National Pride On The Small Screen

Al Jazeera is hiring in Kenya and all I can think about are Boeings 747s.

A few years ago I went to visit my family in Jamaica for the Christmas holidays. I try and go roughly every two years or so but this particular year I had left it very late to book my ticket and I couldn't find any direct flights. That was when I discovered Cubana Airlines - Cuba's national airline - and was able to finally spend the festive period with my relatives after a short stop over in Havana. For anyone who has not had the pleasure of flying Cubana Airlines it is a slightly ramshackle affair, the planes are old Aeroflot planes and the service makes RyanAir look positively luxurious. However the feelings of national pride of the cabin crew and my Cuban passengers was positively tangible and that is the point of most national airlines; national pride.

In the 1950's and 60's as different countries achieved independence nationalised airlines proliferated. It was a way for countries to assert their presence on the world stage and demonstrate their economic importance. It was a form of global shorthand saying "we are a country to be reckoned with".

However as the global financial realities took hold throughout the '80's and '90's the vast majority of these airlines were sold off, closed down or were subsumed into larger private airlines. The national names occasionally remaining but effectively they are just shells for other carriers (the Jamaican governments owns less than 17% of Air Jamaica now).  

But while countries have now abandoned this aerial national posturing recently a new form has crept onto the world stage that should concern people from diverse backgrounds working in the media: The nationalised international news channel.

Like the airlines before them the nationalised news channels do not make a profit and they normally rely on the largess of the state. But unlike the national airlines this is not a game that small states can play as they did previously with airlines. Television news is so expensive and the returns are so small it is a game only for the emerging new world powers; Russia, the Middle East and China to name three.

If one needed an example of how these news channels are vying for national pride and global influence one should look no further than East Africa. Qatar’s Al Jazeera announced on the 8th August that it will launch Al Jazeera Kiswahili in 2012 broadcasting to Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi. This comes just a month after China Central Television (CCTV) went on a recruitment drive for East African electronic media journalists. The cold war might be over, the space race may be won (and lost), and national airlines might have flown away but clearly news and us journalists are the latest tool in global power struggles.

In many ways this is a great opportunity for all television journalists across the world. Greater competition between channels means more demand for our talents and that obviously translates into better jobs and careers. 

However these new developments are not without their concerns. While Al Jazeera English regularly displays high editorial standards the journalistic integrity of other channels can be more questionable as they put patriotism before objective reporting. It may be idealistic but while I positively welcome news from different global agendas I think striving for truth should be every journalists' objective, not bringing glory to whichever nation is paying your salary. 

At its best news fosters democracy, civil society and our understanding of the world. The news is far too important to become propaganda for the glory of nations to assert their power on a world stage. If the nationalised airlines of old were bad then normally worse that could happen is they would lose your luggage. Bad nationalised news channels can keep corrupt governments in power or even justify unjust wars. But like the airlines hopefully the bad ones will just go away with time.

Why The Riots Need More Black People

OK a slightly provocative title I admit but hopefully it got your attention. To be precise the riots need more black and BME journalists reporting it.

Over the last few days I have received twitter comments, corresponded with people through emails and spoken to friends about the racial nature of the recent riots. A lot of people have told me that I am wrong to draw any conclusions about race relations from the riots. They have told me that it is not a “black and white thing” but an “underclass thing”, they point out white kids and Asian youths are rioting right alongside their black friends. “This isn’t like the Brixton riots in 1981, they aren’t protesting against police racism or anything like that - they are just mindless looters, it’s wrong to ‘racialise’ these events” is what one person told me.

However if you look at any old footage of the original Brixton riots there were white people rioting alongside black people. When it comes to police stop and search, in total numbers more white people are stopped than black people. But there is no denying that there was a strong racial element to the 1981 riots and stop search is an issue that preoccupies the black community.

In the same way black youth are disproportionately involved in these recent riots. Not all rioters are black and not all black youth are rioters (that is obvious) but it is an issue that disproportionately affects the black community and has its roots in a black grievance (the police killing of Mark Duggan). Whether we like it or not these riots are a black issue.

If plastic bullets are used in mainland Britain for the first time, as recent reports have indicated, the targets of those bullets will more than likely be black youth.

That is why recent events have proven the need for good quality black journalists reporting the riots. While I have not been able to kick the habit of listening to the BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme when I get up in the morning I have increasingly been turning to independent black radio to supplement the predominantly white mainstream coverage of the riots. In much the same way as my usual diet of BBC and SKY News was complimented by Al Jazeera during the Arab Spring one radio station has now been added to my DAB radio pre-sets to compliment my understanding of the riots: Colourful Radio.

