Plan B Activity

In this video, rapper Plan B uses his single to show how youths are presented because of things such as the London riots. He is trying to give he youth a fair voice by the lyrics and images he uses in his video making out the youth are portrayed more negatively than they should be. His satirical and judgmental lyrics such as "CHAV" which in the video stands for "Council Housed And Violent" is an argument against the the rich upper classes judging the youths because of their background. He discusses with the interview below as he understands growing up as a youth in a poor part of Britain. He further suggests this with the chorus of the song "Oi, I said Oi, what you looking at you little rich boy?" suggesting the rich are looking down upon youths  no matter what without giving them a chance. Although in the interview he says the riots "disgusted" him it doesn't give people to right to talk down to everyone who is within the youth bracket, everyone has a right whether they have a different musical taste or have very little education. This video is a statement that young people aren't as bad as they are represented in the media, the media use events such as the riots to create a moral panic against the young people and it should stop.

Social Media Response

How far were the responses of the rioters themselves given space in the media?


Throughout the articles and television broadcasts I have collected its clear that the rioters have very little space to  have a response to the negative press that they get. Unfortunately because the youths don't have a voice to back them up in the media all youths are given a stereotype by everyone in society as criminals and vandals, despite the fact that most youths are law abiding citizens who find it difficult to not be victimized by the public for being a youth in today's world. The youths did however did get a quiet voice through a young man who discusses with Boris Johnson, the video clip of this is in my previous research. The voice did give the point of view from the other side but it wasn't strong enough top persuade the public that the youths are good people, it wasn't strong enough to beat the media and their negative influence on youths. Apart from this clip all other clips and articles only show the damage some youths do to property and had people give their thoughts on it. Thoughts of the public though and not any thoughts of any youths.

What sorts of young people were given space to respond in the media debates?


A clip I found shows that actors speak within group discussion on why the youth of today act the way they do, suggesting that the parents have lost their power over their kids because of fear of being prosecuted for child abuse. People expect parents to make their kids a good citizen, but how is that possible when the parents power is taken away? The video clip below shows the actor Adam Deacon speaking on the Young Voters and gives the youths a voice, a voice which people will listen too because he is a successful, popular actor.




To what extent did social media challenge or confirm representations of youth identity in the mass media during the the time of the London riots?
-Discuss the positive and negative
-Use examples and theory to illustrate your argument

Summary of the London Riots - Write Up

The London Riots began when a 29 year old man, Mark Duggan, was shot on 4th August 2011 by police who attempted to arrest him in Tottenham, North East London, England. He died from a gunshot wound to the chest after it was suspected that he was planning a revenge attack after his cousin was stabbed to death, he had a gun with him during the incident. At first the Riots began as a peaceful protest outside a police station in Tottenham, however, youths began to arrive later on and began to initiate violence as the peaceful protest escalated into a full blown violent riots. The youths that escalated the riots were not given a fair voice as the press began stereotyping youths which caused moral panic amongst the population, this ruined any chance of remorse towards them, no forgiveness or excuse. The youths involved in the riots represented all youths in a bad way although most youths do not behave in ways like this. This links with avid Gauntlet's theory of " identities are not given but constructed and negotiated" which goes with the riots as the media constructed fear and panic into the public that all youths are responsible for the events of the riots, without taking into account they youths side of the events.

Suggested Contributory Factors
- Poor relations with police
- Social exclusion
- Family breakdown
- Government cuts
- Unemployment
- Gang Culture
- Criminal Opportunism
- Moral decay at the top
- Failure of the penal system

Using the newspaper articles and videos from youtube I have gathered it is clear to see that youths are shown in a bad light. Newspaper headlines such as the Daily Telegraph's "Rule of the mob" the Independent's "Mob Rule" and the Time's "Mob rule as police surrender the streets", all three headlines mention the word "Mob" which is a stereotypical view on youths of Britain today. With the media portraying the youths as bad people the population are unable to see the good things that youths do, its not all bad, its just the youths don't have a voice in the media to stop all the moral panic and social deviance that the media create. There was only one video I found that showed a young man speaking to Boris Johnson, putting the youths side into perspective, which gives the youths a small voice within the media, although most videos I found make youths look like criminals as they show buildings being smashed up, bricks being thrown and cars being set a light.

