Looking at my choices this week, I am struck that all are, in one way or another about the impact media, social or otherwise, has on us and how we perceive ourselves and others. Domestic violence reduced to a lover’s spat. Page 3 and its ongoing hold and impact on our nation. The blurred lines between good intentions and propaganda when it comes to engaging people in our causes.
Great article discussing what we should do when we witness incidents of violence, in this case domestic violence
It is, obviously, too late for anybody seeing the pictures of Nigella Lawson to step in and alter the situation. But we can collectively respond to them in an ethical way. While the follow-up in rival newspapers may be prurient, and interested only in the exciting prospect of a celebrity suffering a public trauma, the spike in interest enables us all to think about the insidiousness of domestic violence and how we deal with it, and to how we respond as citizens to inappropriate behaviour happening in our midst.
A friend of mine Isabel Hardman, writes about her boobs in the Independent: I’ve got no time for page three, but a blanket ban would be pointless:Glossy magazines jammed with size-zero models are far more worthy of our scorn
…banning the newspaper from Parliament or anywhere else is pointless, because it does nothing to change the market forces that drive demand for page three. As it happens, that demand appears already to be on the wane, with Rupert Murdoch himself tweeting earlier this year that those who said the feature was “so last century” were “maybe right”. Anti-sexism campaigners will have their day of victory not when they succeed in stopping a few right-on shops from selling the most popular newspaper in this country, but rather when editors decide their readers aren’t really keen on naked ladies in the paper, and just drop them. Page three really is last century’s problem.
Fascinating and uncomfortable reading all at the same time. I’ve long not liked the charity jingles that start in black and white, with slow, sad piano music. It is only when the white man swoops in with his money and mosquito nets that Coldplay kicks in and we go techni-colour. There is also something unsettling about using images of victims of crime, neglect, war and disasters without their consent and to deliberately provoke reactions. Poverty Porn and A New Way to Regard Social Impact
There is power in engaging westerners through a language that we know, through tropes we are used to, through allowing us to feel good about the work we do—and when done well, it’s both good business and good storytelling. But as Unite for Sight says, “in addition to violating privacy and human rights, poverty porn is damaging to those it is trying to aid because it evokes the idea that the poor are helpless and incapable of helping themselves, thereby cultivating a culture of paternalism.”
Tweets of the week:
Rachel Held Evans: When I tell people I’m a blogger, they usually respond, “Oh, so you’re a mommy blogger!” Nope. Women can blog without being moms, you know.
VeryBritishProblems: Having an uneasy feeling that the sky has been stockpiling rain for Wimbledon
James Martin: If Charles Saatchi claims that’s a ‘playful tiff’, perhaps someone should give him a ‘whimsical pat’ to the bollocks.
@ManageFlitter: “Twitter makes me like people I’ve never met and Facebook makes me dislike people I already know”