Colourful Radio was set up by Henry Bonsu three years ago, an old BBC journalist himself Henry he has paid his dues; first as a reporter on the BBC’s Today Programme and he finally left the BBC as the presenter of Radio London’s Drive-time show under newspaper headlines of being “too intelligent”.  The station was set up to try and meet the needs of a slightly older, more educated multicultural audience that just isn’t serviced by other “black” radio stations who are normally more youth focused. In the last few days this approach has proved vital to anyone wanting a different black perspective on the riots.

In the last few days they have interviewed Cindy Butts (from the Metropolitan Police Authority) Chuka Umunna (Member of Parliament), Onyi Onyando (Gang member turned writer) and even Olympic black power legend Tommie Smith – “to inspire our youth”. Through their quality journalism they have also been able to get scoops no one else come close to. For example this morning Met Assistant Commissioner Steve Kavanagh said the police were responsible for the "murder of Mr. Duggan". A statement he quickly retracted when further pushed on the issue by the presenter.

While the scoops and the quality of the guests have far surpassed anything you would normally get on a pirate station more importantly the presenters have asked the the questions I would have wanted to ask. Questions that sometimes differ from the questions the BBC, ITV or other mainstream media would ask.

Equally interesting are the phone-calls from the listeners. After listening for an hour each day I feel I get the real temperature of what Black communities in the UK are feeling about this massive news event (the biggest civil disorder in living memory). And like the black community itself  its not one view I'm hearing but a myriad of opinions. I feel I don’t get this when I listen to other phone-ins as by their very nature they normally have a predominantly white audience and so I will only hear one or two black voices at most.

While I will continue to listen to BBC Radio 4, watch Channel 4 News and read every newspaper I can lay my hands on from the Daily Mail to the Guardian recent events have proven the need for black journalists to cover the major news issues and how that can enrich our understanding of the big stories.

Could better TV have stopped the London riots?

Two days before the London riots kicked off Professor Peter King of Imperial College London appeared on a Radio 4 programme called Voices From The Old Bailey. The series looks at old court transcripts and examines what they say about the history of the time. I know hardly sounds like the most riveting radio. However as coincidence would have it last Wednesday they were discussing old court transcripts involving riots. It was on this programme that Professor King defined riots “as an argument continued by other means” (an obvious re-working of the famous quote “War is the continuation of politics by other means”). This is echoed by the fact that the recent London riots only started after the police at Tottenham refused to meet the people protesting over the police killing of Mark Duggan – the peaceful argument became violent – the police have subsequently apologised for not meeting the Duggan “family's needs more effectively”.

But what lessons does this teach people working in the media? If Professor King’s definition is correct then I think the recent riots point to a massive failure by those of us working in television, radio, print and online.

Successful media should act as a platform for Professor King’s pre-riotous “arguments” to take place. Remove that platform, deny people the ability to have that argument and one result according to Professor King’s definition could be riots.

Twelve years ago (a life time ago) I used to provide on such media platform for the black British community; I produced the Schumann Shuffle. Broadcasting every Saturday morning it was a current affairs radio phone-in on Choice FM, tackling the big issue of the week affecting the listenership. For a station that was 99% music based, broadcasting to an audience we were told weren’t interested in politics, it surprised everyone except me and the presenter (Geoff Schumann) that we quickly became the highest rating programme on the station.

We discussed everything including deaths in police custody, legalisation of drugs, and failing schools. My personal favourite however was when Geoff tackled the crisis in Zimbabwe and the 1992 Land Acquisition Act (although we did give it the catchier title of “Can white people ever be African?”). What the experience of producing the show taught me however is that black people are crying out for a serious platform to discuss politics on their own terms. The callers spanned the whole spectrum of the black community; from the suburbs to the inner-cities, from pensioners to school children, and from right wing “hangers and floggers” to the most liberal minded. But most importantly we tried to get studio guests of standing; Trevor Phillips was a regular fixture, Members of Parliament made appearances and high ranking police frequently popped in. When our listeners called in they felt they were the ones being listened to and were being taken seriously. To paraphrase Prof. King; for large sections of the black community there was no need for the argument to be continued by other means.

While there is no doubt that I look back at my time on the Schumann Shuffle through rose tinted glasses, the fact of the matter is that back then there were far more media platforms for arguments reflecting the concerns of African and Caribbean people. Black Britain was a current affairs programme on the BBC and the newspapers The Voice and New Nation both had quality journalism with decent circulations. I doubt anyone could seriously argue that BBC 1Xtra plays the same function now (although it does have some great documentaries targeted at a youth audience).