London Riots Newspaper Analysis 2

BBC News Article on the London Riots

What Sensationalist language is used?


"Disgusting and Shocking"


The Deputy Mayor of London said this about the London Riots, by using someone of a higher profession makes the events of the riots appear more serious. These words describe two nights of London rioting and this makes the people reading the article think the events were really bad and would make them think the youths involved were of a bad nature. Although the youths may not be only to blame articles such as this make people believe that it is only the fault of the youths. He also explains that the police did a good job, however this can be debatable as on lookers described the police as being unorganized allowing rioters to destroy shops and vehicles, using objects violently an shouting abuse which they reacted by not displaying any kind of authority. We would expect the police to display their authority to stop events like these occurring or at least get out of hand.

"Outrageous level of violence"


A MET police officer expressed the view of the police by being shocked at the severity of the violence that was used during the riots and how badly behaved they were to parts of their hometown. The article suggests that because there was so many people taking part in the riots its difficult for a small group of police officers to deal with it. This allowed the youths to start attacking more knowing they had a larger amount of people on their side, so with this there's a lower chance to be arrested. This all started when a policeman killed Mark Duggan so it is sort of understandable why the youths are angry and would want to attack the police force, however, not all of them were involved so its slightly pointless injury wise and its why language such as "outrageous" is used. Using words like this links to serious events as you would not expect to here words like this usually and it implies the riots are more serious than some people may have thought.

What images are used?


There is only one image used in the article, a medium shot of two masked youths rioting with one throwing an object, there is a group of people behind them also, presumably rioters too. The rioters have their faces covered to avoid being caught by the police and one is throwing an object although we don't know what he is throwing it at, we assume its either a building because during the riots buildings were the main target of attacks or the police because the relationship between the police force and the youths had been lost during this period due to the differences between them, as the youths believed they weren't in the wrong and believe they are being victimized.

How does this article construct representation of youth identity?
Is the article biased?
Are youths given a fair voice?


Th youths are the height of each topic that is discussed in the article and they are represented in a bad light throughout, the article focuses on youths looting, being arrested for burglary of frozen goods and attack on the shop Curry's. Throughout the article each separate event has been aimed at the youths as it appears it was mostly their fault. However, I don't believe the article is biased because its talking about events that actually happened where youths are seen committing crimes such as stealing and vandalism. Its basically a review of the events over the three days that they happened. The youths in this article don't have a fair voice, so they are unable to explain why they are doing what they are doing, we are unable to see their side of the story so it makes people who read this article automatically assume that all youths are evil or criminals, which is unfair in my opinion.

London Riots Newspaper Analysis

The Guardian London Riots Article

What Sensationalist Language is used?


"It's just mindless thuggery" 


This was said a local resident in London who's 100 year old shop was burned down leaving him and his father distraught, getting the point of view from a victim of the rioting shows how they are having a massive negative effect on society. Most people's thoughts are expressed through this saying, which in turn makes the public opinion of today's youths become negative. Also by using a victim of the riots it creates sympathy towards him which creates a feeling of dislike towards the youths. It's described that the smoke from the fire was so thick that the residents found it extremely difficult to breathe, this just shows that the youths don't care about the well-being of others and only care about causing mayhem. This guardian news article just shows how dangerous youths are as well, they could have quite easily of hurt or killed somebody with the fires and violence that they continued to use for what appeared to be no point what so ever.

"Horrendous spectacle"


His was said by it Malthouse, London's deputy Mayor of policing. By getting someone of great profession to express his opinion about the riots makes the subject matter important because he is an important person in London. He uses the word "Horrendous" because its horrible to see the destruction that is happening within the area of London and uses the word "Spectacle" because it is a huge event taking place with loads of different violent events for people to see. Its sort of an opposite to when people would call a parade a spectacle because of all the different people dressed up and dancing. This creates a sense of hatred towards the youth rioters because of the negativity the guardian focuses on.

What images are used?


