Words In APA Format Double-Spaced Demonstrate Your ✓ Solved

1500 words APA format Double-spaced Demonstrate your

Demonstrate your knowledge and understanding of moral entrepreneurship, moral panics, and social problems. This includes familiarity with the four original readings by Kai Erikson, Howard Becker, Brezina and Phipps, and Stanley Cohen. Trace the development of theories regarding moral entrepreneurship, labeling, moral panics, and social problems from Kai Erikson and Howard Becker to Stanley Cohen to Brezina and Phipps. Identify the main elements and/or similarities that tie these readings together. Analyze whether the social reaction toward the economically disadvantaged victims of Hurricane Katrina rises to the level of moral entrepreneurship and moral panic as described by Becker and Cohen.

Provide a solid, evidence-based rationale to support your arguments regarding the application of the moral panics/social problems approach to the social reaction in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Read the following articles: “NOTES ON THE SOCIOLOGY OF DEVIANCE” by KAI T. ERIKSON, “Moral Entrepreneurs” by Howard Becker, “Round Up the Usual Suspects: Crime, Deviance, and the Limits of Constructionism” by Erich Goode, and Brezina and Phipps' "False news reports, folk devils, and the role of public officials: Notes on the social construction of law and order in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina." Lastly, “Whose side are we on? The undeclared politics of moral panics theory” by Cohen.

Paper For Above Instructions

In the contemporary discourse surrounding social problems, the concepts of moral entrepreneurship and moral panic serve as significant lenses through which societal reactions to deviance and social issues can be critically examined. This paper aims to demonstrate knowledge and understanding of these concepts as articulated by prominent sociologists such as Kai Erikson, Howard Becker, Stanley Cohen, and others. A particular focus will be on the social reaction to the economically disadvantaged victims of Hurricane Katrina, exploring whether it exemplifies moral entrepreneurship and moral panic as theorized by Becker and Cohen.

Theoretical Foundations

Moral entrepreneurship refers to the actions taken by individuals or groups who seek to influence others to adopt certain norms or attitudes, often aimed at defining what is considered acceptable behavior in society (Becker, 1963). These entrepreneurs play a pivotal role in labeling certain actions, individuals, or groups as deviant. Becker's theory emphasizes that deviance is not inherent in an act but is a result of societal reaction to that act. Similarly, Cohen (2011) elucidates moral panic as a process that arises when a group or event is labeled as a threat to societal values, leading to disproportionate concern and reaction from the public and officials alike.

Kai Erikson's work on the sociology of deviance complements these notions by examining how societies construct deviant categories and respond to them. Erikson posits that societal reactions can sometimes amplify deviance, creating a feedback loop where the labeled individuals become more entrenched in deviance due to societal labeling (Erikson, 1962). In relation to Hurricane Katrina, it is essential to analyze how societal reactions contributed to the perceptions of the victims and how these reactions typified moral entrepreneurship and moral panic.

Moral Entrepreneurship and Hurricane Katrina

The aftermath of Hurricane Katrina revealed significant moral entrepreneurship as societal actors mobilized to define and label the victims of the disaster. Media representations often framed the economically disadvantaged as looters or criminals, while simultaneously presenting health and safety concerns surrounding the disaster-stricken areas. This narrative exemplifies Becker’s and Cohen's theories, illustrating how certain groups are labeled negatively, which can perpetuate further marginalization.

Brezina and Phipps (2010) discussed how public officials utilized the imagery of "folk devils" in the context of Hurricane Katrina, portraying individuals from marginalized communities as contributors to the disorder that followed the hurricane. This portrayal aligns with Cohen’s concept of moral panic, as it incited fears that went beyond the immediate realities of the disaster, leading to a heightened sense of urgency among law enforcement and government agencies to impose control over the affected populations.

Social problems are often defined and responded to through the lens of moral panic, which generates significant cultural reactions that serve to create myths around the affected groups. Analyzing the response to Hurricane Katrina, it becomes evident that these responses reflected a moral panic over the socioeconomic conditions of the victims. The media's framing of these individuals as threats to public safety further exacerbated this sense of panic, suggesting that the inherent vulnerabilities of these populations were overlooked in favor of sensationalist narratives that contributed to the construction of deviance.

According to Cohen (2011), moral panics focus on the fears surrounding “folk devils,” which represent out-groups who threaten societal values. The economically disadvantaged victims of Hurricane Katrina were labeled as such through media depictions, which oftentimes ignored the broader structural issues that precipitated their vulnerability and painted them instead as a collective threat to civil order. The lack of attention to the socio-economic contexts that these individuals faced reflects a failure of moral entrepreneurship to genuinely address the underlying social problems

Evidence-Based Rationale

To support the argument regarding the effectiveness of the moral panics/social problems approach in understanding aftermath responses to Hurricane Katrina, one must examine the historical context of the event itself. Research indicates that natural disasters do not create social problems but rather reveal pre-existing conditions (Goode, 2010). The reactions to Hurricane Katrina, including increased police presence and calls for more stringent laws, were informed by entrenched socioeconomic disparities that had been ignored prior to the disaster.

Moreover, the application of moral panics analysis elucidates how public officials used the post-Katrina landscape to justify repressive measures against marginalized communities. The government's response was not merely an attempt to ensure safety but also a mechanism to reinforce existing social hierarchies and control vulnerable populations. This inclination reflects Becker’s theory regarding the instrumental use of societal reactions to further moral agendas.

In conclusion, the social reaction toward the economically disadvantaged victims of Hurricane Katrina significantly exemplifies the concepts of moral entrepreneurship and moral panic as outlined by Becker and Cohen. The societal labels placed upon these individuals served to perpetuate their marginalization, often overlooking the essential socio-economic realities that fueled their vulnerabilities pre- and post-disaster. The transformation of victims into perceived threats showcases the role of moral entrepreneurs in shaping public perceptions and responses to social problems, fundamentally underscoring the need for deeper engagement with the complexities of these issues beyond simplistic narratives. Engaging with the theoretical frameworks articulated by Erikson, Becker, Cohen, and Brezina and Phipps allows for a more nuanced understanding of the intricate relationships between moral entrepreneurship, social labeling, and the dynamics of moral panic in contemporary society.

References

• Becker, H. (1963). Moral Entrepreneurs. In Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. Free Press.
• Brezina, T., & Phipps, H. E. (2010). False news reports, folk devils, and the role of public officials: Notes on the social construction of law and order in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Deviant Behavior, 31(1), 97-134.
• Cohen, S. (2011). Whose side are we on? The undeclared politics of moral panics theory. Crime, Culture and Media, 7(2), 23-39.
• Erikson, K. T. (1962). Notes on the Sociology of Deviance. Social Problems, 10(2), 147-157.
• Goode, E. (2010). Round Up the Usual Suspects: Crime, Deviance, and the Limits of Constructionism. In The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements.