Category: Political Communication

Original analysis essay questions
Brief: Choose ONE of the questions below, and drawing on relevant academic literature, conduct an original analysis on your chosen example of political communication in an essay of no more than 1,200 words.
· The seminar tasks will give you the opportunity to practice analysis of examples, so please do use that experience to inform your analysis.  You will probably find it easier to choose a topic where you attended and participated in the seminar that week, but please do not use the text used in class for your own analysis.
· Your essay should have a clear and coherent structure, including a brief introduction and conclusion.  
· The introduction should briefly outline the specific piece of political communication that you are analysing, and the sample you have chosen, e.g. which scandal, which specific newspapers, within what date-range.  
· The analysis should draw on reading from the reading lists for the relevant topics in order to explain the analytical concept(s) that you will use (e.g. populism, the protest paradigm, etc.). 
· If analysing a sample of press coverage, please use the Nexis database to identify a coherent but manageable sample of newspaper articles (around 7-15 articles, depending on length).  I have given you some hints about how you might do that in the notes on the relevant questions. 
· Your analysis should make relevant observations of your chosen piece of communication, including evidence (brief quotes, references to specific news articles and/or webpages) that allow you to answer the question set.  
STRUCTURING YOUR ANALYSIS
Your essay should have an introduction that briefly sets out what the essay aims to do and how it will be structured (i.e. the key analytical themes below) 
You will need a paragraph or two to set out the key concepts from a range of academic reading on the topic – these readings should inform the analytical themes of your framing analysis.
The main body of the essay should take those themes in turn (e.g. for populism, anti-elite rhetoric might be one theme), and connect them to one another with transitional sentences so that the argument flows. 
Like any essay, you need to wrap it up with a conclusion that summarises your argument – in this case how your analytical findings answer the question set.
How to fit all the analysis in:
• Don’t take the text in chronological order – gather together everything you
have highlighted as a specific theme and summarise it with illustrative example,
then move on to the next one
• You do not need to quote everything that fits under given theme, but do
summarise the extent to which that theme appears
• Please feel free to include the full analysis in some form in an appendix – this
won’t count toward the word count, but do make sure anything that is crucial to
your answer to the question is included in the essay proper!
1. Political publics
Choose one press release from Extinction Rebellion’s press page* and compare it with coverage in at least one right/conservative newspaper (e.g. Daily Mail, Times, Telegraph) and one left/liberal newspaper (e.g. Guardian, Independent, Mirror)**.  How do they compare in their presentation of cause and tactics, and accordance with the protest paradigm?
* You may choose a different protest movement press page with the approval of the module convener, and if located in another country the relevant newspapers
**Please choose comparable newspapers – i.e. two tabloids or two quality/broadsheet newspapers
2. Persuasion and deliberation
Analyse a recent broadcast* or parliamentary (or equivalent, e.g. congressional in the US) debate to assess the extent to which it uses deliberative or plebiscitary the argumentation.  
* E.g. UK examples include the Conservative party leadership election debates, an episode of BBC Question Time, BBC Radio 4 Any Questions, or perhaps an episode of The Moral Maze or Across the Red Line that focuses on a broadly political question.  Consult the module convenor if you are unsure whether your chosen example is appropriate.
3. Personalisation, populism and celebrity politics
Analyse EITHER one recent substantial speech by a populist political figure (a full transcript) OR one social media account of a populist leader (at least 20 recent posts).  Explain why you define that figure as a populist and identify the populist tropes in their communication.  Evaluate the significance of this populist communication within the national politics of their country.  
4. Contested truth claims
Analyse a fact-checking or OSINT verification* assessment of a political claim and compare its use of evidence and interpretation to mainstream news reporting of the claim.  
* E.g. Full Fact (UK), Channel 4 News (UK), Politifacts (US), BBC Verify, or Bellingcat.
5. Scandal, truth and trust
Analyse one recent mediated political scandal in terms of themes from the literature.  How did the news media justify the story’s political significance in relation to the public interest or morality, and to what extent did the accused manage to resist or deflect public opprobrium?
6. Human interest
Analyse the use of personal narratives and emotion in communication of the Post Office Horizon IT scandal*.  Compared to more ‘objective’ accounts of the controversy, how effectively do they convey the political significance of the events?
* You may use a different case study with the approval of the module convener
Course content
Part 2: Public opinion & political participation
In the previous section of the module, we focused on the relationship between politicians’ communication and journalists’ reporting on both their words and actions.  However, politicians are not the only political actors – ordinary citizens also take a variety of political roles, as voters, supporters, and activists that politicians try to court.  And their political action is not limited to the realm of formal, parliamentary politics, but also includes street and online politics, often related to single issue campaigns.  In this section, we will explore how ordinary publics are rhetorically invoked by populist politicians and journalists alike, and how they make their authentic voices heard. 
1. Political publics
Journalists implicitly invoke a notion of the public when claiming to serve the public interest, but they also attribute specific characteristics and opinions to ‘the public’, portraying them (us!) as politically passive and reactive, and often as silent.  Indeed, when citizens become politically active and vocal via protest, the media has traditionally discursively excluded them from their definition of ‘the public’, and rather presented them as a nuisance to the ‘genuine’ public.  However, political publics are no longer entirely dependent on the mass media for representation of their claims and demands.  With citizen journalism websites such as Indymedia, blogs, and later social media, activists can be the media.  
This week we will examine how the public is characterised in mainstream news media, on what basis, and whether social media has changed this, as well as how protest movements can circumvent news media to mobilise support online, self-mediate their protest activity, and even use the internet as a site of protest.
Public opinion: As part of their watchdog role, journalists often claim to speak for the people or represent their interests (the public interest), especially when criticising politicians and policy.  However, like populist politicians they largely intuit this sense of who ‘the public’ are and what they believe or demand – what constitutes ‘public opinion’ – through heuristics such as other media and personal contacts, or occasionally opinion polling.  
Interest & issue publics: The existence of multiple publics rather than one monolithic public opinion is most visible in interest and issue publics.  Interest publics are groups that advocate for their own (largely economic) benefit, such as trade unions on the one hand and business interest groups on the other. Issue publics are those who have particular social and political concerns that are not related to their personal interest (as in, they won’t personally benefit from the changes they support).  This overlaps with more organised forms of civil society such as professional associations and charities, but is encapsulated most clearly in social movements.
Here is an interesting example of differing interpretations of journalism ethics in relation to protest. The BBC is currently caught up in a controversy over newly issued guidelines on impartiality, including support for social movements in their private lives and on social media. The Director General has decreed that support for Gay Pride is not political (in Hallin’s terms – in the sphere of consensus) if merely ‘celebratory’, but that Black Lives Matter is politically contentious (and therefore in the sphere of legitimate controversy) and therefore journalists should not express support. What do you think? Read the full story here (Confusion at BBC as boss says staff can attend Pride marches after all | BBC | The Guardian), plus reporting on the initial announcement of social media rules for journalists here, and an analysis of the ideological connotations of the term ‘virtue signalling’ here (Virtue signalling: the culture war phrase now in BBC guidelines | BBC | The Guardian). 
Alternative media: We’ll start with the ways in which political issue publics can voice their own concerns through online platforms.  We will focus on particular on protesters’ efforts to challenge the dominant framing of the protest paradigm through their own self-representation, starting with Indymedia in 1999, and increasingly now through mainstream social media.  Next, we’ll turn to how online platforms help to mobilise support among likeminded people, and allow protest movements to spread far and wide. Finally, we’ll briefly look at the internet as a site of protest, both in terms of online petition sites and hacktivism.
Reading List
Gil-Lopez, T. (2021) ‘Mainstream Protest Reporting in the Contemporary Media Environment: Exploring (In)Stability and Adherence to Protest Paradigm From 1998 to 2017’, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 98(3): 692–724 doi: 10.1177/1077699020984783
Lewis, J., Inthorn, S. and Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2005).  Citizens or Consumers? What the Media Tell Us About Citizen Participation.  Maidenhead: Open University Press link to scan of chapter 8
Broersma, M. and Graham, T. (2013) ‘Twitter as a News Source’, Journalism Practice, 7(4): 446-464, doi: 10.1080/17512786.2013.802481
Bourdieu, P. (1979) ‘Public Opinion Does Not Exist’, in Mattelart, A. and Siegelaub, S. (eds.), Communication and Class Struggle, Vol 1, pp.124-130.
Philo, G., Hewitt, J. and Beharrell, P. (1995) ‘And Now They’re Out Again’: Industrial News., in Winston, B., et al (eds.) Glasgow Media Group Reader, Volume 1. London: Routledge link
Davis, A. (2002) Public Relations Democracy: Public Relations, Politics and the Mass Media in Britain, Manchester: Manchester University Press
Gitlin, T. (2003). The whole world is watching: Mass media in the making and unmaking of the new left. Univ of California Press.
