Friday 2nd December 2016
Papers Reviewed: The Sun, The Guardian, The Daily Mail, The Times
Topic of article: Popular Culture
Headline: Form a Vorderly queue, boys
Authors: Andy Halls (TV Editor)
Aim of the article: The article describes that Carol Vorderman is reportedly not interested in finding a relationship but wants to have more casual relationships.
Agenda of the article: If there’s anything The Sun knows how to do it is to either glamourize and sexualize a woman, or alternately, to make them appear as total failures in meeting these desired beauty standards that they perpetuate. Either way, women are described in terms of their function as a partner for a male and little more. This story is about the revival of Carol Vorderman through being a contestant on I’m a Celebrity. The article sensationalises her choice of behaviour, highlighting her age and that she is a mum of two, in dating or having sex numerous men rather than attending to the common path of seeking one person to have a relationship with.
Bias of the article: The article conflicted me at first, I completely support Vorderman’s right to what she is quoted to have said but I disagree with the portrayal by The Sun. The paper focus on her being this stereotype of a “glam” attractive older woman who wants to meet younger “toyboys”. This is because it is a simplistic view of her as a person, based on her sex and relationships rather than any of her other qualities.
Topic of article: Sport; Crime
Headline: Police flooded with reports of football abuse
Authors: Vikram Dodd (Police and crime correspondent)
Aim of the article: The article reports the huge number of reports of sexual abuse within football that has arisen particularly recently since the Barry Bennell charges.
Agenda of the article: The article is indicating that the numbers reported of 350 people having come forward pending investigation across “more than a quarter of UK police forces” may tragically be conservative. This is mainly through the sentence “Police and experts believe the sexual abuse of children is massively underreported in Britain.” The article highlights numerous examples of areas, particularly Newcastle and Manchester, where investigations are taking place and cites David Eatock as a public figure who has disclosed they were sexually abused whilst at Newcastle United.
Bias of the article: The Guardian does somewhat link it’s “revelations about child sexual abuse in football” to the large numbers of people now coming forward to report their experiences to police forces across the country. The piece is one of shock, and mainly quotes from the Police, who are the dominant source of information and the National Police Chiefs’ Council for child protection lead Simon Bailey who suggests that the unprecedented number of calls are putting a strain on police services though they continue to take them seriously and investigate all reports. The article isn’t critical in nature and a question could be into why this issue has been known about such as their example of “Operation Tide” at Newcastle United in the 1980s and 1990s, what was done about it?
The Daily Mail
Topic of article: Politics
Headline: Migrant numbers hit new records
Author(s): Steve Doughty (Social Affairs Correspondent), James Slack (Home Affairs Editor)
Aim of the article: The article is reporting the latest Office for National Statistics data on EU migration to the UK and David Davis’ plans for Brexit.
Agenda of the article: The article is classically stirring up anti-migrant rhetoric by using these latest statistics showing “unprecedented” levels of migration to Britain. The standard tropes of migrants stealing our jobs is supported by highlighting “82,000 of them looking for work” and a focus on specific nations this time being “Romania and Bulgaria.” The idea that Eurosceptics, which the paper does seem to distance itself from slightly, desire to “regain control of the country’s borders” is back again with a vengeance pervades the article. There is also a sense that Brexit secretary David Davis is betraying these Eurosceptics by saying we may “continue to pay billions to Brussels” in order to have the benefit of the single market and to allow “significant numbers of migrant workers” to migrate to Britain for work.
Bias of the article: The article is mostly dominated by numbers and then saying that those numbers are bigger than ever before. There are no direct quotes for any of the claims made in the article including what Davis said. The article appears to want to “reignite the debates of the referendum campaign” with a headline we have seen far too many times, it disapproves of Davis’ ‘soft Brexit’ tactics. It seems to want the borders to be closed to EU migrants regardless of the key counterargument of the negative economic repercussions if that occurs which the article gives very little coverage to.
Topic of article: Politics
Headline: Davis backs soft Brexit in blow to hardliners
Authors: Sam Coates (Deputy Political Editor), Henry Zeffman (Political Correspondent), Richard Ford (Home Affairs Correspondent)
Aim of the article: The article reports David Davis’ remarks regarding the sort of Brexit Britain is planning for at a Confederation of British Industry dinner.
Agenda of the article: The article seems to enjoy reporting this tactical back-tracking of the Brexit dream (or nightmare) from the Brexit secretary themselves. The article highlights that Britain will pay the EU to get access to the single market and will allow both skilled and potentially unskilled (via the Agricultural Workers Scheme revival) workers access to Britain in order to protect industries that rely “to survive” on workers from the EU. Davis is seen as prioritising business interests and this focus on a potential “skills shortage” if flow of EU workers in specific areas was cut off.
Bias of the article: The article focuses on this “moderating” rhetoric and gives multiple examples from David Davis, Phillip Hammond, “cabinet ministers” and “business leaders” of supporting this “softer” Brexit. However the article juxtaposes this with an entire paragraph specifying the rising numbers of people moving from the EU to Britain and those securing residency compared to previous years. Despite this immigration fear breeding paragraph, generally the article tends towards the measured version of Brexit, the newspaper having supported the Remain campaign back on that fateful day in June.
Front page images from: http://en.kiosko.net/uk/
Reviewed by: Alice Edwards