Critique Paper: critique one of the following articles Discuss what is successful or helpful about the research and/or information presented Describe what the research or topic reminds you about Relate what you know to the information presented Provide co

http://informahealthcare.com/dep ISSN: 0968-7637 (print), 1465-3370 (electronic)

Drugs Educ Prev Pol, 2016; 23(6): 462–470 ! 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. DOI: 10.3109/09687637.2016.1167168

Feeding on fear: Edible marijuana and disproportionality in US media

Michael H. Eversman

Department of Social Work, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ, USA

Abstract

Aims: US marijuana policy is in flux, as some states have legalized it for medical and recreational use despite long-standing federal prohibition. Edible marijuana (edibles) allows consumption without smoke inhalation, yet concern surrounding dosing and its effect is concerning. Cohen’s moral panic framework informs how and why some societal problems are disproportionately constructed and stigmatized, while other important problems are tolerated or ignored. This qualitative study explores the construction of disproportionality within textual US news coverage of legal edibles. Methods: A three-year sample of 349 articles was retrieved and analysed. Analysis was informed a priori by the moral panic criteria of disproportionality, and data reflect headlines and story text purporting to gauge problems surrounding edibles. Findings: Using reports of emergencies, poison centre calls and anecdotes, disproportionality surrounding edibles was constructed using indefinite numeric adjectives while avoiding or downplaying totals and presenting statistics with little context to gauge danger relative to other substances. Edibles were also depicted as causing fatalities, occluding other contributing causes. Conclusions: Deviance was ascribed to marijuana by exaggerating its toxicity when eaten and downplaying important contextual factors. Disproportionality surrounding marijuana supports bases vested in maintaining criminalization policies while drawing attention from other relevant social problems.

Keywords

Cannabis, drugs, policy, qualitative research, substance abuse

History

Received 13 January 2016 Revised 6 March 2016 Accepted 14 March 2016 Published online 27 April 2016

Introduction

Evidence of worldwide marijuana (cannabis sativa/indica)

smoking and eating for medicinal purposes, religious rituals

and consciousness transcending has existed for millennia, yet

its benefits remain challenged and its dangers are often

exaggerated (Bostwick, 2012; Cohen, 2009). From ‘‘reefer

madness’’ during the 1930s to its inclusion in the War on

Drugs, marijuana in contemporary US society has long been

immersed in sociopolitical conflict (Berkey, 2011; Musto,

1973; Sloman, 1979/1998). Despite long-standing federal

prohibition, individual states began legalizing medical mari-

juana in 1996 and recreational use in 2012. Presently, 23

states and the District of Columbia have legalized medical

marijuana, while four states and D.C. have legalized recre-

ational use.

Edible marijuana products – long a mainstay for medical

users who prefer not to smoke – have proven popular in the

recreational market. In edible form, marijuana can be

consumed without smoke inhalation, considered perhaps its

biggest health risk (Lamarine, 2012). Yet concern surround-

ing proper dosage and the unique high of edible marijuana has

garnered attention, as it has been implicated in a handful of

serious incidents, emboldening those opposed to expanded

legalization.

Cohen’s (1972/2002) social constructivist framework of

moral panic helps inform how and why some social problems

are constructed such that they serve particular interests

(political, business, etc.). During moral panic, the true threat

posed by certain social problems is exaggerated, typically via

sensationalized media coverage. From this construction of the

problem, it becomes increasingly stigmatized and those

associated with it politically weakened. In the wake of the

disproportionate danger ascribed to the problem, the occur-

rence of other, often more serious social problems is accepted

or ignored. Given the contentious sociopolitical history

surrounding marijuana in the United States and the presence

of vested interests opposed to liberalized marijuana policies,

examining its depiction is relevant. Informed by Cohen’s

moral panic framework, this study examines textual US news

coverage of edible marijuana, specifically the qualitative

construction of disproportionality within media depiction

of it.

Edible marijuana: Background

The therapeutic value of marijuana was first formally

acknowledged in the United States by its inclusion in the

1850 United States Pharmacopeia drug reference manual

(through 1942 when it was removed), and it was long

recommended for various disorders (Sloman, 1979/1998).

Edible marijuana products (‘‘edibles’’) originated within the

medical marijuana community and have long been a staple

choice for patients who prefer to consume it without smoking

Correspondence: Michael H. Eversman, Department of Social Work, 418 Hill Hall, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ 07102, USA. E-mail: [email protected].

(Chapkis & Webb, 2005). However, since the 1970 federal

Controlled Substances Act deemed marijuana a Schedule I

substance with high abuse potential and no medicinal value,

large-scale study of therapeutic efficacy was effectively

stifled (Bostwick, 2012). Yet throughout the 1970s, some

states began decriminalizing marijuana and supporting

research, and with the AIDS crisis in the 1980s, San

Francisco enacted medical marijuana, setting the stage for

California’s passage of the Compassionate Use Act in 1996

(Berkey, 2011).

In addition to voluminous anecdotal patient reports

supporting the therapeutic benefits of marijuana (Chapkis

& Webb, 2005), clinical research supports its indication for

controlling nausea and vomiting and promoting weight gain,

and treating muscular neuropathy and spasticity from

conditions such as multiple sclerosis (Grant, Atkinson,

Gouaux, & Wilsey, 2012), though others suggest the benefits

may be overstated (Whiting et al., 2015). While early-age

marijuana use is concerning, lifetime dependence rates

(9–10%) compare favourably to those of other recreational

substances such as nicotine (32%) and alcohol (15%)

(Bostwick, 2012; Cohen, 2009). Marijuana dependence is

associated with psychosis and the onset of schizophrenia,

and while causality is unclear, heavy use is associated with

cognitive impairment, depression and severe psychiatric

illness. Claims of a ‘‘gateway theory’’ – that marijuana use

leads to the use of ‘‘harder’’ drugs – are largely unsubstan-

tiated (Bostwick, 2012; Cohen, 2009).