McLeod, D. M. and Hertog, J. K. (1992). The manufacture of public opinion by reporters: informal cues for public perceptions of protest groups. Discourse & Society, 3(3), 259-275 doi: 10.1177%2F0957926592003003001
Boyle, M. P., McLeod, D. M., & Armstrong, C. L. (2012) ‘Adherence to the Protest Paradigm: The Influence of Protest Goals and Tactics on News Coverage in U.S. and International Newspapers’, The International Journal of Press/Politics, 17(2): 127–144. doi: 10.1177/1940161211433837
Harlow, S., & Johnson, T. J. (2011). The Arab Spring: Overthrowing the Protest Paradigm? International Journal of Communication, 5, 16 link
Kyriakidou, M., & Olivas Osuna, J. J. (2017). The Indignados protests in the Spanish and Greek press: Moving beyond the ‘protest paradigm’? European Journal of Communication, 32(5): 457–472. doi: 10.1177/0267323117720342
Gil-Lopez, T. (2021) ‘Mainstream Protest Reporting in the Contemporary Media Environment: Exploring (In)Stability and Adherence to Protest Paradigm From 1998 to 2017’, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 98(3): 692–724 doi: 10.1177/1077699020984783
Giraud, E. (2014). Has radical participatory online media really ‘failed’? Indymedia and its legacies. Convergence, 20(4): 419–437 doi: 10.1177/1354856514541352
Atton, Chris (2009) ‘Alternative and Citizen Journalism; in Wahl-Jorgensen and Hanitzsch (eds.) The Handbook of Journalism Studies, London: Routledge, pp.265-278
Lievrouw, Leah (2011) Alternative and Activist New Media. Polity Press. ProQuest Ebook Central link to ebook
Allan, Stuart (2013) Citizen Witnessing : Revisioning Journalism in Times of Crisis, Polity Press. ProQuest Ebook Central link to chapter 4
Rucht, Dieter (2013) ‘Protest movements and their media usages’ in Cammaerts, Matoni and McCurdy (eds) Mediation and Protest Movements. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp 249-268 ProQuest ebook link
Lievrouw, L.A. (2011) Alternative and Activist New Media. Cambridge: Polity [link to mobilization chapter]
Rheingold, H. (2007). Smart mobs:  The next social revolution. Basic books.
Penney, J. and Dadas, C. (2014). (Re)Tweeting in the service of protest: Digital composition and circulation in the Occupy Wall Street movement. New Media & Society, 16(1): 74–90. doi: 10.1177/1461444813479593
Rheingold, H. (2008). ‘Mobile Media and Collective Political Action’; in Katz, J.E. (ed.) Handbook of Mobile Communication Studies, MIT Press; ProQuest, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/nottingham/reader.action?docID=3338873&ppg=238
Tudoroiu, T. (2014) ‘Social Media and Revolutionary Waves: The Case of the Arab Spring,’ New Political Science, 36(3): 346-365, doi: 10.1080/07393148.2014.913841
Lievrouw, L. (2011) Alternative and Activist New Media. Polity Press. [link to chapter on hacking & hacktivism]
Milan, S. (2015) ‘Hacktivism as a Radical Media Practice’, in Atton, C. (ed.) The Routledge Companion to Alternative and Community Media. London: Routledge, pp. 550-560, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2901929
Denisova, A. (2019). Internet Memes and Society: Social, Cultural, and Political Contexts. ProQuest Ebook Central https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/nottingham/detail.action?docID=5739573
2. Persuasion and deliberation
Last week we looked at the public’s participation in politics, as citizens, voters and activists, and as discursively constructed in the media as ‘public opinion.’  This week we will consider how citizens form their opinions in relation to attempts to persuade them, and how knee-jerk resistance to political persuasion can lead us to cling on to mistaken beliefs, and to reject sound evidence and arguments, through ‘motivated reasoning.’  However, often we are unconvinced by political argumentation and debate because we are aware that it is strategic and manipulative, so it is also beholden on public figures to use constructive forms of political argumentation consistent with deliberative ideals. 
Political belief: This week we’ll start by considering how we come to form our political belief, and how it can be tied in with a partisan identity that we become emotionally attached to.  Persuasion attempts may also be experienced as threats to our autonomy as independent thinkers, leading us to instinctively dismiss or counterargue anything that contradicts or challenges our political beliefs – in other words, to use motivated reasoning (also termed motived scepticism, or motivated cognition).   
Adversarial debate: Next, we’ll look at the adversarialism of dominant forms of political debate, and their media reporting.  Audiences complain that election leader debates, in particular, are marked by debaters attacking their opponent rather than explaining their own policies, avoiding answering questions and using pre-prepared “rehearsed” or “scripted” statements.  Debaters are not seeking to persuade their opponent, but rather to defeat them in the eyes of the audience.  Nonetheless, this results in an alienating spectacle for the audience, who can enjoy and gossip about the drama, but do not feel respected or enabled as political decision-makers. 
I recommend Stephen Coleman’s excellent podcast series, The Sound of Politics, as an accompaniment to this topic, especially episode 1, which includes a contribution from an ex-producer of BBC Question Time.
Deliberative debate: If typical forms of debate are unproductive, then, what would be a better way to consider new information and arguments and make up our minds?  The ideals of deliberative democracy suggest some productive ways of persuading in a way that engages the listener’s thinking and reflection, and conflict mediation suggests techniques to improve our listening skills and to see things from others’ points of view. 
Some interesting examples of current affairs programming that does this include BBC Radio 4’s Across the Red Line (BBC Radio 4 – Across the Red Line) and the BBC Podcast AntiSocial (BBC Radio 4 – AntiSocial), which has the tagline ‘peace talks for the culture wars.’
Reading List
Davidson, S., Elstub, S., Johns, R. et al. (2017) Rating the debates: The 2010 UK party leaders’ debates and political communication in the deliberative system. British Politics 12: 183–208. DOI: 10.1057/s41293-016-0021-9
Taber, C.S. and Lodge, M. (2006), Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50: 755-769. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x
Coleman, Stephen and Moss, Giles (2016). Rethinking Election Debates: What Citizens Are Entitled to Expect. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 21(1), 3-24. https://doi-org.nottingham.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1940161215609732
Kock, Christian (2021). Evaluating Public Deliberation: Including the Audience Perspective. Journal of Deliberative Democracy, 17(2), pp. 45–56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.945
Groot Kormelink, T., & Costera Meijer, I. (2017). “It’s Catchy, but It Gets You F*cking Nowhere”: What Viewers of Current Affairs Experience as Captivating Political Information. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 22(2), 143-162. https://doi-org.nottingham.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1940161217690881
Chambers, S. (2009). Rhetoric and the Public Sphere: Has Deliberative Democracy Abandoned Mass Democracy? Political Theory, 37(3), 323-350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591709332336
Davidson, S., Elstub, S., Johns, R. et al. (2017) Rating the debates: The 2010 UK party leaders’ debates and political communication in the deliberative system. British Politics 12: 183–208. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-016-0021-9
Botes, Johannes and Jennifer Langdon. 2006. “Public Radio Talk Show Hosts and Social Conflict: An Analysis of Self-Reported Roles During Debates and Discussion.” Journal of Radio Studies 13(2): 266–286. (ResearchGate link to PDF)
Goldstein, N. J., Vezich, I. S., & Shapiro, J. R. (2014). Perceived perspective taking: When others walk in our shoes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(6), 941–960. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036395
3. Personalisation, populism and celebrity politics
Almost as soon as democracy became established in Western Europe and North America, concerns were expressed that the popular votes might not always be commensurate with social justice.  Liberal theorists such as JS Mill and Alexis de Tocqueville expressed this concern as ‘the tyranny of the majority’, as dominant groups could oppress minorities through majoritarian democratic mechanisms such as the British FPTP (first past the post) system.  Whilst others such as Habermas have promoted the ideal of deliberation oriented to the public interest within the ‘public sphere’, in practice many voters have become disillusioned with formal (‘establishment’) politics.  As policy decisions become increasingly complex and technical, politics increasingly takes place on the battlefield of trust, and voters may favour charismatic leaders from outside politics (such as Donald Trump) as more trustworthy than competent technocrats.  As such, populism is related to the wider trend of the personalisation of politics.  Nonetheless, populism is a form of ‘loyal’ or ‘semi-loyal opposition’ that does not undermine procedural democracy itself but seeks to change it from within, whereas a ‘disloyal’ opposition or ‘anti-politics’ would seek revolution to overthrow the system.
Dimensions of populism: Populism is a term that has been bandied about a lot in recent years, especially in the wake of the US Presidential election and British EU referendum in 2016.  But what does it mean?  Watch this lecture video to start to explore the dimensions of populism – that is, the criteria by which we might identify it. 
Personality politics: Next, we’ll turn to the wider influence of a populist style on political communication in general, and especially in terms of personality politics, whereby celebrities run for offices and career politicians promote themselves in a similar way. Is politics ‘showbiz for ugly people’? Here’s an example of a news feature on a political persona – Joe Biden, the US President when he was Democratic Party candidate for President.  Do you think that this focuses on what Langer (2012) calls ‘performance-related personality traits’ (leadership qualities) or more personal traits? Big value with our flexible tickets | EMR (youtube.com)
Some of the seminar responses have brought up the significance of Trump’s use of Twitter for his political communication and campaigning. You might find this Channel 4 documentary interesting: President Trump: Tweets From the White House (Watch President Trump: Tweets from the White House | Stream free on Channel 4)
Implications: Finally, what does populism mean for political communication?  Is this a way of re-engaging people with politics, on an emotional level?  Does political marketing make parties as ‘brands’ more responsive to voters, or does treating citizens as consumers damage the social contract between politicians and publics? 
Reading list:
Fahey, J.J. (2021) ‘Building Populist Discourse: An Analysis of Populist Communication in American Presidential Elections, 1896–2016’. Social Science Quarterly, 102: 1268-1288. https://doi-org.nottingham.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/ssqu.12951
Barr RR. (2009) Populists, Outsiders and Anti-Establishment Politics. Party Politics 15(1): 29-48. doi:10.1177/1354068808097890
Frajman, E. (2014) ‘Broadcasting Populist Leadership: Hugo Chávez and Aló Presidente’, Journal of Latin American Studies, 46: 1-26 https://www.jstor.org/stable/24544171
Canovan, M. (1999) ‘Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy’ Political Studies XLVII 2-16 doi:10.1111/2F1467-9248.00184
Waisbord, S. (2012) ‘Democracy, Journalism, and Latin American Populism’, Journalism 14(4) 504–21 doi: 10.1177%2F1464884912464178
Fahey, J.J. (2021) ‘Building Populist Discourse: An Analysis of Populist Communication in American Presidential Elections, 1896–2016’. Social Science Quarterly, 102: 1268-1288. DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12951
Lorenzetti, M.I. (2018) ‘A cross-linguistic study of new populist language’, in Kranert, M., & Horan, G. (eds.) Doing politics: Discursivity, performativity and mediation in political discourse. John Benjamins Publishing Company / ProQuest
Street, J. (2003) ‘The Celebrity Politician: Political Style and Popular Culture’, in Corner, J. and Pels, D. (eds) Media and the Restyling of Politics, London: Sage, pp. 85-98.
