News Representations - 3
Analyse the representations in Sources A and B. Use any relevant feminist theory. [10 marks]
The Mirror have chosen to report on Meghan Markle. The headline and story being based on her getting a lift off a friend. However, due to this being a celebrity and apparently having no privacy, it just has to be reported based on the fact it is Amal Clooney's plane and how much it's worth. This creates a materialistic representation of Meghan and Amal as they are either only good for their looks or their possessions. Her looks being used as an attracter for the male gaze. This is done by having a large image of her casually dressed, well lighted and positioned on the top corner - the part which will be seen when stacked on shelves. This supports Van Zoonan's theory which states that in the media and therefore as it controls so much of life, in general, women are viewed as possessions and objects, used for sexualization; supporting the patriarchy. This creates negative stereotypes of women being weaker and recessive as appose to men (who are dominant). This is a negative stereotype because it supports the inequality between the sexes.
The second story says: "Jihadi-Brit 'aided hurt fighters in hospital'". The media language used which assists her representation is the size of the image/section and the actual title. Firstly, the image of her is so small compared to that of Meghan. However, the story is clearly more significant. A celeb gossip about a plane ride is less important than a story of a woman who was supposed to join ISIS. But, quite possibly due to her religion, race and circumstances, The Mirror sees her as inferior and decided to show her as the minority their audiences perceives her as. Not only this but she is seen as so insignificant, her name is not even mentioned. She is just a 'Jihadi-Brit' according to this story, no more than. This not only supports Van Zoonan's theory but also bell hooks intersectionality theory. How things like gender, race, religion create an intersection giving way to the white supremacist patriarchal society.
Similarly, The Daily Mail have chosen to report on women's bodies. However the story is sourced from a different place - that of self harm. The school girls considered in this report are supposedly self-harming themselves due to their bodies being inadequate to fit society's 'beauty'. This may be the case for some but definitely not all. The ideology of their bodies being the main concern is pushed by the use of the headline and main image. The headline reads: 'Schoolgirl self-harm surging'. First of all, the connotations the term 'schoolgirl' has are sexual. This can be traced back to uses of schoolgirls being innocent in modern pop culture. This instantly catches the male gaze of the audience as it can trigger the negative stereotype of 'schoolgirls' known in today's society. The alliteration of the letter 'S' also creates a sinful aspect of the report maybe referencing the act of self-harm. The main image is also used to show the body that is later revealed to have been turned away from walking the fashion show. This is a standard tabloid convention, using a tall image of a woman to the side of the paper, directly targeting the male gaze rather than trying to respect or link to the story. The model isn't even named which shows how irrelevant she as a person is but her body is useful. This creates and follows an incredibly negative stereotype of women being used for their bodies by men, no more. This again fits with Van Zoonan's theory as the females mentioned don't have names but their bodies are reported on. It further supports the patriarchy as it also presents women as only having concerns over their looks, to be good enough to be found sexy by their partners. There are many other reasons why a girl would self harm, why anyone would. Why isn't there a story on men's self-harm? or suicide? The keeping of men's harm secret and displaying women's emotional processes is strictly abiding by the patriarchal ideologies and gender representations of today's society.
These two sources are similar in their representations of women as they clearly follow the social constructs of men being dominant. They both support Van Zoonan's theory about women being inferior and objects but alternatively, The Mirror also pushes the intersectionality theory of bell hooks. Their differences may be routed in the audiences they're published for. The Mirror is published for a left wing audience, those who will have a dominant understanding when it comes to the content. This could alter the content and representations as they would seem more supportive of equality. However, this particular cover doesn't do that as much as it could have. Being owned by Reach plc and therefore Jim Mullen, the paper will favour the views of these owners. Views which just aren't as clear in this cover.
Conversly, The Daily Mail has a right wing dominant audience which means they will act and publish more right wing viewed stories to attract and meet the wants of their target audience. The paper is right wing too which can be linked back to the owner DMGT and Jonathan Harmsworth, a conservative supporter. This gives him authority over the content published which is why even when they are trying to report on an incredibly serious problem (self-harm), they are creepily able to sexualise it with uses of media language, again to meet to wants of their right wing and sexist audience.
