By stewartb

Motivating much of the work of TuS is a recognition that the mainstream news and current affairs media that supposedly ‘serve’ Scotland’s polity do nothing of the sort: they do NOT serve our democracy well when judged in terms of delivering balance and objectivity.

Even the UK’s (and Scotland’s) prime public service broadcaster, the BBC – the organisation which promotes itself endlessly both domestically and internationally as a beacon of journalistic quality and integrity (or whatever other gushing self-aggrandisement it favours) – falls very far short within and towards Scotland. It fails to inform on relevant context; it fails to provide perspective; it shies away from comparative analyses of governments and of public service performance between the UK nations; and it has a strong tendency to omit positives and push negatives about the contributions of the Scottish Government and others to life in our nation and it does this so consistently and to such a degree that a charge of ‘gaslighting’ Scotland can credibly be evidenced. It’s notable that of the multiple Scottish Government press statements released online every afternoon of the working week, remarkably few get any mainstream media coverage at all.

In the face of such powerful forces deployed in support of the Union – and ranged against even the democratic right of Scotland’s population to asks itself a constitutional question – what defence is available? The advocacy here on TuS on Scotland’s future is characterised by the provision of references to sources of evidence called upon for case-making. Implicit in this is: ‘if in doubt check it out for yourself’! Notwithstanding the efforts of TuS contributors, this persists as one of the great unresolved challenges confronting pro-independence political parties and the present Scottish Government. The very minimum must be to raise awareness among individuals of what is being done to them through mainstream media practices.

In this regard, the views of other critical observers of the UK mainstream media – those whose concerns lie beyond Scotland – may offer generic insights of value. Become aware – become alert – become inoculated!

‘Grooming’

The independent journalist Jonathan Cook has written a critique of the ways the mainstream media operate, including and in particular the BBC. Whilst his principal subject is the contrasting media coverage of what’s happening in Gaza and Ukraine, much of what he describes has broader significance. 

Source: Jonathon Cook (10 July 2024) Why the news media’s job is to groom us. (https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2024-07-10/news-media-groom/)   

He writes: ’When all we have to rely on in understanding our relationship to the news media is the media’s self-proclaimed assessment of its own role, maybe it is no surprise that most of us assume the West’s “free press” is a force for good: the bedrock of democracy, the touchstone of a superior western civilisation.’

‘The more idealistic among us think of the news media as something akin to a public service. The more cynical of us think of it as a competitive marketplace in information and commentary, one in which ugly agendas are often in evidence but truth ultimately prevails.’

However, Cook contends: ‘Both views are fanciful. The reality is far, far darker – and I speak as someone who worked for many years in the Guardian and Observer newsrooms, widely seen as the West’s most progressive newspapers. As readers, we don’t, as we imagine, “consume” news. Rather, the news consumes us. Or put another way, the media uses the news to groom us, its audience. Properly understood, the relationship is one of abuser and abused.’

In acknowledging that some may consider his ‘a paranoid conspiracy theory’, Cook reminds us that a similar assessment was provided years ago in Noam Chomsky and Ed Herman’s book Manufacturing Consent. ‘Chomsky and Herman’s Propaganda Model explains in detail how western publics are “brainwashed under freedom” by a media driven by hidden corporate and state interests. He suggests: ‘Those interests can be concealed only because the media decides what counts as news and frames how we understand events. Its chief tools are misdirection and omission – and, in extremis, outright deception.’

Cook’s concerns are with globally very significant, current events but his insights may have relevance here in Scotland with a mainstream media including the BBC concerned with preserving the Union. He notes: ‘I have spent the past 15 years or more trying to highlight to readers the true nature of our relationship to the media – the groomer and groomed – using the media’s coverage of major news events as a practical peg on which to hang my analysis. Talking about the abusive relationship purely in the abstract is likely to persuade few, given how deeply we are immersed in propaganda.’

Alert to media practices

Cook goes on to argue that: ’Understanding how the media carries out its day-to-day switch and baits, its omissions, deceptions and misdirections, is the key to beginning the process of freeing our minds. If you look to the state-corporate media for guidance, you are already in its clutches. You are already a victim – a victim of your own suffocating ignorance, of your own self-sabotage, of your own death wish.’

In what follows, I’ve attempted to take Cook’s examples and express them in generic terms that may help more people be more ‘alert’, more sceptical and questioning, when reading, listening to and viewing the outputs of the mainstream media within and on Scotland:

• the use of ‘different narratives’ – the use of contrasting frames – when reporting on closely comparable issues or events occurring in different settings;
• being selective over how – or even if – the affiliation of an individual or group associated with a news story is reported;
• the use of different language terms in reporting comparable stories e.g. the use of the term ‘claim’ versus an alternative form of expression that promotes a report as ‘factual’;
• the choice of ‘dry, matter of fact’ language versus the emotive – intended to steer responses of readers/listeners. Cook refers to ‘emotional descriptors’ deployed to sway readers into an emotional response;
• adopting the language/terminology of just one of opposing interest groups/one side of a debate or dispute and so conferring legitimacy on that singular point of view;
• the careful crafting of headlines and images – ‘the part of a story that almost every reader sees’ – and their role in framing our understanding of events: ‘They are the print media’s main means of propagandising us’.

Cook argues that the broadcast media like the BBC ‘work slightly differently in manipulating our responses’. In summary, this is his identification of other influencing factors:

• running orders – a TV channel’s way to signal its news priorities;
• reactions: – the visible or audible emotional reactions of programme anchors and reporters;
• ‘human-interest’ stories – the selective use of human interest stories to ‘make us invested in some events but not others’.

To extrapolate from Cook’s assessment of the coverage by the BBC of globally significant events, we should be alert to patterns of skewing news priorities: ‘the constant distorted framing of events is the clue to how we should decipher what the media is trying to achieve, what it is there to do’.

In his analysis, Cook remarks: ‘With this as our framework, we can understand why the BBC and other media fail so systematically to fulfil their self-professed remits to reporting objectively and disinterestedly, and fail to scrutinise and hold power to account – unless it is the power of an Official Enemy.’ And ‘The truth is the BBC, the Guardian and the rest are nothing more than conduits of state-corporate propaganda, masquerading as news outlets. Until we grasp that, they will continue grooming us.’

Cook referenced the blog post through his X/twitter account (https://x.com/Jonathan_K_Cook/status/1811308415806828726). Among the many responses he received, I spotted these remarks (with my emphasis):

• ‘The manipulation is obvious and often created with micro moments as described. As well as the content, the tiny facial expressions and intonations have an impact and are intentional.’
• ‘A lot of differences are quite subtle but over time have a large impact on public perception.’
• And finally, ’If you live in Scotland you have been bombarded with this since 2014 and the ramping up in the last year or so while not the only reason played a major role in the outcome of the election… It works !!!’

End note

It is worth reading and reflecting upon Jonathon Cook’s blog post (10 July) for its intended purpose: ’Why the news media’s job is to groom us: large numbers of Palestinians and Ukrainians were killed in missile strikes days apart. The media’s differing treatment of these comparable events is the clue to what the media’s really there to do’ (see https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2024-07-10/news-media-groom/). A profile of Cook and his professional credentials can be found here https://www.jonathan-cook.net/about/ .