Langer, A.I. (2010) ‘The Politicization of Private Persona: Exceptional Leaders or the New Rule? The Case of the UK and the Blair Effect’. International Journal of Press/Politics, 15 (1). pp. 60-76 doi:10.1177/2F1940161209351003
Scammell, M. (2003) ‘Citizen Consumers: towards a new marketing of politics?’ in Corner, J. and Pels, D. (eds.) Media and the Re-styling of Politics.  London: Sage, pp. 117-36.
Street, J. (2019) ‘What is Donald Trump? Forms of ‘Celebrity’ in Celebrity Politics’, Political Studies Review, 17(1): 3-13. doi: 10.1177/1478929918772995.
Street, J. (2003) ‘The Celebrity Politician: Political Style and Popular Culture’, in Corner, J. and Pels, D. (eds) Media and the Restyling of Politics, London: Sage, pp. 85-98.
Langer, A.I. (2010) ‘The Politicization of Private Persona: Exceptional Leaders or the New Rule? The Case of the UK and the Blair Effect’. International Journal of Press/Politics, 15 (1). pp. 60-76 doi:10.1177/2F1940161209351003
Scammell, M. (2003) ‘Citizen Consumers: towards a new marketing of politics?’ in Corner, J. and Pels, D. (eds.) Media and the Re-styling of Politics.  London: Sage, pp. 117-36.
Street, J. (2019) ‘What is Donald Trump? Forms of ‘Celebrity’ in Celebrity Politics’, Political Studies Review, 17(1): 3-13. doi: 10.1177/1478929918772995.
Part 3: Issues in mediated political communication
In the third and final section of the module, we will consider some specific debates around the quality of political journalism.  This connects back to the question of the public interest that we addressed at the start of the module in relation to media freedom, power and responsibilities.  This throws up interesting questions about proportionality – for instance, balancing scrutiny and respect for privacy – and the ways in which the profit motive can interfere with journalists’ professional ethics.  We will also, however, consider the ways in which political news needs to engage the audience in order to fulfil their public interest role.  
4. Contested truth claims
In addition to publics, their representatives or leaders, and other powerful figures such as corporations, there is another groups of people that engage in political communication – experts such as scientists, academics, professionals (e.g. in law or health) and other specialist civil society organisations.  In an increasingly complex and interconnected world, they are crucial as government advisors in all kinds of political system, but in democratic and transitional states they have a public role to inform debate in the public sphere about how best to achieve common goals and serve ‘the public interest’.  The global journalistic norm of ‘objectivity’ also favours expertise in terms of ‘credible’ sources, particularly in offering informed criticism of government policy.  However, there is also a tension with the democratic principle of democracy, especially when the reasoning of those experts is obscure and opaque to the inexpert public.  In populist rhetoric, therefore, expert judgement can be rejected in favour of the instincts (and prejudices) of the public.  All of this is complicated further by the nature of scientific knowledge as developing and often contingent, especially when we need this knowledge to guide our actions in a ‘risk society’ characterised by global risks such as climate change and of course pandemics. 
Risk, credibility & trust: This week we’ll start with a general consideration of trust, and especially when it comes to risk and uncertainty, when facts are hard to come by, and the extent to which we trust information we find in news media and online. (https://youtu.be/HkpIF6eGjoY)
Risk reporting: The challenges with identifying what is true when the science is not yet settled, or predicting what will happen in the future, presents difficulties both for politicians deciding on the best course of action, and for journalists reporting on the issue. 
Fact-checking: Many journalists are aware of the limitations of their conventional practices, and new kinds of reporting (e.g. peace journalism, public journalism) have emerged over the years to address these shortcomings, as we saw in week 4.  The latest of these tries to address the difficulties of reporting truth when sources are not truthful, or are mistaken in their assertions.  This is fact-checking journalism, and although it emerged to verify political claims in election campaigns, it has evolved to cover a wider array of misinformation, including rumours and disinformation on social media.
Reading list: 
Lehmkuhl, M. & Peters, H.P. (2016) ‘Constructing (un-)certainty: An exploration of journalistic decision-making in the reporting of neuroscience’, Public Understanding of Science 25(8): 909-926 doi: 10.1177/0963662516646047
Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Robinson, T., Eddy, K., and Kleis Nielsen, R. (2023) Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2023. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism link
Dunwoody, S. and Konieczna, M. (2013) ‘The role of global media in telling the climate change story’, in Ward, S.  (ed.) Global Media Ethics: Problems and Perspectives, Proquest, pp. 171-190 Link to chapter
Peters, H.P. & Dunwoody, S. (2016) ‘Scientific uncertainty in media content: Introduction to this special issue’, Public Understanding of Science 25(8): 893–908 doi: 10.1177/0963662516670765
Schudson, M. (2019) ‘The Fall, Rise, and Fall of Media Trust’, Columbia Review https://www.cjr.org/special_report/the-fall-rise-and-fall-of-media-trust.php
Kitzinger, J. (1999) ‘Researching Risk and the Media’, Health, Risk & Society, 1(1): 55-69, doi: 10.1080/13698579908407007
Priest, S.H. (2005) ‘Risk Reporting: Why Can’t They Ever Get it Right?’ in Allan, S. (ed.) Journalism: Critical Issues. McGraw-Hill Education / Proquest link
Yang, G. (2013) ‘Contesting Food Safety in the Chinese Media: Between Hegemony and Counter-Hegemony’, The China Quarterly (214): 337-355. link
Holland, K., Sweet, M., Blood, R. W. and Fogarty, A. (2014) ‘A Legacy of the Swine Flu Global Pandemic: Journalists, Expert Sources, and Conflicts of Interest’, Journalism, 15(1): 53–71. doi: 10.1177/1464884913480460
Cottle, S. (2009) Global Crisis Reporting: Journalism in the Global Age. Maidenhead: Open University Press link to ebook
Graves, L. (2016) Deciding What’s True: The Rise of Political Fact-Checking in American Journalism. New York: Columbia University Press / ProQuest ebook link
Birks, J. (2019) Fact-Checking Journalism and Political Argumentation : A British Perspective. Basingstoke: Palgrave/Proquest ebook  (there is also an end-user report of statistical findings you can download here)
PEN (2017) Faking News: Fraudulent News and the Fight for Truth.  New York: PEN America link
Cushion, Stephen, Marina Morani, Maria Kyriakidou & Nikki Soo (2022) Why Media Systems Matter: A Fact-Checking Study of UK Television News during the Coronavirus Pandemic, Digital Journalism, 10:5, 698-716, DOI: 10.1080/21670811.2021.1965490
Morani, M., Cushion, S., Kyriakidou, M., & Soo, N. (2022). Expert voices in the news reporting of the coronavirus pandemic: A study of UK television news bulletins and their audiences. Journalism, 23(12), 2513-2532. https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849221127629
Birks, J. (2019) ‘UK election 2019: public resistance to factchecking’, The Conversation, available online: https://theconversation.com/uk-election-2019-public-resistance-to-factchecking-128565
Birks, J. (2019) ‘Fact-checking GE2019 compared to fact-checking GE2017’, LSE Policy and Politics Blog, available online: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/fact-checking-ge2019/
Birks, J. (2017) ‘Fact-checkers’ attempts to check rhetorical slogans and misinformation’, in Thorsen, E., Jackson, D. and Lillieker, D. (eds.) Election Analysis 2017 available online: http://www.electionanalysis.uk/uk-election-analysis-2019/section-1-truth-lies-and-civic-culture/fact-checkers-attempts-to-check-rhetorical-slogans-and-misinformation/
5. Scandals, sleaze and trust
In the context of hyper-adversarial media and political communication, with the lack of resources for investigative journalism coupled with increasingly personalised politics, the watchdog role of the news media often takes the form of mediated scandal.  Mediated scandal is that enacted, defined and sustained in and by mass media (Thompson 2000).  The narratives of such scandals fit with traditions of morality tales and popular storytelling, but are motivated in part by the profit-orientation of commercial media as much as (or more than) the public interest.  Political scandals are more common in, but not exclusive to, liberal democracies, and most frequently take the form of sex, financial or power scandals.  Sex scandals ultimately stem from the disparity between front and back stage performances of self (Goffman 1969), which despite being a common distinction in everyday life, can be interpreted as hypocrisy in public figures when glimpses of the back stage persona clash with a highly managed image.  This is culturally specific, however, as there are differences between countries and over time in how appropriate revelations about politicians’ private lives are.  Financial and power scandals are more overtly political as they relate to conflicts of interest.  We will examine a range of scandals including Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, the British MPs’ expenses and disgraced former Chinese politician, Bo Xilai.
Defining mediated scandal: This week we’ll start with a definition of mediated scandals and then will explore the ways in which scandal narratives typically play out. 
Sex, cash & power scandal: Next we’ll look at the three main kinds of scandal – sex scandals, financial scandals and power scandals – with reference to some examples, and examine how they relate to the watchdog and morality narratives. 