When it comes to the riots it is often all too easy to blame the politicians put it all down to vague socio-economic factors or demonise the lawless looters themselves. As black people working in the media however I think it is incumbent on us to ask what responsibility we should bare, or at the very least how we can make things better. Giving rioters and “potential rioters” a forum to air their grievances peaceably would be a good first step.

Looting For An Identity

I’m sitting in my office in BBC Scotland with my fellow news colleagues watching images of London burning as rioting and looting takes place in Hackney, Tottenham and Brixton. As one of the few Londoners in the office and definitely the only Black person in the office, the question my fellow journalists keep asking is why? They point out that deprivation in parts of Scotland is far worse than anything in London, pockets of youth unemployment in Glasgow is far worse than any black youth unemployment rate, and even life expectancy is worse in Scotland. Yet no one is rioting in Glasgow. Simple liberal explanations of blaming the riots on racism and socio-economic deprivation just don’t seem to explain the full story.

As the apparent sole representation of all things black and London, my answer is “identity”. Specifically, the need for “role-communities” not “role-models”. Let me explain:

I’ve been working in Scotland now for over three years. What I love about Scotland is just how broad Scottish identity is. You can be an intellectual, read ancient Gaelic poetry and love long country hikes and feel very Scottish. At the same time you can enjoy eating deep-fried mars bars, drink buckfast (a potent mix of caffeine and alcohol popular on Glasgow’s streets), and regularly get into fights on a Saturday night and still be 100% Scottish.  It’s equally Scottish to wake up listening to BBC Scotland Radio’s Good Morning Scotland (the Scottish equivalent of Radio 4’s Today programme) or listening to something a little lighter on Radio Clyde. And whether you support Scottish independence or think Scotland should always be part of the United Kingdom, it doesn’t matter to your identity - no one can use that to tell you you’re not a proud Scot.

Scottish identity is a broad church.

So what has this got to do with rioting by black youth in London?  The fact is that black British identity, and more importantly the black British community, is the complete opposite.

Since the 1980s, there has been a great deal of effort to increase representation of black people on TV, Radio, online and in print.  That effort has been crucial.  However, what it has not managed to do is to challenge and broaden the black British identity.

Whether on TV, Radio, online or in print, the Black community is invariably very narrowly defined. It is generally portrayed as a dysfunctional community that is dominated by youth culture, the underclass and constant undertones of criminality.

However as a result of efforts since the 1980s, we now see some successful elements – those great black individuals on screen who have “made it”. The problem is that these black people are not seen as being part of a functioning black community.  They are nearly always portrayed as being fully integrated into the broader white community; islands of success divorced from the gangster laced black community which they managed to escape from, and now might visit occasionally.

The message this sends out to young black kids is dangerously clear, as the riots have demonstrated. They have to make a choice: either be part of a narrowly defined dysfunctional black community (populated with hoodies, grime and undertones of criminality); or leave that community behind and become fully integrated into a functioning wider white community. Choose between a culture of crime or a lifetime of community self-loathing. In TV terms a choice between MTV gangsta rappers or the single black character in a Mike Leigh film. This is a choice that media representations by well meaning liberals of “positive black role models” does not address and can sometimes inadvertently reinforce.

Is it any wonder then, that when someone from the black community is killed, the outcome is a riot? According to the media the dysfunctional black community is populated with potential rioters, all the black youth have done is internalise this identity and reacted accordingly.

That, I believe, is why youth are rioting in London and not in the most deprived areas of Glasgow. It’s a lack of a broader, functional community identity.

In this context, the media has an (if not the) most important role to play in addressing identity, and therefore these riots. Yes, the police need to take action, and re-connect with the black community. That’s necessary. But it’s not sufficient. It is only the media that can really start to widen the definition of black British identity. The havoc being wreaked in Tottenham and other black communities throughout London demonstrates that we need to go well beyond finding a few “positive role models” or teaching our children about individual, one-of-a-kind black heroes from Martin Luther King to Barack Obama. We need to present a black community that these youth want to be part of that is as broad as the Scottish identity – one where Goths and nerds can co-exist with rappers and all feel an equal claim to the term “black”. One where a suburban middleclass black family can feel their community is as “legitimately” black as any inner city black family.  One where black people can do PhD’s without the feeling that they are “acting white”.

These broad black communities already exist; I suspect that a lot of black people in the BBC and other media offices actually do come from these communities. Our job is to stop shining the spotlighting on just a few individual role models from these communities, and broaden our focus to “role-communities”. Only then will we give our children a true choice of what it means to be black, without the need to resort to riots.