There is only one image used in this article, the image being one masked youth with his hood up on a sporty tracksuit there is a vehicle engulfed inflames behind him with the smoke creating a massive fog overhead. The caption of the image displays "A masked man on the streets of Hackney where a car burns out of control on the third day of street disturbances across London." This image represents how youths are bad because there is a masked youth in the centre of the picture and he's surrounded by damaged cars on fire with smoke everywhere, because he's i the centre of the reason it suggests h that youths are the main reason for the bad events taking place in London.

How does the article construct representation of youth identity?
Is the article biased?
Are youths given a fair voice?


Youths in this article are shown in a bad light throughout it as the situations are being discussed and the youths are the height of each topic. A various amount of events are discussed from looting to a 100 year old shop being burnt down completely putting the residents lives in danger, when reading the article it could be about any gangs, however, it is clearly labelled that the youths are the main offenders in this situation. However, I don't believe this article is biased because all of the reactions are from actual events that occurred during the riots and it shows evidence that youths are committing crimes as the image suggests. They are only commenting on events that actually happened which makes this article not at all biased in my opinion. No youths have been questioned in this article so they are unable to give their opinion, leading me to think that they are not given a fair voice, there are two sides to every story and there is only one side to it in this article. The youths are unable to defend themselves and this is why they are demonized by the public because articles make them out to all be bad which creates a moral panic in society.

London Riots Newspaper Headlines

 

Today's national newspaper front pages have found a variety of ways to headline the riots across London. Without exception, all feature images of burning buildings.

The Daily Telegraph's "Rule of the mob" was echoed by The Independent's "Mob rule" and The Times's "Mobs rule as police surrender the streets."

The Sun went for a single word "Anarchy" while the Daily Mail preferred "The anarchy spreads" and Metro was rather similar with "Riots: the madness spreads." The Daily Mirror chose "Yob rule."

All were bettered by the Daily Star's excellent "Anarchy in the UK". That deserved a headline-of-the-day award.

The Daily Express went for a more personalised line: "Flaming morons". And The Guardian was altogether more pedestrian, but less slanted than its rivals, with "The battle for London".

Elsewhere, the Belfast Telegraph - a paper that has covered many a riot down the years - ran a page one with the headline "London blitzed."

The Yorkshire Post devoted most of its front page to the riots, "PM flies home to 'war zone'", while The Scotsman - which was probably preparing to carry a picture of the current Edinburgh festival - published a full-page image of a riot scene with the headline "London under siege as mobs roam streets."

London Riots Broadcast News Analysis 3

Who do the reporters interview?


This news report shows a young man being interviewed, speaking to Boris Johnson the Mayor of London. It allows the teenager to give his view on why the youths of today are rioting, he explains that the economy has forced youths to loot and damage property to create a statement for it to stop. This interview shows what most youths are like in the UK, not criminals and hooligans just ordinary and law abiding citizens, he mentions most of his friends want to go to university but are unable to because of the expensive fees that have to be paid. This interviews stands out as it isn't focusing on the youth rioters but a smart opinionated young man who has a point he wants the Mayor of London to hear.

What images are used in the broadcast? What does it suggest about representation of the riots?


The broadcast is just a heated interview with a youth and the Mayor of London so no images of the riots are actually shown, however this interview does put the riots into perspective as it gives the point of view of a youth in the UK. It represents youths as misunderstood and demonized by the public and this broadcast suggests the government should pay more attention to youths in our country.

Is the broadcast biased?


I don't believe this broadcast is biased because the media constantly portray youths in a bad light and this interview finally lets youths be heard through the voice of one young man. This interview lets us understand why the youths are rioting and it shows us youths in a more positive light rather than a negative one, which is what the media always focuses on.

Are the youths given a fair voice?


The youths are given a fair voice in this broadcast, this young man is a good representation of what youths are like in the UK as he explains to Boris Johnson that its the economy which is causing all the riots. It gives society a reason to why today's youths act the way they do and the interviewed youth gives the impression that youths a intelligent, opinionated and want to be successful in life but its difficult due to the feeling of dislike towards the youths in the UK.

London Riots Broadcast News Analysis 2

Who do the reporters interview?


