BCM110

Posted on 17th May 202017th May 2020 by daleramsden

Research Report

How does the government use their media ownership to fake a sense of reality and manipulate the public into siding with their political views?

Introduction

‘Controversial issues are, by their essential nature, unsolvable to everyone’s satisfaction.’ (Kuypers, 2002.) These issues are always controversial and are open to debate and discussions. We often seek out the views of politicians and aristocratic figures. However, it is not often that we consider the message who brings us our information. The information provider and publisher control the way in which the audience perceives the story as schema. This is what is taken advantage of by governments and politicians trying to gain respect from the public. They use their media ownership to create ideal situations and scenarios to push their political viewpoints. The way in which they do this is by creating frames which governments use to create propaganda. Frames propagate a particular point of view. In legacy media the framing and event stages of the story are closed, and the public are unable to obtain accessibility into the story. The public is given a coherent story packaged as a product to be consumed. To survive the legacy media model has to literally stop the audience from acting as a publisher. This is why in order for the audience to side with a government or a politician they need to be able to control every aspect of the content that is being visible by the public.

However, in the new day and age a new format of media emerged. People don’t want to respond to inert content they want to engage and challenge the content. The audience is now introducing their own frames into the story which again repurpose the meaning behind the story and can expose the government’s intentions of framing the story. “The people formerly known as the audience” (Rosen, 2006) were now interacting with all stages of production of a story which has strongly contributed in lowering the government’s media ownership control over the frames in which people perceive reality.

Discussion

A terrific example that highlights the government taking advantage of their media control and ownership can be seen in the children overboard incident which occurred in 2001. “We will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come.” (Howard, 2001) John Howard gained a lot of popularity from this famous quote in that people were willing to support someone that would make a stand against asylum seekers who were framed to be dangerous to society. To support this statement John Howard along with defence minister Peter Reith and Philip Ruddock did everything in their power to demonise the asylum seekers. Reith released photos of children being rescued in the ocean by the HMAS and published them saying that the refugees had thrown their children overboard. This news of asylum seekers putting their children at risk framed them as being callous, threatening and dangerous. As well as this it caused an immediate media frenzy and the photos of the children had been seen by an immense amount of people.

The reality of the situation was that the result of the children being in the water was the boats they were on had sunk due to the extremely poor conditions the boats were under. Only hours after Reith had released the photographs his office was informed that the statements, he had made were false. Despite this Reith didn’t make any attempt to correct his statement and inform the public. Former prime minister Bob Hawke said, “The lie had created a climate of hatred towards asylum seekers and an atmosphere Mr Howard thought was conducive to his re-election.” (Hawke, 2004) The government only corrected the record after an inquiry into the situation was made after the election.

As with the children overboard case, the government didn’t allow asylum seekers any degree of human context. This was done in an attempt to further demonise the asylum seekers and not allow the public to empathise with them. When publishing media to do with Asylum seekers Former defence PR chief Jenny McKenry said, “We were told that there was to be nothing in the public forum which would humanise these people.” (McKenry, 2011). The government only allowed photos of asylum seekers to be long shot; they couldn’t be shown to have any emotion.

In August 2014, four corners released an episode called Australia’s Shame which exposed on the darkest moments in juvenile justice history. The episode explained that in juvenile detentions in the Northern Territory, kids as young as 10 were being locked up and kids at just 13 years old were being put into solitary confinement at the Don Dale juvenile detention centre. After 1 boy managed to escape from his cell due to a guard not locking his door, the Don Dale management team informed the media that a riot had just broken out and 6 boys had escaped and were armed and dangerous. “There was a deliberate effort to misinform the public as to what occurred” (Sharp, 2016). At the time the general public had no idea as to the circumstances that the boys were being kept in and how they were being treated. The NT legal Aid Commission is pursuing a lawsuit against the government, claiming racial discrimination and human rights abuses still continue to occur within juvenile detentions in Northern Territory despite a royal commission handing down a report on the condition in 2017. This incident further implies that the government often abuses their media ownership in order to paint to the public that they are setting a great example for the country.

Conclusion

Controversial issues are unsolvable to everyone’s satisfaction. As we absorb information provided to use by the government, we process it as schema which then determines the way in which we perceive reality. The government uses their media ownership to create the ideal world which will benefit their political opinions. The children overboard affair became of the most controversial focuses of the 2001 federal election campaign and some even say Howard won the election due to this event. Again, with the Don Dale juvenile detention centre, the government hid the fact that these kids were being punished in unhuman ways are were being kept as animals to protect their image to the public. To help prevent these sorts of issues from occurring in the future the Australian public needs to be constantly proactive and not believe everything that the government is telling them.

