Week 23: Theoretical recap apply to Case Studies

D - outline and describe the theorist, theory and describe how it applies to the Case Study

C - compare 2 opposing theories and apply to the debate/issues

B - balance and explain the points from the case studies using theory (discredit and support your argument)

A - justify your answer using theory having balanced the debates and provide a future prediction

Starter: put together an argument: http://youtu.be/Q_uy1frxn7Y

http://youtu.be/Qt5MjBlvGcY

Vs

http://youtu.be/Vn9_0mTfT3Y

Which do you agree with?

Task: mind map out the case studies and the debates that came from them

Benefits Street

Key Debate 1

The programme revealed the nature of statutory regulation can sometime place regulation too close to the interests of the current government and it's policy to cut benefits to unemployed to encourage them to find work (despite high levels of unemployment and a recession in the UK). 

A conservative view would see the programme justifying the benefits cuts and see the residents negatively

A liberal view would hold the programme to account for its deliberately negative representation of the residence - assembling all the most negative footage and focusing on this.

A pluralist view would see that the programme actually contained a positive narrative at its heart - that of community during adversity and their struggle as well as the reasons that some of them were caught in a culture of poverty where they are dependent on benefits. They have neither the discipline, skills or in some cases confidence to 'get a job' - in some cases the opportunity.

Theory 1

A hegemonic view may cynically see an abuse of regulatory practices to justify a conservative point of view in the build up to the 2015 election. The dominant class use the media and an outlet to maintain their power of the subordinate (middle, working and under-) classes.

Who is responsible - what would be most effective?

1. The producers Love productions had responsibility and duty of care to the well-being and representation of their contributors under editorial guidelines of Channel 4

2. Channel 4 could have decided to not air the programme and had to decide if it was in the public interest and showed a 'fair and balanced' view of the residents

3. OFCOM has regulatory powers to insist that the series was no aired after the first episode. As no children were harmed during the filming of the series, and the show was aired after the watershed where the scenes of them shop lifting were after 9pm, they interpreted that the programme did not breach guidelines or any legal issues of discrimination. CLASS is NOT protected under anti-discrimination laws. (Key Debate 2)

4. The Moral Panic that came about from the story being manipulated by the media to sensationalise the feelings of outrage directed towards people on benefits also suited Conservative policy in benefit cuts - justified them? Are they being Scapegoated?

Key Debate 2

The Moral Panic also came from Twitter - this time being created by the opinions of the general public who took to making death threats online - this in itself bring up the 2nd Central debate about whether the internet ought to be regulated. Theory 3 - is this the Hypodermic Needle Theory?

Theory 2: Moral Panics are created by the media (and now social media) to demonise and marginalise a group in society that threaten the norms and agreed values of society to make them hate figures or perceived as a threat to social order ('normality' as it currently stands). This often then leads to justification for further control, laws and regulation in response to social outrage (stoked up by the media).