* Becaby's Blog *

ESSAY shakes fist

2006-01-25T11:09:00.000+11:00

Ok, being the indecisive Libran that I am, I've changed to a new essay question, complete with a brief outline about what I will attempt to address in the essay.

Cottle (2000), argues that, despite the good intentions of reporters, multiculturalist representations in the media "may actually serve to reinforce culturally sedimented views of ethnic minorities as 'Other', and simultaneuosly appear to give lie to ideas of structural disadvantages and continuing inequality."(P.11)

Respond to Cottle's argument by analysing the mythological construction of recent coverage of indigenous affairs in the Australian media.

This question, as noted above, allows me to respond to Cottle's argument about multicultural representations in the media, by analysing recent media coverage of indigenous affairs in Australia. I will do this by referring to my blog research in which I breifly discussed the mythological construction of some news articles. The first part of my essay will be an introduction to the way myth and narrative is used in the media to tell stories. In this I will also state why news as narrative only reinforces cultural ideologies of unequal minorites, and the issue of racism in Australia, hence supporting Cottle's argument. While the media in Australia may only want to make more aware the problems facing indigenous Australians, representing them as the minority encourages public ideas of equality and racism. Bird and Dardeene, as well as Cottle, are two of my staple sources to be used in some length throughout the essay. Bird and Dardeene is a source I will refer to closely in the introduction of myth and narrative, as it provides an excellent summary on the subject.

The second part of my essay will be comprised largely evidence from my blog research, supporting Cottle's argument. I will refer largely to the coverage of the education and welfare issue for remote indigenous communities, and the way the media separated them as a separate, disadvantaged society, completely apart from non-Indigenous Australians. Another issue I will also pay close attention to is an article about the prison population in Australia. It is a particularly interesting example as it can support and contest Cottle's argument. The article continually mentions Indigenous as separate from non-Indigenous, who are only mentioned as "adults". While the reporter may have done this in order to make aware the problem with the indigenous peoples and their association with crime, mentioning them separately from "adults" may also fuel racist views of Indigenous Australians as criminals and unequal to non-indigneous Australians. In doing this I will make aware the power of the Australian media in forming cultural ideologies and fueling pubic opinion regarding indigenous Australians.

essay topic (work in progress)

2006-01-23T21:39:00.000+11:00

Bird and Dardenne write: "In news making, journalists do not merely use culturally determined definitions, they also have to fit new situations into old definitions. It is in their power to place people and events into the existing categories of hero, villain, good and bad, and thus to invest their stories with the authority of mythological truth" (Bird and Dardenne, 1998, p.345).

Analyse and evaluate the way local and international media have employed "mythological truth" to construct news stories in the area of indigenous affairs, focusing on the issue of land rights.

Like I said, it's a work in progress. I'll publish another post with the essay description and annotated bibliography. Later.

Greetings from Fiji

2006-01-15T11:28:00.000+11:00

This post is just an update of whats been picked up by the media from the troubles currently in Fiji. All the major newspapers from Sydney as well as The Australian have been following the events in Fiji, though I haven't really looked at papers from other states. Basically all the articles again provide a chronicle of the events, rather than show any real signs of bias.

News.com.au released an article yesterday (from AAP), about peace talks which were held on Monday between the military chief and Fiji's PM and acting PM. Basically it's been announced that concessions are being made between the parties, with both agreeing to put the interests of the nation first.

"Ratu Madraiwiwi said in a statement that that Mr Qarase had agreed that Commodore Bainimarama and the police commissioner would join the national security council as observers.
Commodore Bainimarama in turn would not air his views through the media without communicating them to the government first." (To view the rest of this article click here.)

I also decided to go on BBC News to view the way the issue is being handled by overseas media. The only article published was one on the 12th. The article told of the statement made by Commodore Bainimarama, who said that his army will have "no qualms about removing a government that will bring back chaos."

Overall the tone of the article was very dramatic. The BBC chose to remind people with thrilling detail about the previous coup, in which "[Coup leader] Speight and six gunmen stormed parliament, taking hostages including the prime minister. " The article then goes on to explain the Bill yet to be passed in Fijian parliament, which will grant amnesty to those involved in the 2000 coup, included convicted leader, Speight. I noticed that papers such as The Australian and The Sydney Morning Herald really focused on the issue from a politcal view, emphasising the planned peace talks and restoring order in the nation. The articles only breifly touched on the previous coups, with little or no mention of the last coup leader, or the proposed bill. The tone of these articles were much less dramatic than that of BBC's reporting.

