Okay, before we begin, let me just say that the ideas mentioned below are more applicable to Australia. Or any country with a good degree of freedom for the media.

STEP 1: GETTING COVERAGE

In general (as mentioned before), only protests with disruption or novelty factors become newsworthy for the mainstream media coverage.

However, getting access into the mainstream media is only the first step. It does not necessarily guarantee that the coverage would be sympathetic enough for sufficient publicity to garner support. 

Most of the time, the media accounts tend to frame the protests by focusing on the events itself and the participants; instead of focusing on the wider social issues concerned.

Priority is quickly given to the protesters' violent or bizarre aspects, which are likely to draw condemnation than approbation. 

Media accounts tend to focus on the sentiments and actions of protestors, while the wider cause will be sullied and trivialized.

For you see, whenever an event happens, journalists always look on their cultural shelf to find a thematic framing package to classify and construct meaning for the event; so that readers can understand it in a frame that is familiar to the dominant culture, making it easier to absorb and digest.  It just so happens that violence and bizarre spectacle are one of those culturally familiar frames.

Abit like this, if you can imagine… Example frames in the picture are strictly products of the writer’s imagination and is not based on real examples of frames.

So, negative framing is majorly prevalent when the dissidents’ interests conflict with governmental interests. The same factors that increase the politically powerful’s level of access to the news media also increase the professional and political resonance of their information flows to the media, giving them the upperhand to skew the news’ framing.

Indeed, we should be alerted to the fact that there are powerful corporate interests behind government, which are mostly in conflict with collective interests of the public.

Hence, the dependent relationship of the media on authorities could be easily abused.

One such example of abuse is a tool called stigmatization. By attributing dissidents with a negative public image, authorities are socially constructing them as undesirables in society. And the media absorbs these labels for their cultural familiarity in constructing meaning.

Another indirect tool of stigmatization is the arrests of dissidents for disruption, which tarnishes their reputation in the public eye when reported in the media.

Observed from the last post by David, the Malaysian government used some of such techniques, aimed to protect the interests of some form of corporate interests (not sure about details), I suppose.

STEP 2 (or back to STEP 1): GETTING POSITIVE/SYMPATHETIC COVERAGE

One important fact to understand is the media’s focus in employing the shallowest level of frames in framing conflict; the media are interested in current affairs, not ideology.

So protesters have to learn how to produce useable information that fits the media’s idea of the culturally familiar.

In other words, protesters have to understand how to play the media game, by employing strategies like:

1. ‘news management’—using professional spokespeople or public relations managers to can manage information flows
   
2. deciding on a clear and simplified media frame of the protest; and persistently push the same consistently coherent messages 
3. Haul a celebrity into the campaign to boost its credibility
   

Figure 3 below provides a summary of the conclusion, in a game I created.

Figure 3: The Activist’s Frame Game

Applying this game on the recent rallies against racism in Melbourne, the issue follows the flow of:

Clear/simplified message-->disruption/violence-->not in conflict with government interests

--> covered positively

As a conclusion, although authorities have advantages over the media in terms of gaining access, challengers sometimes do emerge victorious .This rare condition only applies if the movement:

1. Is able to manage their issues or messages and exploit the media appropriately
   
2. Works for long-range change in society, leading them to change media frames in the process 

Politically marginal groups will have to continue finding human interest angles to associate with their agenda for journalists to work on, and to present their message in individualized ways with sensational or dramatic aspects.

Specifically, protesters could either keep increasing the participation rate in demonstrations, or to continue raising the level of drama.

For these purposes, it is more advisable to construct a more ‘moderate’ voice of pressure politics in contrast to ‘extreme’ movements.  Greenpeace and Friends of Earth are good examples of former politically marginal movements that have adjusted their political and media strategies majorly to accumulate more political capital. Their emergence in the 1960s as  an environmental movement left the media struggling to find appropriate labels for their novel cause. For immediacy’s sake, the media dealt with the issue by categorizing the movement as irresponsible and lacking in authority, especially when the movement employed high profile spectacular stunts.

