With some notable exceptions, media analysis of the problems of crime, imprisonment, exclusion and poverty, and/or media representation of same, is so shallow (in Ireland anyway) that it severely inhibits any attempts at progress, real development or solutions.
The more sensationalist media (so-called tabloids) are full of what I consider to be irresponsible copy in respect of marginalised and excluded people. The personalities involved are caricatured with lurid descriptions of their own and their families’ lives and any thoughtful reflection on the issues is almost always absent.
The traditional media (sometimes called quality media) often far more subtly excludes by largely focusing on problematic topics or themes among families who are marginalised (albeit, perhaps, in a thoughtful, analytic but perhaps patronising way) but will rarely carry stories that spontaneously highlight something that families or communities have done or can do for themselves, or reflect innovation, creativity, or even beauty among the Focus Group.
In both cases, the familiarity element that I described in a previous post prevails, as writers and editors choose what will attract us, the general public.
Very recently I heard a positive and uplifting interview on the radio with a prison Governor about the importance of family visits to those in custody. The Governor mentioned some positive initiatives that the Prison Service had recently implemented for children and families. The reporter then handed back to the studio. Immediately, the presenter in the studio switched the conversation to the topic of drugs getting into prison.
Now I’m not saying that a radio presenter shouldn’t mention drugs in prison. It’s just that this particular news item (for once) was focused on the positive; families, children and good practice within the prison estate, not on the negative. The example illustrates the point that I made in this post on media bias – that the media will virtually always default to what they think that the public will be attracted to. In this case, sensationalism, conflict and misery.
Media love conflict and misery because both, for some strange reason, entertain us. Very often, major newsworthy items that are relevant and exciting, and which may inculcate feelings of security and hope are overlooked in favour of lurid and fear-inducing stories that keep us on our toes.
And, of course, if reporting of war, man’s inhumanity to man, poverty, criminality, or exposés of scandals and wrongdoing, and such matters reduced the likelihood of their occurrence there’d be none of them in the world!
This might sound a little unfair, but there are some journalists that cover crime and when I hear them on radio or TV, or read their articles, the image of boys rushing to the scene of a fight in the school playground, encouraging the protagonists and cheering on the violence, comes to my mind.
And sometimes, when I see how people who are involved in crime are portrayed in the media I think of the song ‘Jesus Was a Capricorn’ by Kris Kristofferson which has the memorable chorus line ‘Everybody’s got to have somebody to look down on’.
There are many different ways of making ourselves feel good. One (healthy) way is to target something and go after it and succeed, and feel proud of our success. Another, very unhealthy way is to continually compare ourselves with others who we deem to be inferior to us.
To explore issues deeply does not seem to be an attractive option for the media – yet I believe that it needs to be done when we consider how to help vulnerable people.
I have rarely if ever experienced any members of the Focus Group to get long term benefit from media attention. It is either neutral, or else utterly exploitative.