In the 1950’s, a group of sociologists influenced by symbolic interactionism decided to question the general assumption that there is a difference between those who offend and those who don’t. Instead, they proposed the idea that most people commit crimes and acts of deviance, but only a small proportion are caught and stigmatised for it. They argue that the focus of criminology should be on the definition of and reaction to deviance, instead of the original act’s causes. As Howard Becker, labelling theory’s best known exponent has said; deviance is “a consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an ‘offender.’” In essence, Becker states that there is no such thing as a deviant act, but only one that becomes so when others define it as such.
Becker highlights that the application of a ‘deviant’ label will very much depend on an audience’s interpretation of an act, something that is subject to a variety of factors. In order to illustrate this idea, he used the example of young people getting involved in a brawl. In a wealthy neighbourhood, this may be interpreted as ‘youthful high spirits,’ whereas the same thing occurring in a low-income neighbourhood may be defined by the police as evidence of delinquency. It is also likely that those committing the deviant act will view it differently to those observing it. For example, if a fight involves a gang trying to defend their ‘turf,’ they will view what they are doing as necessary, whereas those around them would likely view it as problematic. Where people are defined (labelled) as delinquents by an agency of social control, they will in turn become deviant. Becker believes that deviance is produced by interaction between a potential deviant and agents of social control.
Labelling theorists argue that the laws themselves reflect the ideals of moral entrepreneurs; people who seek actively to create and enforce the law. This may be because they believe the laws would benefit society, or simply because they benefit the the activists directly. Becker used the famous example of marijuana use’s outlaw in the USA in 1937. After prohibition laws were repealed, it was viewed to be a growing problem, so the Federal Bureau of Narcotics waged their successful campaign. Becker has pointed out that it was only so effective because it ‘plugged in’ to common values in the USA including the belief that people should be in control of their thoughts and actions, and that pleasure for its own sake was wrong. He used the term ‘moral crusade’ to describe the manner of the campaign.
Focusing next on the effects of a person’s label, Becker argued that it becomes a person’s master status — meaning it tends to override any other status, such as friend, sister or parent. This can ultimately lead to a self -fulfilling prophecy, where someone commits deviant acts just because they have been labelled as such. Becker outlined this as a process with stages, the first being an individual labelled publicly as a deviant, potentially leading to rejection from family or friends. This label can lead to further deviance, for example a drug dealer unable to get a job might steal to fund their habit. Another example can be found among ex convicts, who may struggle to find employment due to their conviction, thus having no choice but to return to crime to live. Becker claims that the deviant career is complete when individuals join an organised deviant group, in which their identity is accepted. Within such a group, a deviant subculture then develops, with alternative beliefs and values rationalising deviant activities.
Jock Young (1971) utilised Becker’s approach in his study of ‘hippie’ marijuana users in London. Examining the meanings colouring the police’s view of them , he found that they tend to see them as dirty, idle, depraved and immature. Young argued that these meanings “fundamentally alter and transform the social world of the marijuana smoker.” Particularly with regard to drug taking which began essentially as a “peripheral” activity, but as become a more central concern, according to him. This is due to police action against marijuana users, which labels them, thus making them feel different, and encouraging retreat into smaller, more closed off groups. Deviant norms and values further develop and evolve in the context of this, as Becker suggested. As their norms further change, the hippies become more and more likely to struggle to partake in conventional society.
While Becker does argue that labels are the cause of further deviance, he stressed that his theory is not deterministic, as the process is not inevitable by any means. Drug addicts can recover, and ex-convicts go ‘straight.’ Aiming to explain the cause of an individual’s first act of deviance, he conducted a study of marijuana users, finding that a variety of conditions had to be met for an experimentation to result in regular use of the drug. Emphasising the significance of subjective meanings given to an experience, he proposed that the physical experience is interpreted in the context of interaction with others. With reference to marijuana, he said “the [new] user feels dizzy, thirsty; his scalp tingles,” and will therefore need other smokers to convince them that these effects are desirable and to be sought after. Becker’s theory is very different to others such as those of Merton (1968) where a single cause (anomie) was identified, as he stressed that it is a process, using what he has called a ‘sequential’ approach to deviance