I can't speak for the rest, but living in Australia has certainly opened up my mind. A lot. In case you haven't been following Karipap News, we've covered numerous public demonstrations here in Melbourne. Many of which concern human right issues in countries like Sri Lanka, Palestine and Burma (just to name a few).

So, you could say my eyes twitched uncomfortably (like this 'o.O'-> 'O.o') when I read today's news from sweet home, Alabam-err... I meant, Malaysia.

Here are some excerpts from the Star.

Foreign nationals living here were urged not to use the streets of Malaysia to protest political developments in their own countries.

Referring to the demonstration by 700 Iranians, mostly students, in front of Wisma UN here on Monday, Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishamuddin Tun Hussein said he had instructed the relevant authorities not to hesitate to take strict action against those that threatened the peace.

"I warned them: Do not use Malaysia as a stage and create disturbances and chaos.

"I have spoken to them and told them not to go overboard on Malaysian soil because the safety and security of Malaysians are most important," he told reporters in the Parliament lobby Tuesday.

I mean seriously... WTF? Creating disturbance and chaos? Why is the government so paranoid? Sure, maybe those Iranian folks should have applied for a police permit, but with due respect to the Home Minister, I think the police has been heavy handed in dealing with the protesters.


Oh yeah. Winning the hearts and minds of protesters. Pic: The Star.

Police presence is common in many of the public demonstrations that we have attended in Melbourne. And get this: The police played a role in guiding, protecting and supporting the demonstrators. I think suppressing non-violent public demonstrations with water cannon and tear gas has a detrimental effect that leads to disturbance, violence and chaos.

*Sigh* When will the Malaysian government understand that freedom of speech is for ALL? Including douche bags?


Oh don't get me wrong, I don't think these people are douche bags. On the contrary... Pic: The Star.

Burma Campaign Australia Candlelight Vigil
for Anniversary of Cyclone Nargis at Melbourne State Library,
May 2 2009.
Reporter: David Yoong
Video prepared by Lutfi Hakim.

David’s been complaining that we haven’t produced much output lately. He’s the one that pushes us to do things around here.

I kid you not.

My apologies, I have been away working on my essay for political communication. It was mainly a research on how protests/ protesters are framed in media accounts and why. So this piece today will be just a shorter summary of my findings. Actually it will be mostly talking about why some protests are reported while others are stifled.

 

Protests. Now here in Melbourne, the democratic right of protesting is pretty well-utilised. If your part-time job is being a pedestrian in the city, I am quite sure you would have come across at least one strikes/demonstrations/protests every month, normally around the State Library/Flinders St station/ Federation Square/ City Square.

So why does the mainstream media only report some of the protests, and not all. Why are the grievances of these dissidents never really heard by the wider public?

Well, the media determines the coverage of protests and movements using a set of preconceived news values that have evolved to respond to audience demands.

 The values relevant here include: 

1. Preference for dramatic, visible events 
2. Journalists’ reliance on authoritative sources.
   

 

1. DRAMA DRAMA DRAMA!

 The reason behind the focus of disruption/violence by the media is, as quoted by Sidney Tarrow:

A single student throwing a rock at a police line makes a better copy than any number of marches peacefully parading down a city street. In this way, the media “accentuate the militant strains found in any collection of activists”. In their search for novelty, the media can even assign a movement a violent or juvenile image, especially when television networks allow only as much footage as will fit on the evening news.

Hence, incorporating the disruption/violence/dramatic spectacle factor into a protest would significantly increase the chances of it getting covered.

 

2. RELIABILITY & CREDIBILITY

Compared to politically marginal groups, authorities and elites are more likely to be considered inherently newsworthy due to the assumptions about their potential for political impact, given their possession of higher levels of organization and resources. These resources include effective public relations, which increases a political actor’s ability to plan, execute and package information in ways that are easier to absorb by the media.

 So when there is an unequal political conflict, it is inevitable and predictable that journalists look up to authorities for ‘reliable’ and credible statements about the event. And the politically marginal are at severe disadvantage because most of the time they do not possess these resources.

