- How did the language and selection of images in the coverage create a particular representation of young people?
Across the media coverage of the riots, young people were labeled in a very negative manner through the choice of images and language. However, what anybody failed to realize is that many of the people involved were in fact, much older. In terms of the choices of language; the papers talk of riots taking place rather than 'civil disturbances' or 'protests. Some papers front covers also used the words 'feral youth', ' flaming morons' to describe young people. Using these types of words describe a particular event in such a way that caused people to look down upon the young people and create negative representations about them. For example, using the word riots suggests something wild, unrestrained, irrational and unexplainable. However, this simply isn't true because this event that was labelled as a 'riot' was yes wild but it was explainable (people began as a peaceful protest wanting to be heard by the police and seek justice of Mark Duggan) and restrained (police to the best of their ability tried to prevent further protests). These negative representations of young people in the language used were further reinforced in the images selected the most iconic being 'one black, hooded young man' which appeared on at least 5 front pages on the first day (seen below); the newspapers constantly came out with large and dramatic images to emphasise how terrible young people were. We were all told that ' young people had not been sufficiently socialized, they were led simply by a kind of childish destructiveness' as the article says.
 |
| 5 newspaper front covers with the iconic riots image |
- Why does David Buckingham mention Owen Jones and his work Chavs: the demonisation of the working class?
He mentions Owen Jones book because David Buckingham says that the 'feral youth' imagined by media institutions and politicians points to the 'emergence of a new form of class contempt in Modern Britain'. He (Owen Jones) goes on to mention how the working class has become an object of fear and ridicule not just in the mainstream kind of media coverage but also in Little Britain's Vicky Pollard and Catherine Tate "Am I bovvered?" character. This representation again comes despite the fact that many of the people convicted of rioting were in respectable middle-class jobs, for instance, there were reports of an Oxford Graduate being convicted and a doctor's daughter. However, when these reports came out the description through language and images were no longer 'feral youth' etc it was a question of 'How did she end up in the dock?' by the Daily Mail.
- What is the typical representation of young people – and teenage boys in particular? What did the 2005 IPSOS/MORI survey find?
Typical representations of young people are negative and show them in a demeaning light. A study by Women in Journalism who analyzed over 7000+ stories showed that out of the stories involving teenage boys '72% were negative'. This is more than '20 times' the number of positive stories at '3.4%'. The typical representations of young people as a whole labeled them as yobs, thugs, sick, feral, hoodies, louts, heartless, evil, frightening and scum. The representation of teenage boys in specific had the same labels most of the time. However, sometimes teenage boys did get described as model students, angels and mother's perfect son but the people represented in this way met an untimely death. The 2005 IPSOS/MORI survey found that '40% of newspaper articles featuring young people focused on violence, crime or anti-social behavior' and '71% could be described as having a negative tone'.
- How can Stanley Cohen’s work on Moral Panic be linked to the coverage of the riots?
Cohen's moral panic can be linked because he argues that the media 'talked up' the riots into a bigger event than they were creating a bigger moral panic than needed to be. Cohen also argues that the media play a role in ‘deviance amplification’: in reporting the phenomenon, and in expressing the fear and outrage of ‘respectable society’, they make it more attractive to those who might not otherwise have thought about becoming involved. I agree with what Cohen says here because the media was reporting how the assumed 20+ year olds who were behind the riots starting were making the riots attractive to younger people as front pages like the one below came out stating 'Rioters aged 7'. The media coverage of the riots can be seen to reflect much more of a general fear of young people and working class people in particular very common among many adults the media speaks to anxieties that many people already have.
- What elements of the media and popular culture were blamed for the riots?
Elements of the media blamed for the riots centered around the stories published about their concerns of 'video games, influence of TV, debates about music hall & popular literature in the 19th century'. Other media related suggestions that were blamed for the riots centered around general advertising; some suggested that the looting of sportswear shops had been inflamed by 'advertising' - it was like 'Supermarket Sweep' said the Daily Mail looters posing for the cameras displaying their pickings was seen as evidence of narcissism and consumerism of the 'Big Brother' and 'X Factor' generation. Then elements of popular culture that were blamed for the riots centered around 'rap music, violent computer games and reality TV' which were said to be provoking young people to go out and start rioting. For instance, the Daily Mail blamed 'pernicious culture of hatred around rap music which glorifies violence'.
