The United States is one of the countries with the strictest policies, rules, and regulations against the peddling and abuse of illicit drugs. Unfortunately, the classification of illicit drugs in the US is largely flawed and influenced by external factors that do not acknowledge individuals’ well-being or benefits. In the past, all individuals received information about drugs and their effects from anti-drug groups, the national government, and media houses, under government control. As a result, the history of drug criminalization in the US is skewed, characterized by propaganda, and filled with non-factual information without any scientific basis. Thus, this essay discusses the false claims made by the media about marijuana in the 1930s and crack in the 1980s.
Media Depiction of Marijuana and Crack
The history of the Cannabis ban in the US boils down to the efforts of one man, known as Harry Anslinger, the first commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. As soon as Anslinger took charge of the commission, he embarked on a fierce war on drugs by making it his mission to eliminate all drugs from the US. Subsequently, he spearheaded rumors that marijuana made people extremely strong and violent (Thompson, 2013). Consequently, he linked marijuana to reckless Mexican immigrants to back up his claims that the drug made individuals daring and uncontrollably dangerous. Moreover, Anslinger associated marijuana with black men, suggesting that they used the drugs to entice white women into having sex. During this period, a popular film, “Reefer Madness,” became the talk of households since it suggested that marijuana dealers lurked in schools and targeted students to draw them into crime (Goode, 2020, p. 290). Moreover, media houses supported that marijuana made people mad after prolonged use. However, this information was not based on scientific evidence. On the contrary, Harry Anslinger ignored the propositions of 29 scientists and instead provided the media with misguided information about marijuana from one scientist.
The prohibition of crack cocaine is another regulation that has faced heated criticism because of its role in inequality, discrimination, mass incarceration, and segregation. During the 1970s, people used cocaine, but it was limited to wealthy individuals like movie stars, media, and sports personalities. However, during the 80s and 90s, crack cocaine made its way to less economically developed regions (Goode, 2020, p. 272). Subsequently, the media sent a scare on the negative impact of crack, the high potential for addiction, and its adverse impact on unborn babies. “Crack babies,” is a term linked to the permanent damages obtained when mothers smoke during their pregnancy periods (Gershon, 2018). Consequently, these developments led to the establishment of punitive laws and regulations against crack, that have seen millions of individuals from marginalized groups and minority races face prison time due to their involvement in the sale or use of the drug.
Why Were these Claims Made?
The main reasons why there was wide misinformation about drugs like marijuana and crack is the lack of alternative information resources and insufficient information from research to guide decision-making. According to Goode (2020, p. 234), most claims were racially and politically propagated to discriminate against minority groups and yield more power over these individuals. For example, the ban on marijuana generally targeted Mexicans and sought to drive immigrants out of the US. On the other hand, the punitive laws implemented to deal with the crack menace had a toll on black communities and marginalized groups as the mass incarcerations have persisted into the modern era. Thus, the media and politicians propagated misinformation with ulterior motives other than the benefit of the general public.
How were these claims corrected?
Over the past decades, human society has witnessed several advancements toward high standards and quality living. As a result, researchers have deeply ventured into the chemical composition and modes of action of various drugs and substances, including illicit and medicinal drugs (Goode, 2020, p. 516). Consequently, these researchers have determined that most of the information initially provided to individuals about drugs and the implications of using certain drugs is not factual.
Have Factual Records been Set Straight?
Technological advancements and increased education levels among populations have enabled more individuals to obtain factual information about the harms of drugs like marijuana and crack, thus placing them in a better position to make informed choices. As a result, most of the misinformation about these drugs has been set straight, encouraging these claims to gradually die down (Thompson, 2013). Today, several states in the US have legalized marijuana and the number of people using crack cocaine is negligible. Thus, the increased access to evidence-based information has significantly enabled people to adopt better practices.
Upon uncovering critical drug misrepresentations, several things have changed my perception regarding drugs. Although I still hold that a drug can either be illicit or medicinal, I presume that most drug descriptions provided to the general public do not provide factual information about the impact of the drug and its long-term implications. For example, these days, many individuals occasionally administer vitamins and supplements that promise a diminished risk of lifestyle diseases. Unfortunately, most of these compounds are used using synthetic chemicals that are destructive to human beings in the long term. On that account, the only reliable place to obtain information about medicines and illicit drugs is peer-reviewed research journals and scientific documentation detailing complex research processes.
References
Gershon, L. (2018). Rereading the Story of the Crack Epidemic. JSTOR Daily. Web.
Goode, E. (2020). Drugs in American society. 10th (Ed.) Vitalsource Technologies, Inc.
Thompson, M. (2013). The Mysterious History Of “Marijuana.” NPR. Web.