Legalized recreational marijuana laws have expanded the

number of marijuana users who can consume edible mari-

juana, and while the exact number of users is unknown, sales

information suggests that it is popular. In 2014, Colorado sold

almost five million units of medical and recreational edible

marijuana products, and approximately, 45% of marijuana

sales in that state involve edible marijuana products (Centers

for Disease Control, 2015; Colorado Department of Revenue,

2015). However, due largely to unclear dosing guidelines and

differences between eating marijuana and smoking it, wider

consumption of edible marijuana has fostered concerns about

increased emergency visits for intoxication and paediatric

exposures and fears of increased youth initiation and use

(MacCoun & Mello, 2015).

Moral panic: Background

Originating with British sociologist Stanley Cohen (1972/

2002), moral panic is a social constructionist framework for

understanding social problems and deviance, notably how,

why and by whom particular phenomena are defined as

deviant. According to moral panic, the dangers of some social

problems are depicted disproportionately to their ‘‘true’’

extent and ultimately draw attention from other equally or

more dangerous problems (Cohen, 1972/2002; Goode & Ben-

Yehuda, 1994/2009). The existence of moral panic requires

three elements: an enemy, a victim and societal consensus to

act. The occurrence of the problem becomes linked to an

enemy or ‘‘folk devil’’ and is seen to threaten victims –

typically children or ‘‘middle class’’ society. From the panic

generated by the problem now linked to the enemy, consensus

emerges that the threat poses wide scale societal danger

unless action is taken – usually legislation (Cohen, 1972/

2002).

A key application of moral panic lies in scrutinizing the

information – typically media coverage – provided about a

particular problem. Functioning as information processors,

media outlets frame and define (construct) social problems as

deviant and worthy of attention (Cohen, 1972/2002). The

elements of moral panic can be found within media coverage

and include concern about the threat of the problem, hostility

targeted at those (enemies) deemed responsible for the

problem, consensus that something be done to address the

problem, disproportionality about the scope of the threat

posed by the problem and volatility, such that panic about the

problem often vanishes suddenly (Cohen, 1972/2002). As

detailed below, this study emphasizes the element of dispro-

portionality, considered the core aspect of moral panic

(Goode & Ben-Yehuda, 1994/2009).

Despite its utility, criticisms of moral panic should also

be noted. For example, some point to its underlying

constructionist orientation and remind us that subjective

formulations of a particular social problem do not mitigate

its objective harms (Goode, 1990). Others argue that

changes in media consumption and production render

moral panics ‘‘everyday’’ occurrences and that the frame-

work has long been removed from its original formulation

and its application complicated by the multiplicity of

societal interests and mechanisms of social control

(McRobbie & Thornton, 1995). More recent critics note

that the meaning of moral panic is and has always been open

to interpretation. For example, a core feature of moral panic

is the irrationality of disproportionate reaction to particular

social deviance, yet Stanley Cohen himself has suggested the

idea of ‘‘good’’ moral panics, whereby societal reaction to

phenomena can be legitimate and proportionate (David,

Rohloff, Petley. & Hughes, 2011).

Drug moral panics in textual US news media

Several analyses of textual US news media have examined

drug moral panics. Most examine methamphetamine

(Armstrong, 2007; Jenkins, 1994; Linnemann, 2009; Omori,

2013; Weidner, 2009), crack cocaine (Chiricos, 1996;

Hartman & Golub, 1999; Reinarman & Levine, 1997), or

both drugs (Cobbina, 2008), while others have considered

heroin (Agar & Reisinger, 2000; Denham, 2008), LSD

(Goode, 2008), MDMA (Baldwin, Miller, Stogner, & Hach,

2012), and marijuana (Goode & Ben-Yehuda, 1994/2009).

Methamphetamine moral panics

Moral panics surrounding methamphetamine (meth) are

considered to have occurred episodically in the United

States since the late 1980s. Jenkins (1994) discussed a brief

panic in 1989 surrounding a form of meth known as ‘‘ice’’.

Though largely confined to Hawaii (called the ‘‘Hawaii

epidemic’’), media coverage and Congressional hearings

fanned concerns and drew national attention but ebbed after

just a few months. Armstrong (2007) declared a meth panic

occurred in the Midwestern United States in the early 2000s,

documenting disproportionality by finding inconsistency

between the volume of meth-related articles and government

DOI: 10.3109/09687637.2016.1167168 Feeding on fear: Edible Marijuana 463

epidemiologic data. Noting also that concerns surrounding

the environmental hazards of meth labs are exaggerated

relative to those surrounding livestock industry waste, for

example, the author concluded that panic surrounding meth

deflects attention from the widespread poverty in many rural

US communities. Similarly, Weidner (2009) studied a meth

panic in the Midwest that occurred between 1997 and 2005

by comparing print media portrayal of meth to objective

indicators including usage rates, treatment admissions and

laboratory seizures, finding that the frequency of related

stories was excessive, while also describing claims about

meth’s addictiveness as exaggerated. Studying a similar

period (1995–2007), Linnemann (2009) noted how identify-

ing moral panic also reveals inequalities spanning race, class

and gender and found differences in media portrayals of

gender such that women who use meth were criticized as

maternal failures, while such failures among men who use

meth were generally ignored, and they were instead

portrayed as rational actors trying to earn a living. Omori

(2013) considered the years 2000–2007 to examine the

influence of print news on state antimeth legislation,

suggesting that media coverage acts in concert with law

enforcement to exaggerate the meth problem and drive

policy formation.

Crack cocaine moral panics

It is widely accepted that moral panic surrounding crack

cocaine occurred in the United States. during the 1980s and

1990s. Chiricos (1996) noted that news coverage of crack

increased during the 1980s despite data indicating its use was

decreasing. This increased attention fuelled panic and largely

obscured the economic decline and rising crime in many US

urban areas, while simultaneously justifying harsh criminal

penalties and expansion of the prison industrial complex.

Similarly, Reinarman and Levine (1997) surmised that fear

and panic generated by sensationalized media accounts in the

1980s and early 1990s misrepresented evidence about crack,

functioning to legitimize the War on Drugs and support a

conservative political agenda. Considering whether inaccurate

news claims about crack would ‘‘self-correct’’, Hartman and

Golub (1999) analysed newspaper and magazine content

spanning 1985–1995, finding that numerous exaggerations

and falsehoods – widely repeated – became accepted as truth.