Annotated Bibliography

Worthington, E., 2020. Evidence Of ‘Torture’ Of Children Held In Don Dale Detention Centre Uncovered By Four Corners – ABC News. [online] Abc.net.au. Available at: <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-25/four-corners-evidence-of-kids-tear-gas-in-don-dale-prison/7656128> [Accessed 17 May 2020].

In this article the author provides extensive information as to the reality of the situation which took place in the Don Dale juvenile detention centre. The article talks about how the media blatantly lied about the 6 boys escaping and causing a riot. Only 1 of the boys escaped out of his cell and even though he escaped he was still in the premise of the building.

Kuypers, J., 2002. Press Bias And Politics. Westport, Conn.: Praeger.

This book written by Jim Kuyper’s gave me some incredible inspiration as it contains a lot of amazing quotes regarding the current problem in that hardly anyone check to see who it is that is publishing the story they read. The book also talks contains statistics about the ratio of people that actually believe everything they read is true on the internet.

The Conversation. 2020. From Tampa To Now: How Reporting On Asylum Seekers Has Been A Triumph Of Spin Over Substance. [online] Available at: <https://theconversation.com/from-tampa-to-now-how-reporting-on-asylum-seekers-has-been-a-triumph-of-spin-over-substance-66638> [Accessed 17 May 2020].

In this article the author provides a lot of different quotes from politicians and their viewpoints about the children overboard scandal. The article also examines the effort the government went to, too demonise the asylum seekers and not humanise them in any way.

Web.archive.org. 2020. They Sank The Boat, Howard Says – Howard In Power – Breaking News 24/7 – NEWS.Com.Au. [online] Available at: <https://web.archive.org/web/20060313072341/http://www.news.com.au/story/0%2C10117%2C18282114-28097%2C00.html> [Accessed 17 May 2020].

In this Article George Megalogenis talks about the extent in which John Howard went into defending himself from the media. The article examines that even after the public knew about the truth of the situation Howard blamed the refugees themselves for sinking the boats. The authors purpose is to challenge John Howard and to alert the public about how wrong he was in his statement.

References

Shame, A., 2020. Australia’s Shame. [online] Four Corners. Available at: <https://www.abc.net.au/4corners/australias-shame-promo/7649462> [Accessed 17 May 2020].

Zillman, S., 2020. Don Dale Mistreatment Continuing Alongside Major Gaps In Mental Health Treatment, Court Documents Allege – ABC News. [online] Abc.net.au. Available at: <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12-20/gaps-in-don-dale-mental-health-treatment-court-documents-allege/10634228> [Accessed 17 May 2020].

the Guardian. 2020. Don Dale Teenager Given Four Years For Riot In Which Inmate’s Cell Was Torched. [online] Available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jul/17/don-dale-teenager-given-four-years-for-riot-in-which-inmates-cell-was-torched> [Accessed 17 May 2020].

Beder, S., 2020. Media Manipulation And Public Relations. [online] Documents.uow.edu.au. Available at: <https://documents.uow.edu.au/~sharonb/mediachap.html> [Accessed 17 May 2020].

Archive.pressthink.org. 2020. Pressthink: The People Formerly Known As The Audience. [online] Available at: <http://archive.pressthink.org/2006/06/27/ppl_frmr_p.html> [Accessed 17 May 2020].

Abc.net.au. 2020. The World Today – Tampa Revisited 07/07/2011. [online] Available at: <http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2011/s3263187.htm> [Accessed 17 May 2020].

Pitt, V., 2011. Leaky Boat. Available at: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ccKArhv28U&t=163s> [Accessed 17 May 2020].

The Age. 2020. Children Overboard The Most Despicable Of Lies: Hawke. [online] Available at: <https://www.theage.com.au/national/children-overboard-the-most-despicable-of-lies-hawke-20040825-gdyiky.html> [Accessed 17 May 2020].

Academic Sources

Marr, D. and Wilkinson, M., 2003. Dark Victory.

Goldberg, B., 2002. Bias. Washington: Regnery.

Kuypers, J., 2002. Press Bias And Politics. Westport, Conn.: Praeger.

