The notion of 'race', which originally came from the ideological separation of 'white people' and 'black people', is one of recent invention as “Before the trans-Atlantic slave trade, 'Black people' did not exist.” (Jordon and Weedon, 1997: 307). This is because the separation of 'races' was a way to justify the exploitation of 'black people' of Africa during the slave trade. Before this there “were only people from specific ethnic and linguistic groups... people from specific locales and people of different religious communities.” (ibid) but no fixed differentiation between them. The term 'race' suggests “that human groups were differential by nature, and that there was a natural line of separation between them.” (Guillaumin, 1999: 359). However, it has been argued that “classification by race is not natural but arbitrary.” (Jordon and Weedon, 1997: 309).

As can be seen from the origins of the term 'race' and people being divided up into separate 'races'; it is a term that has given reasoning to “a social and cultural system that magnifies differences of skin-colour and phenotype, and links these differences to notions of superiority and inferiority.” (Jordon and Weedon, 1997: 252) i.e. 'racism'. Racism “is based on a conception of differences among people as having fundamentally to do with the traits they inherit, or supposedly inherit, by virtue of being part of the same gene pool.” (ibid: 256). This is “the racist ideology of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries” (ibid: 292).

The word 'racism' did not appear in the English Language until the 1930s and only came about due to “the growing body of scientific evidence which undetermined the idea of 'races' as natural, discrete and fixed subdivisions of the human species” (Miles, 1999: 344). Before this, the term 'race' was widely believed as scientific truth, and with this a racist attitude was also accepted based on the evidence of differences between 'races'.

Even though the concept of 'race' is now not accepted “in biology, it has been common to argue that race remains a legitimate concept... because social actors treat it as real” (Mason, 1999: 8). This means that there are “social processes through which relationships become racialized; that is, represented ideologically as race.” (ibid). This has lead to a 'new racism' which favours the “exclusion of migrants, or segregation of members of differential population groups... [due] to cultural incompatibility” (ibid: 10) between these different social groups. This means that this new racism is ideologically linked to the nation state and suggests that the culture of the state is threatened by 'outsiders' or 'foreigners'. In other words it stems from xenophobia.

Biological racism still exists in society (although not to the same extent as it once did) alongside this new racism, which is now the more dominant form of racism and accepted by large numbers of people. This shows that there is no longer one type of racism, but different types of 'racisms'. Racism still exists because it “is deeply ingrained within the dominant social structures and signification systems of contemporary western societies.” (Jordon and Weedon, 1997: 253).

“from the 1840s, racist ideology was deliberately promulgated in Britain. It was spread by all possible means, including popular culture, the media, the churches and missionaries, the education system and spokespeople from all walks of life, as well as by the burgeoning ‘scientific’ and imperialist associations”

(Sherwood: 2003)

“Research indicates that the mass media play a critical role in producing and reproducing negative stereotypes of minority ethnic groups, in caricaturing their beliefs and cultures, and in stimulating moral panics around issues such as crime... immigration... [and] urban disorders.”

(Mason, 1999: 112)

One of the most dominant mass media organisations in Britain is the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), which claims to be “the largest broadcasting corporations in the world” (BBC, 2009a). It is also a British “public service broadcaster... funded by the licence fee that is paid by UK households.” (ibid). This shows that the BBC potentially has a large impact on British society and an analysis of it should show that the BBC represents the ideas prevalent within the society. Due to its very nature of being a British organisation to “inform, educate and entertain” (ibid) the British public, there is, to a small extent at least, an attempt to construct a notion of Britishness. The extent of this will be discussed through the rest of this essay to see whether it could be accused of incorporating racism within its programming.

