Human Rights in the UK Media: Representation and Reality University of Liverpool 19 th September 2014 David Mead, Professor of UK Human Rights Law, UEA.

Human Rights in the UK Media: Representation and

RealityUniversity of Liverpool19th September 2014

David Mead, Professor of UK Human Rights Law, UEA

"They offer you a feature on stockings and suspenders next to a call for

stiffer penalties for sex offenders: do we learn more about the media than

about human rights from tabloid coverage of human rights?"

“Just the facts m’am, just the facts”

‘You couldn’t make it up’

‘Economical with the actualité’

Techniques of distortion

Sins of omission

Sins of commission

Media theory

Content analysis

Semiotics

Discourse and narratives

Lessons

Further research

‘You couldn’t make it up’: just plain wrong

‘Economical with the actualité’: a distorted truth

McQuail (1992): three criteria to assess media bias (i) factualness; (ii) accuracy; (iii) completeness

Stressing human rights elements of “disagreeable” decisions Failing to note critical role of the HRA in welcome decisions Trivialising Giving misleading impression of legal position Failing to explain or provide context Ignoring fact that HRA would make no difference

In short: HRA as source of all evil & never (rarely?) a force for good

Techniques of distortion: sins of omission

• Paulet v UK 13 May 2014• RMT v UK 8 April 2014• Church of the Latter-Day

Saints v UK 4 March 2014• Jones v UK 14 Jan 2014• R (oao Whiston) v SoS for Justice

[2014] UKSC 39

Sins of commission: prematurity, prominence, partiality & phrasing

“The continual production of reality” (Negus, 1999)

“terrorists murderers and rapists” features in 15 Mail on-line stories (4 from abroad) in past year

“paedophiles, rapists and murderers” appears in ten Mail on-line stories

“murders and rapists” in 34 stories, only 7 from abroad, and almost all in context of prisoners’ rights/deportation

“rapists and killers” appears 20 times, 8 from abroad

Why the repetition and reinforcement? Cohen, 1973; Hall, 1977

Sins of commission: lies, damned lies and statistics

l

Content analysis

Massive

Possible under-representation of terrorists as beneficiaries of human rights “industry” Massive over-

representation of foreign criminals as beneficiaries of human rights “industry”

Reading the signs: the semiotics of human rights reporting

What I call “human rights”

Worthy victims don’t need human rights

Wider discourses: regular readers of The Daily Mail understand

that… Human rights are not for “us” – they are

for the undeserving Human rights claims are generally

unmerited & made by unmeritorious people

Human rights are not universal Human rights favour criminals not

victims Human rights are decidedly un-British

and undemocratic Human rights claims are generally lost

by the UK Government

Lessons Reinforces juriscentricity of HRA Repeal of HRA: needs to be based

on facts not fear Public discourse in general

weakened Citizenship and HR culture What does it tell us about the right

of free speech - its role/functions - & press accountability

Further research questions Below-line comments: what can

we learn about reader knowledge

Prominence and placement of stories: juxtaposition

Comparing different newspapers coverage of same story

Longitudinal content studies On-line vs. print versions

But it’s not all doom and gloom for human rights in the Daily Mail…