Posted on 21st Apr 202022nd Apr 2020 by daleramsden

The Media Theory Toolbox

The public sphere theory was formatted by german philosopher Jurgen Habermas 1962. When Habermas first created the public sphere theory in 1962 he imagined to play out how a coffee shop would have in the 18th century. The basic premise being that it was a social space in which different opinions could be said by everyone in the room and that everyone was free and could be free to talk about relevant issues. Initially though in the 18th century there was a big exclusion of people that were poor and uneducated as it only made sense if you had the money to absorb or contribute to the public sphere in a meaningful way.

*Visual demonstration of how a public sphere might look like*

The definition of a theory states that it is a system of ideas with amendments being made to it throughout time. This is evident with the public sphere theory as it has become held online in a virtual world rather than in a physical situation. “the concept of the public sphere is constantly developing”. The number one reason for this is social media and the internet. Social media increases opportunity for political communication and enables democratic capacity for political discussion within the virtual public sphere. There are infinite public spheres online for example group chats, discussion forums and so on. A big part of my public sphere and where I engage in political discussion is on reddit.

Amazing video giving insight into the background of Habermas and how he developed the public sphere

Reddit is a great app that unites people across the globe to talk about common interests and post content and share to an audience who can relate to them and understand their feelings. It operates through subreddits which are groups that anyone can join and discuss and post content related to this topic of the subreddit. A lot of different subreddits are based for posted news related materials and there are entire subreddits based around political discussion. However in recent times a lot of subreddits have become more mediated in that there are more strict guidelines and criteria that users have to obey and keep in mind when producing content on subreddits. A lot of subreddits have implemented Auto moderator bots that are designed to filter content that doesn’t comply with the rules of the subreddit. This is a great example of how social media has affected the public spheres and users ability to express and open opinion without having to worry about censorship.

This is a screenshot I took from when I tried to post something into a subreddit and it was denied because it didn’t have enough karma points

Almost anyone can access reddit if they have internet and a device of some sort and an internet connection. Although it may seem at first like reddit is a completely inclusive app that allows anyone to post content within the subreddits this is not necessarily the case. A lot of subreddits have been set so that users require a certain amount of Karma points (Points you can gain from posting and commenting) to post something in the subreddit. This is mainly to stop spam but it takes away the freedom of a public sphere as anyone can participate in the discussion.

Media Industries And Ownership

As a member of generation Z I tend to get my news feed about the current world scattered from different sources ranging from articles such as the daily telegraph to YouTube videos by the nine news. In terms of YouTube content is controlled and moderated by YouTube team members who filter the content and distribute it accordingly. A lot of YouTubes control over the media comes from the distribution of their content. On all of the nine news videos the comments are turned off and the like dislike ratio is disabled which prevents any discussion about the video on YouTube. YouTube controls and filters the distribution of the content and in some instances monetises content they find will benefit them the most. If YouTube has the power to not recommend a video to specific audiences if they believe the video contains political opinions different from their own. As well as not recommending videos YouTube can also recommend videos to more users to gain more attention on specific videos. A great example of YouTube abusing their power can be seen through them capitalising people’s deaths and recommending past videos of their life and career just after they die.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is screen-shot-2020-04-12-at-11.25.10-pm.png

Robert Murdoch is a massive figure when it comes to controlling media as he owns 4 main different news outlets in Australia. He has been known to manipulate the truth of matters in his articles to best suit his political views. During the devastating bushfires in Australia Murdoch owned news sources blamed arsonists for the terrible fires and they could have been controlled by people not being stupid. This was indeed proven to be false with only 1% of the fires were proven to be caused by arsonists.

News sources have grown a reputation that they are unreliable over a long period of time which is largely due to the common notion of free speech in Australia and peoples ideologies interfering with facts and studies. This occurrence is extremely common with new sources such as fox news, who have ideological opinions to try and cater to larger audiences and capitalise on revenue. A great example is the coronavirus scandal, at first the news and media made the crisis into a bigger story than it was exaggerating the truth of the situation to gain more attention through audiences as they knew it was the hot topic and everyone was wanting to know information about the new disease.

