Category Archives: churnalism

Media sexism

Not all media sexism is as overt and in your face as the examples given by women’s groups during their awesome testimony to the Leveson Inquiry yesterday. Media sexism, (or #mediasexism if you want to do a Twitter search for coverage of Tuesday’s morning’s hearing) isn’t always about Page 3 ‘girls’, victim blaming, sexual objectification or downright misogyny: often it’s a lot more subtle than that.

Take the erasure of women from the MSM for example. The way women are ignored or marginalised, treated as though we don’t exist or as though our issues are unimportant in the grand scale of things, that’s also media sexism.

Continue reading

Women’s organisations get their say at Leveson

For those of you who missed it here’s the link to this morning’s Leveson Inquiry hearing where representatives from women’s organisations finally got their say on sexism in the media. The relevant bit starts at around 105:00, and it’s well worth watching: Leveson Inquiry Tuesday am

And here’s my Storify of some of the tweeting that went on during it: Women at Leveson

In other news, I did the interview about lap dancing clubs on BBC Radio Norfolk’s breakfast show that I mentioned in my previous post  – you can listen to the full thing here. And yes I know, I said Camden when I should have said Hackney, but never mind.

Anyway, here’s the money quote from that interview: I’m still ridiculously chuffed that I managed to get that line in. Hey Norfolk, have some radical feminist theory with your cornflakes…….

It’s all just ‘stuff’ on the Internet

I know I know: no sooner did I announce I was going to be blogging more this year than I all but disappeared off the Internet. Rest assured though, I haven’t been idle in my absence. Last week for instance I was on BBC Radio Suffolk’s Breakfast Show talking about Suffolk Police’s ‘no means no‘ campaign (where I reminded listeners of the Rape Crisis England and Wales Christmas campaign – Drinking is not a crime. Rape is – and suggested that “Don’t Rape” might be an effective campaign message to target at young men), and I also wrote this piece for Comment is Free about Lord Astor’s contribution to the HS2 debate. And by the way, if anyone’s around tomorrow morning and fancies being woken up by my dulcet tones, I’m due to be on BBC Radio Norfolk at some ungodly hour to talk about lap dancing clubs: I’ll let you know how that one goes.

In between all that, and working, and tweeting, and watching my beloved soaps (more on those in a future post), and getting hooked on BBC 4′s Borgen; like a lot of people with far too much time on their hands I’ve also been following the Leveson inquiry.

Now a ton of ‘stuff’ has already been written about Leveson, so I’m not going to bore on about it too much here, however, I couldn’t let Ian Hislop’s testimony pass without comment.

Continue reading

The great 10 Yetis circle jerk

There was a survey about parental attitudes around sex education getting some quite prominent coverage in the press towards the end of last week  (it’s cited here for instance, and here, and here).

Now if you’re anything like me, you might have wondered about the coincidence of such a survey coming out in the very week that, thanks to Wednesday’s 10 minute rule bill on the subject from Nadine Dorries, sex education in schools was set to become a really hot topic. Indeed, following on from the Parliamentary debate, Dorries even used the survey herself in one of her own ‘blog’ posts to help illustrate the support her bill had attracted, and to help reinforce her argument that abstinence education for girls is something that the majority of parents want:

“We are excited that a very high profile individual, not from the world of politics, wants to come on board. Pollsters conducted snap polls and the results were so favourable, I was shocked. Which makes this following link to the BBC report re parents concerns re sex education in schools, no surprise.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-13292133

And yet it now turns out that there was no coincidence or serendipity involved  in the date of the survey’s publication:  because the so-called ‘survey’ isn’t so much a survey as a marketing stunt by PR company 10 Yetis.

And a very cynical marketing stunt at that.

Continue reading

“Daily Mail Reporter” does Churnalism. Again.

It’s great to see yesterday’s budget demo getting some coverage in the msm. It’s just a shame though that all that coverage amounts to is the regurgitation of a press release.

Here’s the text of the press release I received in my inbox yesterday:

ACTIVISTS BLOCKADE CHANCELLOR’S CAR  IN ATTEMPT TO STOP BUDGET

In an audacious attempt to stop George Osborne delivering the budget this afternoon, 20 women blocked the five main exits of Downing Street. They blocked Osborne’s car from leaving, but were dragged away from the car. One member of the group was arrested, and later released without charge.