Here’s another sex scandal involving hypocrisy – a far-right Hungarian MEP, in a government that has been oppressive to LGBT rights,  implicated in an alleged gay orgy during lockdown in Brussels: link to story (Far-right MEP resigns after attending an alleged sex party – Channel 4 News)
Here’s an example of a financial scandal: the UK government PPE procurement scandal (https://youtu.be/Yukl2qUX-FM)
Causes & consequences: Finally for this week, let’s examine why there has been an increase in mediated scandals in recent years, and why this matters and what it means in terms of ethics and transparency in politics. Scandal-hit politicians often hit back at the media to try to discredit them, which is also very troubling for the health of a democracy.  This edition of the Journalism History podcast (Feldstein podcast: Wars on the Press by Richard Nixon and Donald Trump – Journalism History journal (journalism-history.org)) discusses Trump’s attacks on the media in the historical context of Nixon’s.Please read chapter 3 of Thompson’s Political scandal: Power and visibility in the media age (Thompson – Mediated Scandal.pdf (nottingham.ac.uk))
Familiarise yourself with a recent mediated political scandal from anywhere in the world.  Obvious recent examples from the UK include the Partygate scandal over lockdown parties in 10. Downing St, or Chris Pincher’s appointment as deputy chief whip despite sexual impropriety, or indeed any one of the numerous scandals (Scandal after scandal: timeline of Tory sleaze under Boris Johnson | Conservatives | The Guardian) that dogged Boris Johnson’s premiership.
Reading list:
Vorberg, L., & Zeitler, A. (2019). ‘This is (not) Entertainment!’: media constructions of political scandal discourses in the 2016 US presidential election. Media, Culture & Society, 41(4), 417-432. DOI: 10.1177/0163443719833288
Thompson, J.B. (2000) Political Scandal: Power and visibility in the media age. Cambridge: Polity / ProQuest (ebook link)
Nyan, B. (2014) ‘Scandal Potential: How Political Context and News Congestion Affect the President’s Vulnerability to Media Scandal’, British Journal of Political Science 45(2): 435-66 doi:10.1017/S0007123413000458
Stanyer, J. (2004) ‘Politics and the Media: a Crisis of Trust?’, Parliamentary Affairs 57(2): 420-34 doi: 10.1093/pa/gsh034
Tumber, H. and Waisbord, S. (2004) ‘Political Scandals and Media Across Democracies’, The American Behaviourial Scientist 47(9): 1143-52
Downey, J. and Stanyer, J. (2013) ‘Exposing Politicians’ Peccadilloes in Comparative Context: Explaining the Frequency of Political Sex Scandals in Eight Democracies Using Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis’, Political Communication 30(3): 495-509 doi: 10.1080/10584609.2012.737434
Chadwick, A. (2011) ‘The Political Information Cycle in a Hybrid News System: The British Prime Minister and the “Bullygate” Affair’, International Journal of Press/Politics 16(1):3-29 doi:  10.1177/1940161210384730
Miltner, K.M. and Baum, N.K. (2015) ‘The Selfie of the Year of the Selfie: Reflections on a Media Scandal’, International Journal of Communication 9: 1701-15.  link
Doig, Alan (2004) ‘Sleaze, Ethics and Codes: The Politics of Trust’, Parliamentary Affairs 57(2): 435-52 10.1093/pa/gsh035
Lee, F.L.F. (2017) Political Scandals, “Black Materials,” and Changing Backstage Imaginary in the Hong Kong Press, 2001–2015, Chinese Journal of Communication, 10:4, 450-465, DOI: 10.1080/17544750.2017.1372492
Vorberg, L., & Zeitler, A. (2019). ‘This is (not) Entertainment!’: media constructions of political scandal discourses in the 2016 US presidential election. Media, Culture & Society, 41(4), 417-432. DOI: 10.1177/0163443719833288
Zulli, D. (2020). Political Scandals in the Modern Media Environment: Applying a New Analytical Framework to Hillary Clinton’s Whitewater and E-Mail Scandals. International Journal Of Communication, 14, 19. Retrieved from https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/14397/3244
Thompson, John B. (2000) Political Scandal: Power and visibility in the media age. Cambridge: Polity / ProQuest (ebook link)
Nyan, Brendan (2014) ‘Scandal Potential: How Political Context and News Congestion Affect the President’s Vulnerability to Media Scandal’, British Journal of Political Science 45(2): 435-66 doi:10.1017/S0007123413000458
Tumber, Howard (2004) ‘Scandal and Media in the United Kingdom: from Major to Blair’, The American Behaviourial Scientist 47(8): 1122-37.
Kelso, Alexandra (2009), ‘Parliament on its Knees: MPs’ Expenses and the Crisis of Transparency at Westminster’, The Political Quarterly, 80: 329-338 doi: 10.1111/j.1467-923X.2009.02005.x
6. Political storytelling
Political communication is generally associated with ‘hard’ news stories about the serious business of government, as opposed to the frothy ‘soft’ news of human interest and entertainment stories.  However, such coverage privileges that which politicians and officials have to say, and excludes the perspective of the ordinary person affected by policies decisions and social issues.  Human interest stories can, therefore, be political.  On the one hand, they can be reactionary moral panic stories that reinforce the dominant (government / elite) agenda, such as scapegoating immigrants and demonising welfare benefit claimants.  On the other hand, they can give those marginalised groups a voice, and challenge that dominant discourse by showing how their experiences contradict official accounts.  However, stories about ‘victims’ can portray them as passive and inspiring our pity and charity, rather than as political agents demanding social change and seeking our solidarity, especially in news of suffering in the global south.
Dumbing down/reaching out: This week, we’ll begin with the debate over whether human interest angles on socio-political stories are evidence of ‘dumbing down’, or whether they actually increase people’s engagement in political issues and widen the scope of what is regarded as politically significant.
Political value: Next, let’s look more closely at how these stories need to be reported to have political value or significance – which relates back to the same issues of public interest versus morality tales and prurient sensationalism that we looked at last week.
Distant suffering: Finally, we’ll consider the transnational angle – focusing on the role of human interest stories in news of poverty and conflict in the global south.  For an example of some recent reporting of distant suffering, please watch this news item (warning: contains distressing content)
· Indefinite sentences for minor offences: https://www.channel4.com/news/campaigners-urge-government-to-resentence-all-those-serving-indeterminate-sentences
· Women pushed into sex work due to cost of living crisis: https://www.channel4.com/news/358027
· High court ruling on puberty blockers: https://www.channel4.com/news/puberty-blockers-for-under-16s-ruled-on-by-high-court-judges
· Family hit by airstrike in Syria: https://www.channel4.com/news/what-happened-to-one-syrian-family-in-aftermath-of-airstrike 
Looking at your chosen example story, say what the personal narratives add to understanding of the political issue
Reading list:
MacDonald, M. (2000) ‘Rethinking Personalization in Current Affairs Journalism’, in Sparks. C. and Zelizer. B. (eds.) Tabloid Tales: Global debates over media standards. Oxford: Rowan and Littlefield, pp.251–266 link
Franklin B (1997) Newszak & News Media. London: Arnold
McLachlan, S. and Golding, P. (2000) ‘Tabloidization in the British press: A quantitative investigation into changes’, in Sparks, C. and Tulloch, J. (eds.), Tabloid tales: Global debates over media standards. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 75–90
Temple, M. (2006) ‘Dumbing Down is Good for You’, British Politics 1(2); 257–273 doi:  10.1057/palgrave.bp.4200018
Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2013) ‘Subjectivity and Story-telling in journalism’, Journalism Studies 14(3): 305–320 doi: 10.1080/1461670X.2012.713738
Brandenburg, H. (2006) ‘Pathologies of the Virtual Public Sphere,’ in Oates, Owen and Gibson (eds.) The Internet and Politics: Citizens, Voters and Activists. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 207-222
Mchakulu, Japhet Ezra July (2018) Mediating an alternative public sphere: Malawian readers attitudes and perceptions towards a tabloid, Cogent Social Sciences, 4:1, 1452841, DOI: 10.1080/23311886.2018.1452841
MacDonald, M. (2000) ‘Rethinking Personalization in Current Affairs Journalism’, in Sparks, C. and Zelizer, B. (eds.) Tabloid Tales: Global debates over media standards. Oxford: Rowan and Littlefield, pp.251–266 link
Harper, S. (2014) ‘Framing the Philpotts: Anti-welfarism and the British newspaper reporting of the Derby house fire verdict’, International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 10(1): 83-98 doi: 10.1386/macp.10.1.83_1
Birks, J. (2017). ‘Moving Life Stories Tell Us Just Why Politics Matters’: Personal Narratives in Tabloid Anti-Austerity Campaigns, Journalism, 18(10): 1346–1363.doi:  10.1177/1464884916671159
Langer, J. (1992) ‘Truly Awful News on Television’, in: Dahlgren, P. and Sparks, C. (eds.) Journalism and Popular Culture. London: Sage, pp. 113–129 link
Thorbjørnsrud, K. & Ytreberg, E. (2020) A Human Interest Economy: The Strategic Value of Turning Ordinary People into Exemplars in the News Media, Journalism Studies, 21(8): 1093-1108, DOI: 10.1080/1461670X.2020.1720520
Polletta, F. & Redman, N. (2020) When do stories change our minds?  Narrative persuasion about social problems, Sociology Compass 14:e12778 DOI: 10.1111/soc4.12778
Wahl-Jorgensen, K. and Pantti, M, (2013)  ‘Ethics of Global Disaster Reporting: Journalistic Witnessing and Objectivity’, in Ward, Stephen J.A. (ed) Global Media Ethics: Problems and Perspectives.  Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp.191-215.  
Chouliaraki, L. (2008) ‘The Symbolic Power Of Transnational Media: Managing The Visibility Of Suffering’, Global Media and Communication 4(3): 329-51 doi: 10.1177%2F1742766508096084
Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2013) ‘The strategic ritual of emotionality: A case study of Pulitzer Prize-winning articles’, Journalism, 14(1): 129–145 doi: 10.1177/1464884912448918
Lugo-Ocando, J. (2015) Blaming the Victim: How Global Journalism Fails Those in Poverty. London: Pluto Press.
