Read the Media Magazine extended feature on the media coverage of the UK riots (MM38 page 5)
Go to our Media Magazine archive, select MM38 and read the WHOLE eight-page feature. Answer the following questions on your blog with as many references to media theory and examples as possible. Refer to specific aspects of the Media Magazine article too:
- How did the language and selection of images in the coverage create a particular representation of young people?
It was to represent them as feral, out of control and anti social. As well as Decivillize (Frantz Fanon - 1952) - Why does David Buckingham mention Owen Jones and his work Chavs: the demonisation of the working class?
Owen Jones speaks about how the working class has become a kind to fear and media coverage such as Vicky Pollard from little britain, inforces stereotypes to make the working class be seen as bad in the society. - What is the typical representation of young people – and teenage boys in particular? What did the 2005 IPSOS/MORI survey find?
40% of any articles related with youths was to do with violence, crime or any anti-social behaviour. Also, 71% of these articles are in a negative tone. In addition, only 1% of the interviews were from those who are being spoken about i.e. the youth. Other than this, only 3.4% of the stories published in the news about the youth are positive, and many stories describe young boys as a scum, heartless ect. Only those youth who had died had been described as ''angel'' or any other positive words. - How can Stanley Cohen’s work on Moral Panic be linked to the coverage of the riots?
The media has talked up this as a ''bigger'' moral panic than it originally was, as the youth were further demonized via the media during the riots - making them the folks devils. - What elements of the media and popular culture were blamed for the riots?
Elements such as rap culture, as it glorifies violence and loathing of authority, as well as violent computer games as well as reality TV was blamed to be provoking youngsters to carry the acts in the riots. - How was social media blamed for the riots? What was interesting about the discussion of social media when compared to the Arab Spring in 2011?
Media reporters had reported that ''thugs'' had been using blackberry messenger to communicate with one another, and newspapers such as the Telegraph believe that the riots had been ''fuelled by technology'. However, this use of technology fuelling riots in a different scenario, which was the Arab Spring was seen positively. - The riots generated a huge amount of comment and opinion - both in mainstream and social media. How can the two-step flow theory be linked to the coverage of the riots?
Two step flow model is a theory on the messages in media, and how opinions are constructed by a minority, or opinion leaders. The news is something that is published to the mass media in a variety of methods such as the traditional newspaper, as well as news apps - that publish the most recent newstory's, reaching a large audience. this audience can be easily influenced into what is right and what is wrong and ''anti social'' - this is the hegemonic control. Anything that is done by minority groups in order to get justice would be shown as ''dangerous'' (Alvarado - 1987) or shown to be Decivillize, regardeless of the cause behind the act - this can lead to many stereotypes being created as well as further reached to the mass audience, showing that news is the massive opinion leader, altering the opinions of the audience as well as indirectly preaching about what is 'normal' and 'abnormal'.
Similarly, social media users can be opinion leaders, as the two step model states - allowing people to retweet them on Twitter for example, as a form of agreement to the person's point, this can then be seen and agreed with further, as well as challenged - putting out a number of opinion leaders, however opinion leaders in social media are likely to be people such as celebrities, or those who are ''twitter famous'' - with a number of people being able to understand, and share their commentary on the riots. - Alternatively, how might media scholars like Henry Jenkins view the 'tsunami' of blogs, forums and social media comments? Do you agree that this shows the democratisation of the media?
They'll believe it's good that the media now gives an opportunity for everyone to participate, as well as challenge the typical and tradition hierarchy and hegemonic control. I believe living in a more egalitarian society is what is morally right, and although this may mean that it allows everyone and anyone to respond instantly, it is fact that anyone being able to say what is politically, socially wrong/right on social media is the only way fair. Although those who are not in the elite, i.e. not politicians are not elected to voice themselves publicly - I believe it is a humanitarian need and requirement to have freedom of speech as well as speak up for what is right and wrong, even if that means once in a while having to take a more rebellious and aggressive approach in order to be heard out by those constantly trying to reinforce what is right and wrong, and have us under a hegemonic control. - What were the right-wing responses to the causes of the riots?
