Using Research so far...

How far were the responses of the rioters themselves given space in the media?


The rioters, as a whole, got very little space in the media. This in turn prevented a clear understanding of the cause of the unrest and created an unfairly biased view throughout the media, pushing public opinion towards supporting government and authority actions rather than that of the rioters. This resulted in the general public accepting any 'mask' the media created for the rioters, which primarily was negative and depicted the youths involved as something of mindless 'thugs' who were just a part of a sub-culture society. The rioters did get some space however, such as the Borris Johnson interview, but these were few and far between.

How much space was given to 'young peoples voices' and what sorts of young people were given space to respond in the media?


The young people were given especially small spaces in the media, emphasised by the underpinning idea that the youth were the sole blame for the outbreak of the riots. Articles and interviews in the media normally consisted of authority or government opinions, again showing how most of the media wished to present the rioting youth in a 'bad light' and creating a backing for the authority that they were challenging. An example of this being the speech given by PM David Cameron which condemned those rioting. This overshadowing of 'young peoples voices' helped present the idea of a biased media representation, which aimed to emphasis on the unwanted sub-culture the youth are portrayed as to being.

Some limited space was given to the youth, however this space was relatively small and struggled to argue any youth case effectively. For example, an interview of some hooded and masked youths was taken in Manchester in aid of understanding why the rioting had spread to that area. The responses given presented the idea that rioting youth had no cause behind their violence, being fairly unintelligent and lacking motivation. This working against creating a fairer picture of youth vs. authority. However, some positive views were shown, such as the Borris Johnson 'heckling' and the coverage of the 'London Riot Clean-up' by students.

To what extent did social media challenge or confirm representations of youth identity in the mass media during the time of the London Riots?

It can be argued that social media played a large role in challenging the way in which the mass media portrayed the youth during the riots. For many, social media often only acted as a way of keeping informed about the riots, especially for those who do not live in the affected areas. The likes of real-time information, such as Twitter, acted mainly as an informent instead of any tool to progress the riots further. Efforts were also made through social media to curb the 'blame' placed on youths at this time, with Facebook being a great tool to allow this to occur. The feature of 'Pages' was used to show support for causes challenging the riots, with many showing support for authority through 'liking' pages such as 'Supporting the Met Police' and 'We're Not Rioting'. Through Facebook the official 'youth cleanup' was organised, which gathered a large amount of support and coincided with the actual clean-up that took place, attracting volunteers and bringing positive public views upon both the youth and the social media that is commonly used. Websites set-up during this time also aided in averting the stereotypical judgement the media had created, with websites such as the 99% campaign and recognising talented youth.  These overall showing that although the media portrayed the interlocking relationship between the youth and social media as a formula for evil, it was used for good points. Giving the impression that the mass media created an unfair subculture of the youth and their lifestyle.

However, social media also aided in confirming the representation presented by the mass media. A key example of this is the use of BBM to organise the riots through free, untraceable messages that allowed easy organisation and up-to-date tactics. Thus resulting in the service being taking down for a short period of time. Although Twitter was primarily used in a non-criminal way, some 'folk devils' used its service as a way to hit hotspots and remain on-the-pulse with tactics and the locations of opposing authority. The use of Facebook during the time also created drawbacks, with many placing 'likes' behind groups and pages that supported the rioting and opposing the authority such as government and the Met police. These highlighting how the connection between the youth and social media did bring drawbacks that in some cases reinstated what the mass media attempted to portray.

However, overall its clear to say that although mass social media was used in unacceptable ways by the youth, the mass media creates moral panic around the situation in hope of reaffirming the subculture many place on the youth of today. This especially being untrue when such positives also came from the close relationship between youth and social media.

interlock theories throughout