Cobbina (2008) considered depictions of race and class

surrounding crack and meth, finding that stories about crack

(portrayed as a black drug) were twice as likely to emphasize

violence and call for harsh penalties than were stories on

methamphetamine (portrayed as a white drug), which more

often emphasized public health problems.

Other drug moral panics

Agar and Reisinger (2000) examined newspaper coverage of

heroin between 1992 and 1998 and found that linking white

suburban youth with heroin use induced moral panic. Denham

(2008) explored whether coverage of heroin during the 1990s

mentioned a cultural icon (model, actor or musician)

associated with heroin use and/or referenced a motion picture

addressing heroin and found that contrary to media coverage,

survey data did not indicate a significant increase in heroin

use. Citing the link of psychedelic drugs to political

subversion during the 1960s, Goode (2008) claims that

stigmatization of LSD users made outrageous claims of its

danger believable. In a case study of MDMA and club drug

use, Baldwin et al., (2012) concluded that passage of an

antirave ordinance in a Florida city in the late 1990s consisted

of an ‘‘interest group’’ moral panic (Goode & Ben-Yehuda,

1994/2009) driven by influential community stakeholders.

Moral panic surrounding marijuana occurred in the United

States during the 1930s, when sensationalized media accounts

and the popular film ‘‘Reefer Madness’’ heightened fears and

deviance (Goode & Ben-Yehuda, 1994/2009). By enflaming

fears that marijuana use induced racial minorities to commit

crimes, state and local governments enacted marijuana

prohibition, culminating in the federal Marihuana Tax Act

of 1937 (Musto, 1973). Marijuana’s current sociopolitical

dynamic (and stigma) is in flux, as states increasingly legalize

recreational use alongside medical use while federal prohib-

ition remains. Informed by Cohen’s moral panic framework,

this qualitative study explores US news coverage of edibles.

Specifically, it considers the presence and construction of

disproportionality in a sample of textual news story headlines

and articles since passage of recreational legalization (2012–

2015).

Methods

Theoretical application of moral panic

While determining the occurrence of full moral panic (i.e. the

presence of all elements) with edibles is beyond the scope of

this analysis, three important aspects are utilized. First, the

presence and qualitative construction of disproportionality in

textual news media headlines and articles are examined.

While moral panic consists of five elements (concern,

hostility, consensus, disproportionality and volatility) dispro-

portionality is central such that ‘‘the concept of the moral

panic rests on disproportionality (Goode & Ben-Yehuda,

1994/2009, p. 38, italics in original). A key indicator of its

presence lies with distorted figures and statistical claims cited

to describe the scope of, and risk posed by, the problem

(Cohen, 1972/2002; Goode & Ben-Yehuda, 1994/2009).

Second, the paper explores how disproportionality can be

constructed to establish (or re-establish) social deviance

surrounding edibles and marijuana per se. Moral panic theory

regards the construction of deviance as transactional,

facilitated by information processors – media outlets with

particular political and commercial interests (Cohen, 1972/

2002). Lastly, moral panic holds that disproportionate atten-

tion given to some social problems draws attention away from

other, often more serious social problems (Goode & Ben-

Yehuda (1994/2009). Thus, the paper considers how dispro-

portionately constructed around edible marijuana usage serves

to occlude other social problems present (but downplayed) in

media coverage of edibles.

Sampling

The sample consisted of 349 unique (i.e. occurring once)

textual US news media articles published between

1 November 2012 (approximating when the first states

464 M. H. Eversman Drugs Educ Prev Pol, 2016; 23(6): 462–470

legalized recreational use) and 31 October 2015. Articles

were retrieved from two comprehensive full-text newspaper

databases – Access World News and Factiva which yielded

articles from newspapers across the United States – and

Google News, a computer-generated aggregator of worldwide

news stories which yielded articles from internet media, such

as magazines, broadcast outlet web pages, web-based news-

paper editions and blogs. Duplicate articles were excluded –

notably syndicated pieces published in multiple sources – and

only the article from the originating media source is included.

All articles were published in US media or the US version of

an international source.

Articles were retrieved based on the occurrence of

keywords appearing anywhere in its text. Keywords included

‘‘edible marijuana’’, ‘‘marijuana edibles’’, ‘‘marijuana

infused’’, ‘‘pot infused’’, ‘‘pot laced’’, ‘‘pot candy’’ and

‘‘marijuana candy’’. Included articles focused on edible

products legally available via medical and/or retail outlets

in the United States. While all retrieved articles referenced

legalized edibles, the sample includes only articles in which it

was a main focus such that an iteration of it appears in the

headline and/or is discussed in the lead paragraph or more

than half of the article text. News stories, columns, opinions

(editorials, op-eds) and letters to the editor (in which the

writer indicated an institutional or professional credential)

were included. Excluded articles were those addressing

‘‘homemade’’ (i.e. illicit) edibles and/or edibles not otherwise

specified as legal, business news and articles addressing

cooking and/or dining with marijuana. Blog content was

included only from blogs affiliated with a mainstream media

outlet (typically online newspaper editions). The author

conducted all database retrieval.

Sample description

Figure 1 shows the bimonthly distribution of all 349 articles

spanning 1 November 2012 through 31 October 2015.

The sampled articles were selected from 191 unique media

outlets throughout the United States, most of which (177)

yielded less than five articles. Table 1 lists the fourteen media

outlets from which five or more articles were sampled.

Almost two-thirds (62%) of the 349 sampled articles

consisted of news stories (n¼216), while columns comprised nearly one-third (31%, n¼109). Editorials (n¼21) and letters to the editor (n¼3) occurred less frequently. Regional distribution was led by articles from national

media outlets (28%, n¼100) and outlets in Colorado (26%, n¼92). Articles from outlets in other legalized states [Washington (n¼23), Oregon (n¼20), California (n¼14)] as well the District of Columbia (n¼11) were also well represented.

Data analysis

Retrieved articles were saved as word processing documents

and entered as qualitative data analysis software files (Atlas

TI, v. 7.5, Corvallis, OR). First-level data coding was then

initiated, during which all articles were examined and

individual recording units identified and coded a priori.

