Study Guides (248,145)
Canada (121,341)
Sociology (577)
SOC 2070 (69)

Chapter 10 - Review Questions for Midterm.doc

7 Pages
Unlock Document

SOC 2070
Norman Dubeski

Organizational Deviance The Definition Two Main Processes: --deviance that can only take place because of Individual misusing position in organization (abuse organizations of trust or power) (going beyond Goffman’s typology) Collective group acting together (for the organization and themselves together) Basic: deviance that can only take place in an organizational environment Not Organizational Deviance Theft, sexual assault, smoking at work, Best: deviance by the organization, by people on its behalf Yes Embezzlement, ALL cover ups, sexual harassment, --usually has a segregated social audience (judged police torture, bribery, corporate crime, safety differently by those in and outside of organization) violations, racial profiling White collar vs Corporate Crime White Collar Fraud Edwin Sutherland in 1939 defined white collar Bernie Madeoff embezzled 65 billion dollars over crime, proposed its study using differential decades association—but the real causes for organizational deviance are not individuals but aspects of the --ran a Ponzi scheme—paying off initial investors whole organization with money from new investors Crime by the corporation as an organization is --while skimming off a lot of the money for himself corporate crime --biggest case of individual white-collar fraud --All corporate crime is white-collar, but not all white-collar crime is corporate --such con men shake our faith in conventional social appearances because when we are cheated we --organizational deviance (including corporate can’t really trust anyone again crime) needs to be explained by institutional factors (go beyond individual factors to group factors) • Rodney King Corporate Crime (1) Corporate Crime (2) --crime by CEOs for both the corporation and --though executives can be criminally charged, themselves as the corporation benefits so do they some getting jail, more commonly fined, they more often receive other sanctions: --ENRON. CEOs created “imaginary profits” (fraud). Stock boomed—then CEOs sold, stock fell, --loss of reputation (of the company so company bankrupted, and pensions became they try to buy off people) worthless --civil suit (tort) settlements --consumer boycotts --Halliburton Dick Channey: illegal trade with --loss of business licenses embargoed country, bribery of officials, charging --legal bills, insurance costs for work never done -- the hidden ways that corporations are forced to --tobacco companies denying they knew smoking rain their own deviance caused cancer while marketing “kiddie packs” to kids knowing that kids were too young to buy --tort settlements can run into billions, which is the cigarettes so you sell them in smaller packs which most serious punishment, but most is paid by are cheaper shareholders --corporate crimes costs tens of billions and that is where the money is, you can become a really rich person Corp crime is punished less than street crimes Corp crime is punished less than street crimes because... (I) because... (II) --so complex it needs professionals to identify it, --no intention to harm specific individuals, they are you may not know who is involved in it, action just willing to take that chance involved can be complex, a level of deniability is there as well --perpetrators never want to physically hurt people, rather they are willing to risk it --enmeshed in regular legal activities --sometimes they may sincerely believe safety standards are unnecessary --victimization is diffuse, you may not know who is getting hurt --can benefit employees & shareholders until exposed --sums are large --guilty are otherwise law-abiding, well-dressed, --rarely prosecuted, police are not really interested upstanding citizens in it unless it is involved in organized crime --blame diffused; their lawyers can fight for --receives less stigma and condemnation decades, where do you draw the line on who is guilty? Appeal any judgments --receives less notice from media --penalties diffused onto stockholders --perpetrators do not feel guilty, will often admit what they did but not that it was wrong “freedom fighters!” Police Brutality (1) Police Brutality (2) --police are in a high-stress job and often feel the --Americans have Rodney King case; Canada has ends justify the means because they are protecting police shooting of Dudley George at Ipperwash Park the public in the 1995 Oka standoff --evidence & weapons are planted on suspects, i.e. --a Native diabetic approached police for help, they “the throwaway gun” thought he was drunk, so they dumped him out of town in a snowstorm where he died. --victims tend to be powerless members of minorities--irrespective of race of cops when it -- people can now record police activities, police comes to the misuse of power, it is going to be the often get a accused of things they didn’t do fact that the victims are stigmatized, that they are not going to be missed, that they are harmful to --police brutality should be seen as scenes that are society more than the sum of their parts, not a product of individuals --it is NOT just a case of a “few bad apples” but the situation (adversarial position, violence, racial tensions Police Brutality (3) 2006 NY Strip Club Police Shooting --police loathe cooperating with “Internal Affairs” --3 unarmed Black men shot at strip club after party --drove into unmarked police van --police separate force as legal, normal, and --groom dead, two critically wounded excessive --the 5 policemen fired 50 bullets legal: by the book --policemen: 2 White 2 Black normal: mostly extra-legal but routine and useful 1 Hispanic (only illegal when it is both useful and hard to --police claim it was justified, not an accident or detect) OK mistake excessive: illegal, visible, and unhelpful, WRONG Other Example --sexualized assault of Stacy Bonds while in Ottawa police actions then divide into justifiable, excusable police custody in 2008 by five police that included or ignorable, and inexcusable and unignoreable one woman, she was thrown in jail for a couple of hours because she was picked up because of public drunkenness, but it was inexcusable that 5 police arrested her and cut off her shirt and bra Sexual Abuse in the Priesthood (1) Sex Abuse (continued) --not new --persistent families were given “hush money.” – --sex abuse not confined to Catholic Church told they could not reveal details of the case --most victims were adolescent boys -priests confessed then reassigned to work with kids --church felt the ends justify the means because they --trusted priests ingratiated themselves with families are saving soles --molesters “groom” prospective victims --coverup scandal erupted in Boston, 2002 --children reluctant to tell parents afraid of being --victims formed groups for therapy and lawsuits disbelieved --about 1200 priests acknowledged to be pedophiles, --parents reluctant to press charges now 50+ defrocked ; the COVERUP perfect example of organizational deviance --bishop would claim he was a fine priest, that this was the first complaint, and going public would hurt --once a coverup starts, it can’t stop: perpetrators Church know lots of damaging secrets (including about the coverup!) Academic Research and Sex Studies Laud Humphreys’s The Tearoom Trade --text author Erich Goode, admits to sex with --gained access to the world of impersonal research subjects in studying BBW “big beautiful homosexual sex in public washrooms by
More Less

Related notes for SOC 2070

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.