In contrast to the BBC, the British National Party, a legitimate political party, is generally viewed as being on the fringes of society as “Its elected councillors represent less than 1% of all those in the UK. ” (Casciani, 2008) and. However, for “the past 10 years there have been predictions that the... BNP... could achieve a major electoral breakthrough” (ibid), which has come in the form of winning its first two MEPs in 2009. The BNP has been accused of being, among other things, a racist party, which can be seen due to organisations set up to oppose the BNP, such as Antifa, Unite Against Fascism and Love Music, Hate Racism. However, the party claims that it “is not a 'racist' or 'racial' or 'racialist' or 'race-conscious' or 'white' or 'white people's' party” (British National Party, 2005: 1). Yet it claims to be “an 'ethno-nationalist' party” (ibid) and espouses “the interest of the particular ethnic group we belong to” (ibid). The BNP will therefore be discussed, alongside the BBC, to see how it attempts to incorporate a racist message within its propaganda. This will be done without going into detail about specific members that have been involved in racist incidents, of which there have been many.

Racism is based on false stereotypes which need to be challenged by media organisations like the BBC. However, this is not the case and therefore the BBC could be accused of 'Institutional racism'; this is supported by Alibhai-Brown, who states:

“It is not uncommon... these days to find black and Asian viewers who feel that... BBC ethnic programming has failed effectively to challenge the assumptions of British white society; that editors have played it safe in reproducing stereotypes and have only commissioned programmes that display the most negative aspects of black and Asian life.”

(Alibhai-Brown, 1998: 121).

Up until the late 1980s, where the participation of ethnic minorities in media production was still low, there was a “broad agreement that the media did influence and reinforce public opinion and... that on race, the media had the potential to affect attitudes and behaviour.” (Alibhai-Brown, 1998: 111). This therefore “promoted a 'white' perspective” (ibid: 112) in the media. However, even now with higher levels of employment within the media sector for ethnic minority groups, these features still “remain stubbornly in place.” (ibid: 116). Alibhai-Brown implies that one reason for this is that many ethnic minorities working within the media have “absorbed the underlying values of the white media to prove their worth” (ibid: 120) instead of using their position to fight against existing stereotypes. She even suggests that there are “examples now of black and Asian journalists and commissioning editors making racist programmes or writing inflammatory articles of the sort that white people tend these days to avoid.” (ibid). An example she specifically cites is a sensationalist Panorama programme aired by the BBC in 1994 called Underclass in Purdah, produced by an “all-Asian team” (ibid). The programme “claimed that many Muslims in the city were involved in illegal activities like drug trafficking and pimping.” (ibid).

There are elements of racism within both the BBC and BNP, undoubtedly to different extents, but still there. Within the media, the BBC is not the worst offender as “many newspapers continue to peddle the worst xenophobic and racist messages in ways that you would not get on radio and television” (Alibhai-Brown, 1998: 118) but often portrays stories in ways that make them “more subtle and acceptable” (ibid). It must also be stated that the BNP uses language that makes their racist ideology more subtle and acceptable in comparison to openly racist political parties of the past. The racist messages are still there in both mainstream and marginalised parts of society, but just in a more complex and subtle way that one-hundred years ago. Even though the concept of 'race' is now widely disputed by academics, it is a term that is still in general use in society, and as Bulmer and Solomos state:

“where members of society make distinctions between different racial groups, at least some members of that society are likely to behave in ways which give rise to racism as a behavioural and ideational consequence of making racial distinctions in the first place.”

(Bulmer and Solomos, 1999: 5).

Bibliography

This essay sets out to explore the claims of ethnocentrism within the mainstream media in Britain, by using the example of the ongoing Israel-Palestine conflict. It will attempt to find out whether any perceived bias in the reporting of the conflict can be proved, if so what causes this, and whether it can be related to ethnocentrism. To be able to find this out, there must be an investigation into how the news functions from a global perspective, both generally and when there is an international crisis, as well as looking at alternative news sources to see if there is a difference in how they operate or give a different perspective of the conflict. There will be a discussion of a broad range of mainstream media, as well as different alternative media sources to see how they contrast in news reporting. Key authors that will be drawn upon throughout the essay include; Mason (1999), Said (2003), Cottle (2006), Philo and Berry (2004) and Allan (2005).