Recording units are textual passages that are discretely

determined by ‘‘a definable boundary, or symbolic meaning’’

(Riffe, Lacy, & Fico, 1998). As such, a recording unit is best

understood as the most basic expression of meaning contained

within the data, coded to reflect this meaning. All retrieved

textual content (headlines and articles) was examined using

the analytic software which allowed the author to highlight

and tag (code) identified passages (i.e. recording units)

reflecting an element of moral panic (concern, consensus,

hostility, disproportionality and/or volatility). Familiarity with

these elements allowed the author to identify content a priori.

The study reports only recording units coded to reflect

disproportionality, which was considered to be present in any

textual references ‘‘cited to measure the scope of the

problem’’ (Goode & Ben-Yehuda, 1994/2009), including

numeric claims (i.e. statistics) and non-numeric claims (i.e.

claims of ‘‘an increase’’ in edible related incidents).

Second-level analysis involved identifying, arranging and

categorizing first-level recording units to reflect thematic

content (Coleman & Unrau, 2005). Specifically, recording

units were grouped to reflect conceptually larger notions of

disproportionality. For example, one grouping of recording

units reflected that disproportionality was constructed by

citing statistical claims out of context, and thus, they were

categorized as ‘‘disproportionality, statistics out of context’’.

Recording units (in the form of story headlines and text)

deemed by the author to best convey larger thematic ideas are

presented below. Further, the data are displayed chronologic-

ally (spanning the sample period). Article headlines are

presented in capital letters, while article text is quoted and/or

block formatted throughout.

Results

Disproportionality constructed around the danger of edibles

used indefinite numeric adjectives to describe the occurrence

of incidents involving their use while avoiding or downplay-

ing low total numbers. Statistics were reported with little

context to gauge the severity of similar incidents (i.e.

emergency exposures) with other substances, while stories

depicted edibles as the central or sole cause of involved

incidents. By linking the benign to the serious, the danger of

edibles was highlighted, while other causes of reported

incidents were typically ignored or downplayed. Incidents

reported included ER visits, poison control centre calls and

fatal and non-fatal anecdotes.

Indicators of disproportionality first emerged in April 2013

with news of a Children’s Hospital Colorado study which

determined that ER admissions for marijuana exposure in

children under age 12 went from zero before 2009 to 14 from

2009–2011 when medical marijuana was enacted in Colorado.

Headlines and articles raised concerns about child access to

edibles but provided no context to properly gauge the extent

relative to accessing other drugs:

COLO. KIDS GET INTO POT CANDY, PROMPT

CALLS FOR CHILDPROOF PACKAGING. UPI.com

(United Press) – 2 April 2013

Children’s Hospital Colorado saw 14 children come into

the emergency room after ingesting cannabis candy in the

two years following medical marijuana legalization in the

state, reports the Denver Post. Studies of ER charts by

DOI: 10.3109/09687637.2016.1167168 Feeding on fear: Edible Marijuana 465

Colorado doctors show looser pot laws leading to child-

hood ingestion, often from mistakenly eating tempting

‘‘edibles’’ like marijuana-infused gummy worms or

brownies. . .

Related articles quoted a doctor affiliated with the study

as having seen ‘‘a dramatic increase’’ in paediatric marijuana

exposures due ‘‘mostly’’ to edibles and treating ‘‘one to two

kids a month’’ without reporting rates of paediatric exposures

to other substances. The doctor is further quoted to say that

marijuana related calls to the state poison control centre

‘‘have doubled since 2009’’ but no specific numbers are

provided. The above study garnered more attention after its

formal publication in May, 2013, and headlines again used

indefinite numeric claims, while multiple articles similarly

cited ‘‘a significant increase’’ in youth marijuana exposure:

CASES OF CHILDREN ACCIDENTALLY INGESTING

POT ON RISE, STUDY SAYS. Los Angeles Times – 28

May 2013

SURGE IN CHILDREN ACCIDENTALLY EATING

MARIJUANA-LACED FOODS. Targeted News Service

– 29 May 2013

STUDY SUGGESTS LINK BETWEEN EDIBLE POT

AND OVERDOSE AMONG KIDS. KPLU.org – 28 May

2013

A new study conducted in Colorado shows an increase in

kids seen at Emergency Departments ever since medical

marijuana laws were liberalized in 2009. In more than

three years prior to that, zero kids went to the ER for

marijuana overdose. But in the two years after the changes,

14 kids were confirmed to have overdosed on marijuana.

Half the poisonings in Colorado were linked to edibles.

Despite articles referencing the ‘‘admittedly small’’ total

number of paediatric exposure emergencies, they were

nonetheless recast as ‘‘small but growing’’ or otherwise

‘‘significant’’:

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN CHILDREN IN COLORADO

FIND THEIR GRANDPARENTS’ POT BROWNIES.

National Journal.com – 28 May 2013

Studying the patient records of one children’s hospital in

the state, the incidence of marijuana consumption in

children younger than 12 hopped up from zero cases

(between 2005 and 2009) to 14 cases (between 2009

Figure 1. Article frequency and key events.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60 Ar�cle Frequency & Key Events

Frequency

4/2/14: 1st fatality 4/17/14: 2nd fatality 6/2/14: NY Times column

4/21/15: 3rd fatality

Table 1. Media outlets (n¼14) yielding five or more articles.

Outlet name

N ¼ Source articles/total

sample

Percentage total article

sample

Denver Post 36 10.4 Denver CBS Local.com 11 3.2 Associated Press (National) 10 2.9 Associated Press (State Wire, Colorado) 8 2.3 Washington Post 8 2.3 USA Today 7 2 Oregon Live.com 7 2 New York Times 7 2 Forbes 6 1.7 Los Angeles Times 6 1.7 Reuters 6 1.7 CBS News.com 5 1.4 Huffington Post 5 1.4 Seattle Times 5 1.4

127/349 33.5

Four or fewer articles were sampled from each of 177 other media outlets.

466 M. H. Eversman Drugs Educ Prev Pol, 2016; 23(6): 462–470

and 2011). The number is small, but the authors find it to

be statistically significant.

By April 2014 media coverage intensified after news

broke of the March 11 death of a nineteen year old college

student visiting Colorado who leapt from his hotel window.

Use of edibles was involved, and the story received national

coverage. Headlines and articles portrayed edibles as the

direct cause of death:

STUDENT DIES IN COLORADO FALL AFTER

EATING POT COOKIE.

