From top: Jeremy Corbyn; Dr Henry Silke
Jeremy Corbyn’s refusal to be part of the liberal media game, on their terms, may in fact be the wisest strategy of all.
Just ask the Irish Water protest movement.
Media scholar Dr Henry Silke writes:
Media watchers looking at events across the water won’t be surprised to hear that the first academic investigations into the coverage of Jeremy Corbyn have found that the media have been less than objective.
One study undertaken by the London School of Economics found that 57% of articles (in eight national newspapers) treated Corbyn in a critical or antagonist manner and a total of 67% of all opinion pieces did so.
Corbyn himself is not sourced in 50% of articles, and in one fifth of articles where he is given voice he is taken out of context or distorted.
Anti-Corbyn Labour parliamentary party sources also outweigh pro-Corbryn party sources. Moreover according to the study no less than 30% of articles ridicule Corbyn and 13% included personalised attacks on Corbyn himself.
Research from the UK based Media Reform Coalition found similar results when looking at the coverage of Corbyn’s first week as leader. The study found that 60% of articles were negative and concluded that:
‘…large sections of the press appeared to set out systematically to undermine Jeremy Corbyn in his first week as Labour Leader with a barrage of overwhelmingly negative coverage’.
Meanwhile, a study from Birbeck University working with the Media Reform Coalition looked at no less than 465 online news items from 8 providers, and 40 prime time television news bulletins on BBC One and ITV.
This research found that ‘twice as much airtime had been given to critical, rather than supportive voices in relation to Jeremy Corbyn on the main BBC bulletins.’
They also reported a strong tendency to use pejorative terms such as ‘hostile’ and ‘hard-core’ when describing Corbyn and his supporters.
Media watchers on this side of the Irish Sea will find it all too familiar following coverage here of the water charges movement, not to mention one of the most overtly biased elections in many years.
So what is it about the media and such movements?
Why is it that the liberal news values of objectivity, impartiality and fact-checking seem to go out the window whenever something even slightly left-field comes along?
Ralph Miliband wrote about this tendency decades ago describing how the western media would follow general rules of impartiality and objectivity once the subjects of the stories remained within certain clearly defined parameters, but those rules will be quickly jettisoned for issues or political subjects outside the boundaries.
Let’s say in Ireland’s case the press will be pretty impartial between Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil or even Labour if discussing how to improve conditions for private interests to invest in the housing market.
The parameters are the assumption that only private interests (i.e. developers) can build houses, and they must be ‘incentivised’ to do so. The only argument is on the method of incentivisation; whether by deregulation, subsidisation or tax relief and so on.
However, throw in a policy that is outside the broad consensus, and a political source outside the realm of political correspondents and PR nexus – let’s say how to remove private interests from housing – with a proposal from a left-wing representative, then that impartiality goes out the window.
The ink was barely dry from a motion passed by Dublin City Council that had been proposed by the Workers’ Party Cllr Eilis Ryan on the redevelopment of O’Devaney Gardens when the Irish Times alongside the council bureaucracy started spinning against it.
The successful motion is for a fully publicly-funded housing scheme, with the innovation of opening it up to people from various socio-economic groups on a rental basis.
The Irish Times, rather than discuss the merits of the proposal, spun that it would simply delay the supply of housing, underlying the relationship that exists between the property industry, the state and the media.
Likewise we are constantly informed rent control is ‘impossible’, (apart of course for Germans, Austrians the half of continental Europe) and that Governments ‘can’t create jobs’, even though some of Ireland’s most successful companies have been public enterprises or have been heavily subsidised by the state.
So what are the parameters involved? In short they are parameters within the deeply embedded ideology of liberalism.
Liberalism has many expressions from the more reactionary neo-liberal variety – what economist Paul Krugman dubs ‘market fundamentalism’ – to the more touchy-feely Irish Times type, that will sometimes challenge conservatives on social issues, or on elements of generally superficial reform.
However, both camps have deep ideological assumptions around the liberal market economy and will defend it from all perceived threats.
The Irish media’s social liberalism is perfectly in tandem with liberal capitalism.
Here women, people of colour and differing genders, while acting as individual economic units, are to be welcomed as equal. Just don’t mention structural issues such as the lack or childcare facilities (beyond its potential as an investment opportunity) or meaningful paternity leave.
We are happy to have equality in marriage, but don’t mention rent control.
Racism will be denounced from the highest moral ground while military planes are quietly refueled in Shannon and refugees (the ones who make it here) are quietly warehoused for decades.
We can celebrate intersectional bombs with the election of Hillary Clinton while appropriating radical feminism to attack figures such as Corbyn or Bernie Sanders, and demonise working-class communities like Jobstown.