Robinson, Piers (2011) ‘The CNN Effect Reconsidered’, Media, War & Conflict 4(1): 3-11. doi: 10.1177/1750635210397434

Original analysis essay questions
Brief: Choose ONE of the questions below, and drawing on relevant academic literature, conduct an original analysis on your chosen example of political communication in an essay of no more than 1,200 words.
· The seminar tasks will give you the opportunity to practice analysis of examples, so please do use that experience to inform your analysis.  You will probably find it easier to choose a topic where you attended and participated in the seminar that week, but please do not use the text used in class for your own analysis.
· Your essay should have a clear and coherent structure, including a brief introduction and conclusion.  
· The introduction should briefly outline the specific piece of political communication that you are analysing, and the sample you have chosen, e.g. which scandal, which specific newspapers, within what date-range.  
· The analysis should draw on reading from the reading lists for the relevant topics in order to explain the analytical concept(s) that you will use (e.g. populism, the protest paradigm, etc.). 
· If analysing a sample of press coverage, please use the Nexis database to identify a coherent but manageable sample of newspaper articles (around 7-15 articles, depending on length).  I have given you some hints about how you might do that in the notes on the relevant questions. 
· Your analysis should make relevant observations of your chosen piece of communication, including evidence (brief quotes, references to specific news articles and/or webpages) that allow you to answer the question set.  
STRUCTURING YOUR ANALYSIS
Your essay should have an introduction that briefly sets out what the essay aims to do and how it will be structured (i.e. the key analytical themes below) 
You will need a paragraph or two to set out the key concepts from a range of academic reading on the topic – these readings should inform the analytical themes of your framing analysis.
The main body of the essay should take those themes in turn (e.g. for populism, anti-elite rhetoric might be one theme), and connect them to one another with transitional sentences so that the argument flows. 
Like any essay, you need to wrap it up with a conclusion that summarises your argument – in this case how your analytical findings answer the question set.
How to fit all the analysis in:
• Don’t take the text in chronological order – gather together everything you
have highlighted as a specific theme and summarise it with illustrative example,
then move on to the next one
• You do not need to quote everything that fits under given theme, but do
summarise the extent to which that theme appears
• Please feel free to include the full analysis in some form in an appendix – this
won’t count toward the word count, but do make sure anything that is crucial to
your answer to the question is included in the essay proper!
1. Political publics
Choose one press release from Extinction Rebellion’s press page* and compare it with coverage in at least one right/conservative newspaper (e.g. Daily Mail, Times, Telegraph) and one left/liberal newspaper (e.g. Guardian, Independent, Mirror)**.  How do they compare in their presentation of cause and tactics, and accordance with the protest paradigm?
* You may choose a different protest movement press page with the approval of the module convener, and if located in another country the relevant newspapers
**Please choose comparable newspapers – i.e. two tabloids or two quality/broadsheet newspapers
2. Persuasion and deliberation
Analyse a recent broadcast* or parliamentary (or equivalent, e.g. congressional in the US) debate to assess the extent to which it uses deliberative or plebiscitary the argumentation.  
* E.g. UK examples include the Conservative party leadership election debates, an episode of BBC Question Time, BBC Radio 4 Any Questions, or perhaps an episode of The Moral Maze or Across the Red Line that focuses on a broadly political question.  Consult the module convenor if you are unsure whether your chosen example is appropriate.
3. Personalisation, populism and celebrity politics
Analyse EITHER one recent substantial speech by a populist political figure (a full transcript) OR one social media account of a populist leader (at least 20 recent posts).  Explain why you define that figure as a populist and identify the populist tropes in their communication.  Evaluate the significance of this populist communication within the national politics of their country.  
4. Contested truth claims
Analyse a fact-checking or OSINT verification* assessment of a political claim and compare its use of evidence and interpretation to mainstream news reporting of the claim.  
* E.g. Full Fact (UK), Channel 4 News (UK), Politifacts (US), BBC Verify, or Bellingcat.
5. Scandal, truth and trust
Analyse one recent mediated political scandal in terms of themes from the literature.  How did the news media justify the story’s political significance in relation to the public interest or morality, and to what extent did the accused manage to resist or deflect public opprobrium?
6. Human interest
Analyse the use of personal narratives and emotion in communication of the Post Office Horizon IT scandal*.  Compared to more ‘objective’ accounts of the controversy, how effectively do they convey the political significance of the events?
* You may use a different case study with the approval of the module convener
Course content
Part 2: Public opinion & political participation
In the previous section of the module, we focused on the relationship between politicians’ communication and journalists’ reporting on both their words and actions.  However, politicians are not the only political actors – ordinary citizens also take a variety of political roles, as voters, supporters, and activists that politicians try to court.  And their political action is not limited to the realm of formal, parliamentary politics, but also includes street and online politics, often related to single issue campaigns.  In this section, we will explore how ordinary publics are rhetorically invoked by populist politicians and journalists alike, and how they make their authentic voices heard. 
1. Political publics
Journalists implicitly invoke a notion of the public when claiming to serve the public interest, but they also attribute specific characteristics and opinions to ‘the public’, portraying them (us!) as politically passive and reactive, and often as silent.  Indeed, when citizens become politically active and vocal via protest, the media has traditionally discursively excluded them from their definition of ‘the public’, and rather presented them as a nuisance to the ‘genuine’ public.  However, political publics are no longer entirely dependent on the mass media for representation of their claims and demands.  With citizen journalism websites such as Indymedia, blogs, and later social media, activists can be the media.  
This week we will examine how the public is characterised in mainstream news media, on what basis, and whether social media has changed this, as well as how protest movements can circumvent news media to mobilise support online, self-mediate their protest activity, and even use the internet as a site of protest.
Public opinion: As part of their watchdog role, journalists often claim to speak for the people or represent their interests (the public interest), especially when criticising politicians and policy.  However, like populist politicians they largely intuit this sense of who ‘the public’ are and what they believe or demand – what constitutes ‘public opinion’ – through heuristics such as other media and personal contacts, or occasionally opinion polling.  
Interest & issue publics: The existence of multiple publics rather than one monolithic public opinion is most visible in interest and issue publics.  Interest publics are groups that advocate for their own (largely economic) benefit, such as trade unions on the one hand and business interest groups on the other. Issue publics are those who have particular social and political concerns that are not related to their personal interest (as in, they won’t personally benefit from the changes they support).  This overlaps with more organised forms of civil society such as professional associations and charities, but is encapsulated most clearly in social movements.
Here is an interesting example of differing interpretations of journalism ethics in relation to protest. The BBC is currently caught up in a controversy over newly issued guidelines on impartiality, including support for social movements in their private lives and on social media. The Director General has decreed that support for Gay Pride is not political (in Hallin’s terms – in the sphere of consensus) if merely ‘celebratory’, but that Black Lives Matter is politically contentious (and therefore in the sphere of legitimate controversy) and therefore journalists should not express support. What do you think? Read the full story here (Confusion at BBC as boss says staff can attend Pride marches after all | BBC | The Guardian), plus reporting on the initial announcement of social media rules for journalists here, and an analysis of the ideological connotations of the term ‘virtue signalling’ here (Virtue signalling: the culture war phrase now in BBC guidelines | BBC | The Guardian). 
Alternative media: We’ll start with the ways in which political issue publics can voice their own concerns through online platforms.  We will focus on particular on protesters’ efforts to challenge the dominant framing of the protest paradigm through their own self-representation, starting with Indymedia in 1999, and increasingly now through mainstream social media.  Next, we’ll turn to how online platforms help to mobilise support among likeminded people, and allow protest movements to spread far and wide. Finally, we’ll briefly look at the internet as a site of protest, both in terms of online petition sites and hacktivism.
Reading List
Gil-Lopez, T. (2021) ‘Mainstream Protest Reporting in the Contemporary Media Environment: Exploring (In)Stability and Adherence to Protest Paradigm From 1998 to 2017’, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 98(3): 692–724 doi: 10.1177/1077699020984783
Lewis, J., Inthorn, S. and Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2005).  Citizens or Consumers? What the Media Tell Us About Citizen Participation.  Maidenhead: Open University Press link to scan of chapter 8
Broersma, M. and Graham, T. (2013) ‘Twitter as a News Source’, Journalism Practice, 7(4): 446-464, doi: 10.1080/17512786.2013.802481
Bourdieu, P. (1979) ‘Public Opinion Does Not Exist’, in Mattelart, A. and Siegelaub, S. (eds.), Communication and Class Struggle, Vol 1, pp.124-130.
Philo, G., Hewitt, J. and Beharrell, P. (1995) ‘And Now They’re Out Again’: Industrial News., in Winston, B., et al (eds.) Glasgow Media Group Reader, Volume 1. London: Routledge link
Davis, A. (2002) Public Relations Democracy: Public Relations, Politics and the Mass Media in Britain, Manchester: Manchester University Press
Gitlin, T. (2003). The whole world is watching: Mass media in the making and unmaking of the new left. Univ of California Press.