 

Building on these values, I shall post an update on HOW TO GET YOUR PROTEST COVERED soon. Stay tuned!

(Since Karipap News has been very quiet of late, here's an entry which was written and published days ago in my blog. Old news, but hey, it's better than nothing, yes?)

I've been thinking of late about an issue that had recently taken place in Melbourne. Some reports on a spate of attacks on some Indian international students actually made many Indians angry, and last Sunday, about 2,000 of them took to the streets with an angry demonstration and demanded that the government do something to purge racist antisocial behaviour out of the country (here).

Why, even this guy even lent his views by refusing to accept an honorary doctorate from the Queensland University of Technology (here).


I so f**king kick ass

The rally caused diplomatic concerns (mostly for economic reasons, duh) and prompted the Australian Primer, Kevin Rudd, to step in and declare, "Australia isn't racist" (here), in a effort, akin to trying to douse the sun with a bucket of cold water. The police is taking corrective anti-racism measures (here), which I think, IS ABOUT TIME.

Looking chronological at the reports of racially-motivated attacks in the Age, I would argue that the newspaper is one of the many key catalysts in the mobilisation of people, and I would presume that this infamous picture of Sourabh Sharma undoubtedly triggered off last Sunday's demonstration (here).


Photo: Penny Stephens

When used in a manner that conjures a sense of great injustice, words and images can be powerful tools in promoting social change.

Ironically, I think this is one of the reasons why Australia is a great country.

[updates and follow ups]

An Australian working in Japan is prepared to pay the airfare from India for the parents of a student who was critically injured when stabbed with a screwdriver at a party in Melbourne last month (here).

Yesterday's match was between Melbourne Ice and Canberra Knights. The former beat the latter 5-2.

Report here.

Lutfi and I attended the game (although we're not all too familiar with Australian ice hockey) and we loved it to bits. In my opinion, there weren't enough fights that broke out. -.-' After all, that's one of the best parts of ice hockey, no? :D But the players were awesomely cool! Very slick skating moves.

Dave and I have been lamenting that most of the protests covered are more often hugely symbolic than effective. I happened to be learning the topic of media accounts of protests in a recent political communication class. Here are some findings and reflections.

Apparently, protests are only mostly effective in mobilizing greater public support when

1. There is good spectacle, visual rich material that (preferably) disrupts the normality of life. Some radical groups choose violence or terrorism to publicize their causes.

2. The protestors’ message and conditions are known.

It is simply easy to gaze at pictures of coverage and attempt to empathize, but sympathy is only heightened when the cause for fighting is known.

Most of the time, mainstream media do not report the protests, if they perceive the issue as not in the mass majority interests i.e. the protestors are subordinate groups.

If the mainstream media accounts do take an interest in the issue, they would often report the activity itself, but fail to elaborate on the fight. This misrepresentation or lack of representation does not create the impact desired by the protestors.
Good news management (self-releasing reliable information) and alliance with celebrities or the media is crucial to secure a greater voice and of course, coverage.

So if you’re wondering why our blog documents protests, here are a few reasons:

1. To bring to light the protestors’ message/objectives and conditions, historical background, reasons, passions; in an attempt to inform readers about unreported [in mainstream media] concerns of the public.

2. To capture the emotions in pictures,
done by our wonderful photographer Dave and documentary extraordinaire (if not budding) Lutfi

Why do we need to know about protests, you may ask?
“Their injustice is not my cause,”, you shrug.

Well, the mainstream media tends to cater to us as consumers, displaying information they think we ought to know, rather than to voice our concerns as participants of a democratic public sphere. We have actually been, and are being increasingly conditioned to not realize our rights to democracy. Sure we have the right to protest—a democratic right in itself, but is it a true right if the concerns are not heard or considered?

I’m pretty sure we are all prepared to fight for more than one cause.
So while we uncover stories (by covering stories), we hope that a greater awareness of certain issues will help us turn symbolism into reality.  

Picture above courtesy of pictureisunrelated.com