NBC News.com – 2 April 2014

TEEN JUMPS TO HIS DEATH AFTER EATING

MARIJUANA-LACED COOKIE FROM COLORADO

SHOP. Hartford Examiner (CT) – 2 April 2014

COLLEGE STUDENT FALLS TO DEATH AFTER

EATING POT COOKIE IN DENVER. Atlanta Examiner

– 3 April 2014

IN THE FIRST FATALITY LINKED TO LEGAL

MARIJUANA, THE MAN WHO JUMPED ATE POT

COOKIES: EDIBLES CITED IN DEATH REPORT.

The Denver Post – 3 April 2014

(Coroner’s office spokeswoman) said (the decedent) had

no known physical or mental-health issues, and toxicology

tests for other drugs or alcohol came back negative. ‘‘We

have no history of any other issues until he eats a marijuana

cookie and becomes erratic and this happens’’, she said.

‘‘It’s the one thing we have that’s significant’’.

This incident drew sustained attention and was com-

monly cited in subsequent coverage of edibles and marijuana

in general, highlighting the dangers and risks of legalization:

ERs SEE MORE PATIENTS AS LAWMAKERS

REVIEW EDIBLES’ POTENCY:

DEATH PUTS FOCUS ON RISK. The Denver Post – 4

April 2014

DEATH RAISES NEW ALARMS OVER POT: EDIBLE

FORM OF DRUG A CONCERN IN COLORADO. The

Baltimore Sun – 9 April 2014

The death, involving a victim with no history of mental

problems or suicidal tendencies, was linked to ‘‘marijuana

intoxication ‘‘. The case has become a grim exhibit in a

growing case file as Colorado health officials wonder

whether, in the rapid rollout of legalized marijuana,

adequate attention was paid to potential health risks of

its use, especially in the little-scrutinized area of edible

marijuana.

Soon after (14 April 2014) news broke of a second

Colorado death involving edibles whereby a husband shot

his wife in their home. Articles noted that the exact role of

edibles in the murder was unclear. The murder was

committed with a firearm, and early reports indicated the

husband may have taken other medications and that the

couple was enduring increasing marital stressors, yet

headlines again depicted edibles as the direct, singular

cause of the shooting:

DENVER POLICE WANT TO KNOW WHETHER

MURDER SUSPECT CONSUMED POT

Los Angeles Times – 15 April 2014

POLICE: MAN ATE POT CANDY BEFORE SHOOTING

WIFE. Honolulu Star-Advertiser – 17 April 2014

A POLICE AFFIDAVIT SAYS THE HUSBAND

SUSPECTED OF KILLING HIS WIFE HAD,

ACCORDING TO HER 911 CALL, JUST EATEN POT

CANDY: MAN ‘‘TOTALLY HALLUCINATING’’. The

Denver Post – 18 April 2014

MAN ATE POT CANDY BEFORE SHOOTING HIS

WIFE DEAD: COPS. Huffington Post.com – 18 April

2014

DENVER MAN ACCUSED OF KILLING WIFE MAY

HAVE EATEN POT CANDY. NBC News.com – 18 April

2014

POLICE: MAN EATS POT CANDY, KILLS. The Key

West Citizen (FL) - April 18, 2014

DAD TURNS VIOLENT AFTER EATING MARIJUANA

CANDY FROM (STORE NAME). Atlanta Examiner – 18

April 2014

Media accounts soon after emphasized the ‘‘ease of

access’’ to edibles purportedly underlying paediatric expos-

ures, and headlines again described an increase using

indefinite terms:

STONED TODDLERS RAISE RED FLAGS. Hawaii

Tribune-Herald (Hilo, HI) – 25 April 2014

CASES OF KIDS EATING POT PRODUCTS RISING.

The Denver Post – 6 May 2014

THIS YEAR’S SURGE IN ACCIDENTAL CASES

INVOLVING KIDS IS ON PACE TO MORE THAN

DOUBLE THE TOTAL FOR 2013.: CHILDREN’S

HOSPITAL SEEING RISE IN MARIJUANA

INGESTION. The Denver Post – 22 May 2014

By using anecdotal accounts, articles also generated

disproportionality surrounding child access through interviews

in which, for example, paediatric exposures are described by

medical personnel as ‘‘rising at an alarming rate.’’ First-hand

accounts from doctors – who were variously described as

‘‘sounding an alarm’’ – provided salient details of danger:

DOCTORS WORRY ABOUT AN INCREASE IN KIDS

CONSUMING CANNABIS. Fox21news.com – 27 May

2014

‘‘There are long-term effects, but the biggest thing is

respiratory depression. Their (children) vitals need to be

constantly monitored, and that’s the biggest one because if

you can’t breathe you can’t live. It’s a scary thing

sometimes,’’ Dr. (name) said. In most cases reported,

children ate edible products. ‘‘The lollipops, the brownies,

DOI: 10.3109/09687637.2016.1167168 Feeding on fear: Edible Marijuana 467

the candies, everything is just way too enticing to kids.

And who’s gonna stop at one brownie?’’

In June, 2014 a high profile first person account of an

unpleasant experience with edibles was published in the New

York Times. Although the amount consumed was unspecified

(‘‘I nibbled off the end. . .and then nibbled some more’’ having had ‘‘a bite or two’’), the column was frequently

recounted in subsequent media coverage, notably the authors

claim of experiencing ‘‘a hallucinatory state for eight hours’’

and having become ‘‘convinced I had died’’. Headlines about

the incident were sensationalized:

COLUMNIST SUFFERS POT PARANOIA AS DOPERS

ADVANCE. Accuracy in Media – 4 June 2014

STAR NEWSPAPER COLUMNIST VISITS

COLORADO, TRIES MARIJUANA

EDIBLE, FREAKS OUT. The Gazette: Blogs (CO) – 4

June 2014

AND THEY CALL THIS A RECREATIONAL DRUG?

The Deseret News (UT) – 9 June 2014

Called the latest in ‘‘a string of incidents’’, the danger

of edibles were further exaggerated by linking this non-fatal

anecdote to the two April deaths:

POT EDIBLES COULD CAUSE MORE THAN A HIGH.