McLeod, D. M. and Hertog, J. K. (1992). The manufacture of public opinion by reporters: informal cues for public perceptions of protest groups. Discourse & Society, 3(3), 259-275 doi: 10.1177%2F0957926592003003001
Boyle, M. P., McLeod, D. M., & Armstrong, C. L. (2012) ‘Adherence to the Protest Paradigm: The Influence of Protest Goals and Tactics on News Coverage in U.S. and International Newspapers’, The International Journal of Press/Politics, 17(2): 127–144. doi: 10.1177/1940161211433837
Harlow, S., & Johnson, T. J. (2011). The Arab Spring: Overthrowing the Protest Paradigm? International Journal of Communication, 5, 16 link
Kyriakidou, M., & Olivas Osuna, J. J. (2017). The Indignados protests in the Spanish and Greek press: Moving beyond the ‘protest paradigm’? European Journal of Communication, 32(5): 457–472. doi: 10.1177/0267323117720342
Gil-Lopez, T. (2021) ‘Mainstream Protest Reporting in the Contemporary Media Environment: Exploring (In)Stability and Adherence to Protest Paradigm From 1998 to 2017’, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 98(3): 692–724 doi: 10.1177/1077699020984783
Giraud, E. (2014). Has radical participatory online media really ‘failed’? Indymedia and its legacies. Convergence, 20(4): 419–437 doi: 10.1177/1354856514541352
Atton, Chris (2009) ‘Alternative and Citizen Journalism; in Wahl-Jorgensen and Hanitzsch (eds.) The Handbook of Journalism Studies, London: Routledge, pp.265-278
Lievrouw, Leah (2011) Alternative and Activist New Media. Polity Press. ProQuest Ebook Central link to ebook
Allan, Stuart (2013) Citizen Witnessing : Revisioning Journalism in Times of Crisis, Polity Press. ProQuest Ebook Central link to chapter 4
Rucht, Dieter (2013) ‘Protest movements and their media usages’ in Cammaerts, Matoni and McCurdy (eds) Mediation and Protest Movements. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp 249-268 ProQuest ebook link
Lievrouw, L.A. (2011) Alternative and Activist New Media. Cambridge: Polity [link to mobilization chapter]
Rheingold, H. (2007). Smart mobs:  The next social revolution. Basic books.
Penney, J. and Dadas, C. (2014). (Re)Tweeting in the service of protest: Digital composition and circulation in the Occupy Wall Street movement. New Media & Society, 16(1): 74–90. doi: 10.1177/1461444813479593
Rheingold, H. (2008). ‘Mobile Media and Collective Political Action’; in Katz, J.E. (ed.) Handbook of Mobile Communication Studies, MIT Press; ProQuest, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/nottingham/reader.action?docID=3338873&ppg=238
Tudoroiu, T. (2014) ‘Social Media and Revolutionary Waves: The Case of the Arab Spring,’ New Political Science, 36(3): 346-365, doi: 10.1080/07393148.2014.913841
Lievrouw, L. (2011) Alternative and Activist New Media. Polity Press. [link to chapter on hacking & hacktivism]
Milan, S. (2015) ‘Hacktivism as a Radical Media Practice’, in Atton, C. (ed.) The Routledge Companion to Alternative and Community Media. London: Routledge, pp. 550-560, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2901929
Denisova, A. (2019). Internet Memes and Society: Social, Cultural, and Political Contexts. ProQuest Ebook Central https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/nottingham/detail.action?docID=5739573
2. Persuasion and deliberation
Last week we looked at the public’s participation in politics, as citizens, voters and activists, and as discursively constructed in the media as ‘public opinion.’  This week we will consider how citizens form their opinions in relation to attempts to persuade them, and how knee-jerk resistance to political persuasion can lead us to cling on to mistaken beliefs, and to reject sound evidence and arguments, through ‘motivated reasoning.’  However, often we are unconvinced by political argumentation and debate because we are aware that it is strategic and manipulative, so it is also beholden on public figures to use constructive forms of political argumentation consistent with deliberative ideals. 
Political belief: This week we’ll start by considering how we come to form our political belief, and how it can be tied in with a partisan identity that we become emotionally attached to.  Persuasion attempts may also be experienced as threats to our autonomy as independent thinkers, leading us to instinctively dismiss or counterargue anything that contradicts or challenges our political beliefs – in other words, to use motivated reasoning (also termed motived scepticism, or motivated cognition).   
Adversarial debate: Next, we’ll look at the adversarialism of dominant forms of political debate, and their media reporting.  Audiences complain that election leader debates, in particular, are marked by debaters attacking their opponent rather than explaining their own policies, avoiding answering questions and using pre-prepared “rehearsed” or “scripted” statements.  Debaters are not seeking to persuade their opponent, but rather to defeat them in the eyes of the audience.  Nonetheless, this results in an alienating spectacle for the audience, who can enjoy and gossip about the drama, but do not feel respected or enabled as political decision-makers. 
I recommend Stephen Coleman’s excellent podcast series, The Sound of Politics, as an accompaniment to this topic, especially episode 1, which includes a contribution from an ex-producer of BBC Question Time.
Deliberative debate: If typical forms of debate are unproductive, then, what would be a better way to consider new information and arguments and make up our minds?  The ideals of deliberative democracy suggest some productive ways of persuading in a way that engages the listener’s thinking and reflection, and conflict mediation suggests techniques to improve our listening skills and to see things from others’ points of view. 
Some interesting examples of current affairs programming that does this include BBC Radio 4’s Across the Red Line (BBC Radio 4 – Across the Red Line) and the BBC Podcast AntiSocial (BBC Radio 4 – AntiSocial), which has the tagline ‘peace talks for the culture wars.’
Reading List
Davidson, S., Elstub, S., Johns, R. et al. (2017) Rating the debates: The 2010 UK party leaders’ debates and political communication in the deliberative system. British Politics 12: 183–208. DOI: 10.1057/s41293-016-0021-9
Taber, C.S. and Lodge, M. (2006), Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50: 755-769. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x
Coleman, Stephen and Moss, Giles (2016). Rethinking Election Debates: What Citizens Are Entitled to Expect. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 21(1), 3-24. https://doi-org.nottingham.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1940161215609732
Kock, Christian (2021). Evaluating Public Deliberation: Including the Audience Perspective. Journal of Deliberative Democracy, 17(2), pp. 45–56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.945
Groot Kormelink, T., & Costera Meijer, I. (2017). “It’s Catchy, but It Gets You F*cking Nowhere”: What Viewers of Current Affairs Experience as Captivating Political Information. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 22(2), 143-162. https://doi-org.nottingham.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1940161217690881
Chambers, S. (2009). Rhetoric and the Public Sphere: Has Deliberative Democracy Abandoned Mass Democracy? Political Theory, 37(3), 323-350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591709332336
Davidson, S., Elstub, S., Johns, R. et al. (2017) Rating the debates: The 2010 UK party leaders’ debates and political communication in the deliberative system. British Politics 12: 183–208. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-016-0021-9
Botes, Johannes and Jennifer Langdon. 2006. “Public Radio Talk Show Hosts and Social Conflict: An Analysis of Self-Reported Roles During Debates and Discussion.” Journal of Radio Studies 13(2): 266–286. (ResearchGate link to PDF)
Goldstein, N. J., Vezich, I. S., & Shapiro, J. R. (2014). Perceived perspective taking: When others walk in our shoes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(6), 941–960. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036395
3. Personalisation, populism and celebrity politics
Almost as soon as democracy became established in Western Europe and North America, concerns were expressed that the popular votes might not always be commensurate with social justice.  Liberal theorists such as JS Mill and Alexis de Tocqueville expressed this concern as ‘the tyranny of the majority’, as dominant groups could oppress minorities through majoritarian democratic mechanisms such as the British FPTP (first past the post) system.  Whilst others such as Habermas have promoted the ideal of deliberation oriented to the public interest within the ‘public sphere’, in practice many voters have become disillusioned with formal (‘establishment’) politics.  As policy decisions become increasingly complex and technical, politics increasingly takes place on the battlefield of trust, and voters may favour charismatic leaders from outside politics (such as Donald Trump) as more trustworthy than competent technocrats.  As such, populism is related to the wider trend of the personalisation of politics.  Nonetheless, populism is a form of ‘loyal’ or ‘semi-loyal opposition’ that does not undermine procedural democracy itself but seeks to change it from within, whereas a ‘disloyal’ opposition or ‘anti-politics’ would seek revolution to overthrow the system.
Dimensions of populism: Populism is a term that has been bandied about a lot in recent years, especially in the wake of the US Presidential election and British EU referendum in 2016.  But what does it mean?  Watch this lecture video to start to explore the dimensions of populism – that is, the criteria by which we might identify it. 
Personality politics: Next, we’ll turn to the wider influence of a populist style on political communication in general, and especially in terms of personality politics, whereby celebrities run for offices and career politicians promote themselves in a similar way. Is politics ‘showbiz for ugly people’? Here’s an example of a news feature on a political persona – Joe Biden, the US President when he was Democratic Party candidate for President.  Do you think that this focuses on what Langer (2012) calls ‘performance-related personality traits’ (leadership qualities) or more personal traits? Big value with our flexible tickets | EMR (youtube.com)
Some of the seminar responses have brought up the significance of Trump’s use of Twitter for his political communication and campaigning. You might find this Channel 4 documentary interesting: President Trump: Tweets From the White House (Watch President Trump: Tweets from the White House | Stream free on Channel 4)
Implications: Finally, what does populism mean for political communication?  Is this a way of re-engaging people with politics, on an emotional level?  Does political marketing make parties as ‘brands’ more responsive to voters, or does treating citizens as consumers damage the social contract between politicians and publics? 
Reading list:
Fahey, J.J. (2021) ‘Building Populist Discourse: An Analysis of Populist Communication in American Presidential Elections, 1896–2016’. Social Science Quarterly, 102: 1268-1288. https://doi-org.nottingham.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/ssqu.12951
Barr RR. (2009) Populists, Outsiders and Anti-Establishment Politics. Party Politics 15(1): 29-48. doi:10.1177/1354068808097890
Frajman, E. (2014) ‘Broadcasting Populist Leadership: Hugo Chávez and Aló Presidente’, Journal of Latin American Studies, 46: 1-26 https://www.jstor.org/stable/24544171
Canovan, M. (1999) ‘Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy’ Political Studies XLVII 2-16 doi:10.1111/2F1467-9248.00184
Waisbord, S. (2012) ‘Democracy, Journalism, and Latin American Populism’, Journalism 14(4) 504–21 doi: 10.1177%2F1464884912464178
Fahey, J.J. (2021) ‘Building Populist Discourse: An Analysis of Populist Communication in American Presidential Elections, 1896–2016’. Social Science Quarterly, 102: 1268-1288. DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12951
Lorenzetti, M.I. (2018) ‘A cross-linguistic study of new populist language’, in Kranert, M., & Horan, G. (eds.) Doing politics: Discursivity, performativity and mediation in political discourse. John Benjamins Publishing Company / ProQuest
Street, J. (2003) ‘The Celebrity Politician: Political Style and Popular Culture’, in Corner, J. and Pels, D. (eds) Media and the Restyling of Politics, London: Sage, pp. 85-98.