Great video highlighting how the news has exaggerated the danger of the corona virus

Interpretations and Representations

Photo from advertisement from Moms Demand Action

The photo above is an advertisement created by the Greys group in support of Mums demand action which is a group of over ten thousand individuals to transform the current gun policy in America (https://momsdemandaction.org/) on social media. The group produced this advertisement as a way of provoking the media and American citizens and getting attention to the issues that surround the gun laws in place in America. The advertisement cleverly conveys to the audience that it’s completely unacceptable that ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ is banned in America due to the appearance of wine on the front page of the book. The representation of the ad lies within the techniques and denotations within the ad to put forward their message in the best way possible. The weapon that the girl is holding is a AR-15 semi-automatic rifle which is one of the most common weapons of choice when it comes to school shootings which indicates that they are referring to school shooters in this ad. In this instant referring to the semiotics theory the weapon acts as a signer of the message the sign is trying to get across. The icon of the gun signifies the metaphor of the one gun being responsible for all the school shootings in America. The girls sitting on the ground acts as a symbol representing that they feel helpless and worried about the situation. The girls sitting down also gives more of an effect of just how enormous the gun is in proportion to the girl which makes the gun seem incredibly powerful and destructive compared to the girl sitting on the ground looking helpless and lost.

Another feature that adds to meaning and representation of the purpose of the ad is writing ‘Guess which one’ which appears red to emphasise the dreadful reality in the answer. This combined with the haziness of the background gives the picture an emotion and mood of darkness and dread. The contrast between the two girls is another technique which adds representation to the ad. The girl on the left hand side holding the book is wearing a pink sweater which symbolises hope for future change. This is compared to the girl on the right side who is wearing more of a grey dark green jumper which blends in with the background to represent all the darkness of school shootings and other gun related tragedies.

The advertisement could also be interpreted as the gun being the object that is illegal. If a person hasn’t read about issues to do with the gun policy in America, most would assume that the gun would be the banned substance. A lot of people don’t look carefully at the image at hand if they are either in a rush or don’t read it properly and miss the point of the image being that the ‘the red riding hood’ book is banned in America and not the gun.

This is a great video that really explained to me the meanings of the icon, index and symbol.

References

Encyclopedia Britannica. 2020. Semiotics | Definition, Theory, Examples, & Facts. [online] Available at: <https://www.britannica.com/science/semiotics> [Accessed 19 April 2020].

Moms Demand Action. 2020. Moms Demand Action. [online] Available at: <https://momsdemandaction.org/> [Accessed 19 April 2020].

Nytimes.com. 2020. Once Banned, Now Loved And Loathed: How The AR-15 Became ‘America’S Rifle’. [online] Available at: <https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/03/us/politics/ar-15-americas-rifle.html> [Accessed 19 April 2020].

News, A., 2020. Moms’ Gun Control Ad Cites Dangers Of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’. [online] ABC News. Available at: <https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/04/moms-gun-control-ad-cites-dangers-of-little-red-riding-hood> [Accessed 22 April 2020].

Posted on 21st Apr 2020 by daleramsden

Audiences

My experience of being part of an audience happened about 2 months ago when my local skatepark held a skate demo which featured the Volcom skate team which included some of the best professional skateboarders in the world. I went to the event and there were around 50 other people. I was engaged the entire time watching the skateboarding and it made me feel inspired and amazed at the skill level of the skaters. Prior to the Volcom skate team appearing in their van there were lots of kids skating around the skatepark doing their own things. As soon as the team arrived without everyone being told everybody cleared the park and waited for the pros to come out. It was evident that everyone knew that they needed their space in the skatepark to do their tricks without having to worry about other people.

Throughout the demo there were a few disruptions caused by small kids throwing toys and other objects onto the skatepark which caused a couple of the professionals to bail out of their tricks to avoid the object which slightly ruined the experience of watching them skate.

The way the skate demo was produced with the main ambition to attract as many people as possible to make it a bigger and successful event. The largest target audience group was young kids aged around 7 – 12 and their parents. This was identified by the Volcom skate team in which they selected the best group of skaters from their team to appeal to the younger kids and their parents. The skaters that are more skilled in performing big airs and high risks stunts give off more of a wow factor and are seemingly more impressive and appealing more to the younger generation who assume that high risk means higher skill. Having followed skateboarding for a long time myself I watch and critique skaters in a much different way than what would have originally been intended by the Volcom skate team. When watching skateboarding I look more for the technique and the style of the way tricks are performed over how risky the trick is. This is a great example of the idea from the ministry of education in NZ that, ‘Audiences have a complex relationship with the product they consume’, and also that ‘Media producers intend audiences to read their product in a certain way, but in actual fact everyone enjoys a product differently due to the individual’s background and lifestyle’.

Posted on 17th Apr 2020 by daleramsden