The politics of reporting poverty statistics in South Africa: anatomy of a media

debateGuy Berger, IAMCR July 2008

Introduction

1. Summary of the issue2. Lining up the theory3. Description of research

data4. Analysis and conclusion

Summary of the issue

• Politicisation of poverty

Thabo Mbeki 2000 -

Pro-poor platform

Rival: Jacob Zuma

Populist

• SAIRR: –1996: 1.9 million < $1 a day– 2005: 4.2 million

Uniqueness of debate

• Most poverty coverage:– Disconnects manifestations of poverty

(eg. poverty, homelessness, hunger)– Disconnects concept and policy of

“poverty” from manifestations

• Here, these all had to be connected to contest the point.

Bombshell

• 3

Appropriating Western theory

CDA:• Repertoire,

genre, style, networks of practice.

Norman Fairclough

Building theoretical bridges

• Salience, media-frames, cultural frames, cause-morality-cure, headlines.

• Keywords, phrases, stereotypes.

William Gamson

Robert Entman

Research data

• 25 articles–3 news–11 opinion pieces (9 non-

journalists)–8 letters

• 13 in Business Day & Weekender• 7 from SAIRR, 3 from government• 0 from poor, NGOs, unions

Frames

1. Inadequacies of journalism:– Lack of scrutiny and value-add; – “Press had field day” (press-bashing).

2. Personalisation of the issues:– “Mbeki attacks Institute of Race

Relations”– “President in war with race body over

poverty”.

Frames

1. Politicisation:

Frames

Frames

1. Politicisation also works by:– ‘ideology’ accusations both sides– Frame expansion: labour laws as

problem.

More frames

4. Conceptualisation of poverty: money-metric vs social wage– Relevance to winning the debate.

More frames

5. Statistics: – Comparing apples & oranges &

diff PDLs– Proportions vs absolute figures

6. Empiricism vs scepticism vs “hunch”-ism– “shoddy”, “inadequacy of stats”,

“it would be surprising if…”

Yet more frames7. International legitimation

around $1 a day– Problem of exchange rate issues (govt); – You use the measure yourself (SAIRR).

8. Dominant consensus vs dissident SAIRR

– “Not one of SA’s poverty experts would argue…” – Miriam Altman

– “We doubt such consensus exists” - SAIRR

Final frames

9. Agenda-switching:– “stop nitpicking”– “surely our top economists would

be better occupied…”

10. Responsibility pointing:– Blame govt, population growth,

economy, liberals.

Conclusion

• Analysis shows themes from frames are rhetorical, more than media frames.

• Debate never resolved: media played role of elite forum only.

Taking stock textually:

• SAIRR won the debate – in terms of volume & reason

Research qtn: media centrism

• BUT: political frame may be the most important – beware of CDA and Frame assumption that texts “talk”, and have influence…

• Because: “White” SAIRR vs black govt.

• In the end, the absent players (at least some) had their say: Mbeki lost his ANC post to Zuma a month later!

On the other hand…