It's just another little bit of history repeating...

2006-01-11T20:01:00.000+11:00

I've been following coverage from the Sydney Morning Herald of the unrest in Fiji for the past couple of days. For those of you not in the know, the Fijian government of 2000 was one of which ethnic Indians were the majority. The military managed to overthrow this government and have it replaced by an administration led my Fiji's current Prime Minister, Laisenia Qarase, and his government of indigenous majority. That military coup was the third in less that 15 years.

Yesterday (Jan10), SMH published an article announcing that the Fijian military cheif, Frank Bainimarama, has made a threat to remove the government, "accusing it of imposing racist policies in the ethnically divided country."This threat could mark the fourth military coup in two decades. Three coups have resulted from ongoing tensions between ethnic Indians and indigenous Fijians, since the nation claimed independence in 1970. For more information about these coups, with links to information about Fiji's government, click here.

Commodore Bainimarama said that since the 2000 coup the government has only continued to adopt racist policies. An interesting point about this is that the policies are considered racist as they are appealing only to the indigenous peoples of Fiji. This appears to be the antithesis of the occurances in Australia, where Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders continue to battle the government and demand better treatment and greater recognition under the law.

Today, the SMH reports that Commodore Bainimarama is set to meet with Fiji's Vice President Ratu Joni Madraiwiwi this week to hold a series of talks, in an attempt to resolve the feud between the military and the government.

At the moment no articles appear to show any real storytelling, except in the case of establishing a context and giving a brief overview of the tensions in Fiji since it's independence. Providing this history is a tool employed by journos simply to assist with the storytelling. As Bird and Dardenne point out in Myth, Chronicle and Story:Exploring the Narrative Qualities of News (1997):

"While news narrates real events, story-telling devices are used to construct the telling of news." (p.333)

Another point which can be taken from Bird and Dardenne is the point made about chronicles - another form of story-telling. The day-to-day occurances of government, which is what is being reported here, "are not 'stories' designed to engage the mind, but 'chronicles' provided as a record that something noteworthy has happened." (p.339)

I think there's something in that for all of us.

Trouble in Paradise Part 2

2006-01-07T19:19:00.000+11:00

Well, Liberal MP Peter Lindsay has been left a Nigel NoFriends. The Courier Mail today published the latest on this issue, announcing that the government has distanced themselves well clear of Mr Lindsay and his comments. And that's it really. Lindsay's been left to fix his mistake and try to defend himself. (And just for the record, the article assures that the government has no intention to shut down Palm Island either now or in the future).

Trouble in Paradise Part 1

2006-01-06T19:10:00.000+11:00

Well, an article from today's Australian shows that it isn't only Mandy Vanstone who is pushing to move Aboriginal communities elsewhere. The lead is as follows:

"THE "dysfunctional" Aboriginal community of Palm Island should be abandoned and its residents moved to the mainland unless they integrate into mainstream society, a federal Liberal MP has insisted." (More)

The MP, who goes by the name of Peter Lindsay, reckons that if the Indigenous peoples of Palm Island cannot get jobs nor obtain property, then the best thing for them would be to move them back onto the mainland. While Aboriginal leaders have (naturally) reacted furiously, Mr Lindsay maintains that the government is not simply neglecting the island. What the poor bloke is quoted as saying next does nothing to help his argument:

"The fundamental issue that troubles me is that Palm Island is a hopeless
dysfunctional community with almost no employment and no prospects of
employment."

While I think ending on that note would be quite effective, it isn't very fair of me. There's more. Australian Associated Press released the news with another quote from Lindsay which apparently went to air on ABC radio:

"I'm fair dinkum – if the indigenous leaders are not prepared to change the
hopeless conditions that the community currently live in, then perhaps it's time
to move them all to the mainland and integrate into mainstream Australia." (More)

If he's fair dinkum, then who are we to judge?

