Covering the vote: UK coverage of Brexit, Jeremy Corbyn, and the 2017 General Election (original) (raw)
2018
The need to examine how news media (print, broadcast, and online) cover political events rests in no small part on journalism’s role as a 'fourth estate' or a 'watchdog'. Both terms refer to the role of journalists in keeping government to account, through reporting in a manner that produces a knowledgeable and critical electorate. This paper argues that the current political climate in the UK, Brexit, the ensuing 2017 General Election, and the introduction of controversial political figures make the need for this re-assessment of print, broadcast, and online journalism in the UK ever more pertinent.
Related papers
This research critically assesses the press coverage of Jeremy Corbyn during his leadership bid and subsequent first months as the leader of the UK’s Labour party. A content analysis (n=815) found that the British press offered a distorted and overly antagonistic view of the long-serving MP. Corbyn is often denied a voice and news organisations tended to prize anti-Corbyn sources over favourable ones. Much of the coverage is decidedly scornful and ridicules the leader of the opposition. This analysis also tests a set of normative conceptions of the media in a democracy. In view of this, our research contends that the British press acted more as an attackdog than a watchdog when it comes to the reporting of Corbyn. We conclude that the transgression from traditional monitorial practices to snarling attacks is unhealthy for democracy, and it furthermore raises serious ethical questions for UK journalism and its role in society.
Journalistic transgressions in the representation of Jeremy Corbyn: From watchdog to attackdog
This research critically assesses the press coverage of Jeremy Corbyn during his leadership bid and subsequent first months as the leader of the United Kingdom's Labour Party. A content analysis (n = 815) found that the British press offered a distorted and overly antagonistic view of the long-serving MP. Corbyn is often denied a voice and news organisations tended to prize anti-Corbyn sources over favourable ones. Much of the coverage is decidedly scornful and ridicules the leader of the opposition. This analysis also tests a set of normative conceptions of the media in a democracy. In view of this, our research contends that the British press acted more as an attackdog than a watchdog when it comes to the reporting of Corbyn. We conclude that the transgression from traditional monitorial practices to snarling attacks is unhealthy for democracy, and it furthermore raises serious ethical questions for UK journalism and its role in society.
Resetting journalism in the aftermath of Brexit and Trump
European Journal of Communication, 2018
This article considers the lifeline of the Anglo-American imaginary in news. It tracks its evolution, consolidation during the Cold War era and centrality in the UK/US coverage of Brexit and Trump in 2016-2017. It argues that not only has the imaginary prevailed but it continues to shape contemporary coverage to the detriment of public understanding of current events.
Central European Journal of Communication
Scholarly research into journalists as a subject of study is increasing. Through this, scholars found there is no consensus among journalists about journalistic practice. This is because journalistic roles are discursively recreated, reinterpreted, appropriated, and contested. The coverage of the EU referendum in the UK provides an opportunity to further explore journalistic roles through a focus group of EU and diaspora journalists and academics. The study reveals that participants were critical of the roles played by the British press in the coverage of the referendum and that they were concerned about its effects on their physical and emotional well-being. Hence, they urge media organisations to offer support and training to redress these concerns. In conclusion, the study provides an in-depth and intense probing of journalistic roles and their eff ects in relation to the coverage of the EU referendum.
Foreword: As media and communication scholars we have been troubled by the problematic way in which the British media has systematically attacked Jeremy Corbyn ever since he came to national prominence in the summer of 2015. At the same time, we also acknowledge that the media needs to fulfill an important watchdog role in a democracy. Indeed, we expect and value our media to be critical and to ask difficult and probing questions of those in positions of power. Jeremy Corbyn is an unconventional party leader in a British context, more leftwing than previous leaders of the Labour Party, contesting the neoliberal common sense and promoting an anti-austerity and anti-war agenda. The question we pose here is to what extent this warranted the acerbic and overtly aggressive media reaction he has consistently received over the last year? Is it acceptable for the media to delegitimise to such an extent a legitimate democratic actor who is the leader of the main opposition party in British politics? This study, undertaken by the LSE's Media and Communications Department, set out to empirically analyse the nature of the media representation of Jeremy Corbyn in 8 British newspapers from 1 September – 1 November 2015. First, it distinguishes between critical reporting and what we call antagonistic reporting. Second, it aims to demonstrate and assess the ways in which the British press systematically delegitimised Jeremy Corbyn as a political leader. The results of this study show that Jeremy Corbyn was represented unfairly by the British press through a process of vilification that went well beyond the normal limits of fair debate and disagreement in a democracy. Corbyn was often denied his own voice in the reporting on him and sources that were anti-Corbyn tended to outweigh those that support him and his positions. He was also systematically treated with scorn and ridicule in both the broadsheet and tabloid press in a way that no other political leader is or has been. Even more problematic, the British press has repeatedly associated Corbyn with terrorism and positioned him as a friend of the enemies of the UK. The result has been a failure to give the newspaper reading public a fair opportunity to form their own judgements about the leader of the country's main opposition. The overall conclusion from this is that in this case UK journalism played an attackdog, rather than a watchdog, role. This is unhealthy from a democratic point of view and poses serious ethical questions as to the role of the media in a democracy, especially when it concerns the legitimate contestation of the Government of the day. When a democracy cannot rely on its press to provide its citizens with information about political parties that meets the basic standards of fairness, then we can expect a political process that is equally unbalanced. Recent events may have provided broader evidence of this disturbing trend. Journalistic Representations of Jeremy Corbyn in the British Press: From Watchdog to Attackdog. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316647148\_Journalistic\_Representations\_of\_Jeremy\_Corbyn\_in\_the\_British\_Press\_From\_Watchdog\_to\_Attackdog [accessed Jun 3, 2017].
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.