Labelling theory

Labelling theory

1. Deviance amplification

   • By attempting to control deviance, more deviance takes place. 1). Public definition of crime (fear/crackdown calls), less tolerance - deviant act - 2) Crime. 3). Operation of news values - selective portrayal - 4). Crime as news - perceived and real increase - 5). Deviance amplification. 6). Moral panic (law and order campaign.

2. Social construction of crime

   • Becker - social groups create deviance by creating rules whose breaking constitutes deviance and by applying those rules to certain people and labelling them as outsiders
   • No act is inherently criminal/deviant in itself - the reaction makes it deviant
   • Moral entrepreneurs have led to two effects; 1). The creation of 'outsiders' who break the new rule. 2). The creation/expansion of a social control agency to enforce the rule and impose labels on offenders
   • Becker says that social control agencies may campaign for a change in the law to increase their own power, e.g. US Federal Bureau of Narcotics successfully campaigned for the passing of Marijuana

3. Who gets labelled?

   • Piliavin and Briar - police decisions to arrest a youth were based on physical cues (manner/dress), also gender, class, ethnicity, time, place

4. Cicourel - the negotiation of justice

   • W/C areas and people fitted police typification most closely = police patrolled these areas more intensively - more arrests - conforming stereotypes
   • Probation officers - common sense theory that juvenile delinquency was caused by broken homes/poverty etc - youths in these areas more likely to offend - less likely to receive support
   • Justice isn't fixed but is negotiable. M/C get off lightly, W/C don't
   • Topic versus resource
     • Cicourel's study has implications for the use we make of official statistics given by police - not a valid pic
     • Shouldn't take them literally, should investigate the process that created them which will reveal how certain types of people get labelled

5. Effects of labelling

   • Negative labels encourage
   • Primary and secondary deviance - Edwin Lemert distinguishes between primary and secondary deviance. Primary = acts haven't been publicly labelled; usually has more than one cause, trivial and goes uncaught, status. Secondary deviance = result of society's reaction - neg labelling - SFP - further crime
   • Young's study of 'hippie marijuana users' - from primary to secondary deviance. The work of Lemert and Young show that society creates deviance. HOWEVER labelling theorists fail to see that someone with a label can choose to deviate further or not

6. The law as ideology and social control

   • Althusser (marxist) argued that law is an ideological state apparatus - benefits capitalists
   • Lareen Snider - capitalist state is reluctant to pass laws that regulate activities of businesses or threaten their profitability
   • The powerful kill/injure/steal from ordinary members of society but these killing are not covered by the law. Seen as civil offences and not criminal offences
   • Law enforcement favours the rich - rarely get taken to court
   • Jeffery Reiman - higher/c people less likely seen as criminal offenders

7. White collar and corporate crime

   • Hazel Croall defines white-collar as involving abuse of an occupational role. Fraud, tax evasion etc are white collar crimes - clever - make money from this kind of crime as they're high earners

8. Labelling and criminal justice policy

   • Attempting to control and punish young offenders makes matters worse. In USA Triplett (2000) - young offenders are seen as evil - harsher sentences - increase in offending

9. Reintegrative shaming

   • John Braithwaite identifies a positive role for labelling process. 2 types of shaming (neg labelling); 1). Disintegrative shaming - not only the crime but also the criminal is labelled 'bad' and excluded from society. 2). Reintegrative shaming - labels the act but not the actor - done a bad thing but not a bad person