Agency and Media [Mis]Representation

According to Althusser (1971) the media is part of the ideological state apparatuses [ISAs]. These are the mechanisms used by the ruling-class to control ideas, which support their interests and maintain their power in capitalist societies.  The media influences the way in which the poor and working-classes are perceived by the public as lazy, worthless and welfare dependent.  Although Althusser’s theory was published in the 1970s, it is still relevant in today’s neoliberal capitalist society.  This is demonstrated in Jensen’s (2014) concept of poverty porn and Tyler’s (2015) notion that the material predicament of the poor has become TV entertainment for the masses.  The public generally believe what they see, hear and read in the legacy mainstream media. However, the concept of ISAs overlooks the power that new social media platforms have to change how the public see and think about the poor.

i. Refer to two real-life examples that demonstrate how the media demonises some of the poorest and most vulnerable people in society.

ii. Is the current system of welfare benefits so generous that it undermines work by handing out ‘free’ payments, or is that a myth?  Support your response with evidence, rather than simply writing down your opinions.

iii. How can social media be used to change public opinion about the poor, and in doing so also improve government welfare policies?

17 thoughts on “Agency and Media [Mis]Representation

  1. People turn to media to gather their opinion such as elections

    the media controls the way we dress and think about others who dress differently

    Like

  2. The media influences the opinions and beliefs of the majority, and this is seen in real life through promotion of brands influencing what people buy and how different events are portrayed in the media influencing public opinion on the matter

    Like

  3. Using media as idealogical state apparatus is arguably easier now as the media is easier to access and more widespread

    Like

  4. 1.mothers with more than 2 kids on benefits

    2.making the public think everyone on benefits are lying

    I think it’s a myth as there is now a 2 child benefit cap so they aren’t giving money to people who are having kids just for the benefits

    the media can stop exaggerating and making the public hate the poor and instead talk about real statistics and real struggles the poor face

    Like

  5. programmes such as benefit street are used as a way to demonise those on benefits and use it to twist the truth. It makes out that those on benefits don’t work at all. Whilst this is the case for some people, a lot of people who claim benefits use it as a means of survival on top of their wages

    Like

  6. social media is more accessible nowadays therefore the idea is spread easier through tv shows and social platforms, the welfare system can be abused but is a good opportunity to those who are unable to work.

    Like

  7. the current welfare state to some is used as an alternative to work. Whilst work should not be a defining point, many see it to be. For example, the ideology of neoliberalism. This ideology reiterates the idea that those on benefits are lazy and don’t work. By saying this, many believe that those receiving benefits are reviving ‘free money’ when this is not the case

    Like

  8. I)

    ii) I think that people who work should be earning more than those who just receive benefits. Being “too generous” means SOME people may get comfortable just receiving those benefits

    iii) Social Media can be used to accurately show how poor people live and survive day to day. This could then change public opinions to not demonise those who are poorer and it can show many don’t live off government money because they don’t like work. However, the media can be manipulated to continue to demonise them

    Like

  9. Demonising them who are just using the system for their own gain. If we all could no one would work that’s the life people want money just coming in their accounts without having to do much. The media Demonises these types of people looks down on them etc. Creating shows like benefit street to further push the agenda of the working class being too lazy and disgusting.

    Like

  10. The media greatly influences society’s opinions on the poor through audio-visual means to police public opinion, and this is usually seen in shows such as Benefits Street. It is usually negative and seen as exploiting the poor to divert attention from crisis in capitalism (Poverty Porn), however it could have a positive impact if it were to express the victimisation of the poor to wider society and lead to class consciousness, as well as advancements in policies that benefit the poor and society

    Like

  11. the current welfare state does not hand out money as if it grows on trees, but instead the gov have cut the benefit system from 2014-15 by £18 billion and have installed a 2 child cap on benefits, limiting those who want to cheat the system by producing more children

    social media can help lobby the gov to make changes to policy & help to change the societal views on the top 1% by factually reporting and enlightening on the fact those are the main ones for causing societal loss of money through tax evasion instead of those at the bottom trying to gain benefits

    Like

  12. I. Demonisation of migrant workers and refugees.

    the UK’s benefits scroungers narrative.

    ii. The idea that that the welfare benefits are so generous that they undermine work by handing out free payments are largely a myth, not supported by evidence.

    Like

    1. The Jeremy Kyle show – all of the people who came on were working class and they were all portrayed as dirty, drug addicted, benefit scroungers
    2. The system can be generous as we’ve seen with the lady and her 8 children. However, it’s not always the case as there are many restrictions and guidelines to who is eligible for benefits and how much it is they get. It may seem generous because a lot of people have access to them, however what does this say about the government and the quality of life, the labour market? If many people are eligible for these benefits and are needing higher amounts then what does this say about the ruling class? They’re not doing their bit to support the people. Yet it’s the same ones that are struggling that are penalised for needing help in the first place.
    3. If social media was less focused on the ones that are already struggling and instead on opening peoples’ eyes to the exploitation from the corporations and politicians then there may be some change in the way that the working classes and “underclass” are viewed and treated. But since the general public never did and most likely never will have access to the money of such figures as Elon Musk and Rishi Sunak, etc, people are more confused on the money they once had. The benefits money they see other people receive that came from their hard work and their taxes. The inaccessibility of the ruling class makes it more difficult for the lower classes to come out of the demonising spotlight. Media does play a huge part in the theory of the ideological state apparatus due to this. The ruling class stay untouched whilst the vulnerable lower classes are continuously penalised. The ruling class needs someone to blame for the country’s poverty and the “greedy” people on benefits are used as the scapegoat in order for the ruling class to stay in power.

    Like

Leave a comment