The Mirror have chosen to report on Meghan Markle. The headline and story being based on her getting a lift off a friend. However, due to this being a celebrity and apparently having no privacy, it just has to be reported based on the fact it is Amal Clooney's plane and how much it's worth. This creates a materialistic representation of Meghan and Amal as they are either only good for their looks or their possessions. Her looks being used as an attracter for the male gaze. This is done by having a large image of her casually dressed, well lighted and positioned on the top corner - the part which will be seen when stacked on shelves. This supports Van Zoonan's theory which states that in the media and therefore as it controls so much of life, in general, women are viewed as possessions and objects, used for sexualization; supporting the patriarchy. This creates negative stereotypes of women being weaker and recessive as appose to men (who are dominant). This is a negative stereotype because it supports the inequality between the sexes.
The second story says: "Jihadi-Brit 'aided hurt fighters in hospital'". The media language used which assists her representation is the size of the image/section and the actual title. Firstly, the image of her is so small compared to that of Meghan. However, the story is clearly more significant. A celeb gossip about a plane ride is less important than a story of a woman who was supposed to join ISIS. But, quite possibly due to her religion, race and circumstances, The Mirror sees her as inferior and decided to show her as the minority their audiences perceives her as. Not only this but she is seen as so insignificant, her name is not even mentioned. She is just a 'Jihadi-Brit' according to this story, no more than. This not only supports Van Zoonan's theory but also bell hooks intersectionality theory. How things like gender, race, religion create an intersection giving way to the white supremacist patriarchal society.
Similarly, The Daily Mail have chosen to report on women's bodies. However the story is sourced from a different place - that of self harm. The school girls considered in this report are supposedly self-harming themselves due to their bodies being inadequate to fit society's 'beauty'. This may be the case for some but definitely not all. The ideology of their bodies being the main concern is pushed by the use of the headline and main image. The headline reads: 'Schoolgirl self-harm surging'. First of all, the connotations the term 'schoolgirl' has are sexual. This can be traced back to uses of schoolgirls being innocent in modern pop culture. This instantly catches the male gaze of the audience as it can trigger the negative stereotype of 'schoolgirls' known in today's society. The alliteration of the letter 'S' also creates a sinful aspect of the report maybe referencing the act of self-harm. The main image is also used to show the body that is later revealed to have been turned away from walking the fashion show. This is a standard tabloid convention, using a tall image of a woman to the side of the paper, directly targeting the male gaze rather than trying to respect or link to the story. The model isn't even named which shows how irrelevant she as a person is but her body is useful. This creates and follows an incredibly negative stereotype of women being used for their bodies by men, no more. This again fits with Van Zoonan's theory as the females mentioned don't have names but their bodies are reported on. It further supports the patriarchy as it also presents women as only having concerns over their looks, to be good enough to be found sexy by their partners. There are many other reasons why a girl would self harm, why anyone would. Why isn't there a story on men's self-harm? or suicide? The keeping of men's harm secret and displaying women's emotional processes is strictly abiding by the patriarchal ideologies and gender representations of today's society.
These two sources are similar in their representations of women as they clearly follow the social constructs of men being dominant. They both support Van Zoonan's theory about women being inferior and objects but alternatively, The Mirror also pushes the intersectionality theory of bell hooks. Their differences may be routed in the audiences they're published for. The Mirror is published for a left wing audience, those who will have a dominant understanding when it comes to the content. This could alter the content and representations as they would seem more supportive of equality. However, this particular cover doesn't do that as much as it could have. Being owned by Reach plc and therefore Jim Mullen, the paper will favour the views of these owners. Views which just aren't as clear in this cover.
Conversly, The Daily Mail has a right wing dominant audience which means they will act and publish more right wing viewed stories to attract and meet the wants of their target audience. The paper is right wing too which can be linked back to the owner DMGT and Jonathan Harmsworth, a conservative supporter. This gives him authority over the content published which is why even when they are trying to report on an incredibly serious problem (self-harm), they are creepily able to sexualise it with uses of media language, again to meet to wants of their right wing and sexist audience.
Comments
Post a Comment