The reasons for the embedding of liberal ideology in the media sphere are myriad; not least journalistic practice and the role of so-called ‘official sources’ alongside an ever growing public relations industry (it’s no accident that both David Cameron and Labour leadership candidate Owen Smith came from careers in PR).
The class nature of journalists – with the cost of education constantly increasing alongside the necessity of ‘interning’ (i.e. working for free) in the creative industries means that only those from higher socio-economic backgrounds can aspire to be a journalist.
And of course not forgetting the issue of media ownership and an industry dependent on advertising from the very economic system that it reports on: Overall, the press rests on ideological beliefs that run through every aspect of society.
So what is to be done?
It is easy to call for alternative media, but it will always be difficult to sustain these without the kind of funding available to groups like Independent News and Media, not least to provide a living for professional journalists.
Citizen journalism while hugely refreshing cannot replace the experience of daily beat journalism and social media for all its advantage is still dominated by the mainstream media organisations.
Others like Owen Jones, have called for a better media strategy, however there is an element of ‘snakeoil’ about this, as media strategy really means changing policy to fit into those narrow parameters, again; and then one could ask what is the point?
As pointed out by Des Freedman of Goldsmith’s University, civil rights and labour movements such as the suffragettes and the trade unions have always faced a hostile media. And have been able to overcome it in the past using a mixture of strategies and as we saw with the water charges movement, the media is not always as influential as we may think
So while the press vilifies Corbyn, as much for his so called inability to ‘do’ media, the fact is that Corbyn’s refusal to be part of the liberal media game, on their terms, may in fact be the wisest strategy of all.
Dr Henry Silke is a Journalism lecturer at University of Limerick and writes for Critical Media Review.
Pic: Getty
This is what Corbyn represents.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/08/secret-life-trade-union-employee-work-benefits-workers-rights?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Please explain how a lazy employ at a clearly lazy union office is what he represents.
That article smells a bit straw-man
good points Matt Berry
Is that Dr Silke behind Jeremy Corbyn in the firsts photo? Over Corbyn’s right shoulder.
Clearly that’s Steven Toast
Their hatred of him shows how much they fear him. That can only be a good thing
Ok, so let’s hear it for a man who voted over 500 times against his own party, who claims to meet armed organisations in the interests of peace, but who has never as far as anyone can tell, met with both sides to a quarrel . A man who confuses slogans with policy and who decided to build a 20 billion nuclear submarine – for the jobs – but send it to sea sans missiles. A man who thinks that a radical demonstration is an indication of the voting instincts of his partys base. He’s a loon who will, if allowed, consign the Labour Party to electoral oblivion for years and years to come in the same way as Militant did in the past.
Are you describing the Arab-Israeli conflict as a quarrel?
Most people are wise to the media nowadays and the more hostile they are towards someone, the more likely that the streisand effect will occur. The mantra that Corbyn was unelectable was everywhere so the media may be still powerful, but not in the intended way.
I don’t think the bias is necessarily a right/left thing however as Trump got the same treatment and look what happened there.
He’s home and dry following the high court decision that new members of the Labour Party can vote.
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB
Owen Smith now down to a 6% chance on Betfair following high court decision that new members can vote
11:28 AM – 8 Aug 2016
Yes the very fact that people are queuing up to join Labour while others are trying to block them is strange. I assume that 6% is an increase in membership? That is huge.
Of course there may be external factors at play, like the rise of UKIP.
No, that’s the odds on Smiffy winning. The bookies take, on the situation. Mind you bear in mind they called Brexit wrong. Though they said it would be close. I think they had the odds on a remain vote at just under 70 percent. Still 6% is fairly damning.
The left can moan about Corbyn all they like but the facts is that a) he was never initially taken as a serious candidate, even by himself. and b) Corbyn will never be British Prime Minister but will ensure the Tories stay in power for years longer.
Politics is all about compromise. You have to compromise to get into power and compromise to stay in power. The media may have an anti-Corbyn bias but they also know that his lack of willingness to make compromises makes him a political joke.
The planning permission granted for O’Deveny gardens (long delayed) regeneration was to have a mix of social rental and affordable homes.
The Workers Party proposal changed the terms or planning permission and as a result, may have to be submitted again, delaying the start by about a year.
The tough lesson learned from Ballymun, Fatima and other social housing projects is that it is a social disaster to only have one income group housed in the same area, that in order for a community to function properly in the medium to long term, its needs a mix of people. Its the same reason why DCC has a ban on gated communities at the other end of the social spectrum.
While intentions may seem sincere, over time, it just develops a ghetto.
