How did the language and selection of images in the coverage create a particular representation of young people?
Language such as the "feral youth", the "hoodies", and "yobs" paired alongside the image of "one black, hooded young man which appeared on at least five front pages" created a very negative representation of young people. The representation created by the coverage showed the youth to be destructive who don't care about anything and just give in to these primal urges.
Why does David Buckingham mention Owen Jones and his work Chavs: the demonisation of the working class?
Owen Jones points to emergence of a new form of class contempt. He argues that the working class have become an object for fear and ridicule and are being targeted by the media, despite the fact that most of those convicted after the riots were actually from respectable middle-class jobs, or wealthy backgrounds.
What is the typical representation of young people – and teenage boys in particular? What did the 2005 IPSOS/MORI survey find?
The typical representation of young people - and teenage boys in particular - is, the vast majority of the time, negative. The IPSOS/MORI survey found that 40% of newspaper articles featuring young people focused on violence, crime or anti-social behaviour; and that 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?
It can be argued that the coverage of the riots were perhaps misrepresented to reflect a much more general fear of young people (and especially of working-class young people); a view that is already held by many of the adults of Britain's society. You can also argue that media talked up the disturbances into a bigger 'Moral Panic'.
What elements of the media and popular culture were blamed for the riots?
Rap music, violent computer games, and reality TV were blamed for provoking young people to go out and start rioting. It was also suggested that the looting of sportswear shops were inflamed by advertising.
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 allowing rioters to co-ordinate their actions. Twitter was heavily mentioned as many rioters were telling others to "roll up and loot". Blackberry's messaging system was also mentioned: Being described as a "communications tool for high-flying executives", "gang members" used this to organise the mayhem. However, social media and technology was seen in a much more positive light during the "Arab Spring". Would there need to be a dictatorship and, subsequently, revolution in Britain for social media to be seen as a good thing? Or is it just one more thing the media is trying to put the blame to keep the masses' eyes away from the more important issues.
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?
As the riots were covered and people saw this coverage, opinions were being formed about the events happening. These opinions caused their comments to be altered, and influenced, into a somewhat biased comment. When these influenced comments are plastered all over the internet, the rest of the audience will read these comments - from the 'opinion leaders' - and become influenced themselves. This fuels a circle in which most of the audience becomes encapsulated in a biased opinion-influenced comment, and anyone with an alternative opinion or comment is immediately disregarded and shot down.
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?
Jenkins thinks that the convergence of media should be understood as a cultural process, and not a technological end-point. Also, I think that this does show more democratisation in the media as the masses now a anonymous point-of-access; in which they can show their views and have freedom of expression. However, this has resulted in people taking advantage of this by trying to cause offence. Trolling has also formed as a part of this as there can be no backlash due to anonymity.
What were the right-wing responses to the causes of the riots?
The right-wing response to the cause of the riots was to blame 'liberal', left-wing values and , particularly, the idea of a welfare state. Max Hastings of the Daily Mail said ‘Years of liberal dogma have spawned a generation of amoral, uneducated, unparented, welfare dependent, brutalised youngsters’. Right-wingers have also blamed schools specifically for failing to instil discipline and respect for authority.
What were the left-wing responses to the causes of the riots?
The left-wing response to the cause of the riots was to blame poverty and deprivation. They also point to the cuts in youth services, rising youth unemployment, and the removal of the Education Maintenance Allowance.
What are your OWN views on the main causes of the riots?
I think that a lack of guidance from a young age mixed in with the media itself constantly showing the youth in a negative light has caused these people act out. Being told that you're good for nothing and having services to help you cut, as well as the influence of gang culture (drugs and alcohol come into this) can make for a very amoral youth. If no-ones helping you when you need it, then why would you stay quiet when something s happening to your community or to someone you know or love. However, it doesn't help when people who are doing for the fun of it start to join in. That defeats the purpose of acting out.
How can capitalism be blamed for the riots? What media theory (from our new/digital media unit) can this be linked to?
Many made the link between the riots and capitalism. If politicians or executives can lie, cheat and bribe their way to the top of the hierarchy, then why can't the less-privileged working-class do the same. Due to the materialistic society we live in, we see our possessions as defining our worth in society (of course our jobs and backgrounds come into this as well), so when an opportunity arises where we can steal goods to raise our worth,we take it. This can be linked to the theory of hegemony; where the corporate elite try to keep the power by manipulating the media and keep the class divide.
Were people involved in the riots given a voice in the media to explain their participation?
Many people were not given a voice as this would challenge the representation already established by the media. This comes back to Marxism as the elite was to keep control of what is being shown and said in the media so they can control and influence the opinions of the masses.
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?
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 can understand why those who acted out did so, but it's still inexcusable. A man died and a teenager was assaulted by police at a peaceful protest. But that doesn't mean you should go and steal a TV from your local ASDA! Also, people died during the riots and many people were harmed in some way. And for what? So you get those trainers you couldn't afford from Footlocker. I can sympathise with that minority who were actually standing up for what they believed in, but those who just took advantage of the situation are the reason why the media portrays the youth in such a negative light. It can be argued that because of this negative portrayal, that these people took advantage of the situation. But, then that just fuels the media even more and thus becomes this vicious cycle in which will probably end in another riot. Its like the question: What came first, the chicken of the egg (although scientists did prove in 2010 that the chicken came first)? Lastly, I think that strong prison sentences isn't the right approach. I think providing these youth-specific services again will help to keep them on the right track.
