The media does more than reflect social reality — it shapes it.
From 1970s tabloid headlines about muggers to today’s viral videos of street fights or riots, the media act as powerful translators of anxiety into public meaning — deciding which events matter, how they are framed, and what emotions they evoke. In doing so, they help to manufacture the very fears that later justify policy action (Hall et al., 1978).
From Reporting to Meaning-Making
Traditional journalism was once framed as being from the perspective of an impartial observer, but sociologists have long shown that news is an act of construction. Through selective emphasis, repetition, and imagery, media outlets organise events into moral narratives — with heroes, villains, and victims. These narratives establish what the public comes to see as common sense (Cohen, 1972; Hall et al., 1978).
Meaning is created not only by what is said, but by how often and how emotionally it is said. Few issues illustrate this better than knife crime. For example, when reporting on crime, the use of phrases such knife crime epidemic, war on knives, or street crime crisis — don’t simply describe; they perform moral urgency. And when repeated across media platforms, transform isolated incidents into evidence of collective breakdown.
Knife Crime and the Cycles of Fear
Since the early 2000s, British media coverage has repeatedly framed knife crime as both a symptom and a symbol of moral decline.
Tabloids warn of ‘teen killers’ and ‘postcode wars,’ while broadsheets publish anguished commentaries about ‘a lost generation.’ But statistical data reveals a more complex picture. While knife-enabled offences fluctuate, they’ve rarely been on the scale implied by crisis rhetoric.
The moral weight of these stories lie less in the numbers than in the imagery. Photographs of hooded youth, police tape, and grieving families communicate danger and empathy simultaneously — inviting readers to imagine their own vulnerability. This process also shapes policing.
Intense coverage of stabbings have coincided with renewed government emphasis on stop-and-search powers. Dramatizations of control, aimed at reassuring the public that the state is responding - even when solutions are symbolic (Garland, 2001)
From Broadcast to Hashtag: The Digital Turn
While traditional outlets still drive many narratives, social media has transformed their velocity. A violent incident once filtered through newsroom routines can now appear online within minutes, accompanied by speculation, commentary, and calls for action.
Platforms such as X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, and Snapchat allow users to participate in the framing process — remixing fear, outrage, and identity in real time (Hier, 2019; Walsh, 2020). The 2024 anti-immigrant UK Riots, considered to be partly fuelled by social media posts, are seen as an example of this.
Where Hall (1978) and his colleagues traced moral panic through print and television, today’s equivalent unfolds through algorithmic timelines and livestreams.
The result is a feedback loop: media report viral fear, audiences amplify it, policymakers promise action, and institutions increase surveillance — particularly of the same marginalised groups who were once portrayed as ‘muggers.’
The Audience as Co-Producer
Modern societies don’t passively consume fear; they negotiate it. Digital users curate their own information ecosystems, then seek stories that confirm their worldview
This selective exposure — sometimes labelled ‘confirmation culture’ — allows moral panics to thrive without traditional gatekeepers. When citizens share alarming posts “to raise awareness,” they often reproduce the same emotional logic that drives moral panic.
For practitioners, this complicates communication. Teachers confronting rumours of violence, or police responding to viral clips, must navigate a hybrid media landscape where perception can outpace fact. Building credibility now requires transparency and sustained local engagement rather than reactive statements.
Implications for Professionals
Understanding how fear is manufactured and circulated helps practitioners resist its pull.
Map the narrative.
Identify who is framing the issue and what emotions their language evokes.Check proportionality.
Compare viral claims with verified data before responding publicly.Engage early.
Provide factual updates and community reassurance before rumours solidify.Acknowledge emotion.
Public trust depends not only on facts but on recognising the feelings that accompany them.
By translating anxiety into informed dialogue, professionals can interrupt the spiral from panic to policy.
Looking Forward
Media will always mediate risk, but the challenge lies in ensuring that mediation does not become manufacture. In an age of instantaneous communication, proportionate response depends on understanding not only what people fear but how they come to fear it.
The next part of this series will explore how such dynamics extend into the digital realm — where fear becomes content, visibility becomes power, and the line between reporting and participation all but disappears.
Suggested Reading
Cohen, S. (1972) Folk Devils and Moral Panics. London: MacGibbon & Kee.
Hall, S. et al. (1978) Policing the Crisis: Mugging, the State, and Law and Order. London: Macmillan.
Garland, D. (2001) The Culture of Control. Oxford: OUP.
Hier, S. (2019) ‘Moral Panic and the Digital Turn’, Current Sociology, 67(6).
Walsh, R. (2020) ‘Viral Fear: Media, Platforms and the Speed of Panic’, Journal of Media Studies, 32(4).
Martínez, E. & Lee, A. (2025) ‘Contagion of Interpretation: Fear and Participation in Networked Publics’, New Media & Society, 27(2).
About the Author / Series Purpose
Written by Daniel Davis, researcher and commentator on social justice and policing.
Unpacking the Crisis: Crime, Power, and the Politics of Fear is a multi-part series examining how perceptions of crime, disorder, moral decline and media narratives shape public policy, policing practices, community relations and public trust.
Drawing on the work of Stuart Hall, Stanley Cohen, and contemporary sociological research, the series explores how institutions — from government to media to local authorities — manage public anxiety and frame “crises” around crime and disorder.
Each chapter is accompanied by a short Practitioner Brief offering applied insight, discussion prompts, and reflective tools which invite professionals across policing, education, and local governance to critically assess contemporary crises, and respond effectively in their practice.
Next: Read Practitioner Brief #3 — Managing Fear and Media Influence
Then Part #4 — From Panic To Policy — How Fear Shapes Governance