How to respond ethically to the latest “Satanic Panic”? - ABC Religion & Ethics (2024)

Has Satan staged a comeback?

The answer seems to be “yes”, at least if the controversy surroundingthe opening ceremony of the 2024 Olympic Games in Paris is anything to go by. Right-leaning pundits accused the ceremony of Satanic influence due to metal band Gojira’s performance and, most notably, drag queensseeming to recreate Da Vinci’s The Last Supper — even though the event’sofficial X account suggested this was actually an homage to Greek god Dionysus.

Over the last eight years, the spectre of Satan has haunted many online conspiracy theories. The most famous of these is associated with QAnon,a group premised on the belief that Donald Trump is secretly trying to save the world from a cabal of Satanic, vampiric elites. Some activists have evenargued that the devil resides in the detail of COVID-19 vaccines.

So are we, in fact, witnessing the return of the “Satanic Panic”? How can media consumers and producers respond to allegations of Satanism without maligning proponents or perpetuating the harms inherent within this rhetoric?

The origins of “Satanic Panic”

The term “Satanic Panic” was coined to describe a series of lurid, media-fuelled moral panics and conspiracies that arose in North America during the 1980s and which revolved around allegations that children were being raped and even murdered by Satan worshippers. Those worshippers were said to be amotley crew of teachers, daycare centre providers, politicians and celebrities.

Those panics emerged during a time of growing public discussions about child sexual abuse, as well as a number of high-profile cases in the United States involving missing young people. These includeJohnny Gosch, an Iowa teenager whose unsolved 1984 disappearance is still grist for theconspiracy mill.

Ideologically, the Satanic Panic reflected an emergent New Right, whose key players included conservative evangelicals, and their hostility towards those progressive movements (feminism, anti-racism, gay liberation) that were supposedly threatening the nuclear family and a properly Christian way of life. It’s no coincidence, then, that daycare centres were a key site of concern among panic proponents. One suggestion underlying that panic seems to be: if women were not participating in the workforce, they would be able to remain home (in the traditionally feminised domestic sphere) to look after their offspring and none of this damage would have happened.

How to respond ethically to the latest “Satanic Panic”? - ABC Religion & Ethics (1)

Actress Lee Remick in a scene from “The Omen” (1976), directed by Richard Donner. (Photo by Twentieth Century Fox Film / Sunset Boulevard / Corbis via Getty Images)

Technologically, the panics arose during a period which sawwhat historian Sarah Hughes calls “a dramatic expansion of television’s role within the domestic space”. The threat of Satanism was discussed with seriousness on then-popular television talk shows and current affairs programs. Horror films such asRosemary’s Baby (1968) andThe Omen (1976), which had previously enjoyed cinematic success, became widely available through their distribution on video cassette and cable television. Those films depict children and families being corrupted and destroyed by ungodly forces.

Ultimately, as Hughespoints out, drawing onthe work of philosopher Jean Baudrillard, television’s expansion contributed to a sense of “hyperreality where the natural world became indistinguishable from the simulacra that invaded, exploited, and appeared to reflect it”. In 1985, a TV news program actually used scenes from the two aforementioned films as“examples” of the demonic machinations that were allegedly threatening suburban, middle-class America.

Satanic Panic, redux

Fast-forward forty years and the entertainment field has vastly expanded thanks to Web 2.0. Today’s internet allows you to locate and stream any number of supernatural-themed films without heading to the video store or waiting for it to pop up on free-to-air television. Pop culture scenes, figures and tropes are recycled for everything from memes to Netflixdocumentaries.

In my research on proponents of conspiracy theories, I have encountered videos posted to “mainstream” social media platforms such as Instagram featuring sometimes graphically violent depictions of Satan’s plans for humanity. Some of these have the earnest, schlocky aesthetic of an oldHammer monster movie. They are designed to horrify and enrage. Others deploy humour (such as through quirky visuals and captions) to soften their blow.