First of all there must be a clear definition and explanation of ethnocentrism. Ethnocentrism is an ideological construct that can be defined as “the practice of evaluating other groups, and their cultures and practices from the perspective of one's own. In this basic sense, it is possibly a feature of all societies.” (Mason, 1999, 10). However, it “includes the tendency to form and maintain negative values and hostility toward multiple groups that are not one's own.” (Cunningham et al, 2004:1333).

Ethnocentrism, from a Western perspective, is often associated with the concept of Orientalism. Orientalism is a concept that originally came out of Western Europe, mainly Britain and France, and is “a Western style for dominating, restructuring and having authority over the Orient.” (Said, 2003: 3). The 'Orient' is a synonym for the 'East' in contrast to the 'Occident' which is a synonym for the 'West'. From this point of view the East is seen as 'the other' in comparison to the 'norm' of the West. European culture has been “able to manage— and even produce— the Orient politically, sociologically, militarily, ideologically, scientifically, and imaginatively.” (ibid: 3).

Within the media, ethnocentrism can be seen in two ways; news values and the linguistic representation of 'the other'. In relation to news values, aspects of ethnocentrism can be seen in a study by of Galtung and Rouge in the mid-1960s, which was based on research of foreign news in the Scandinavian press. In this research they found a total of twelve informal rules or codes, which were used in the selection of news stories, but here there will be a focus on the most related to the concept of ethnocentrism.

Firstly, there is the rule of 'conflict'. When reporting conflicts, “'balanced' journalism dictates that 'each story has two sides'” (ibid: 57). The news story must be seen to have some relevance to the audience, so “The proximity of the event is a related factor.” (ibid). When the news is reported there will be elements of simplification to make the story unambiguous and therefore “the diversity of potential interpretations may... be kept to a minimum.” (ibid). The news also mainly focuses on elite nations and:

“gives priority to events in those countries which are regarded as 'directly affecting the audience's well being', such as the USA and other members of the 'first world'. This is at the expense of those events taking place in other places, particularly developing or 'third world' countries”

(ibid: 58)

The last rule that will be mentioned is cultural specificity, where “'maps of meaning' shared by newsworker and news audience have a greater likelihood of being selected” (ibid). This means that there is a greater chance of stories being selected “about 'people like us' at the expense of those who 'don't share our way of life.” (ibid).

These rules contribute to Pilger's concept of 'unpeople' where he states that “certain lives have media value while others are expendable. The killing of those of ‘us’ counts as a crime; the rest are unpeople.” (Pilger, 2003: 137). It seems that the less an audience is deemed to have in common with another group of people, the less important that group are considered in relation to newsworthiness.

The language of the media is also important when considering ethnocentrism, and it is constructed in a way that “can invoke a cultural division between 'us and them'” (ibid: 145). Hall (in Allan 2005) argues that there has been a 'naturalization' of racist ideology in the media, and society in general. He states that there is “a set of complex, often contradictory, social relations” (ibid) which defines how the media functions. This has resulted in two types of racism within the media; 'overt' and 'inferential'. Overt racism is usually confined to right-wing media tabloids which “popularize openly racist ideas” (ibid). Inferential racism, which is more widespread in the British media, is being “inscribed in media coverage as a set of unquestioned assumptions.” (ibid) and is “largely invisible even to those who formulate the world in its terms” (ibid). Within the language of the media, being 'white' is seen as 'the norm' and is therefore rarely used in the description of the said person, where as 'non-white' people are usually described in terms of their skin colour and therefore seen as 'the other'. The same can also be seen in terms of nationality and religion, where non-British and non-Christian people are described to in a way that makes them seem like 'the other'.