- 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?
Social media was blamed for the riots as it was reported that social media was used to plan and carry out the chaos. Despite, being depicted by the tabloids as mindless thugs and morons, the rioters were also seen as skilled enough to co - ordinate their actions by using Facebook, Blackberry, and Twitter. The Sun, for example, reported that 'THUGS used social network Twitter to orchestrate Tottenham violence and incite others to join in' as they sent messages urging 'Roll up and loot'. According to The Telegraph 'technology fuelled Britain's first 21st-century riot'. The Tottenham riots were orchestrated by teenage gang members, who used the latest mobile phone technology to incite and film the looting and violence.
When you take the responses to the uses of social media between the Arab Spring events and the London Riots it was completely different. It was interesting how the discussions of social media use in regards to Arab Springs was positive whereas the social media use in regards to the London riots was negative.
- 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?
The two-step flow theory can be linked to the coverage of the riots because the way in which the riots were represented in the papers by (opinion leaders) media institutions governed the way in which we all saw the riots and responded to them and the people involved.
- 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 democratization of the media?
Media scholars like Henry Jenkins tend to celebrate these kinds of media (army of bloggers creating a running commentary of events as they unfold). It is viewed as participatory media. Though, some see it as evidence of wholesale democratization of communications systems. They argue that the age of 'Big Media' - of powerful, centralized corporations controlling media - is now finished: hierarchical, top - down communications have been replaced by a 'more egalitarian approach'. (Egalitarian -believing in or based on the principle that all people are equal). Personally, I agree that this shows the democratisation of the media because it is something that is accessible to everyone to share their views and opinions on an equal level but despite the equal level that we all participate on there is not any control over what gets published so it could be argued that the use of communications systems in the riots and other big events or even just generally like Twitter are only providing a platform for people to vent on not share useful and insightful opinions on topical issues.
- What were the right-wing responses to the causes of the riots?
Right-Wing Responses: Amoral Youth
Most astonishing example came in an article by Max Hastings of The Daily Mail headed 'years of liberal dogma have spawned a generation of amoral, uneducated, unparented, welfare dependent, brutalized youngsters'. The main target of this article is 'liberal (that is left wing) values and specifically the idea of the welfare state: too much permissiveness, Max Hastings argues, has bred a generation of young people with 'no respect' for elders and betters, and no 'moral compass'. These young people that Hastings refers to are working class youth who apparently live lives of 'absolute futility'. The article details how we at the bottom of society there are young people with no aspirations and values who simply just exist.
Summary
Right wing responses to the riots are that the young people involved resulted from their poor upbringing; those who did not have parents to guide them for instance, had no specific way of life to follow they made it up as they went along and no guidance which apparently resulted in them having a life in which they get involved in terrible events such as the London Riots.
From the article
They are essentially wild beasts. seems appropriate to young people bereft of the
discipline that might make them employable; of the conscience, that distinguishes
between right and wrong.
The article is basically saying that us young people do not know what is right and wrong and putting a spin on the saying of 'think before you speak' the article says we young people 'react before we think'
'...of a culture which gives them so much unconditionally that they are let off learning how to become human beings...'
We young people have so much say in the culture that surrounds us that we do not have to learn the important stuff, having a 'life' with values and aspirations.
The article snippet ends on:
'My dogs are better behaved and subscribe to a higher code of values than the young rioters of Tottenham, Hackney, Clapham, and Birmingham'.
Whatever the culture that we young people are surrounded by or other circumstances that have governed the way we have taken to the world and grown up how is possibly right to compare those involved in the riots to the likes of dogs. This line, in my opinion, is an example of class dimension which is shaping all young people in one particular light after the events of the 2011 riots. Not every single person involved by age was a young person many were a lot older and as stated further up in the article some were even respectable Oxford Graduates, doctors, lawyers etc.
- What were the left-wing responses to the causes of the riots?