The News Tribune (WA), 23 June 2014

Edibles can even be a problem for adults – as illustrated in a

recent article by New York Times columnist (name). . .who took ill after ingesting a small amount of pot-infused candy.

In March, a 19-year-old college student who had eaten a pot

cookie died after jumping off a Denver hotel balcony. And

the shooting death of a Denver woman has been linked to

her husband’s ingestion of pot-infused candy.

In March, 2015 a third death was linked to edible

consumption, in which a young man shot himself while visiting

Colorado on family vacation. Dubbed a ‘‘MARIJUANA

SUICIDE’’ by at least one headline, others again suggested

edibles were the singular, direct cause of death:

OKLAHOMA MAN SHOOTS SELF AFTER EATING

POT CANDIES. The Denver Post – 27 March 2015

MAN COMMITS SUICIDE AFTER CONSUMING POT-

INFUSED CANDIES. Las Vegas Review-Journal – 27

March 2015

DID POT GUMMY BEARS KILL THIS MAN?

Associated Press State Wire: (CO) – 27 March 2015

Referred to as ‘‘The latest of a handful of deaths’’ and

reflecting ‘‘The growing number of deaths’’ linked to edibles,

headlines and articles emphasized an unchallenged attribution

by grieving family members that the death was caused by

marijuana ingestion, ignoring other factors such as firearm

availability:

MARIJUANA EDIBLES BLAMED FOR KEYSTONE

DEATH. Denver.CBSLocal.com – 25 March 2015

The family of a. . .man who shot himself Saturday night- . . .is blaming his suicide on his ingestion of edible marijuana candies. ‘‘It was completely a reaction to the

drugs,’’ (decedent’s mother) said about her son’s

suicide. . .(The coroner spokeswoman) says the preliminary cause of death is a self-inflicted gunshot wound. As for the

impact of the marijuana edibles, she said, ‘‘That’s what

we’ve heard consistently.’’

In June 2015, findings of an academic study (Onders,

Casavant, Spiller, Chounthirath, & Smith, 2015) reported on

rates of paediatric (aged six and younger) marijuana expos-

ures in the United States. In their findings, the study authors

noted that the low rate (5.9 per every 1,000,000) indicates

these exposures are ‘‘rare’’ and that between 2006 and 2013

the total numbers increased from roughly 100 to 250, yet

headlines and articles reported these numbers in percentages:

MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION MEANS MORE

CHILDREN ACCIDENTLY CONSUMING POT

PRODUCTS, EXPOSURE ROSE 148% SINCE 2006.

IBTimes.com – 8 June 2015

AS POT BECOMES LEGAL, MORE KIDS EAT IT.

Cincinnati.com – 14 June 2015

A study released this week found toddlers and infants are

being exposed to marijuana nearly 147 percent more often

than in 2006, prompting researchers to recommend states

take swift action to address child safety when marijuana is

legalized. Cincinnati.com – 14 June 2015

Similarly, headlines in July 2015 and beyond proclaim

that Poison Control calls involving edibles have increased by

noting an ‘‘ALARMING INCREASE’’ or that

‘‘REPORTS. . .SPIKE’’, while articles downplayed the low overall numbers and instead emphasized that they represent

‘‘An upward trend’’, ‘‘An increasing number’’, and ‘‘An

emerging health risk’’. The headline and text from a story

reporting on ‘‘14 potential marijuana poisonings’’ among

youth 19 and younger:

MARIJUANA ‘POISONING’ INCIDENTS ON THE

RISE – CHOCOLATES, CANDIES APPEAL TO

CHILDREN. The Spokesman-Review (Spokane, WA) –

28 July 2015

Reports of kids eating marijuana-infused cookies and

candies are on the rise statewide and in Spokane County,

where a 4-year-old spent the night in intensive care after

eating a product belonging to a parent. The number of ‘‘pot

poisonings’’ is relatively small, but the increase is

troubling to public health officials.

Similarly, a headline to a story which reported the total

number of marijuana calls (of which an unspecified ‘‘many’’

are attributed to edibles) increased from 54 in 2009 to 136 in

2013:

POISON CONTROL CALLS UP AFTER

LEGALIZATION OF POT.

Reuters.com – 16 October 2015

468 M. H. Eversman Drugs Educ Prev Pol, 2016; 23(6): 462–470

Discussion

While considering the presence of all moral panic elements is

beyond the scope of this analysis, there is evidence of media

generated disproportionality and other key features of moral

panic surrounding edible marijuana. Although these media

accounts can be said to be objectively true, presented as they

are – without context to gauge their frequency and severity

relative to similar incidents with other legal substances –

distorts the danger posed by edible marijuana and increases

social deviance surrounding its very nature. Indeed, unchal-

lenged suggestions that edible marijuana consumption leads

directly to death and/or violent behaviour are reminiscent of

‘‘Reefer Madness’’ era hype. Attributing the cause of such

incidents solely to the intrinsic properties of edible marijuana

without focusing on dosage, the possibility of irresponsible

use, and the presence of other causative factors serves to

increase stigma and reinforce stereotypes of the danger of

marijuana. Such a climate becomes more favourable to

marijuana control policies that maintain criminalization or

otherwise hinder liberalization.

Depicting the two April 2014 deaths as due solely to edible

consumption established what Agar and Reisinger (2000)

called a topic framework for subsequent coverage, whereby

the danger of edibles becomes taken for granted by the

audience. From this comes what Cohen (1972/2002) called

‘‘sensitization’’, a cueing process that occurs during moral

panic that ‘‘. . .has the effect of increasing the awareness of items of a similar nature which he (the reader) might

otherwise have ignored’’ (p.59), or as Goode and Ben-

Yehuda (1994/2009) describe it ‘‘. . .the process whereby harm, wrongness, or deviance is attributed to the. . .phenom- enon that is routinely ignored when the same consequences

are caused by or attributed to more conventional conditions

(p. 156, emphasis added). For example in the U.S. there are

over 30,000 annual ER visits (and many hospitalizations) for

children aged six and younger due to pharmaceutical medi-

cation exposure and over half a million calls to Poison Control

hotlines for children aged 19 and younger involving

prescribed and over the counter pharmaceuticals (Ferguson,

Osterthaler, Kaminski, & Green, 2015; Lovegrove et al.,

2014). Further, there are over 2000 annual alcohol poisoning

deaths – more than 40 of which involve youth aged 15–20

(Kanny et al., 2015). By comparison, the number of fatalities

attributed to marijuana in this sample pales. If the same media

intensity were given to alcohol fatalities, such stories would

exceed five a day.