The article makes some attempt to balance points-of-view, but in the end, it's another classic case of storytelling in journalism, in terms of good vs. bad. For those who haven'talready established, Mr Lindsay is a baddie. A baddie who just doesn't appear to think before he speaks, and, according to the Deputy Mayor of the island, "hasn't got a clue what he's talking about."

Aboriginal Local Government Association of Queensland Chairman, Vince Mundraby, provides the final say, which sums up the overall tone of the article:

"A lot of the (non-indigenous) population will move from inland to
coastal areas in the future and is this just a roundabout way to take
indigenous land away from indigenous people?"

Today's fight: Global Mining Industry vs. Small Indigenous Comminities of the World

2006-01-02T13:28:00.000+11:00

After a whirlwind Chrissy and New Year I'm back for the second phase of this blog. I come back with an interesting article I've come across from BBC News. Apparently the United Nations had dubbed the past ten years as the International Decade for the World's Indigenous People. This article outlines the work that has been done for indigenous communities around the world. An interesting read.

More information on the International Decade for the World's Indigenous People can be found here.

I am currently scouring the web for stories on current indigenous issues in other parts of the globe. I've found one on a Canadian online news source called The Tyee. The article outlines unrest in Guatemala between indigneous and non-indigenous peoples - and is another classic example of cultural myth in j0urnalism (the whole good and evil thang). A Canadian company called Glamis Gold, (hereafter GG), is in the process of digging an open-pit mine on Mayan land. The conflict has resulted in the death of two people, and has "pitted indigenous communities against the Canadian and Guatemalan governments and mining interests," (are we reminded of Australia's Aborigines battling with the interests of the government here?). But GG's Vice Pres, going by the name of Chuck Jeannes, says that the mine is also backed by the indigenous communities of the area. Chuckie also says the mine is being promoted as:

a necessary step for economic development in the region. Mayan communities,
many of which live in grinding poverty, have been offered jobs, schools and help
with local business ventures, among other benefits.

A Mayan activist by the name of Ronaldo Lopez Cristostomo speaks for the
indigenous side in this article. He says that the communities are rejecting of open-pit mines and are afraid of their detrimental impacts on the environment. He also says that the native communities, which account for almost half the population "simply do not trust that the mining companies and the government will keep their promises of putting some of the huge wealth to be generated by the mine into communities."

The International Finance Corporation completed an internal audit of the situation and found that the whole conflict was simply all one big misunderstanding, largely due to the Guatemalan government feeling it was superflous to obtain full consent from the local communities. Where's the justice to local communities here? This article very obviously places GG and the government into the role of bad kids on the block.

Guatemala's indigenous communities aren't the only ones to suffer under a gold-mining giant. A similar situation can be found in Peru, where local communities remain impoverished from mining projects.

Just as an aside, the article provides a great link to an extensive report from The New York Times on the global mining industry.

"It's time to go...Aborigines!"

2005-12-13T19:28:00.000+11:00

So it seems Indigenous Affairs minister Mandy Vanstone has decided that she'll become Big Brother (Sister for the politically correct), and evict at least 50 000 Aborigines from their current settlements (December 10, Herald Sun). It's all part of a new plan she's devised, which could see tiny outback communities move to larger settlements. According to Mandy, indigenous communities with fewer than 100 people are "unviable government funding cannot solve poverty, unemployment and health problems caused by isolation."

She added that the government "couldn't supply money to suit the whims of chardonnay-sipping commentators who wanted to keep the 'cultural museums.'" Ouch, that's gotta hurt.

Ex-ATSIC chairman, Geoff Clark, lives in one such community in Victoria. He thought Mandy's plan was just "kicking blacks", saying that the Aborigines of these communities are once again under threat of being shunted from the little patch of country they were given back.

Mandy Vanstone came out with a mind-blowing piece of information this week in a speech to the Australian and New Zeland School of Government, saying that "Aboriginal kids aren't dumb", and should have the choice of entering a profession.

Such comments were not taking well by Opposition indigenous affairs spokesperson Chris Evans, who said the term "cultural museums" was highly insulting to indigenous Australians. He said that this term, and Mandy's plan in general, were a "real slap in the face for any recognition of their culture."

