The Role Law Plays in Society (OCR A-Level Law): Revision Notes
The Role Law Plays in Society
Durkheim's theory of law in society
Emile Durkheim, a pioneering sociologist, viewed law as a boundary-maintaining device that serves a crucial function in maintaining social order and stability. According to Durkheim, law operates through two fundamental purposes that work together to prevent social chaos and ensure that society functions smoothly.
Durkheim's concept of law as a boundary-maintaining device emphasizes that law doesn't just punish wrongdoing—it actively creates and maintains the social boundaries that define acceptable behaviour in society. This perspective views law as essential to social cohesion.
Two purposes of law
Durkheim identified that law fulfils two essential purposes in maintaining social boundaries:
1. To define sanctions
Law establishes clear boundaries by identifying what behaviours are prohibited or required in society. By defining these sanctions, the law communicates to all members of society what is acceptable and what crosses the line into unacceptable conduct. This creates a shared understanding of social boundaries.
2. To prescribe punishment
Law prescribes appropriate punishments for those who violate established rules. The purpose of punishment extends beyond simply penalising wrongdoers—it acts as a deterrent that discourages individuals from creating social instability. The threat of punishment helps maintain conformity and reinforces social norms.
Critical Concept: Durkheim argued that social stability is both created and maintained through these legal structures. Without law defining boundaries and consequences, society would lack the mechanisms needed to prevent disorder and maintain cohesion.
Two types of legal structures
Durkheim distinguished between two types of legal structures, each serving different functions in maintaining social stability:
1. Repressive law – criminal law
Repressive law corresponds to the criminal law system. The primary aim of criminal law is to maintain law and order within society by punishing those who breach established rules.
When a person is found guilty of a criminal offence, the offender receives punishment. This punishment serves multiple purposes:
- It acts as retribution for the wrong committed
- It deters the offender from reoffending
- It deters others in society from committing similar crimes
- It reinforces society's collective values
Criminal law also aims to protect society as a whole. This protective function justifies more severe sanctions, such as imprisonment, which physically removes dangerous individuals from society and prevents them from causing further harm.
The repressive nature of criminal law reflects society's need to respond strongly to behaviours that threaten collective wellbeing and social stability. The severity of punishment often corresponds to the perceived threat to social order.
2. Restitutive law – civil law
Restitutive law corresponds to the civil law system. The primary aim of civil law is to uphold the rights of individuals and businesses when those rights have been violated.
Unlike criminal law, which focuses on punishment, civil law focuses on compensation and restoration. When civil rights are breached, the courts can order compensation designed to put the parties back to the position they would have been in if their rights had not been violated.
This restorative approach reflects the principle that civil disputes typically involve conflicts between private parties rather than offences against society as a whole. The aim is to restore balance and make the wronged party whole again, rather than to punish the wrongdoer.
Examples of restitutive law include:
- Contract law (enforcing agreements between parties)
- Tort law (compensating for harm caused)
- Property law (protecting ownership rights)
Law as a social control mechanism
Law functions as one of the most important mechanisms of social control in modern society. As a social control mechanism, law comprises rules for controlling our behaviour with the ultimate goal of maintaining order in society.
How law shapes society and vice-versa
The relationship between law and society is reciprocal and dynamic. Law does not simply impose order from above; rather, it develops organically from the behaviours and values that society has accepted over time as 'appropriate' or 'normal'.
Two-Way Relationship Between Law and Society:
Law shapes behaviour: Legal rules influence how people act by establishing consequences for certain behaviours. People modify their conduct to comply with legal requirements, knowing that failure to do so may result in sanctions.
Society shapes law: The rules that make up the law develop from social customs, moral values, and shared expectations that evolve within society. As society's values change, the law adapts to reflect these new understandings of appropriate behaviour.
This means that law both shapes our behaviours and is shaped by them. The law is not static but rather evolves continuously in response to changing social attitudes and needs.
Understanding rules
A rule is something that determines the way in which we behave. Rules govern our conduct and create expectations about how we should act in various situations.
There are two main ways in which we relate to rules:
1. Voluntary submission to rules
We submit ourselves to some rules voluntarily. This is the case with moral rules, which we follow because we believe they are right, not because we fear punishment. For example, many people are honest not because the law requires it, but because they believe honesty is morally correct.
2. Enforced compliance with rules
We must follow other rules because they are enforceable in some way. This is the case with legal rules. Unlike moral rules, legal rules carry formal sanctions—punishments imposed by the state if we violate them. The enforceability of legal rules distinguishes them from purely moral or social conventions.
This distinction is important because it shows that law operates through external enforcement mechanisms, while morality operates through internal conscience and social pressure. Understanding this difference helps explain why some rules are more effective than others in controlling behaviour.
Moral panic and the media as an agent of social change
What is moral panic?
Moral panic occurs when an issue is highlighted by the media as a threat to the values or interests of society. During a moral panic, public concern about a particular issue becomes disproportionate to the actual threat it poses.
Stanley Cohen, in his influential work Folk Devils and Moral Panics, defined moral panic as occurring when:
a condition, episode, person or group of people emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests
Cohen believed that the media play a crucial role in creating and enforcing moral panic. Even routine news reporting can amplify concerns and create a sense of crisis that may not be justified by the actual facts.
Cohen's five stages of moral panic
Cohen identified five distinct stages through which moral panic typically develops:
Stage 1: Definition of threat
Something or someone is defined as a threat to society's values or interests. This could be a particular behaviour, a group of people, or a social trend that is portrayed as dangerous or harmful.