Incidents of suicide, domestic violence and gun violence

have multiple causes and antecedents such that no single

variable can fully explain their occurrence. Yet by suggesting

that edibles are the lone, immediate cause in the incidents

covered, the tragic regularity with which they occur goes

unnoticed. In 2013 adolescents and young adults committed

suicide at a rate of 10.9 per 100,000, and more than 41,000

suicides occurred in the United States overall. A firearm was

used in more than half (American Foundation for Suicide

Prevention, 2015). Similarly, between 2001 and 2012, over

6000 women were murdered by an intimate partner using a

gun (Center for American Progress, 2014). Such numbers

make these incidents tragically ‘‘routine’’, and sadly it is the

involvement of legal marijuana that accounts for the intense

and sustained media attention received.

Goode and Ben-Yehuda (1994/2009) describe elite-engin-

eered moral panic as driven and maintained by particular elite

interests (law enforcement, political, business) to divert

attention from societal problems such elites may have to

account for, or which if given attention, will otherwise hurt

their interests. Certainly those vested in continued marijuana

criminalization policies and limiting its availability as a

therapeutic and recreational substance benefit from dispropor-

tionate danger ascribed to it. Other interests are served when

attention is drawn from the public health problems associated

with the misuse of widely available legal pharmaceutical and

recreational substances, and firearms violence. Constructing

disproportionality around the danger of marijuana enables

these concerns to ‘‘hide in plain sight’’. Additionally, dispro-

portionality in media coverage diverts attention from policy-

related harms. For example, drug criminalization policies

divert attention from the fact that prohibition creates an

environment in which people, fearing the associated social and

legal repercussions, may avoid seeking medical attention for

accidental ingestion or overdose.

As other states consider legalization policies they look to

the experience in Colorado for guidance (Miller, 2016), and

news reports from that state greatly influence the general

discussion of marijuana policy. Support for marijuana legal-

ization in the United States has consistently increased in

recent years, with poll data indicating a majority (58%) of

Americans support it, the highest margin in 46 years (Jones,

2015). Support for legalization is strong among youth aged

18–34 (68%) and has risen sharply amongst all groups except

those aged 70 and older (People Press.org, 2015. With

legalization likely to continue expanding among states, it

appears marijuana is now less deviant than ever in the post

‘‘reefer madness’’ era, and whatever fear and opposition

remains seems to surround edibles.

Study limitations include the sampling procedures. First,

the databases utilized may not have contained all relevant

textual news coverage of edibles in the United States, and

thus, relevant articles may be excluded. The keywords used to

retrieve articles may not have included all iterations of

legalized edibles, and implicit references to them or articles

discussing them by some other form were not included. In

addition, the exclusion of articles about illicit edibles might

overlook policy-related news and consideration of policy

reforms in reaction to depictions of edibles. Furthermore, the

sample excluded content from non-journalistic sources such

as social media and so-called ‘‘niche’’ blogs. Though textual

news media is a valid proxy for overall news media (Smith

et al., 2008), non-textual media (television, internet and radio

broadcasts) were not included. Finally, the study did not

discern whether and how media outlets may construct

marijuana coverage differently, for example whether patterns

exist based on geographic region or ownership structure.

Future studies should continue to examine media depic-

tions of marijuana, particularly as state legalization expands

along with calls to reschedule marijuana at the Federal level.

Concerns for youth marijuana use should receive attention, as

should attention to media coverage of other social problems

(child welfare, suicide, domestic violence and gun violence)

DOI: 10.3109/09687637.2016.1167168 Feeding on fear: Edible Marijuana 469

in which marijuana use may be involved. Such studies should

particularly examine the depiction of marijuana relative to

these other concerns. Attention should also be paid to the

depiction of marijuana in influential non-textual media and

social media sources.

Declaration of interest

The author declares that no funding was received for this

research and there are no conflicts of interest.

References

Agar, M.H., & Reisinger, H.S. (2000). Read all about it: Media construction of a heroin epidemic. Substance Use & Misuse, 35, 1551–1571. doi: 10.3109/10826080009148230.

American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, (2015). Facts and Figures. October 7, 2015. Retrieved from https://www.afsp.org/understanding- suicide/facts-and-figures.

Armstrong, E.G. (2007). Moral panic over meth. Contemporary Justice Review, 10, 427–442. doi: 10.1080/10282580701677519.

Baldwin, J.M., Miller, B.L., Stogner, J., & Hach, S. (2012). The night the raving died: the social construction of a local drug panic. Deviant Behavior, 33, 675–698. doi: 10.1080/01639625.2011.636723.

Berkey, M. (2011). Mary Jane’s new dance: the medical marijuana legal tango. Cardozo Public Law, Policy, and Ethics Journal, 9, 417–450. doi: http://trove.nla.gov.au/version/171489159.

Bostwick, J.M. (2012). Blurred boundaries: the therapeutics and politics of medical marijuana. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 87, 172–186. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2011.10.003.

Center for American Progress, (2014). Fact sheets: Protecting women from gun violence. Retrieved from https://www.americanprogress.org/ issues/guns-crime/report/2014/10/14/92119/protecting-women-from- gun-violence/.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2015). Notes from the field: death following ingestion of an edible marijuana product – Colorado, March 2014. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/ mmwrhtml/mm6428a6.htm?-s_cid¼mm6428a6_x.

Chapkis, W., & Webb, R.J. (2005). Mother’s milk and the muffin man: Grassroots innovations in medical marijuana delivery systems. Journal of Ethnicity in Substance Abuse, 4, 183–204. doi: 10.1300/ J233v04n03_08.

Chiricos, T. (1996). Moral panic as ideology: drugs, violence, race, and punishment. In Critcher, C. (Ed.), Critical readings: Moral panics and the media (pp. 103–123). Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Cobbina, J.E. (2008). Race and class differences in print media portrayals of crack cocaine and methamphetamine. Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, 15, 145–167.

