Martin Conboy

The language of the news

1. Language and Society 2. The Development of Newspaper Language 3. Contemporary Newspaper Language 4. Newspapers as Interpretative Communities 5. Language Content and Structure 6. Headlines 7. Stories 8. Objectivity 9. Summary

THE FUTURE OF NEWSPAPERS

To what extent can we disassociate the technology and economics of newspapers from their political and cultural functions? Many of the latter functions have survived previous eras of technological change, often with a heightened promise of a more democratic engagement with readers and a subsequent amelioration of civic communication. Toolan (1998) has provocatively suggested that, in their narrative conventions, newspapers often literally do not know what they are writing about. This has partly been because of the time constraints on the production of news and the narrative conventions which this economy imposes upon them. Yet this clearly has not prevented newspapers from having a very strong sense of longer narratives and ideological identities, in combination with an ability to tailor these to a highly conventional notion of audience. What happens when newspapers are freed from this diurnal duty, as is increasingly the case in the contemporary world of newspapers, when more and more breaking news is dealt with by “quicker” media? Does this provide newspapers in whatever new formats with the opportunity to reconfigure themselves as spaces more accessible to traditions of communication and civic engagement; ones which draw upon a more discursive space of commentary and opinion on the contemporary rather than being limited to the provision of daily news? This paper sketches an analysis of how the shift of newspapers from news to commentary and identity politics which is already occurring may be informed by previous paradigms of periodical news production. It explores certain aspects of the newspapers function over time in order to consider what it has to offer in whatever reconfigured technological future.

The Paradoxes of Journalism History

In order to extricate journalism from broader media history, we need to better develop ways of understanding the generic characteristics of journalism over time and across geo-political space. This paper will aim to address what could be termed certain paradoxes of journalisms history; paradoxes which relate to our definitions of the generic boundaries of journalism and flux across those boundaries. Engaging with the complexities of these historical paradoxes will, we may hope, contribute to our understanding of what makes this set of practices distinct in the present and also what we may want to retain of its range of features in some technologically reconfigured future. Journalisms current crises and opportunities, with their implications for the broader qualities of public communication, need us to consider it in all its historical complexity, not just as a profit-making machine which has broken down. Furthermore, the only way to fully begin to grasp journalisms current potential is to consider how it has formed and mutated over the centuries as a global phenomenon. Propelled by both intellectual and technological developments, journalism history is moving out from its confinement in the margins of other disciplinary areas. Journalism studies worldwide is providing a wealth of opportunities for scholars. This paper argues that we need to embrace more ambitious dialogues to clarify our understanding of journalism in itself as well as in its intersections with other fields, at the same time as becoming involved in methodological conversations about the exploitation of digital resources.

Celebrity journalism – An oxymoron? Forms and functions of a genre

Debate about the ideal content or purpose of journalism is as old as print itself. The messy characteristics of popular culture have always intruded into the high principles and purposes of the communication of politics and journalism’s intentions to provide information of importance for the public. In the intensity of the contemporary media era it is necessary to reconsider the interplay between celebrity news and journalism: beyond oxymoron and towards the appreciation of a paradox. This contribution seeks to explore some of the forms and functions of celebrity news in contemporary British culture and speculates on the increasing relevance of celebrity to the future of journalism.

Journalism history—a debate

In this exchange, Mark Hampton and Martin Conboy debate the best approaches to researching and writing journalism history. In the first essay, Hampton, taking as his starting point Conboys 2010 agenda-setting article, “The Paradoxes of Journalism History”, argues that journalism history should be more deeply integrated within broader cultural, political, and economic historiographies, and that media history is key to this task. In the second essay, Conboy acknowledges the importance of such wider contexts, but reaffirms the need for disentangling journalism history more carefully from media history in order to appreciate its distinctive qualities. This methodological disagreement is particularly important because of the underlying premise on which both scholars agree: that a rigorous historical approach is central to the undertaking of Journalism Studies.

THE DAILY MIRROR AND THE CREATION OF A COMMERCIAL POPULAR LANGUAGE

It has long been acknowledged that the Mirrors transformation from middle-class to working-class newspaper after 1934 was effected to a large extent through its astute identification of a language which could communicate its journalism to a new market. This language has been explored with particular intensity during the period of the Second World War and the post-war period when the paper rose to both political as well as commercial prominence. However, there has been little interest in the early years of this evolution, merely a generally held assumption that some time between 1934 and 1940, the newspaper developed a brand of journalistic language which embodied a credible appeal to a working-class readership. This paper attempts to redress this imbalance by focusing on the ways that the newspaper dealt with the outbreak of the Spanish Civil War between 1936 and 1939; part of the period described by Pugh as the neglected pre-1939 era—a neglect which is all the more surprising because, as he observes, “the Mirror was profoundly influenced by international events around 1935–36, and by 1939 it had become a central element in the tide of opinion that was shortly to envelop the parliamentarians” (Pugh, 1998, p. 424).

Morbid symptoms: between a dying and a re-birth (apologies to Gramsci)

This paper argues that despite an appearance of rupture, journalism is in an era of good fortune. While it would be both premature and historically naïve to point at a new “golden era”, there is reason to see a strengthening of journalisms sense of core responsibilities emerging from the challenges and opportunities which new technologies present. With an eye towards journalisms history as a force with the potential to feed contemporary debate, this paper briefly surveys the relationship between technological innovation and role perceptions of journalism. Against this backdrop, it evaluates the discourses of professional ideals and norms within the elite press in Britain in 2011 and 2012, in the context of new media technologies.