This article is another really good example of the way journalism attempts to remain objective. Quotes from Mandy were balanced with quotes against what she is saying, and from someone that is neutral and can see both sides of the coin. That someone is Noel Pearson, head of the Cape York Institute. He said that he didn't believe in forcibly moving communities, but he believed Aboriginal towns need to be economically viable.

Mabo, tennis and Germaine Greer

2005-12-12T19:06:00.000+11:00

Just going back to the other articles I had promised to read and analyse. We first turn to an article from The Age published on the 3rd of this month. It's an opinion piece written by none other than Germaine "I am woman, hear me roar" Greer herself. Greer talks about the history and development of Aboriginal art and it's significance to Australia's culture and economy. She criticises people who are ignorant of the true nature of Aboriginal art (namely tourists). Often people ask to be given some explanation of the meaning of what art they are purchasing, and are "given some explanation [they] almost certainly misunderstood." Greer implies the ignorance of non-Indigenous peoples in recognising the genuinely "sublime" Aboriginal art. She notes that even the art considered bad still makes a profit, though not for the artists themselves:

"Aboriginal art generates exponential profit for all those who touch it
- even though perhaps not propotionately, for the people who make
it."

I think the fact that The Age employed Greer to compose the article suggests a technique of the media. Greer is a well-known outspoken social theorist. The Age, being as objective a source of news as possible, may not have gotten away with a regular reporter holding such a strong opinion. Perhaps using Greer was to cover The Age's backside? If people don't agree with an opinion expressed, I guess they are more likely to blame the paper itself. As Greer wrote the article, people are already aware of her nature, so know that a strong opinion is expected.

On to tennis now: the first real light-hearted piece I've seen thus far. The Age ran an article on December 6, reporting that tennis great Evonne Goolagong Cawley is taking four young Aboriginals to East Timor for a tennis camp, to inspire the local children there. Goolagong said she hoped to unite the Aboriginal and Timorese children. The issue of reconciliation popped up, with Goolagong saying that her belief in reconciliation "is about working together and understanding each other."

And finally, the Mabo case made a comback on December 8, when The Australian reported that the Mabo judges misinterpreted history. The Mabo case was a case in Australian history, nullifying the notion of 'terra nullius', or 'land belonging to no one'. The article talks about a lawyer who represented Eddie Mabo, who said that "there were shortcomings in the High Court's historical reasearch."

A critique by Dr Michael Cooper, the article goes on, reveals that Mr Greg McIntyre, Mabo's lawyer, misunderstood legal history. It seems the High Court wrongly believed that the notion of terra nullius was the grounds on which the Poms colonised our fair land. There's no real issue with this article, it just happens to be on Indigenous affairs.

Role of the media: encouraging the divide

2005-12-11T09:06:00.000+11:00

Several stories I have set thine eyes upon this week made me realise just how much the media promotes the separation of Indigenous Australians from the non-Indigenous. Whether it is done intentionally or not, by simply mentioning the two as separate societies, people in turn are encouraged think of the two as separate, rather than under the same umbrella of 'Australians'.

My first example of this is an article published in The Australian on December 6. The article tells of a report that was released by the Centre for Independent Studies (CIS), which states that Indigenous parents should not receive child welfare payments if their children do not regularly attend school. Veronica Cleary, who worked as a teacher and contributed to the report, said that the schools should utilise the money to support the child with food, clothing and health services.

Another issue raised in the article is the urgency for scholarship and support systems, so that more Aboriginal children can attend "mainstream boarding or day schools." Here is where I think the divide is implied. The use of the term "mainstream", to describe educational institutions in more urbanised areas, denotes that Aboriginal children living in remote areas receive a different, perhaps even substandard education. Indigenous children living in remote communities attend schools funded by the Government, making them public schools. To separate schooling in remote areas from the "mainstream" schooling only heightens the division between Indigenous and non-Indigenous. In doing so, the media create a mindset which suggests that Indigenous communities are separate from mainstream society.

The Age published the same news on the same day, though the writing is slightly different. The article makes no mention of "mainstream" education, although it makes specific reference to Aboriginal communities. Rather, the article calls for more support from the Government, parents, employeers and community members in assissting to lift Aboriginal schooling. I found the article to have a far more positive tone, in terms of finding ways people can help to improve the standards of education for children, as well as improve the work skills of others living in remote areas.