Cohen, S. (1972/2002). Folk devils and moral panics: The creation of the mods and rockers (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.

Cohen, P.J. (2009). Medical marijuana: the conflict between scientific evidence and political ideology. Part one of two. Journal of Pain and Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy, 23, 4–25. doi: 10.1080/ 15360280902727973.

Coleman, H., & Unrau, Y.A. (2005). Analyzing qualitative data. In Grinnell, R.M., & Unrau, Y.A. (Eds.) Social work research and evaluation: Quantitative and qualitative approaches (7th ed.) (pp. 404–420). New York: Oxford University Press.

Colorado Department of Revenue (2015). Annual update. Retrieved from https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/2014 MED Annual Report_1.pdf.

David, M., Rohloff, A., Petley. J., & Hughes, J. (2011). The idea of moral panic – ten dimensions of dispute. Crime, Media, Culture, 7, 215–228. doi: 10.1177/1741659011417601.

Denham, B.E. (2008). Folk devils, news icons, and the construction of moral panics: Heroin chic and the amplification of drug threats in contemporary society. Journalism Studies, 9, 945–961. doi: 10.1080/ 14616700802227811.

Ferguson, R.W., Osterthaler, K., Kaminski, S., & Green, A. (2015). Medicine safety for children: An in-depth look at poison center calls. Washington D.C.: Safe Kids Worldwide Watch.

Goode, E. (1990). The American drug panic of the 1980’s: Social construction or objective threat? The International Journal of the Addictions, 25, 1083–1098. doi:10.3109/10826089009058874.

Goode, E., & Yehuda, N. (1994/2009). Moral panics: The social construction of deviance (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Goode, E. (2008). Moral panics and disproportionality: The case of LSD use in the sixties. Deviant Behavior, 29, 533–534. doi: 10.1080/ 01639620701839377.

Grant, I., Atkinson, J.H., Gouaux, B., & Wilsey, B. (2012). Medical marijuana: Clearing away the smoke. Open Neurology Journal, 6, 18–25. doi: 10.2174/1874205X01206010018.

Hartman, D.M., & Golub, A. (1999). The social construction of the crack epidemic in the print media. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 31, 423–433. doi: 10.1080/02791072.1999.10471772.

Jenkins, P. (1994). ‘‘The ice age’’: The social construction of a drug panic. Justice Quarterly, 11, 7–31. doi:10.1080/07418829400092111.

Jones, J. (2015). In U.S., 58% back legal marijuana use. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/186260/back-legal-marijuana.aspx.

Kanny, D., Brewer, R., Mesnick, J., Paulozzi, L., Naimi, T., & Lu, H. (2015). Vital signs: Alcohol poisoning deaths — United States, 2010– 2012. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ mm6353a2.htm.

Lamarine, R.J. (2012). Marijuana: Modern medical chimaera. Journal of Drug Education, 42. 1–11. doi: 10.2190/DE.42.1.a.

Linnemann, T. (2009). Mad men, meth moms, moral panic: Gendering meth crimes in the Midwest. Critical Criminology, 18, 95–110. doi: 10.1007/s10612-009-9094-8.

Lovegrove, M.C., Mathew, J., Hampp, C., Governale, L., Wysowski, D.K., & Budnitz, D.S. (2014). Emergency hospitalizations for unsupervised prescription medication ingestions by young children. Pediatrics, 134, 1009–1016. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-0840.

MacCoun, R.J., & Mello, M.M. (2015). Half-baked: The retail promo- tion of marijuana edibles. The New England Journal of Medicine, 372, 989–991. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1416014.

McRobbie, A., & Thonrton, S.L. (1995). Rethinking ‘moral panic’ for multi-mediated social worlds. British Journal of Sociology, 46, 559–574. doi:10.2307/591571.

Miller, J. (2016). In Colo., a look at life after marijuana legalization. Retrieved from https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/ 2016/02/21/from-colorado-glimpse-life-after-marijuana-legalization/ rcccuzhMDWV74UC4IxXIYJ/story.html.

Musto, D. (1973). The American disease: Origins of narcotic control. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Omori, M.K. (2013). Moral panics and morality policy: The impact of media, political ideology, drug use, and manufacturing on metham- phetamine legislation in the United States. Journal of Drug Issues, 43, 517–534. doi: 10.1177/0022042613491101.

Onders, B., Casavant, M.J., Spiller, H.A., Chounthirath, T., & Smith, G.A., (2015). Marijuana exposure among children younger than six years in the United States. Clinical Pediatrics, 55, 428–436. DOI: 10.1177/0009922815589912.

People Press.org (2015). In debate over legalizing marijuana, disagree- ment over drug’s dangers. Retrieved from http://www.people-press.- org/2015/04/14/in-debate-over-legalizing-marijuana-disagreement-over- drugs-dangers/.

Reinarman, C., & Levine, H.G. (1997). The crack attack: Politics and media in the crack scare. In Reinerman C., Levine H.G., (Eds.), Crack in America: Demon drugs and social justice (pp. 18–51). Berkeley: University of California Press.

Riffe, D., Lacy S., & Fico, F. (1998). Analyzing media messages: Using quantitative content analysis in research. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Sloman, L. (1979/1998). Reefer madness: A history of marijuana in America. New York: St. Martin’s Griffin.

Smith, K.C., Wakefield, M.A., Terry-McElrath, Y., Chaloupka, F.J., Flay, B., Johnston, L., . . . Siebel, C. (2008). Relation between newspaper coverage of tobacco issues and smoking attitudes and behaviour among American teens. Tobacco Control, 17, 17–24.

Weidner, R.R. (2009). Methamphetamine in three small Midwestern cities: Evidence of a moral panic. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 41, 227–239. doi:10.1080/02791072.2009.10400533.

Whiting, P.F., Wolff, R.F., Deshpande, S., Di Nisio, M., Duffy, S., Hernandez, A.V., . . . Kleijnen, J. (2015). Cannabinoids for medical use: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the American Medical Association, 313, 2456–2473. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.6358.

470 M. H. Eversman Drugs Educ Prev Pol, 2016; 23(6): 462–470

Copyright of Drugs: Education, Prevention & Policy is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.