That politicians are trying to create their own future base is an angle that seems to be missed in all this.
I agree DubLoony, I’m currently posting this from the social hellhole that is Dalkey. What we need here is an influx of scroungers and single parents to make our community functional again. Some five storey flats on Vico road maybe.
There a loads of scroungers and one parent families in dalkey. The fact that people always think of dalkey as the place to reference the rich is laughable. Its where the people who think they are rich live. Like chelsea in London, Super rich to the normal people. But as a very very well off relative once said to me “Chelsea! I wouldnt live in that kip”.
Oops, that wasn’t in reply to your post Joe.
Corbyn was absent from the Brexit campaign. That alone should be enough to oust him.
Labour in UK has been flooded with new members, something like 100K in 3 days at one stage. Many are not Labour but people who are voting to take down the Labour party from within.
While Corbyn is ‘a political joke’, Owen Smith is platformless amorphous mass.
Both lacking sense of compromise – Corbyn in being rigid, Smith – not knowing the boundaries of compromise. Tough choice between dogmatism and h0-ing :-)
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/17/jeremy-corbyn-trident-compromise-no-nuclear-warheads
‘Jeremy Corbyn’s refusal to be part of the liberal media game, on their terms, may in fact be the wisest strategy of all.’
Arf!
Unelectable, contemptuous of representative democracy, in hock to the far, far left and its anti-Semite fellow travellers, friend of Hamas and Hezbollah, the list goes on and one. He is destroying the British Labour Party and doesn’t seem to care.
Oh and that ‘research’ has been thoroughly debunked but even at face value he’s getting bad press because he’s doing a terrible job.
+1
What’s this ‘unelectable’ talk – he has been elected to be leader of the Labour Party, why does everyone keep saying he is unelectable?
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction – the right in Britain (and here too) are pressing for the total privatisation of the State services for it’s associates/sponsors benefit – British people are generally proud of the NHS and nobody in the UK wants the NHS to be privatized, yet it’s slowly happening through divestment, retardation of services, unnecessary bureaucracy, to make it almost a foregone conclusion and an inevitability that the State will stop providing health support services for it’s citizens , (a process that is far more advanced in the Republic, ads running for hospitals akin to choosing a brand of cat food etc..) – people want to put a stop to this process – so they start voting for an opposing voice – that happens to be Corbyn. He is electable if the people want him.
“He is electable if the people want him” That’s the most meaningless statement on here. You’re ignoring political realities and taking refuge in the kind of high-principled talk that ensure Michael Foot’s well-meaning but essentially naïve determined efforts kept Margaret Thatcher in power in the 1980s. Corbyn’s supporters know only how to commandeer the Labour Party from their bases in far-left groups. They know nothing of winning a general election.
In fairness, he did apologise for the hezbolla hamas friends thing. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/04/jeremy-corbyn-says-he-regrets-calling-hamas-and-hezbollah-friends
Read Owen Jone’s view on Corbyn and Labour :
https://medium.com/@OwenJones84/my-thoughts-on-the-plight-of-labour-38413229f88
and that should be jones’ if BS had an *edit* function
I find it amazing that “research” can “find bias”.
Presumably you could ask 20 people off the street about every single article or news item that was “researched” for this study and get 20 different answers about whether it was biased or not, or whether the parameters used to decide it was biased indicate bias.
Trump gets the same treatment. Not seeing the academics come out supporting him.
This is all a bit ghostbusters. Anyone who doesn’t like it MUST be a misogynist, even though low and behold, it’s actually a bit crap,.
I thought it was pretty good. Better than Ghostbuster II.
This Henry Silke character is a right male genital. You do know he’s middle class himself. One who can afford to do a PHD. Check out his Facebook page ans see the roll call of SJWs on his friends list.
You do know it’s not going to be a roll call to anyone except people like you, nursing grudges on social media, blackening the soul god gave you.
I nurse grudges on real life too. Sometimes I think I should really let all of this go but it I am unable to. Maybe I need to withdraw completely but I am not sure if that will help my mental state.
I sincerely believe you are making things worse for yourself as is. I don’t know what else to say other than to scale back your over-investment in a zero-sum cultural war where people on both sides are delusional and angry. But that advice goes for everyone.
You say middle class like that’s a bad thing. #BougieBougie
I’ve no hang ups about being middle class. However plenty Rabble and Broadsheet posters do.
Didn’t really think you did, old chap!
Is Henry the new Julian?
Imagine if the toffe nosed half royalty of the “Orish Times” had to live among
the poor, they are the outfit that made one the worst investments during the
property boom which they hyped up and ended in a crash.