Before there can be any discussion of how the news functions during times of crisis, there must be an analysis of how the news functions generally. In an investigation conducted by Lewis et al (2008), there sufficient evidence to prove that four interconnected 'rumours' of newsgathering and reporting practices were true. In the investigation there was an analysis of 'quality' newspapers like the Guardian, The Times, the Independent and the Telegraph and the mid-market tabloid, the Daily Mail. These rumours were “journalists have... become processors rather than generators of the news” (Lewis et al, 2008: 27) due to “an increasingly influential role for public relations professionals and news agencies” (ibid). One reason why this has happened is because “relatively fewer journalists are now required to write more stories to fill ever-expansive pages of national press.” (ibid: 27-8) while workers are “increasingly pressurised and low-paid (ibid: 28). This has led to journalists being “more likely to accept them [sources] without check or criticism” (ibid). So it is now seen that news “is increasingly generated from outside formal media organisations and newsrooms” (ibid). This has been seen as “an inevitable response to maintaining profitability during a period of steady... decline in news readership.” (ibid: 42).

As journalists are now relying on external sources so much, the most powerful sections of society are in a position to take advantage of the situation and therefore making Marx's view that “The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas” (in Allan, 2005: 48) even harder dispel. To further support this argument “many political economists argue that news media power is being restricted to an even smaller number (of usually white and male) hands” (ibid: 52) mainly from the 'elite nations', which in turn is another reason to explore the arguments that the media is ethnocentric. This has been seen to back up the perspective that “corporate fears over 'the bottom line' are reshaping judgements about newsworthiness in ways which frequently all but silence alternative or oppositional views.” (ibid).

To explore how the news functions in times of crisis, the Israel-Palestine conflict will be used as an example to support the claims made. First of all a background to the conflict will be given, but due to restrictions in regard to word limit, it will be very brief.

The roots of the conflict around the end of the 19th century, and what is now known as Israel and Palestine, were both apart of the same country, Palestine. According to a census in 1878, there was a Jewish population of “15,011 living amongst a combined Muslim/Christian population of 447,454” (Philo and Berry, 2004: 2). Due to anti-Semitism in Europe, Jewish immigration into Palestine increased and at the same time there was an increasing interest in a movement called Zionism which “stressed the need for Jews to return to the Holy Land as a necessary prelude to the Redemption and the second coming of the Messiah.” (ibid). Here the Holy Land is synonymous with Palestine and within it the Jews were “to create their own state, in which they would constitute and majority and be able to exercise national self-determination.” (ibid: 3) and “deport the native population” (ibid:4). Tens of thousands of Jewish immigrants continued to settle in Palestine, with hostility increasing between the native Arab population and the settlers. “After the First World War Britain was assigned control of Palestine” (ibid: 7). Britain had already promised Zionist leaders of “a Jewish home in Palestine.” (ibid). “Throughout the 1920s Arab hostility to the Zionist project manifested itself in increasingly prolonged outbreaks of violence.” (ibid: 8). In the wake of the Holocaust, there was increased pressure for the Zionist cause and because of the upsurge in violence in Palestine, the British, already weakened from the effects of the Second World War, decided to “hand the question of Palestine to the United Nations.” (ibid: 17). The solution was to have two separate states within the region and the state of “Israel was established in 1948” (ibid: 258), but this meant that “large numbers of Palestinians were displaced from their homeland” (ibid). Violence still continues in the region, but with Israel gaining increasing power in both regions, “after 1967, Palestinians in the occupied territories lived under various forms of military control in which they were ultimately subject to the power of Israel.” (ibid). Israeli settlers still continue take away more Palestinian land, which is made possible with the support from countries like the US who supply “arms and money to Israel.” (ibid: 221).