Commentators from the right-wing, believe that the rioters need more discipline. The rioters have been essentiallized (Frantz Fanon 1952) and seen as ''the bottom of our society'', they are described to simply be a layer of young people with no skills, education, values or aspirations. In addition, the parenting and schooling was questioned, of such youngsters that were compared to animals such as dogs. Commentators were calling for the use of water cannon and plastic bullets (or in some cases, real ones). These comments have lead a number of punishments in order to set people in their place, such as putting two members of the society in prison for 4 years, for inciting a riot that didn't take place. - What were the left-wing responses to the causes of the riots?Unlike the right wing response to the cause of the riots, the left wing commentators believe the cause of the riots was to do with the inequality in the UK, which is the highest in the Western World, as well as the cuts in youth services such as those near the area of riots (Haringey, the borough in which Tottenham is located, recently closed 8 of its 13 youth clubs). Other than this, the unemployment rate which is 25% for the youth between the age 18-25, also can be seen as a cause, in addition to the discontinuation of EMA.
- What are your OWN views on the main causes of the riots?
I believe that where the riots started (Tottenham), is a deprived area, with low levels of employment and general deprivation. This can lead to a lot of acts that are seen as anti-social in the media, such as having to sell drugs in order to make money, or having to take them due to lack of upbringing or general stress as well as the strong gang culture in such areas. Riots in such an area are unlikely to be calm, especially when it involves a number of people since the weather was warm (in Summer), and someone from the black community - Mark Duggan was killed, provoking many from that community as well as those in minority groups as this was seen as a racist and unjustified act. To add to this, and to make situations even worse for the community in Tottenham - many of the youth clubs being closed down, as well as being able to recieve no EMA was a factor for further demotivation with life, education as well as provoking youngsters to rebel against the system that hasn't done much good for them at the time, including raising Univeristy Tuition Fees. This goes to show that there can never be one main reason for the riots, as there were so many people involved, and that to from all over the coutry, and for many it could just be that there parents weren't around, or didn't care, or didn't know - it was hot, they had nothing to do, so believed to simply join the crowd. - How can capitalism be blamed for the riots? What media theory (from our new/digital media unit) can this be linked to?
- Were people involved in the riots given a voice in the media to explain their participation?
No, but Tudor Historian - who had no clue about the potential causes of the riots and struggle of many of the ''chavs'' he spoke about. - In the Guardian website's investigation into the causes of the riots, they did interview rioters themselves. Read this Guardian article from their Reading the Riots academic research project - what causes are outlined by those involved in the disturbances?Reading this article had shown me that the main causes of the riots actually were:
-> opportunity to acquire goods and luxury items they could not ordinarily afford (This can link to lack of benefits, employment as well as cut of EMA and other bursaries)
-> gang members played only a marginal role in the riots, this shows that it was mainly individuals rioting
->BlackBerry phones – and the free messaging service known as "BBM" – were used extensively to communicate, share information and plan riots in advance.
-> 59% of rioters interviewed were unemployed, and just under half were students, this can tap into issues financially, and with family - as if they are students, many will be minors who are expected to be dependant on parent/carers. This can lead to questioning on schooling and parenting.
-> lack of money, jobs or opportunity was a cause for many as well as, being treated differently within society, and there being a lack of justice in the system.
-> Many mentioned the increase in student tuition fees and the scrapping of the education maintenance allowance.
-> They cited "policing" as the most significant cause of the riots, and anger over the police shooting of Mark Duggan, which triggered initial disturbances in Tottenham, was repeatedly mentioned – even outside London. - What is your own opinion on the riots? Do you have sympathy with those involved or do you believe strong prison sentences are the right approach to prevent such events happening in future?I do sympathize with those who were involved, as many of them may not be raised as politicans and those higher in the hieracy were raised, thus they can't empathise with such youth. However, being a youth, it is understandable that a lack of money and injustice as well as all the other causes listed above, can be demotivating and lead to wanting to be anti-social especially if there is no one there to stop you. I understand that the government don't want any re-occurrences of the riots thus the strict prison sentences, although I believe this is just going to lead to more hate and ''anti-police'' attitude amongst the youth. The few chances that these youths (mainly from deprived areas) did have of getting a job and being or doing something and having ''lives'' other than grieving about EMA cuts and youth clubs closing down, were the chances snatched away from them by labelling them as hoodlums, animals and wasting years and months of their lives but putting them into prisons - for crimes in which they were maybe just dragged into due to peer pressure, family and financial crisis.
No comments:
Post a Comment