Nobody is actually interviewed in this broadcast, it basically just shows the mass amount of damage that the youth rioters have caused during the London riots. I believe trying to get an interview during the riots would be extremely dangerous because of he violence an vandalism that is being used. It shows the police wearing special rioting gear in an attempt to try and stop the youths from causing damage to property such as shops and police cars, with the help of dogs to try and catch any wrong doers. It is understandable in this broadcast why nobody is interviewed from the footage that is being shown.

What images are used in the broadcast? hat does this suggest about the representation about the riots?


Most of the broadcast shows youths causing damages to shops and looting with police using dogs in an attempt to stop it. However, a number of different images are used to show the amount of damage that the youth rioters had caused, police cars with smashed windows, smashed windows in shops and the inside of shops being completely wrecked with objects thrown all over the floor. This broadcast represents youths as bad people, hooligans and criminals because this video footage shows damaging pretty much everything they see, wearing hoodies and masks to disguise their identity in an effort to avoid being caught. It shows how youths of today do not care about he property of others and are willing to use violence to cause mayhem.

Is the broadcast biased?


I believe this broadcast is not biased because its footage of youths performing illegal acts which shows youths being horrible, violent criminals. Focusing on the negative aspects of youths which creates a moral panic, it shows the youths as criminals but it doesn't show why they are doing it, although health and safety comes into account because it would be dangerous to ask the rioters why they are doing it. Its also quite difficult to not focus on the damage the youths caused but it does create a general dislike for all youths of today.

Are the youths given a fair voice?


No youths actually speak in the broadcast, but no reporters don't speak either, it just shows video footage of youths attacking shops and cars. It show what the youths are doing during the London riots portraying them as violent criminals as I've said previously. I believe this broadcast is accurate of what our youths are like in today's society.

London Riots Broadcast News Analysis

Who do the reporters interview?


This specific clip a news reporter from the BBC interviews a correspondent who is watching the events unfold during the riots in Tottenham. However, no proper interviews take place because its clear to see that it's not safe to do so because of the violence that is taking place. We see in this broadcast that vandals are smashing up police cars, throwing bricks and stones at passing and stationary police cars. The danger is accepted by he news reporter as she says "we'll leave it there" after he asked a hooligan why he was blocking the camera which resulted in him getting pushed away.
However, a local resident of Tottenham gets questioned over the phone, he's called Sam and he explains whats going on from his point of view. He explains to the BBC that this type of thing has never happened before around the area and how its usually a nice quiet place. This shows how anyone would want to get involved in the riots in Tottenham.

What images are used in the broadcast? What does this suggest about the representation of the riots?


Th broadcast is live footage of the riots so no previous images of the riots are shown, its just showing first hand what the riots are like. It is explained however, by the news correspondent whats been happening as rioters attack police cars with bricks and rocks whilst a large amount of hooded people take pictures and videos with their mobile phones and because of the vast amount of rioters the police only don't have any effect  all to enforce their authority. This is video footage of the riots that are happening at that specific time, it shows that youths are represented as bad people because of the unnecessary damage they are doing to other people's property. Furthermore, most of the rioters have their faces covered with masks and hoods to avoid being caught by the police although they are still willing to take part in the riots.

Is the broadcast biased?

The broadcast isn't biased in my opinion because its video footage of a reporter updating on the events of the riots, the situation is real footage of whats happening so it can't be altered or made up because its live. The reporter explains whats happening then masks youths push the camera away or try and block it, there is no evidence of the broadcast being at all biased.

Are the youths given a fair voice?


The reporter doesn't have anything negative to say about the rioters d although no youths speak in the broadcast it still shows them doing bad, violent things. When he does ask a youth "why are you blocking the camera?" he simply gets pushed away and doesn't get a response which shows the violence youths are willing to use in a the situation, they just don't want to be caught on camera in case of being caught. The broadcast shows what they youths of today are like in my opinion.

Key Newspaper Articles

Two youths attack pregnant woman
Two young boys aged 16 and 18 attacked a pregnant woman in the street after a number of other incidents involving them all against women or younger children, the woman's 6 year old daughter wrote to the judge at the trial describing what happened. The two boys were sentenced to 5 and 6 years under custody.