What Is Journalism? The Art and Politics of a RuptureNashChrisWhat Is Journalism? The Art and Politics of a Rupture, Palgrave Macmillan: London and New York, 2016; 247 pp.: £66.99

Chapter 4 titled ‘The media from below’ discusses the more direct links between media and peace promotion and focuses on peace promoters’ views of the role of the media in the transformation of this conflict as experienced through grassroots activity. The testimonies in this chapter call for a journalism as peace promoters see it – the one that includes the many aspects of Palestinian life, analyses of Israeli society, comprehensive explanations of conflict, developments in negotiations, violent outbreaks and crimes committed by both parties involved and not just one. Chapters 5 ‘Journalists covering Palestine: old and new perspectives’ and 6 ‘Journalists and their profession’ consider the social nature of journalism using an ethnographic approach to media production of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Both chapters focus on the perspectives of a group of journalists who covered this conflict, showing how practitioners make choices on the basis of the belief in the truthfulness of their accounts, which take different shapes according to their different experiences and visions of the world. The discussion looks at how practitioners describe and justify their work, then explores the tendency of journalism to resist reflexivity and internal change as it uncovers some of the reasons why the news often represents dominant or polarized narratives with little transformative framing or analysis. These two chapters are a unique call to journalists to reflect on how their representations enter a context of social, cultural and political dynamics, which offers opportunities for peace. Finally, in her final chapter called ‘Conclusions: a strategy for peace journalism’, Tiripelli discusses a strategy for peace journalism that involves dialogue and collaboration with the range of actors involved in shaping narratives of the conflict (international network of advocates and practitioners, experts, academics, intellectuals, peace promoters, audiences and journalists) who can provide knowledge about the very practical aspects of conflict resolution with their experiences working in the field for transformative purposes and important support for the affirmation of more responsible coverage of this conflict. In conclusion, this book deals with the very complex topic of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict as it tries to explain the role of journalism or rather peace journalism in it. The ideas postulated in this book constitute an ideal project to make peace journalism a substantial and tangible contribution to this decades – long conflict as well as setting out different ways in which the media can promote peace precisely because they present versions of reality that largely influence public opinion and can directly contribute to conflict resolution.

PERMEATION AND PROFUSION

Journalism is living through interesting times. Formats are changing, audiences fragmenting, the exchanges between quality and tabloid are accelerating. There is a burgeoning set of debates both within the industry and the academy, not to mention among the citizens or consumers themselves about what sort of journalism we are being presented with in the early years of this new millennium. Popular journalism in particular is crossing boundaries and multiplying its output in a process of permeation and profusion. From the perspective of panic-mongers, what they refer to as ‘‘tabloidization’’ seems to threaten the fabric of social and political representation, as we know it. From the perspective of the consumer of popular journalism there has never been so much to choose from and never previously has there been such a determination to prioritize what the people want. It seems appropriate to reconsider the pace and content of popular journalism in 2007 at the start of a new millennium since journalism as a popular form was very much at the heart of developments in both political culture and leisure for much of the previous millennium. So many broader discussions of popular culture are written as if such culture was exclusively of the moment and predominantly to do with youth culture. There is much to be gained by considering longer-term views of popular culture especially when dealing with journalism. Historical perspective can alert us to the fact that complaints about the quality of popular journalism or reminiscences of declines in standards since a previous golden age are not accurate reflections of the complexities of journalism’s appeal over time (Tulloch, 2000). Historical perspective also demonstrates that journalism has always been part of a general process of making information accessible to people outside the narrow confines of power-elites and gossip-mongers. Earliest periodicals in the 17th century included claims to be addressed to the ‘‘People’’ in their titles. Radical newspapers in the 19th century claimed power for the people, the Daily Mirror from the 1940s adopted the slogan ‘‘Forward With The People’’ and today ratings-chasing news programmes celebrate an affinity with the viewer-as-people. What unites all of these different addresses to the people is an ability to frame the appeal within a language, a rhetoric which encapsulates not only the world view but also the very language of those people (Conboy, 2002). For readers unfamiliar with the debates specific to journalism and its relationship to popular culture, there is clearly a need for a brief synopsis of the main points of reference. This is not merely turf arranging. It is an attempt to outline the terms of debate so that the various contributions in this volume can be appreciated in the light of the ongoing traditions of discussion on this subject. We will start with certain key definitions of ‘‘popular’’. These definitions illustrate why debates about the role and quality of popular journalism are so hotly contested. Raymond Williams (1976, p. 19) claims that there are three areas of conflict around the term ‘‘popular’’ which create complexity around the term and the variety of its products. It can be seen, first, politically as denoting culture

Journalism and the Democratic Market Society: Decline and fall?

This paper argues for the continuing relevance of Michael Schudson’s historical approach to journalism. It probes links with Schudson’s insistence on the centrality of the cultural contexts of journalism’s reception, which allow us to appreciate the ways in which his work has prompted historicizations of journalism to move from mere chronology into areas rich for interdisciplinary investigation, such as the economic underpinnings of news, the relationship of journalism to democracy, assessments of the sedimentation of journalistic styles and even discursive analysis. Such studies are increasingly important in their capacity to assess the performance of journalism from the perspective of textual evidence and thus challenge many outdated or unrepresentative idealizations that may lie at the heart of journalism’s contemporary plight.