In a study of how television news covered the Israel-Palestine conflict and how the public understood the news coverage, Philo and Berry (2004) found that there was confusion from the audience's understanding of “the origins and underlying political dimensions of the conflict” (Philo and Berry, 2006: 199). The “gaps in the public knowledge were related to lack of context and explanation of key issues in news bulletins.” (ibid). Journalists have claimed “that part of the reason for the lack of historical context was they were under pressure was they were under pressure from news editors to produce dramatic reports with strong visuals that would catch the attention of the viewer.” (ibid: 201).

The reporting of the conflict gives “very little reference to the military nature of the occupation and its social consequences for Palestinians or to the large number of UN resolutions condemning the occupation.” (ibid: 202). There is not much mention of the “exploitation of Palestinian land and water resources” (ibid) and there is also “a very limited picture of Israeli settlers living in the occupied territories; yet the settlements have a key role in the occupation.” (ibid: 203). Research shows that “less than a fifth of viewers were aware that Palestinian refugees had lost their land and homes during the creation of the Israeli state.” (ibid: 200)

This lack of context gives a distorted view on the whole conflict, usually in favour of the Israeli side, which is shown by the fact “Israeli perspectives on the conflict were featured more prominently than those of Palestinians” (ibid: 202). In the news “the Palestinians are seen to initiate the trouble or violence and the Israelis are presented as 'responding' or 'retaliating'.” (ibid: 203-4). A study in to BBC1 and ITV news showed that the Israelis were six times more likely to be shown as responding to violence than Palestinians. On top of this there was more emphasis on the deaths of Israelis in the conflict, with “differences in the language used for the casualties of both sides... [and] more coverage of Israeli deaths” (ibid: 204), despite the fact that the casualty rate of Palestinians is “much higher than the Israelis.” (Philo and Berry, 2004: 231).

The actions of the Israelis are more likely have “an explanation which could legitimise what they were doing.” (ibid: 245). This is partly due to Israel having a “more efficient public relations machine” (ibid), and with the increasing amount of PR material used in news rooms, as well as more journalists living in Israel that Palestine, it gives a huge advantage to the Israeli side. This comes down to Israel being a 'richer' country, due to their links with the more developed countries in the West. Furthermore, “government intimidation of reporters deemed 'unfriendly' to Israel is routine and sanctioned by the government.” (Ibid: 247). There have been reports “that the Israeli embassy in London has mounted a huge drive to influence the British media” (ibid: 248). The embassy's press secretary has claimed to “have had influence on the BBC” (ibid). Many journalists have been “accused of being pro-Palestinian at best, and at worst anti-Semitic.” (ibid).

Participants from Philo and Berry's research got the impression that Israel was “'an island of democracy' in the Middle East... [while] At the same time, some aspects of Muslim culture were seen as strange and difficult to identify with.” (ibid: 237). This shows that the Israeli people are seen as 'more like us', while the Palestinians are seen as the 'other'. To emphasise this likeness to 'us' since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, “Israel has stressed its role as part of the 'war against terror'... presenting Israel as one part of the Western Alliance.” (ibid: 249).

Due to the US being an elite nation and having a strong political alliance with Britain, they are more likely to have their views represented than key figures from other countries. In light of this, the distortion in reporting is also “magnified by the prominence given to American sources who tended to support the Israeli position.” (Philo and Berry, 2006: 202); but because there is “considerable confusion over the relationship between Israel and the US” (Philo and Berry, 2004: 220), it is not always clear to the audience why the high profile figures, including politicians, from the US would support either side. “There is some evidence to suggest that perspectives on the Middle East adopted by US politicians are strongly influenced by pro-Israeli lobbies.” (ibid: 252).

