Category Archives: Poverty and the Media

Runnymede study blasts media depiction of white working class

Posted on by
Reply

According to a newly published study by the Runnymede Trust, Who Cares about the White Working Class?, poverty is the biggest cause of discrimination against white working class people not race.

The report states “The white working classes are discriminated against on a range of different fronts, including their accent, their style, the food they eat, the clothes they wear, the social spaces they frequent, the post-code of their homes, possibly even their names. But they are not discriminated against because they are white,”.

The Guardian writes the report attacks middle class media commentators for simultaneously defending white working class interests against the false attack of politically correct multiculturalism whilst they simultaneously deride and ridicule the feckless and undeserving poor, who have squandered the opportunities offered by the welfare state.

The BBC’s The White Season and Channel 4’s Immigration-The Inconvenient Truth, come in for particular criticism. Of these programs the report says “The interests of the white working class are habitually pitched against those of minority ethnic groups and immigrants, while larger social and economic structures are left out of the debate altogether.”

Are the media really concerned with the white working class or are they just jumping on the scapegoating bandwagon?

Why do the media focus on race instead of class?

Knocking Jeremy from his Pedestal

Posted on by
Reply

Guardian Journalist, Andrew Sparrow, has hit out at the Jeremy Kyle Show’s aggressive and self-righteous exploitation of guest’s varying manifestations of poverty.

The article, which uses research from Joseph Rowntree Foundation’s ‘Public Interest in Poverty Issues‘ project, considers the report’s assertions that the show is:

‘presenting the less well-off as “undeserving” objects of derision’

‘while the Jeremy Kyle Show presents itself as a programme about relationships, “it could be viewed as a rather brutal form of entertainment that is based on derision of the lower-working-class population”.’

‘A spokesman for the Jeremy Kyle show responded, “It is unfortunate that this report presents a one-dimensional view of our programme. The Jeremy Kyle Show does not seek to ‘deride’ any particular social class or portray any group of people as ‘undeserving objects’. On the contrary, it focuses on real people with real problems addressing conflict in their lives, problems which reflect genuine issues within society, and seeks to help them achieve a resolution. We do this both within the programmes and with the support of an aftercare team comprised of qualified mental health nurses and a psychotherapist.”‘

It seems interesting to me that a report that engaged experts from so many fields would come to such a conclusive, singular conclusion without it being warranted.

Does the fact that guests aren’t actively steered towards their appearance and actions prior to the the show prove the producers good intent…

and the presence of professional care following the show demonstrate that that Jeremy’s dressing down of guests, before a studio and large television audience, is a nothing more than Tough Love?

Jeremy Kyle Show ‘undermines anti-poverty efforts’, says thinktank
-Andrew Sparrow, Guardian.co.uk,Wednesday 10 September 2008

Repossession, Repossession, Repossession

Posted on by
3

ITV’s new program Repossession, Repossession, Repossession focuses appropriately on people whose lives have been turned upside down by debt in the most dramatic fashion by the loss of their homes.

Following the lives of a family, a glamour model, a gambler and most interestingly Jamie an ambulance driver, it attempts to explain how these people got into a mountains of debt. Although the program lays some blame on banks and financial instituitions, it still focuses on individuals ‘spending sprees’ as the real reason their homes repossesed.

As Gary Hoffman, group vice-chairman of Barclays, rather checkily explains: “People binge eat, they binge drink, sometimes they spend, sometimes they binge borrow and what I encourage, what Barclays encourage, is for customers to talk to us when they have a problem.”

This from a man whose bank has lent millions pounds to those on low-comes and made a large fortune out credit card repayments.

The biggest question in this program should not be why are people are spending so much more than they earn? Or have people become too greedy? But why are public sectors workers like Jamie, who carry out essential services such as driving ambulances, earning so little they rely on debt to get by?

When will there be a program asking vice-chairs of Banks why they ran up so much debt they require billions of pounds of government bail outs?

Marsh farm challenge to the BBC

Posted on by
Reply

Formal Complaint to BBC

Dear BBC complaints team

I am writing to complain about the serious and damaging misrepresentations made by John Waite on Face the Facts regarding the Marsh Farm estate in Luton and our efforts to regenerate our community as part of the governments New Deal for Communities programme.

There are many cases of serious misrepresentation of facts throughout the entire programme but for purposes of initiating my complaint I will focus on the most serious and damaging wrong assertion made in the programme.

Waite gave the listener totally inaccurate information relating to the Marsh Farm Community Development Trust and its investments as part of the New Deal for Communities project, contrasting this alleged lack of investments with the New Deal programme in Norwich which was presented as a success story with £15 million capital investments and an annual return on those investments of between £3-400,000 per annum.

To emphasise the point the presenter John Waite said:

“An objective which – at least in Norwich – is well on the way to being met. Everyone I spoke to there said the £30 million of NDC funding so far released had been very well spent. Contrast that to Luton, just a hundred miles away, and its Marsh Farm estate, and the story’s a very different one. No smart new business centre there – just a tired old shopping centre.”

The programme goes on to give the clear impression that Marsh Farm New Deal has invested £27 million with nothing to show for it with regard to assets or sustainable project potential.

This could not be further from the truth.

Whilst doing his report from the Purley Centre, Waite was in fact standing directly opposite the largest single community owned building in the UK – a 120,000 sq ft former factory sitting directly in the centre of our community – which was paid for, equipped, brought into use and is kept in operation by New Deal funding. It used to be known as the ‘Coulters Factory’ and is now known as the ‘CERC’.

