Adrian Paris

FEED FORWARD

2/11/15

Using material from Item A and elsewhere, assess the usefulness

of the labelling theory in explaining crime and deviance in society
today (21 marks)
Labelling theorists such as Becker see crime as being a social construct
meaning that crime only exists because society makes the act deviant.
According to the labelling theory, no act is by definition deviant in all
situations at all times and instead only becomes criminal when it is
labelled as such, thus labelling theorists focus more on societies reaction
to deviant acts which create a self fulfilling prophecy and leads to further
crime. This is supported by item A as crime only exists due to the laws
constructed y society. However, the usefulness of this theory may be
criticized for not giving valid accounts as to why crime should be viewed
as the result of mainly working class criminals as victims of discriminatory
labelling.
The labelling theory can firstly be seen as useful as it offers an
explanation as to why and how laws are made, which reinforce the
stigmatization of deviant acts. According to Becker, people who feel that
they are responsible to change the law for the benefit of others or moral
entrepreneurs, create or change a law which have two effects. First it
creates a new group of deviants who break the law and secondly, is the
creation or expansion of social control agencies (i.e. police) to enforce the
law. Platt uses the example of juvenile delinquency which was a separate
category of offender that involved more young people and was the result
of a campaign led by Victorian moral entrepreneurs. Therefore, the
labelling theory is useful in suggesting that the negative outcomes of a
certain behavior is not what causes new law to be created but is instead
controlled by powerful individuals who decide which behaviors are
deemed unacceptable.
Furthermore, the labelling theory shows which groups are more likely to
be labelled in a criminal way which may emphasize the social construction
of crime. Different factors such as interactions with social control agencies
(i.e. police), appearance, background, situation and circumstances are all
taken into account when choosing who gets arrested (punished) for
committing an offence. For example, Pillivian and Briar in their study
found that when deciding to arrest youth, police based arrestment on
factors such as their manner and dress as well as other influencing factors
like gender, ethnicity, and even time and place. This therefore shows that
the labelling theory takes into consideration that not every individual who
commits deviant acts will be arrested, as social control agencies such as
polices base their assumptions on specific factors.
Further evidence for this theory can be provided by Cicourel who in their
study found that officers typifications or their stereotypes of the ideal
criminal led them to focus and chase after certain types of individuals
that they believed would be more likely to commit crime. As a result, class
bias was visible and police were led to patrol working-class areas more

Adrian Paris
FEED FORWARD

2/11/15

often and intensively in order to confirm their stereotypes. Such

typifications included expecting to see a working-class male out late at
night for example. It was also found that even other social agencies
reinforced this class bias such as probation officers who held the idea that
juvenile delinquents were associated with broken homes and poverty. This
led to these probation officers more likely to not support individuals that
fit in this category for non-custodial sentences. Therefore, Cicourels study
supports the theory that social control agencies use specific typifications
to judge which group of people are the criminals.
Cicourels study also highlights the importance of not taking official
statistics recorded by the police at face value as they are biased and only
represent the stereotypes that officers used to make a case against so
called criminals. Therefore, these statistics do not give a valid picture of
patterns of crime and cannot be utilized as a resource. Instead official
statistics should be viewed as a topic for sociologist to investigate such as
stop and search laws. Other methods such as participant and nonparticipant observation may give a clearer picture as to the typifications
and assumptions of control agencies that lead to false statistics.
Moreover, the labelling theory explains the effects of labelling, leading an
individual who is labelled to obtain a deviant career and is thus useful in
explaining crime and deviance in modern society. According to Lemert,
who distinguished between primary and secondary deviance argues that
as primary deviance refers to any deviant act that is not yet labelled it is
pointless to seek the causes as it is widespread and easy to rationalize.
However, secondary deviance or the result of societal reaction can be
seen as leading to further deviance by the process that occurs as a result
of this reaction. An individual who gets caught and publically labelled as a
criminal can be subjected to stigmatization, humiliation or exclusion from
normal society. This then leads to the individual now being referred no
longer to their previous status of mother, father, employee, etc. but
instead to their new status as a criminal which becomes their master
status. By gaining this label, the individual falls in the crisis of self concept
or their own sense of identity and may try to resolve this by accepting
their new deviant label and see themselves as that. This in turn may lead
to a self fulfilling prophecy where the individual acts towards their label
and thus may look for a deviant career through outsiders support in
deviant subcultures.
A contemporary example of secondary deviance was experienced by
Jimmy Saville, who during his lifetime was extremely popular with British
society for being a famed television personality and one of the first
famous DJs. However, after his death in 2011, reports that Saville has
sexually abused many boys and girls, most of which were very young
created a major outbreak in the public towards their views of Jimmy. The
people no longer saw him for all of his wealth, charisma, fame and charity
work but instead as a pedophile due to the constant media publications of
these reports.

Adrian Paris
FEED FORWARD

2/11/15

Furthermore, Young shows the relevance of secondary deviance in his

study of hippy marijuana users in Notting Hill. At first it was seen that drug
use was considered primary deviance as it was relatively insignificant
deviant act that was a lifestyle to the hippies and was not at the time
labelled as deviant. However, as the police and the justice system began
persecuting and labelling this act, the hippies began to retreat to groups
and form a deviant subculture, usually symbolized by their flamboyant
clothing and their longer hair. Drug use thus became a central activity
which created more deviance and attention from the police which in turn
filled their self fulfilling prophecy. This therefore illustrates the concept
that serious deviance is not caused by the act itself but by societal
reaction.
However, the labelling theory can be criticized for being deterministic as it
implies that once someone is labelled, a deviant career is inevitable. Yet,
labelling theorists do in fact recognize that although a deviant career is a
common outcome that it is not inevitable. According to Downes and Rock,
we cannot determine who will end up following a deviant career as
individuals are always free to choose to deviate further or not. This
therefore suggests that although some criticizers may claim that the
labeling theory is deterministic, it can be seen as accepting that a deviant
career is not inevitable.
Furthermore, the labelling theory may be criticized for emphasizing on the
negative effects of labelling by giving an offender a victim status.
According to other sociologists such as Right Realists, this ignores the real
victims of crime. Also by assuming that offenders are victims of labelling,
it ignores the fact that individuals may choose deviance and thus
contradicts Young, Lemert, Downes and Rocks point that a deviant career
is supposedly
inevitable.
Other sociologists such as Marxists argue that the labelling theory fails to
examine the link between the labelling process and capitalism. This
results on the theory focusing on middle range officials such as officers of
the police force who are the appliers of the law when in fact it is the
capitalist class who make the rules in the first place. Also, the labelling
theory fails to explain the origin of the label or why they are applied to
certain groups such as the working class.
However, labelling theorists do offer solutions to crime and deviance
which most theories dont therefore still make it useful. For example, it
emphasizes on enforcing reintergrative shaming instead of disintegrative
shaming to avoid blaming the individual as a whole for committing a
deviant act but instead inly blaming their actions. Also, an example of a
solution to crime from labelling theorists comes from Uruguay and their
legalization of marijuana and how this has led to a decrease in crime as
not many individuals are being persecuted on the basis of labels for such

Adrian Paris
FEED FORWARD

2/11/15

deviant acts and also there is no longer a probable cause for individuals to
experience secondary deviance since this act is now legal.
In conclusion labelling theorists may offer a useful explanation of crime
and deviance in todays society by offering the reasons behind law
making, the choices of offenders, the processes that make an individual
deviant and the solutions that may improve crime in society.