This issue of the media encouraging a divide can be seen in another article I found a few days earlier in The Sydney Morning Herald (December 2). The article draws attention to another major problem concerning Indigenous Australians, which I think only adds to the racial tension: Aborignal people and their association with crime. While the article regurgitates a bunch of stats about the prison population, the reporter makes a point of mentioning that Aborignal Australians make up an increasingly disproportionately high percentage of prisoners. Although the statistic is true, there is nothing about what percentage of Anglos/Caucasian prisoners there are. If there was mention of other groups then the impact of mentioning Aborignals would of course be lessened. The fact that they are the only group mentioned makes them stand out more. Non-indigenous prisoners are referred to as "adults", or "prisoners". While there is only the one reference to Aboriginal peoples, separating them will only fuel people's ideas of seeing Indigenous peoples as a separate group, and, in this case, one heavily associated with crime.

A different story published on Dec 6 in the SMH also makes a reference to the report released by the CIS. Everyone's favourite Health Minister, Mr Tony Abbott, announced a new health program to "tackle debilitating eye disease rife among indigenous communities." The new funding will go towards 27 health services, while some will go towards the expansion of health services in four remote areas. As well as this, the Government will spend almost a million a year in "screening programs to reduce the incidence of trachoma." I have nothing to really comment on about the role of the media with this one I'm just aiming to show the scope of what is being reported in the area of Indigenous Affairs.

Journalism and culture

2005-12-10T13:37:00.000+11:00

Simon Cottle, in his Rethinking News Access, argues that there are two paradigms within journalism: a sociological and a cultural. There is more of a focus on the media operating as a business and exercising it's power there, rather than noting the power of the media to shape and sustain cutural ways of thinking. The cultural paradigm puts a focus on the way a journalist concentrates on the textual structures of a story, developing the story as narrative. The media can contribute to and maintain cultural myths that exist within culture; one such exampe is the idea of good verus bad. I have come across a story which demonstrates the way a good and an evil is portrayed, in this story, the bad is the Government, the good - the Yorta Yorta people, the indigenous people of Melbourne.

So, the lowdown: the Yorta Yorta people are threatening to stage a protest outside the Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG), on the night of the Commonwealth Games opening ceremony. They intend to protest in response to the proposed Aboriginal Heritage laws, which, they argue, "are ambiguous and fail to recognise the interests of different indigenous groups." The government has been criticised for their lack of consultation with the traditional land owners. The article makes little or no attempt to balance the views of both parties invloved, making it clear that the government are, in this case, (and the hundreds of others), the bad guys on the block. One strong quote I picked up from this story is one from Lee Joachim, chairman of the Yorta Yorta Nation, which pretty much sums up the main concern from the indigenous people:

"We've got thousands of years of footprints on here, but people that have
been here five, or 20, 30 years can make a decision in regards to the
traditional owners' cultural heritage and that's a real concern."

All the quotes bar one at the very end of the story are from people challenging the propsed laws. The one quote found in the story from someone from government, suggests the lack of impartiality the reporter has held in writing the story. The fact that the quote is at the end, suggests that readers' would have already established a mindset early on in the piece as only one view was really represented.

Few more links

2005-12-08T14:45:00.000+11:00

Here's a few more links (linx/lynx) to articles on indigenous affairs....

Abbott unveils indigenous health program, SMH
Australia's prison population increases, SMH
Mabo judges 'misread history', The Australian

My plan is that I'll come back to these links to analyse the articles properly. That's the plan, anyway.

Useful links for Indigenous affairs

2005-12-05T16:32:00.000+11:00

As I'm still adjusting to the truly magical world of Blogging, I'm starting small and have just provided a list of links to articles in the media, which I will analyse in the coming days.

ABC Message Stick site
Goolagong takes tennis to Timor, SMH
Educator backs push to lift Aboriginal schooling, The Age
Yorta Yorta threat to Games opening, The Age
Uncertain quest for the sublime, The Age
No school, no child cash, says Indigenous report, The Australian

Ello ello ello

2005-12-05T15:41:00.000+11:00

Yay I'm officially a blogger, and have just proven to myself that I am not as computer illiterate as once thought!