The sign at the front clearly says ‘The Marsh Farm Community Enterprise and Resource Centre’ and if the journalist researching this had taken a glance at Companies House records they show the existence of a company called ‘The Peoples Property Company Marsh Farm’ which holds a single asset – the CERC  building I am referring to.

MFCDT set up the Peoples Property Company when the building was purchased and the MFCDT capacity building team is currently preparing the ground for opening up membership of the company board beyond its current membership (resident representatives and partners) to the entire community, with a view to post NDC assets management strategies etc.

The CERC  currently houses many “very smart” new spaces including a new employment agency, Princes Trust offices, brand new computer suites serviced by the local colleges, drugs outreach offices, community outreach offices, fully equipped cafeteria, space for local small businesses, a number of operating social enterprises, office space for Marsh Farm Trust regeneration team, community police rooms, a neighbourhood warden base, victim support offices, a bricklaying college, car valeting service, off road driving project for local youth, a community radio station base and more.

MFCDT ownership of the building has also made possible (by provision of low cost or free space) the prospect of generating dozens of sustainable new jobs in a range of sustainable new social enterprises delivering goods and services to our community and beyond. These jobs would be prioritized for take up by members of our community who are most in need – none of which would be possible without having purchased the invaluable asset that is the Marsh Farm CERC.

Whilst there is still work to be done to ensure post NDC sustainability of the CERC we do have an achievable strategy here on Marsh Farm which is clearly set out in the public document that is the MFCDT 10 year Delivery Plan.

Further to all of this, MFCDT are in discussion with Luton Council about devolution of some of our environmental services that are currently delivered by the council on a town wide scale. The thinking at Marsh Farm Trust has always been that localised delivery could radically improve the service – hence the decision to invest in purchase of our Community Enterprise and Resource Centre. None of the above would be even up for consideration if not for the investment made by MFCDT in the asset.

Just 6 months ago I co-authored an article for leading regeneration magazine ‘Third Sector’ with Dr Gareth Potts, Head of Research and Policy for the British Urban Regeneration Association (BURA) setting out this strategy. Its the availability of all of this information – whether it’s a massive building sitting right in front of John Waite’s own eyes or easily researchable public documents – which makes the misrepresentations all the more shocking. I thought Face the Facts and BBC Radio 4 have a reputation for better reporting than this absolute nonsense which has been broadcast both today and on Friday.

I am happy to forward the article I co-wrote with Dr Potts and any other relevant information to help you with your deliberations, but would ask that this complaint be dealt with speedily as the damage could not come at a worse time for our community building efforts here in Marsh Farm

Glenn Jenkins
Resident, Marsh Farm

To read a full transcript of the program Face the Facts or listen to the original Radio 4 broadcast please click here

Secret Millionaire

Posted on by
Reply

Secret Millionaire: Who benefits?

Channel 4’s Secret Millionaire prides itself on bringing to light the social inequalities in Britain and highlighting the importance of ‘modern day philanthropy’.

By sending an undercover millionaire into deprived areas looking for worthy causes to give their money to, the program aims to uncover the secret heroes of deprived areas.

But who is it really for?

Is the focus ordinary people who daily struggle with poverty or the emotional journey of the millionaires themselves?

Though undoubtedly moving, this program disenfranchises the local people it tries to help but by making them lucky receivers of charity, grateful that one ignorant rich person has been educated in how hard it is to be poor. Rather than forcing the viewer to question a society where so much social inequality exists, it simply makes the millionaires feel better about being rich because they have helped a few poor people.

There is very little that is ‘modern’ about this ‘modern day philanthropy’. Is it not just the same as Victorian philanthropy where the wealthy would give alms to the poor and if this is the case what does it say about ‘modern-day Britain?’.

Watch a clip from The Secret Millionaire below and let me know if you agree or disagree

Rich Kid, Poor Kid showing a divided London

Posted on by
Reply

Channel 4’s Cutting Edge documentary Rich kid, Poor Kid tells the story of two London teenages who live in the same street but inhabit different worlds. As the title suggests they are separated by great social and financial inequality one attending private school and one living in a council flat. A great deal of the narrative is structured around the girls living so geographically close together but does it really give an accurate picture of the local area or those who live in it?

Do you live in the Rich Kid, Poor kid area? Is it a realistic depiction of the way people interact?

Has the area you live in been in a documentary?

How was your area portrayed?

Are British children the poorest?

Posted on by
Reply

A Unicef report conducted in 2007 concluded that British children were the most impoverished in the industrialised world. What does this say about our country and how reliable is this report?

For example, whilst Britain came 18th out of 21 when it comes to material wealth, the measure used by UNICEF was to classify anyone living in a household with less than the national average as in poverty. Of course, this means that whilst we may have more children living in such a state as other countries, does not necessarily mean they are poorer than some of the countries who outscored the United Kingdom in the survey. Does this figure say more about the extravagent wealth of some than the poverty of the many?

Ranking just a position above the UK was the USA, which is a matter of serious interest, with Germany’s position in the middle reaches of the table meaning three of the most vibrant world economies fail to provide an adequate basis for their children to prosper. What do you make of this report? Is it cause for concern, or a case of lies, lies and statistics? According to the BBC, to newspapers etc, we are failing our children. Do you agree?

Can you become rich by thinking it?

Posted on by
Reply

Napoleon Hill wrote the famous book, ‘Think and Become Rich’ some 70 years ago. Having studied some of the most successful people in history, he noted that the key to success was through your mindset. But how easy is it to simply, think it and become rich. Or even to become happy through a simple state of mind, irrespective of material wealth?

Jenny poses this question, referring to Hill’s work, asking whether we can change our lives through our outlook? And is poverty merely a question of wealth? Or is it a state of mind, a form of mental richness?