International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, Volume 35, Issue 3/4, April 2015.
Purpose Much social policy research today is commissioned, published and publicised by organisations with direct involvement in that particular aspect of policy. Whilst much good can result from such ‘advocacy research’, at times the tactics employed by some groups have been criticised for exaggerated claims-making and sensationalist reporting as they attempt to get their particular issue into the political and public domain and also generate more government funding and/or increase public donations. This paper investigates such claims. Design/methodology/approach In this paper I wish to look at some of the tactics utilised by advocacy groups in order to establish the legitimacy of their particular concern. I focus on material published by Action for Children (AFC) and the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) and between 2010 and 2012 in relation to child maltreatment, critically analysing them from a social constructionist standpoint and drawing on aspects of moral panic theory. Findings The paper concludes by warning of the dangers for both social policy and related practice that can arise from uncritically accepting the claims of contemporary moral entrepreneurs. Originality/value This paper uses theoretical concepts to analyse contemporary camapigns by two charity organisations.
Purpose Much social policy research today is commissioned, published and publicised by organisations with direct involvement in that particular aspect of policy. Whilst much good can result from such ‘advocacy research’, at times the tactics employed by some groups have been criticised for exaggerated claims-making and sensationalist reporting as they attempt to get their particular issue into the political and public domain and also generate more government funding and/or increase public donations. This paper investigates such claims. Design/methodology/approach In this paper I wish to look at some of the tactics utilised by advocacy groups in order to establish the legitimacy of their particular concern. I focus on material published by Action for Children (AFC) and the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) and between 2010 and 2012 in relation to child maltreatment, critically analysing them from a social constructionist standpoint and drawing on aspects of moral panic theory. Findings The paper concludes by warning of the dangers for both social policy and related practice that can arise from uncritically accepting the claims of contemporary moral entrepreneurs. Originality/value This paper uses theoretical concepts to analyse contemporary camapigns by two charity organisations.