1.
How did the language and selection of images in the coverage create a particular representation of young people?
The language used in the coverage of the riots suggested that the people involved were young and ethnic minority groups. The types of words used to describe the rioters were displayed on the front page of newspapers to get an audience to immediately associate it with particular groups of people. So Andy Medhurst's theory can be applied to imply shorthand stereotypes were being presented for audiences to create the correlation which would have been young people and destruction. The images conveyed young people as dangerous as they were shown to be creating the carnage.
2.
Why does David Buckingham mention Owen Jones and his work Chavs: the demonisation of the working class?
Owen Jones' book of Chavs was mentioned to identify a new form of class contempt in modern Britain. He argues that the working class has become an object of fear and ridicule but again this is despite the fact many of those ultimately convicted after the rioting were in respectable middle class jobs or from wealthy backgrounds.
3.
What is the typical representation of young people – and teenage boys in particular? What did the 2005 IPSOS/MORI survey find?
Young people are typically represented as the main culprits for the riots. They would come from working class families usually from estates without much hope and the media have tried to create the correlation between them and the riots. It could be argued that they helped the news institutions form these representations and stereotypes because they have been captured on footage destroying the capital. The IPOS/MORI survey found that 40% of newspaper articles featuring young people focused on violence, crime and anit social behaviour and 71% could be described as having a negative tone. More recently a study by the organisation Women in journalism analysed 7000+ stories involving teenage boys, published in online national and regional newspapers during 2008. 72% were negative more than twenty times the number of positive stories. 75% were about crime, drugs or police and the great majority of these were negative (81.5%). 0.3% were positive news stories. There were particular words used to describe teenage boys such as: yobs, thugs, sick, feral, hoodies, louts, heartless,evil, frightening and scum. A few stories described individual teenage boys in glowing terms like: model student, angel, or ever mother's perfect son but without the exception these were all about boys who had met an untimely death.
4.
How can Stanley Cohen’s work on Moral Panic be linked to the coverage of the riots?
The objective of news institutions back in 2011 was to create a moral panic. They wanted the public to fear young people and feel hate towards them and the working class. It separated the nation for sure as middle and upper classes shifted the blame on lower classes alongside the parental skills which would be a catalyst in why youth felt they were invincible. The coverage showed the acts of the young people which could have certainly had an impact on audiences as they watch the capital collapse. The moral panics would be portrayed through the way young people's behaviours at the time which would reinforce the stereotypes and ideologies people already had of teens from estates. Therefore, the media talked up the disturbances into a bigger moral panic.
5.
What elements of the media and popular culture were blamed for the riots?
It was argued that rap music, violent video games or reality TV that was somehow provoking young people to go out and start rioting. The Daily Mail for example blamed the pernicious culture of hatred around rap music, which glorifies violence and loathing of authority (especially the police but including parents) exalts trashy materialism and raves about drugs. They believed it advertised the looting as if it was a Supermarket sweep because of the images of the looters posing for the cameras and displaying their pickings. It was seen as evidences of the narcissism and consumerism of the Big Brother and X Factor generation.
6.
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?
It was believed that the rioters were seen as skillful 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 the Tottenham violence and incite others to join in as they sent messages urging: 'Roll up and Loot'.
7.
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 media decided to highlight the influence the rioters were having on young people. They did this by identifying the rioters as young people. This was significant because it made audiences believe that the carnage and damage was only caused by young people from working classes. Audiences of the middle and upper classes would then be influenced by the way news stories portrayed these young people on a daily basis. Its just like the two step flow model as in audiences are influenced by opinion leaders who are the news institutions and this is through the ways news stories of the rioters were told which was negative with the constant reference of the youth.
8.
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?
A media scholar like Henry Jenkins tend to celebrate these kinds of 'participatory' media and some see this as evidence of a wholesale democratisation of the communication system. They believe that the age of the big media of powerful, centralised corporations controlling media is now finished. I don't entirely believe this is true because audiences are still being influenced by news institutions especially when it comes to how they portray groups of people to reinforce ideologies. For example, the US election and the EU referendum were two massive events of last year which the news institutions tried to play a part to ensure their views were shared with the public. However, audiences do have some type power now as digital media has developed over the years. Social media is the main reason why audiences are able to share opinions amongst a wide range of people with a mixture of opinions.
9.
What were the right-wing responses to the causes of the riots?
Right wing responses were aiming at working class citizens and young people in particular. These types of news institutions (Daily Mail) wanted to form news stories that would be a preferred reading of their audiences reinforcing ideologies of lower classes. So this would be middle and upper classes uniting to argue/fight back through the media seen as they are the ones with power. Furthermore, race was introduced in the discussion where some television shows held Q and A sessions with political people and some of them blamed the black culture for the riots as it represents gang culture according to them.
10.
What were the left-wing responses to the causes of the riots?
Left wing responses were countering the points made by right wing media. For example the cuts in youth services lead to the increase in rising youth unemployment and the removal of the education maintenance allowance.
11.
What are your OWN views on the main causes of the riots?
I believe the internet played a major role in the riots of 2011 especially when considering the ages of the people involved in the events. Many young people were seen roaming the streets of London causing carnage and this is because of the hype the riots caused online. Just like with a sporting event like the World cup where everyone wants to join in, we saw many young people of London wanting to be part of the rebellious behaviour news institutions had broadcast to millions. Social media specifically had many people sharing their opinions on the riots but before it became anything serious people were using it to unit and fight back against the authorities.
12.
How can capitalism be blamed for the riots? What media theory (from our new/digital media unit) can this be linked to?
12
13.
Were people involved in the riots given a voice in the media to explain their participation?
Yes the rioters were given the chance to explain themselves and this was during the events. News reporters would stop some of the rioters to ask them about their views and the purpose of their acts.
14.
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?
The rioters reasoning for the riots was the distrust and antipathy towards police. Analysts reported that they got some of their findings from social media like Tweets on Twitter and it showed some of the reasons for the riots. Some people were using the riots as an opportunity to help their quality of life and often described the riots as an opportunity to 'grab free stuff'. Also, it seemed David Cameron's claims of gangs being heavily affiliated with the riots wasn't entirely true as researchers found out they played a marginal role. Furthermore it seemed people were using social media to communicate specifically the BBM service BlackBerry offered.
15.
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?
My opinion on the riots is that most people saw it as an opportunity to get many items for free. Usually with riots we mainly see carnage and explosions which I don't dispute occurred in 2011 but many footage showed people looting and stealing from shops. However, it could have been mediated by news institutions to make audiences believe that these rioters were clueless of the peaceful protest that once was before the riots actually evolved.