Left Wing Responses: inequality and poverty
The UK has one of the highest levels of inequality in Western world. Left wing views say it was unsurprising how most disturbances erupted in areas with high levels of poverty and deprivation - and they point out that these communities bore the brunt of the riots damage. It also talks of how causes of the riots in the view of the Left wing people were down to factors which were outside of the individual's control (e.g. Youth unemployment), which is now over '20%' in the '18-25 age group'. These are valid arguments they focus only on youth when as I have said many people convicted were once respected middle class working individuals.
- What are your OWN views on the main causes of the riots?
Personally, I understand why peaceful protests were begun; and this is because people were after justice for Mark Duggan being shot but also because they were angry about getting mixed messages from Scotland Yard in the aftermath of the shooting. According to Shaun Bailey, a former aide to David Cameron "the Metropolitan Police’s failure to speak directly with the Duggan family, coupled with the mixed messages coming out of Scotland Yard in the aftermath of the killing, made people take to the streets across the country.". I do not agree with the stories that came out over the period of the riots blaming the cause on the influence of reality TV or rap music etc on young people nowadays. I do not agree with this simply because I feel that these stories were published as a way to deflect from the fact that the riots were triggered through a spread of misinformation by the police. These types of stories were spread in a hope to deflect a negative light from the police who we put our trust in to protect us but at this point in time were being questioned for their actions which made a lot of people question whether there was cause for shooting Mark Duggan.
- How can capitalism be blamed for the riots? What media theory (from our new/digital media unit) can this be linked to?
Capitalism be blamed for the riots links to the NDM theory of Marxism which believes that society is one of class domination. Capitalism can be blamed for the cause of the riots because according to Peter Oborne (writing for the right-wing Daily Telegraph) 'it has become acceptable for our politicians to lie and to cheat... the sad young men and women, without hope or aspiration, who have caused such mayhem and chaos over the past few days... have this defence: they are just following the example set by senior and respected figures in society'. Capitalism can be blamed in accordance to this because people were following what the more powerful classes in society are doing and this is the defence for the reasons for the mayhem.
- Were people involved in the riots given a voice in the media to explain their participation?
The people involved were not given a voice in the media they were simply convicted andn spoken of no more after the media broadcast them on sentencing day and told us what their verdicts were. Instead, of giving these people a voice the media had people who clearly knew nothing about the topic being discussed give their views on the riots. For instance, as the article mentions BBC2's Newsnight had Tudor historian Professor. David Starkey come on and discuss the riots, they might have been hoping for a historical perspective. However, what they got instead was an astonishing diatribe about how 'the chavs', the whites are now blacks and about Gangsta rap which he did not know anything about. Starkey's remarks were challenged by a number of guests on the show and other academics as well as some skillful mash-up YouTube artists. The media gave a voice to people who could not really explain the cause of the riots which resulted in a lot of people changing their opinions towards the event because they heard information from the horse's mouth with a title of Professor at the beginning of his name rather than through 5 times re-reporting from mainstream news outlets.
Causes of the riots outlined by those involved include:
- Involvement in looting down to opportunism - Perceived suspension of normal rules allowed people to get their hands on things they couldn't normally afford.
- Political Grievances - Pervasive sense of injustice
- Policing - cited as the most significant cause of the riots in addition to the anger over the police shooting of Mark Duggan
- Stop & Search - Identified as a possible motivation for Black and Asian rioters in regards to how the searches are carried out: This was found out on an independent panel set up by the Government in the aftermath of the riots.
- 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 have sympathy for those involved in terms of the victims because many lost their homes and businesses their entire lively hood was flashed before them. However, I do not have sympathy for those involved in the riots because they entered into them knowing full well that there was the chance of them getting arrested. In my opinion, I am in favour of those involved being sent to prison but giving them strong sentences is not going to help them because unfair sentences are likely to make people want to re - offend as a result of their anger over their sentences. Strong sentences is also not the right approach to avoid such events in the future because if those sentenced get out and re-offend they will be sent back to prison by the police and based on previous sentences get a harsher term but then it is just a back and fourth cycle without any education or help to stop those people committing a crime again.