Langer, A.I. (2010) ‘The Politicization of Private Persona: Exceptional Leaders or the New Rule? The Case of the UK and the Blair Effect’. International Journal of Press/Politics, 15 (1). pp. 60-76 doi:10.1177/2F1940161209351003
Scammell, M. (2003) ‘Citizen Consumers: towards a new marketing of politics?’ in Corner, J. and Pels, D. (eds.) Media and the Re-styling of Politics.  London: Sage, pp. 117-36.
Street, J. (2019) ‘What is Donald Trump? Forms of ‘Celebrity’ in Celebrity Politics’, Political Studies Review, 17(1): 3-13. doi: 10.1177/1478929918772995.
Street, J. (2003) ‘The Celebrity Politician: Political Style and Popular Culture’, in Corner, J. and Pels, D. (eds) Media and the Restyling of Politics, London: Sage, pp. 85-98.
Langer, A.I. (2010) ‘The Politicization of Private Persona: Exceptional Leaders or the New Rule? The Case of the UK and the Blair Effect’. International Journal of Press/Politics, 15 (1). pp. 60-76 doi:10.1177/2F1940161209351003
Scammell, M. (2003) ‘Citizen Consumers: towards a new marketing of politics?’ in Corner, J. and Pels, D. (eds.) Media and the Re-styling of Politics.  London: Sage, pp. 117-36.
Street, J. (2019) ‘What is Donald Trump? Forms of ‘Celebrity’ in Celebrity Politics’, Political Studies Review, 17(1): 3-13. doi: 10.1177/1478929918772995.
Part 3: Issues in mediated political communication
In the third and final section of the module, we will consider some specific debates around the quality of political journalism.  This connects back to the question of the public interest that we addressed at the start of the module in relation to media freedom, power and responsibilities.  This throws up interesting questions about proportionality – for instance, balancing scrutiny and respect for privacy – and the ways in which the profit motive can interfere with journalists’ professional ethics.  We will also, however, consider the ways in which political news needs to engage the audience in order to fulfil their public interest role.  
4. Contested truth claims
In addition to publics, their representatives or leaders, and other powerful figures such as corporations, there is another groups of people that engage in political communication – experts such as scientists, academics, professionals (e.g. in law or health) and other specialist civil society organisations.  In an increasingly complex and interconnected world, they are crucial as government advisors in all kinds of political system, but in democratic and transitional states they have a public role to inform debate in the public sphere about how best to achieve common goals and serve ‘the public interest’.  The global journalistic norm of ‘objectivity’ also favours expertise in terms of ‘credible’ sources, particularly in offering informed criticism of government policy.  However, there is also a tension with the democratic principle of democracy, especially when the reasoning of those experts is obscure and opaque to the inexpert public.  In populist rhetoric, therefore, expert judgement can be rejected in favour of the instincts (and prejudices) of the public.  All of this is complicated further by the nature of scientific knowledge as developing and often contingent, especially when we need this knowledge to guide our actions in a ‘risk society’ characterised by global risks such as climate change and of course pandemics. 
Risk, credibility & trust: This week we’ll start with a general consideration of trust, and especially when it comes to risk and uncertainty, when facts are hard to come by, and the extent to which we trust information we find in news media and online. (https://youtu.be/HkpIF6eGjoY)
Risk reporting: The challenges with identifying what is true when the science is not yet settled, or predicting what will happen in the future, presents difficulties both for politicians deciding on the best course of action, and for journalists reporting on the issue. 
Fact-checking: Many journalists are aware of the limitations of their conventional practices, and new kinds of reporting (e.g. peace journalism, public journalism) have emerged over the years to address these shortcomings, as we saw in week 4.  The latest of these tries to address the difficulties of reporting truth when sources are not truthful, or are mistaken in their assertions.  This is fact-checking journalism, and although it emerged to verify political claims in election campaigns, it has evolved to cover a wider array of misinformation, including rumours and disinformation on social media.
Reading list: 
Lehmkuhl, M. & Peters, H.P. (2016) ‘Constructing (un-)certainty: An exploration of journalistic decision-making in the reporting of neuroscience’, Public Understanding of Science 25(8): 909-926 doi: 10.1177/0963662516646047
Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Robinson, T., Eddy, K., and Kleis Nielsen, R. (2023) Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2023. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism link
Dunwoody, S. and Konieczna, M. (2013) ‘The role of global media in telling the climate change story’, in Ward, S.  (ed.) Global Media Ethics: Problems and Perspectives, Proquest, pp. 171-190 Link to chapter
Peters, H.P. & Dunwoody, S. (2016) ‘Scientific uncertainty in media content: Introduction to this special issue’, Public Understanding of Science 25(8): 893–908 doi: 10.1177/0963662516670765
Schudson, M. (2019) ‘The Fall, Rise, and Fall of Media Trust’, Columbia Review https://www.cjr.org/special_report/the-fall-rise-and-fall-of-media-trust.php
Kitzinger, J. (1999) ‘Researching Risk and the Media’, Health, Risk & Society, 1(1): 55-69, doi: 10.1080/13698579908407007
Priest, S.H. (2005) ‘Risk Reporting: Why Can’t They Ever Get it Right?’ in Allan, S. (ed.) Journalism: Critical Issues. McGraw-Hill Education / Proquest link
Yang, G. (2013) ‘Contesting Food Safety in the Chinese Media: Between Hegemony and Counter-Hegemony’, The China Quarterly (214): 337-355. link
Holland, K., Sweet, M., Blood, R. W. and Fogarty, A. (2014) ‘A Legacy of the Swine Flu Global Pandemic: Journalists, Expert Sources, and Conflicts of Interest’, Journalism, 15(1): 53–71. doi: 10.1177/1464884913480460
Cottle, S. (2009) Global Crisis Reporting: Journalism in the Global Age. Maidenhead: Open University Press link to ebook
Graves, L. (2016) Deciding What’s True: The Rise of Political Fact-Checking in American Journalism. New York: Columbia University Press / ProQuest ebook link
Birks, J. (2019) Fact-Checking Journalism and Political Argumentation : A British Perspective. Basingstoke: Palgrave/Proquest ebook  (there is also an end-user report of statistical findings you can download here)
PEN (2017) Faking News: Fraudulent News and the Fight for Truth.  New York: PEN America link
Cushion, Stephen, Marina Morani, Maria Kyriakidou & Nikki Soo (2022) Why Media Systems Matter: A Fact-Checking Study of UK Television News during the Coronavirus Pandemic, Digital Journalism, 10:5, 698-716, DOI: 10.1080/21670811.2021.1965490
Morani, M., Cushion, S., Kyriakidou, M., & Soo, N. (2022). Expert voices in the news reporting of the coronavirus pandemic: A study of UK television news bulletins and their audiences. Journalism, 23(12), 2513-2532. https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849221127629
Birks, J. (2019) ‘UK election 2019: public resistance to factchecking’, The Conversation, available online: https://theconversation.com/uk-election-2019-public-resistance-to-factchecking-128565
Birks, J. (2019) ‘Fact-checking GE2019 compared to fact-checking GE2017’, LSE Policy and Politics Blog, available online: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/fact-checking-ge2019/
Birks, J. (2017) ‘Fact-checkers’ attempts to check rhetorical slogans and misinformation’, in Thorsen, E., Jackson, D. and Lillieker, D. (eds.) Election Analysis 2017 available online: http://www.electionanalysis.uk/uk-election-analysis-2019/section-1-truth-lies-and-civic-culture/fact-checkers-attempts-to-check-rhetorical-slogans-and-misinformation/
5. Scandals, sleaze and trust
In the context of hyper-adversarial media and political communication, with the lack of resources for investigative journalism coupled with increasingly personalised politics, the watchdog role of the news media often takes the form of mediated scandal.  Mediated scandal is that enacted, defined and sustained in and by mass media (Thompson 2000).  The narratives of such scandals fit with traditions of morality tales and popular storytelling, but are motivated in part by the profit-orientation of commercial media as much as (or more than) the public interest.  Political scandals are more common in, but not exclusive to, liberal democracies, and most frequently take the form of sex, financial or power scandals.  Sex scandals ultimately stem from the disparity between front and back stage performances of self (Goffman 1969), which despite being a common distinction in everyday life, can be interpreted as hypocrisy in public figures when glimpses of the back stage persona clash with a highly managed image.  This is culturally specific, however, as there are differences between countries and over time in how appropriate revelations about politicians’ private lives are.  Financial and power scandals are more overtly political as they relate to conflicts of interest.  We will examine a range of scandals including Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, the British MPs’ expenses and disgraced former Chinese politician, Bo Xilai.
Defining mediated scandal: This week we’ll start with a definition of mediated scandals and then will explore the ways in which scandal narratives typically play out. 
Sex, cash & power scandal: Next we’ll look at the three main kinds of scandal – sex scandals, financial scandals and power scandals – with reference to some examples, and examine how they relate to the watchdog and morality narratives. 