The group was trying to stop George Osborne from delivering the budget because the government’s cuts agenda will decimate the Welfare State, harming the poorest and most vulnerable people the most.

At 11.15am, a group of protesters arrived at Downing Street carrying placards in the shape of red briefcases reading ‘Block the bankers’ budget’. Minutes later groups of three women lay in front of each of the four vehicle exits of Downing Street, and locked themselves together inside arm tubes, which makes it difficult for the Police to remove them quickly.  The groups remained in position until 11.52, when the vehicle carrying George Osborne broke through one blockade.

The group of women pointed out that the cuts will have a devastating impact on the lives of women, citing examples such as the closure of women’s refuges, cuts to child, disability, carers and housing benefits, the roll back of maternity rights and that women are thought to make up 80 per cent of the expected job losses from the public sector.

Sara Ayech, one of the women lying outside the main gates of Downing Street said:

“We are stopping George Osborne from delivering his bankers’ budget because this budget has been written for the benefit of big business and the banking sector, not for ordinary people. The banks destroyed the economy and in return received the bail out and bonuses. But the government is choosing to make everyone else pay the price through unemployment, the decimation of the Welfare State and the NHS.

“The Welfare State was fought for and won by ordinary people only 64 years ago. It’s now under attack by the coalition government and we are here to defend it and show that people will resist the injustice of these cuts.”

Here’s the text of the release that went out from the UK Press Association:

Group tries to block Downing Street

“A group of women has tried to block Downing Street ahead of the Budget to protest at its “devastating” impact on the welfare state and poor people.

They carried placards in the shape of the Chancellor’s red briefcase, reading Block The Bankers’ Budget, and sat down in the road outside the main exit.

They said that the cuts will have a huge impact on the lives of women, such as the closure of women’s refuges, cuts to child, disability, carers and housing benefits, the roll back of maternity rights and public sector job losses.

Sara Ayech, one of the protesters, said: “This Budget has been written for the benefit of big business and the banking sector, not for ordinary people. The banks destroyed the economy and in return received the bail-out and bonuses.

“But the Government is choosing to make everyone else pay the price through unemployment, the decimation of the welfare state and the NHS.

“The welfare state was fought for and won by ordinary people only 64 years ago. It’s now under attack by the coalition government and we are here to defend it and show that people will resist the injustice of these cuts.”

And now here’s the Daily Mail’s take on the story – see if you can spot the difference:

Women lie in road in bid to block Downing Street exit in protest at ‘devastating’ Budget

A group of women tried to block Downing Street ahead of the Budget to protest at its ‘devastating’ impact on the welfare state and poor people.

They carried placards in the shape of the Chancellor’s red briefcase, reading Block The Bankers’ Budget, and sat down in the road outside the main exit.

They said that the cuts will have a huge impact on the lives of women, such as the closure of women’s refuges, cuts to child benefits, the roll back of maternity rights and public sector job losses.

Sara Ayech, one of the protesters, said: ‘This Budget has been written for the benefit of big business and the banking sector, not for ordinary people. The banks destroyed the economy and in return received the bail-out and bonuses.

‘But the Government is choosing to make everyone else pay the price through unemployment, the decimation of the welfare state and the NHS.

‘The welfare state was fought for and won by ordinary people only 64 years ago. It’s now under attack by the coalition government and we are here to defend it and show that people will resist the injustice of these cuts.’

See also The Morning Star, the Blackpool Gazette, the Batley and Birstall News, the West Sussex County Times, the Londonderry Sentinel, the Ripon Gazette and I could go on. And on. And on.

Click here for the analysis from Churnalism.com

Like I said, it’s good to see the demo getting some press coverage (and well done to all the women involved!) It would be even better though if newspapers could actually be arsed to send reporters out to cover a story, and if those reporters then reported on what they saw and wrote up their stories with their own individual take on things. Or is that asking too much?

For more on churnalism, see Flat Earth News by Nick Davies