Mass mugging gang locked up
One of Britain's most violent gangs were locked up because of over 100 robberies, steeping on a woman's neck and hitting a woman 30 times in the face with a mallet, some members of the gang were as young as 13 years of age. The gang also filmed themselves bragging over what they had done after one crime they had committed. The older members of the gang were sentenced to nearly 33 years and stripped the younger gang members of their anonymity

Teenager rapes 4 year old
A 17 year old male took a 4 year old  from a playground and to a secluded wood and proceeded to assault her only yards away from her mother. The 17 year old is to serve 5 years for the rape after the 4 year old girl recognized him in the street 12 days after the attack.

Historical Case Study

Stanley Cohen's ideas

Defiance Amplification - This occurs when the media focuses upon negative aspects of behavior amongst defiant groups.

Moral Panic - This is a public panic over an issue deemed to be a threat to, or shocking to, the sensibilities of "proper" society, often caused by over exaggeration in the media.

Folk Devils - Deviants of society such as teenage tribes of the 60's such as mods and rockers.

Moral Entrepreneurs - Keeping the social norm.

A Clockwork Orange 1971
The film is set in a future dystopian Britain showing the violence of a gang within it, it features disturbing, violent images, facilitating its social commentary on psychiatry, youth gangs and other social, political and economic subjects.

The film received negative press as it created what the media called a number of "copy-cat crimes". For example, Edward Laxton reported in the daily mirror "The terrifying violence in the film A Clockwork Orange fascinated a quiet boy from a grammar school...And it turned him into a brutal murderer". Laxton continues "Th boy viciously battered to death a harmless old tramp as he acted out in real life a scene straight from the movie A Clockwork Orange".

These are two newspapers articles depicted crimes that have been compared to A Clockwork Orange due to there brutality and violent nature, it shows how the film is still shown in a bad light by the media, its always had negative press since its release and because the film is such a strong deviance film it is often referred to when violent crimes such as this occur during modern day society. A Clockwork Orange created a moral panic in society and the media could use this to fall back on to show the intensity of their news stories.

Cohen's theory's can be linked very well with the issues raised by A Clockwork Orange, his theory of moral panic for example. The film creates the sense of moral panic due to its shocking story line and violence, this is exaggerated by the media by comparing actual crimes to the film itself even if they are not really linked with each other. Another Cohen theory is Deviance Amplification is when the media focuses on the negative aspects of behavior amongst deviant groups and this can be related to A Clockwork Orange as the media always assume gangs relate to the film although the film may not of been intended to be portrayed in this way. This allows the media to focus on the worst parts of society, such as gangs,  to show deviance within their newspaper headlines such as "Clockwork Orange gang found guilty of killing bar manager."

Quadrophenia 1979
Jimmy - His character is portrayed as care-free and naive because of his age, he wants to be someone and uses his appearance to try and achieve that, wearing parker jackets, staypress trousers and skinny ties. Jimmy cares only for his MOD gang, his scooter and becoming intoxicated with alcohol or drugs rather than caring about getting a job to earn an income. Jimmy is rebelling against thinking of himself as an individual although really he is just following a trend.

Steph - Her character is a more unique member of the MODS as she is portrayed as a more feminine female of the group, a girly girl with long, blonde, wavy hair who wears make-up and wears a leather jacket with nice clothes to make her stand out. Steph has no loyalty as she sleeps with who ever she wants, she leads men on and cheats on them for fun.

Kevin - Kevin is the complete opposite to Jimmy, he's mature and doesn't care about his image unlike Jimmy, however he still wants to be friends with him, even though he is from a rival social group. He joined the army to get away from it all and to be an individual, rather than doing the same thing with the Rocker influenced group he was a part of.

Mise en scene
Mods - Parker jackets, smart suits, skinny ties, staypress trousers, scooters
Rockers - Gelled hair, leather jackets, motorbikes, pubs, clubs, roadside cafe's, street corners

Quadrophenia can be linked to Stanley Cohen's theory of moral panic that was created over the mods vs rocker gang brawls.

Exam

2 Hour Exam
15th June 2012

Section A - Theoretical Evaluation of Production (50 marks)
Section B - Contemporary Media Issues (50 marks)