Stage 2: Media depiction
The threat is depicted in an easily recognisable form by the media. The media often simplify complex issues, create stereotypes, and use dramatic language and imagery to make the story more compelling and accessible to audiences.
Stage 3: Rapid build-up of public concern
There is a rapid build-up of public concern. As media coverage intensifies, more people become aware of and worried about the perceived threat. This concern can spread quickly and widely, creating a sense of urgency.
Stage 4: Response from authorities
Authorities or opinion makers respond to the public concern. This might involve politicians proposing new laws, police implementing new enforcement strategies, or other institutions taking action to address the perceived threat.
Stage 5: Resolution
The panic either recedes or results in social changes. In some cases, public interest simply wanes and the panic fades away. In other cases, the panic leads to lasting changes in law, policy, or social attitudes.
Impact of social media
When Cohen developed his theory, he was commenting primarily on mainstream media—newspapers, radio, and television. However, the arrival of social media has significantly amplified the potential for moral panic.
How Social Media Amplifies Moral Panic:
Social media platforms enable:
- Faster spread of information and misinformation
- Direct participation by the public in shaping narratives
- Greater emotional intensity through personal stories and viral content
- Sustained attention on issues through hashtags and online campaigns
- Formation of online communities that reinforce particular viewpoints
This has compounded the phenomenon of moral panic, making it potentially more intense, more rapid, and more widespread than in Cohen's original conception.
Contemporary examples of moral panic include media coverage surrounding the death of George Floyd in 2020, the death of Sarah Everard in 2021, and coronavirus antivax campaigns. In each case, media coverage—both traditional and social—played a significant role in shaping public perception and prompting responses from authorities.
Social control theories and mechanisms
Social control operates through both formal and informal mechanisms to produce social conformity and maintain order.
Formal mechanisms of social control
Formal mechanisms involve external agencies coercing individuals to obey rules through the threat of punishment. These are official, institutionalised systems of control.
Examples of formal mechanisms include:
- Substantive law: The actual legal rules that define what behaviour is required or prohibited
- Police: Law enforcement agencies that detect crime and apprehend offenders
- Courts: Judicial institutions that determine guilt and impose sentences
- Prisons: Institutions that incarcerate offenders as punishment and to protect society
Formal mechanisms operate through external coercion. Individuals comply with rules not necessarily because they agree with them, but because they fear the consequences of non-compliance. The state's monopoly on legitimate force enables these formal mechanisms to be effective.
Informal mechanisms of social control
Informal mechanisms work through an individual's bonds to society and the process of internalising norms and values through socialisation. These mechanisms do not rely on official sanctions but rather on social pressure and internal conscience.
Examples of informal mechanisms include:
- Family: Parents and relatives teach children acceptable behaviour and values
- Peers: Friends and social groups influence behaviour through acceptance or rejection
- Education: Schools transmit social values and norms alongside academic content
- Work: Employment settings enforce professional standards and workplace norms
Key Difference: Informal mechanisms are often more powerful than formal ones because they create genuine belief in the rightness of social rules rather than mere compliance based on fear of punishment. When norms and values are internalised through socialisation, individuals follow them even when no formal sanctions threaten.
Theoretical approaches to social control
Theories of social control can be separated into two main approaches:
Conformity producing theories
These theories focus on how people learn to conform by internalising social norms and taking on social roles. The functionalist view falls into this category, emphasising how socialisation through informal mechanisms creates genuine commitment to social values.
Conformity producing theories primarily rely on informal mechanisms to explain why most people obey most rules most of the time. They argue that effective social control comes from creating citizens who want to conform, not just citizens who fear punishment.
Deviance repressing theories
These theories examine the relationship between deviant behaviour and the measures used to reduce it. Right and left realist approaches fall into this category, focusing on how formal sanctions deter crime and deviance.
Deviance repressing theories primarily rely on formal mechanisms to explain social control. They emphasise the importance of effective law enforcement, appropriate punishment, and the deterrent effect of sanctions in maintaining order.
Combined approaches
The most effective methods of social control combine both types of approach. A society that relies solely on formal mechanisms (punishment and coercion) will face constant resistance and require extensive resources for enforcement. Conversely, a society that relies solely on informal mechanisms may lack the capacity to deal with serious violations effectively.
The Optimal Approach: The optimal approach uses informal mechanisms to create broad social conformity through shared values, while maintaining formal mechanisms to deal with those who nevertheless violate important social rules. This combination ensures both efficiency (most people comply voluntarily) and effectiveness (serious violations are punished).
Remember!
Key Points to Remember:
-
Law as boundary-maintaining device: Durkheim argued law maintains social stability by defining sanctions and prescribing punishment to deter social instability
-
Two legal structures: Repressive law (criminal law) maintains order through punishment; restitutive law (civil law) upholds rights through compensation
-
Law as social control: Law comprises rules controlling behaviour to maintain order; law both shapes society and is shaped by society's accepted behaviours
-
Moral panic: Stanley Cohen identified five stages: threat defined → media depiction → rapid public concern → authority response → panic recedes or creates change. Social media has intensified this phenomenon
-
Social control mechanisms: Formal mechanisms (police, courts, prisons) coerce through punishment; informal mechanisms (family, peers, education) create internalised conformity through socialisation. The most effective approach combines both types