Aufgabe NT 2 - Aufgabe 3.2 · Abitur NRW Englisch GK · Nachtermin · Weiterbildungskolleg 2022

Klausurteil A

Joseph Harker

The British press isn’t racist, say the editors. That just shows how long the problem will endure

A few years ago, on the day singer Tom Jones revealed he may have Black ancestry, the

Daily Mail’s chief cartoonist, Mac, went to work. How did he depict this Black lineage?

With a couple of tribal figures, in the jungle: one a topless mother with a baby at her breast;

the other a spear-carrying “savage” with three human heads dangling in front of him.

5 It was the most clearly racist depiction of Black people one could possibly imagine. It went

in the next day’s paper.

By chance, on the day of publication the Daily Mail was hosting an event on behalf of the

Journalism Diversity Fund, which gives aspiring journalists from racial-minority backgrounds

a helping hand with training courses. As someone who works on diversity in the press, I was

10 invited.

A senior Daily Mail editor gave a fulsome speech about the fund’s good work, and why the

press needs more diversity. Afterwards, I asked him about the cartoon, and whether he saw

any disconnect. I wasn’t sure what reaction I would get but I was still shocked: “What the

hell are you saying?” he fumed. “I see nothing wrong with it. You’re simply trying to make

15 trouble.”

I’d expected him to be mildly embarrassed by the cartoon, and to try to laugh it off. Instead,

despite the crudest of stereotypes it portrayed, he saw absolutely nothing wrong with it at

all – and I became the accused.

Later, at the same event, I talked to one of the Mail’s senior PR honchos. He told me: “Look

20 what we’re doing here tonight, hosting this diversity event. This is what really matters.”

I told him he was wrong. That what matters is what goes in their product every day; that they

can spend thousands on feelgood diversity events without it making a single difference to

how their organisation operates.

I thought back to these conversations yesterday, when – in the aftermath of Harry and

25 Meghan’s claims about racism in the media – the Society of Editors issued an immediate

rebuttal 2. “The press is most certainly not racist,” it said, absolving itself immediately of even

the slightest guilt over Meghan’s coverage. According to the society, all the press does is

hold the powerful to account.

That will be news to many people of colour in the UK. Not only have there been glaringly

30 different takes on Meghan compared to Kate (the baby-bump-caressing; the avocados), but

beyond the royal family there are stark contrasts in the way Black and white people are

reported on. […]

The society also denied being “bigoted” – but as anyone with the most basic understanding

of the issue knows, this is not the same as racism, which operates in far more subtle ways

35 than name-calling or “No Blacks” signs.

Despite this, there’s plenty of evidence of the crude kind of racism within the British press:

from the conflation of Asians with terrorism or grooming gangs, to the association of Black

boys with gang violence.

And underpinning this is the long-running institutional racism which the press has never shaken

40 off: the unthinking racism that makes change so snail’s-pace. It’s seen in the dominant culture

of almost every national newspaper: middle-class, white, Oxbridge. You’ll find the occasional

minority-ethnic person in a senior role, but nothing to seriously challenge the corporate thinking.

For the most part, the agenda-setting discussions about race, or religion, take place among a

small group of white people: as people of colour, we are mostly spoken about, not to; and it’s

45 a rare thing indeed when we get to lead the discussion.

These are the issues at the heart of the racial disparity in news reporting: subtle biases come

together in an in-group which reinforces them, and then key decisions are made, unchallenged

by outsiders. It’s why a group of editors can all agree with themselves that the crudest racial

stereotypes are just a bit of fun.

50 The first way to tackle this is to accept that there’s a problem: that racism may be an issue,

given that only 6% of British journalists are ethnic-minority, and most of them are likely to

be in the most junior roles. Instead, the Society of Editors has come out with a kneejerk reaction

saying there’s no problem at all. […]

[I]f those in charge are so defensive about even the vaguest allegations of discrimination, then

55 what are the chances of them ever admitting the need for real change?

One thing this whole episode shows is that for some British editors, box-ticking is fine: but

don’t you dare try to question the way their institutions truly operate. And don’t expect any

serious challenge to racism in the newsrooms anytime soon.

2 After resigning as active members of the royal family, partly because of the British press’ treatment of Meghan, Prince Harry and his wife Meghan gave an interview, which was broadcast worldwide.

Annotations:

2 · Daily Mail – a major tabloid newspaper in the UK

19 · honcho – informal: the person in charge

25 · Society of Editors – British association of people working in the media

30 · Kate – Kate Middleton; wife of Prince William and Meghan Markle’s sister-in-law

30 · baby-bump-caressing, the avocados – examples of the same behaviour and eating habits by Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton which were reported on differently by the British press presenting Meghan in a negative way

37 · conflation – here: association

37 · grooming – here: befriending a child with the intention of establishing an abusive relationship

41 · Oxbridge – contraction of Oxford and Cambridge, two of the most prestigious British universities

52 · kneejerk – here: an impulsive reaction as a result of habit rather than careful consideration

56 · box-ticking – here: the process of doing something just to have it done

3.2 After finishing school, you are about to start studying journalism at university. To be admitted, you are required to write a letter to the head of the department in which you reflect on what, in your view, constitutes good journalism today and which major challenges journalists have to deal with. (Evaluation: re-creation of text) [14 Punkte]