Despite a strong argument that the mainstream media provides a distorted view of the conflict in favour of Israel, there are certain media organisations that can be seen to dispel this claim. Al-Jazeera has come “to international prominence since 11 September 2001” (Zayani, 2006: 178) and due it being an Arab based media network, has “broadcast content originating from outside western countries and cultures, and thereby expand, or at least inflect, to some appreciable degree the range and breadth of view on world events.” (Cottle, 2006: 163). One way that it has come to such prominence is through the Internet as well as satellite and cable television, where people in the west have access to it. They have managed to disseminate “images and ideas that western governments and interests may prefer to see controlled and censored.” (ibid). The al-Jazeera website seems to support the Palestinian cause, which can be seen by a section of their website called “War on Gaza”(al-Jazeera, 2009), and articles with headlines such as “Gaza: The endless cycle of trauma”(Tolan, 2009) and “Who will save the Palestinians?”(LeVine, 2009). The articles are often accompanied by photos of dead and maimed Palestinian people and children caught within the conflict to provoke an emotional response. These all suggest a war where Palestinian people are the main victims.

Alongside al-Jazeera there other alternative news sources such The Electronic Intifada, which is a website that “publishes news, commentary, analysis, and reference materials about the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict from a Palestinian perspective.” (EI, 2009). There are also many British based anti-capitalist newspapers (who usually have websites too), such as Socialist Worker, who openly support the Palestinian people against the Israeli government, by having headlines such as, “Break Britain’s links with Israel” (Socialist Worker, 2009a) and “Step up solidarity for Gaza” (Socialist Worker, 2009b). The rise of new media has definitely helped people gain access to these alternative news sources, however, the reason they are still considered alternative is because most people do not use them or do not know about them.

There has also been resistance to these dominant ideas from the general public, shown by the mass protests and condemnation against Israel's military attacks in Gaza throughout December 2008 and January 2009. The biggest of the many protests in Britain had “as many as 100,000 people” (Quinn and Smith, 2009) in attendance. This also included protests aimed at the BBC, from both the public and people who worked within the media; because the BBC, along with Sky television, refused to “air the Gaza humanitarian aid appeal” (Holmwood, 26/1/2009) as they claimed “it risked compromising its impartiality” (ibid).

There is certainly a case to say that the majority of the mainstream media within Britain is ethnocentric, due to it being tied up within the political economy, and being increasingly used to represent the dominant ruling class ideas through their more effective PR techniques. With the case of the Israel-Palestine conflict, the ruling class of the western nations see Israel as an ally within the Middle East, as “Israel has been granted a unique immunity from criticism in mainstream journalism and scholarship” (Chomsky, 2008: 221). Although this is most prominent in the US, their powerful influence over British society and the British ruling class' own interests in the Middle East, means this is also an issue within Britain. However, there are small sections of the media, which are either alternative media organisations or mainstream media workers, who try resist the dominance of ethnocentric thinking within the media.

Bibliography

Pilger, J. (2003) New Rulers of the World,London : Verso.

A Critique of the Draft Social-Democratic Program of 1891 by Frederick Engels [http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx...1891/06/29.htm]

Letter to August Bebel in Zwickau, March 1875 by Frederick Engels [http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx...s/75_03_18.htm]

REFERENCES:



The Civil War in France by Karl Marx [http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx...rance/ch05.htm]

A Space for Participatory Democracy? by Mark Frezzo [http://www.envisioningdemocracy.net/...e-for-par.html]

Democracy Without Politicians? by Dave Zachariah [http://reality.gn.apc.org/polemic/Za...nDemocracy.pdf]

Programme of the Social-Democratic Emancipation of Labour Group by Georgi Plekhanov [http://www.marxists.org/archive/plek.../xx/sdelg1.htm]

Politics by Aristotle [http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin...0line%3D%23175]

Transcritique: On Kant and Marx by Kojin Karatani [http://books.google.com/books?id=mR1HIJVoy6wC]

Criminal Procedure in Ancient Greece and the Trial of Socrates by Douglas Linder [http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/proj...ekcrimpro.html]

The Tasks of the Russian Social-Democrats by Vladimir Lenin [http://www.marxists.org/archive/leni...97/dec/31b.htm]

Ideas of Leadership and Democracy by Paul Cockshott [www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc/reports/leadershipconcepts.pdf]