Here’s another sex scandal involving hypocrisy – a far-right Hungarian MEP, in a government that has been oppressive to LGBT rights,  implicated in an alleged gay orgy during lockdown in Brussels: link to story (Far-right MEP resigns after attending an alleged sex party – Channel 4 News)
Here’s an example of a financial scandal: the UK government PPE procurement scandal (https://youtu.be/Yukl2qUX-FM)
Causes & consequences: Finally for this week, let’s examine why there has been an increase in mediated scandals in recent years, and why this matters and what it means in terms of ethics and transparency in politics. Scandal-hit politicians often hit back at the media to try to discredit them, which is also very troubling for the health of a democracy.  This edition of the Journalism History podcast (Feldstein podcast: Wars on the Press by Richard Nixon and Donald Trump – Journalism History journal (journalism-history.org)) discusses Trump’s attacks on the media in the historical context of Nixon’s.Please read chapter 3 of Thompson’s Political scandal: Power and visibility in the media age (Thompson – Mediated Scandal.pdf (nottingham.ac.uk))
Familiarise yourself with a recent mediated political scandal from anywhere in the world.  Obvious recent examples from the UK include the Partygate scandal over lockdown parties in 10. Downing St, or Chris Pincher’s appointment as deputy chief whip despite sexual impropriety, or indeed any one of the numerous scandals (Scandal after scandal: timeline of Tory sleaze under Boris Johnson | Conservatives | The Guardian) that dogged Boris Johnson’s premiership.
Reading list:
Vorberg, L., & Zeitler, A. (2019). ‘This is (not) Entertainment!’: media constructions of political scandal discourses in the 2016 US presidential election. Media, Culture & Society, 41(4), 417-432. DOI: 10.1177/0163443719833288
Thompson, J.B. (2000) Political Scandal: Power and visibility in the media age. Cambridge: Polity / ProQuest (ebook link)
Nyan, B. (2014) ‘Scandal Potential: How Political Context and News Congestion Affect the President’s Vulnerability to Media Scandal’, British Journal of Political Science 45(2): 435-66 doi:10.1017/S0007123413000458
Stanyer, J. (2004) ‘Politics and the Media: a Crisis of Trust?’, Parliamentary Affairs 57(2): 420-34 doi: 10.1093/pa/gsh034
Tumber, H. and Waisbord, S. (2004) ‘Political Scandals and Media Across Democracies’, The American Behaviourial Scientist 47(9): 1143-52
Downey, J. and Stanyer, J. (2013) ‘Exposing Politicians’ Peccadilloes in Comparative Context: Explaining the Frequency of Political Sex Scandals in Eight Democracies Using Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis’, Political Communication 30(3): 495-509 doi: 10.1080/10584609.2012.737434
Chadwick, A. (2011) ‘The Political Information Cycle in a Hybrid News System: The British Prime Minister and the “Bullygate” Affair’, International Journal of Press/Politics 16(1):3-29 doi:  10.1177/1940161210384730
Miltner, K.M. and Baum, N.K. (2015) ‘The Selfie of the Year of the Selfie: Reflections on a Media Scandal’, International Journal of Communication 9: 1701-15.  link
Doig, Alan (2004) ‘Sleaze, Ethics and Codes: The Politics of Trust’, Parliamentary Affairs 57(2): 435-52 10.1093/pa/gsh035
Lee, F.L.F. (2017) Political Scandals, “Black Materials,” and Changing Backstage Imaginary in the Hong Kong Press, 2001–2015, Chinese Journal of Communication, 10:4, 450-465, DOI: 10.1080/17544750.2017.1372492
Vorberg, L., & Zeitler, A. (2019). ‘This is (not) Entertainment!’: media constructions of political scandal discourses in the 2016 US presidential election. Media, Culture & Society, 41(4), 417-432. DOI: 10.1177/0163443719833288
Zulli, D. (2020). Political Scandals in the Modern Media Environment: Applying a New Analytical Framework to Hillary Clinton’s Whitewater and E-Mail Scandals. International Journal Of Communication, 14, 19. Retrieved from https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/14397/3244
Thompson, John B. (2000) Political Scandal: Power and visibility in the media age. Cambridge: Polity / ProQuest (ebook link)
Nyan, Brendan (2014) ‘Scandal Potential: How Political Context and News Congestion Affect the President’s Vulnerability to Media Scandal’, British Journal of Political Science 45(2): 435-66 doi:10.1017/S0007123413000458
Tumber, Howard (2004) ‘Scandal and Media in the United Kingdom: from Major to Blair’, The American Behaviourial Scientist 47(8): 1122-37.
Kelso, Alexandra (2009), ‘Parliament on its Knees: MPs’ Expenses and the Crisis of Transparency at Westminster’, The Political Quarterly, 80: 329-338 doi: 10.1111/j.1467-923X.2009.02005.x
6. Political storytelling
Political communication is generally associated with ‘hard’ news stories about the serious business of government, as opposed to the frothy ‘soft’ news of human interest and entertainment stories.  However, such coverage privileges that which politicians and officials have to say, and excludes the perspective of the ordinary person affected by policies decisions and social issues.  Human interest stories can, therefore, be political.  On the one hand, they can be reactionary moral panic stories that reinforce the dominant (government / elite) agenda, such as scapegoating immigrants and demonising welfare benefit claimants.  On the other hand, they can give those marginalised groups a voice, and challenge that dominant discourse by showing how their experiences contradict official accounts.  However, stories about ‘victims’ can portray them as passive and inspiring our pity and charity, rather than as political agents demanding social change and seeking our solidarity, especially in news of suffering in the global south.
Dumbing down/reaching out: This week, we’ll begin with the debate over whether human interest angles on socio-political stories are evidence of ‘dumbing down’, or whether they actually increase people’s engagement in political issues and widen the scope of what is regarded as politically significant.
Political value: Next, let’s look more closely at how these stories need to be reported to have political value or significance – which relates back to the same issues of public interest versus morality tales and prurient sensationalism that we looked at last week.
Distant suffering: Finally, we’ll consider the transnational angle – focusing on the role of human interest stories in news of poverty and conflict in the global south.  For an example of some recent reporting of distant suffering, please watch this news item (warning: contains distressing content)
· Indefinite sentences for minor offences: https://www.channel4.com/news/campaigners-urge-government-to-resentence-all-those-serving-indeterminate-sentences
· Women pushed into sex work due to cost of living crisis: https://www.channel4.com/news/358027
· High court ruling on puberty blockers: https://www.channel4.com/news/puberty-blockers-for-under-16s-ruled-on-by-high-court-judges
· Family hit by airstrike in Syria: https://www.channel4.com/news/what-happened-to-one-syrian-family-in-aftermath-of-airstrike 
Looking at your chosen example story, say what the personal narratives add to understanding of the political issue
Reading list:
MacDonald, M. (2000) ‘Rethinking Personalization in Current Affairs Journalism’, in Sparks. C. and Zelizer. B. (eds.) Tabloid Tales: Global debates over media standards. Oxford: Rowan and Littlefield, pp.251–266 link
Franklin B (1997) Newszak & News Media. London: Arnold
McLachlan, S. and Golding, P. (2000) ‘Tabloidization in the British press: A quantitative investigation into changes’, in Sparks, C. and Tulloch, J. (eds.), Tabloid tales: Global debates over media standards. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 75–90
Temple, M. (2006) ‘Dumbing Down is Good for You’, British Politics 1(2); 257–273 doi:  10.1057/palgrave.bp.4200018
Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2013) ‘Subjectivity and Story-telling in journalism’, Journalism Studies 14(3): 305–320 doi: 10.1080/1461670X.2012.713738
Brandenburg, H. (2006) ‘Pathologies of the Virtual Public Sphere,’ in Oates, Owen and Gibson (eds.) The Internet and Politics: Citizens, Voters and Activists. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 207-222
Mchakulu, Japhet Ezra July (2018) Mediating an alternative public sphere: Malawian readers attitudes and perceptions towards a tabloid, Cogent Social Sciences, 4:1, 1452841, DOI: 10.1080/23311886.2018.1452841
MacDonald, M. (2000) ‘Rethinking Personalization in Current Affairs Journalism’, in Sparks, C. and Zelizer, B. (eds.) Tabloid Tales: Global debates over media standards. Oxford: Rowan and Littlefield, pp.251–266 link
Harper, S. (2014) ‘Framing the Philpotts: Anti-welfarism and the British newspaper reporting of the Derby house fire verdict’, International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 10(1): 83-98 doi: 10.1386/macp.10.1.83_1
Birks, J. (2017). ‘Moving Life Stories Tell Us Just Why Politics Matters’: Personal Narratives in Tabloid Anti-Austerity Campaigns, Journalism, 18(10): 1346–1363.doi:  10.1177/1464884916671159
Langer, J. (1992) ‘Truly Awful News on Television’, in: Dahlgren, P. and Sparks, C. (eds.) Journalism and Popular Culture. London: Sage, pp. 113–129 link
Thorbjørnsrud, K. & Ytreberg, E. (2020) A Human Interest Economy: The Strategic Value of Turning Ordinary People into Exemplars in the News Media, Journalism Studies, 21(8): 1093-1108, DOI: 10.1080/1461670X.2020.1720520
Polletta, F. & Redman, N. (2020) When do stories change our minds?  Narrative persuasion about social problems, Sociology Compass 14:e12778 DOI: 10.1111/soc4.12778
Wahl-Jorgensen, K. and Pantti, M, (2013)  ‘Ethics of Global Disaster Reporting: Journalistic Witnessing and Objectivity’, in Ward, Stephen J.A. (ed) Global Media Ethics: Problems and Perspectives.  Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp.191-215.  
Chouliaraki, L. (2008) ‘The Symbolic Power Of Transnational Media: Managing The Visibility Of Suffering’, Global Media and Communication 4(3): 329-51 doi: 10.1177%2F1742766508096084
Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2013) ‘The strategic ritual of emotionality: A case study of Pulitzer Prize-winning articles’, Journalism, 14(1): 129–145 doi: 10.1177/1464884912448918
Lugo-Ocando, J. (2015) Blaming the Victim: How Global Journalism Fails Those in Poverty. London: Pluto Press.
Robinson, Piers (2011) ‘The CNN Effect Reconsidered’, Media, War & Conflict 4(1): 3-11. doi: 10.1177/1750635210397434