How to respond ethically to the latest “Satanic Panic”? - ABC Religion & Ethics (2)

A supporter of former US President Donald Trump poses for a photo while holding a banner referring to QAnon outside of the Trump National Doral resort on 12 June 2023 in Miami, Florida. (Photo by Stephanie Keith / Getty Images)

In Web 2.0, factually dubious and outright misleading content, as well as content that blends fact and fiction, can be shared and re-shared by media commentators, users, and politicians. Sometimes, this material is shared because it reinforces a particular worldview; other times, because it evokes strong emotions in the sharer (anger, disgust, fear). One net effect ofthe proliferation of fake news is that it becomes ever more difficult to sort the factual wheat from the fictional chaff.

For example, child sexual abuse remains a very real and very grave social problem. There is little empirical evidence to suggest that this is being committed by occultists, or that, in encountering gender and sexual diversity in classroom lessons or everyday life — in other words, outside parental control and the domestic sphere — children are being groomed for abuse. These kinds of anxieties have been articulatedby religious and non-religious folk alike.

Moreover, Web 2.0 provides platforms through which anyone can broadcast their views, no matter how unhinged and hostile. The following two responses to the Olympic opening ceremony bear out this point:

  • Conservative British rapper and social media personality Zuby posted thefollowing missive to Twitter/X: “Imagine not believing that there is a gay agenda and a satanic agenda. How obvious do they have to make it?”
  • Senator Ralph Babet, leader of the United Australia Party, issued amedia release describing the ceremony as “demonic and deranged”. The statement goes on to blame “woke elites” for “parading transgenderism and giving the middle finger to Jesus Christ”.

Both Zuby and Babet have healthy online followings. As of August 2024, Zuby has 1.2 million followers on X while Babet has 45,700 —Crikeyhas gone so far as describing the latter “Parliament’s top shitposter”. Their messages are reaching audiences of sizes, and with a swiftness, that would have been unimaginable a few decades ago.

Whether these men actually believe the allegations they are making is a moot point. So is the very likely chance that they are capitalising on the attention that their heated rhetoric will inevitably generate (sensationalism equals clicks, after all).

How to respond ethically to the latest “Satanic Panic”? - ABC Religion & Ethics (3)

Heavy Metal band Gojira performs during the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games Paris 2024, on 26 July 2024. (Photo by Zhang Yuwei-Pool / Getty Images)

The rise of Web 2.0 has coincided with an eclectic array of transformations to the social fabric. The last two decades, for example, have seen a greater public visibility of

gender and sexual diversity, particularly among young people, who have any number of platforms through which to articulate their lived experiences and challenge hostile stereotypes. This is undoubtedly a positive, though some politicians and journalists from across the political spectrum have begged to differ — and haveoccasionally done so in an alarmist fashion.

Some queer musicians have incorporated references to Satanism (and all things unholy) into their lyrics and music videos —Lil Nas X,Kim Petras and Sam Smith are prominent recent examples. These artists have received accusations of devil-worship and, indeed, might have courted such accusations. Their work seems self-consciously, even comically provocative, as though they’re having a laugh at the uproar they know they’ll receive.

How to respond ethically to the latest “Satanic Panic”? - ABC Religion & Ethics (4)

Sam Smith and Kim Petras perform during the 65th Grammy Awards at Crypto.com Arena on 5 February 2023 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by Timothy Norris / FilmMagic)

And then there’s COVID-19. The profound, wide-ranging effects of the virus on health, safety and everyday life are by now well-documented. Some folk have responded by scapegoating social groups, includingChinese people (for eating habits that ostensibly led to the virus flourishing) and the Satanists who areallegedly producing vaccines.

The harms of Satanic Panic

Allegations of Satanism can cause any number of harms, whatever one’s views on faith and (non-)belief. They can encourage and implicitly justify abuse against those who are targeted. For example, the organisers of the Olympics opening ceremony have since receiveddeath threats.

In December 2016,a man burst into a Washington, D.C. pizzeria armed with a gun and seeking to rescue the children who — according to a popular online conspiracy — were being sexually abused in Satanic rituals conducted beneath the restaurant at the behest of Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. This entire episode is known colloquially as“Pizzagate” and is an antecedent of QAnon.

How to respond ethically to the latest “Satanic Panic”? - ABC Religion & Ethics (5)

A protester holds a sign during a “Save our Children” rally outside Downing Street on 10 October 2020 in London, England. (Photo by Hollie Adams / Getty Images)

Allegations of Satanism contribute to the dehumanisation of those at which they are levelled. The missives of Zuby and Babet are clearly sledges against queer communities, especially trans and nonbinary members. Through my research, I have encountered online content (including videos and memes) that, in advancing conspiracies about everything from vaccines to the so-called“Great Reset”, have equated Satanism with Judaism.

I would imagine that it’s easy for secular audiences, in particular, to dismiss allegations of Satanism as feverish hyperbole. Much easier, say, than just coming out and branding a particular group as sick, dangerous and unnatural (though such attacks are regularly made, as even a quick Google search attests).

Want the best of Religion & Ethics delivered to your mailbox?

Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Your information is being handled in accordance with the

ABC Privacy Collection Statement.

Finally, allegations of Satanism — even by those who are expressing a genuinely held Christian faith and concern for child safety — contribute to a broader political polarisation. This polarisation is constructed and enriched throughlanguage use. Consider the uncritical use of terms such as “woke” and “elites” to attack (real and perceived) ideological opponents. Allegations of Satanism might represent culture war rhetoric in its rawest form, framing one’s foes not just as wrong or misguided, but as the very embodiments of an otherworldly overlord.

What can be done?

The following are suggestions on how media consumers and producers — groups that sometimes overlap — can respond ethically to public anxieties surrounding Satanism. These suggestions could also be useful in responding to other conspiracies currently flourishing online:

  • Allegations of Satanism should not be shared by social media users, even for the purpose of critique or debunking. Sharing equalsamplification.
  • Social media platforms shouldshadowban hashtags and keywords like “Satan” and “Satanic”. These may not always be used to malign others, but their proliferation can lead the unsuspecting — and not-so-unsuspecting — user to abusive content. Content that represents certain groups and individuals as Satanists should be removed.
  • Proponents of Satanic Panic should not be ridiculed or dismissed as “cookers” or “Jesus freaks”. This only reinforces the sense of “us” and “them” that is adistinguishing feature of conspiracies — with the “them” being devout Christians and the “us” being the ‘elites’ who mock and deride them. Pejoratives like “Jesus freaks” paint all Christians as adherents of similar and similarly extreme beliefs, when this clearly is not so.
  • Journalists should report on allegations of Satanism where these are deemed newsworthy (such as in the example of the 2024 Paris Olympics) but resist the temptation to provide these with any credence. This could involve fact-checking allegations of Satanism and not including references to Satan in headlines. (I appreciate that the latter step will be difficult to implement, given Beelzebub’s inherent clickbait-worthiness, but there is a potent ethical case for doing so.)
  • If the journalist does choose to quote panic rhetoric (as I have done in this article), quotes should be brief and the journalist should spell out why they are problematic — for instance, they are hostile, demeaning to others, seldom based on fact, and so on. (I am aware, of course, thatreporting on extremist and violent content can itself be a form of amplification.)

What, then, of actual, self-identified Satanists? Such individualsdo exist, and they are not entirely the products of evangelical nightmares. How should they be represented by journalists and themselves? What should social media platforms do with their content? These are valuable questions and questions that will need to be addressed elsewhere — of concern here are unfounded and hostile accusations of “Satanism”.

So, to return to my initial question: Yes, we are indeed witnessing a new “Satanic Panic”. Or perhaps this panic never really went away. There is no quick solution to anxieties about the Devil, but there are steps we can each take to ensure that these do not (further) erode public discourse and entrench polarisation.

Jay Daniel Thompson is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Media and Communication at RMIT University, Melbourne. He is currently completing a book on the ethics of journalistic reportage on conspiracy.

Posted, updated

How to respond ethically to the latest “Satanic Panic”? - ABC Religion & Ethics (2024)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Recommended Articles
Article information

Author: Tyson Zemlak

Last Updated:

Views: 5831

Rating: 4.2 / 5 (63 voted)

Reviews: 94% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Tyson Zemlak

Birthday: 1992-03-17

Address: Apt. 662 96191 Quigley Dam, Kubview, MA 42013

Phone: +441678032891

Job: Community-Services Orchestrator

Hobby: Coffee roasting, Calligraphy, Metalworking, Fashion, Vehicle restoration, Shopping, Photography

Introduction: My name is Tyson Zemlak, I am a excited, light, sparkling, super, open, fair, magnificent person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.