Posts By / Daniel Jackson

FMC Research process seminar – all staff welcome. Thinking about epistemology. Tues 1 June at 2pm

In the last research process seminar of the academic year, we are delighted to welcome Dr Richard Thomas (Swansea University), who will present the thinking behind his epistemological approach, and challenge us to think about our own research philosophy.

All of us adopt a philosophical position in relation to knowledge in our work – even if we rarely give it any attention. Today we give it the attention it deserves, and in an accessible and friendly atmosphere.

All welcome. Hope to see you there. Details below:


Thinking about epistemology – by Richard Thomas at Swansea University. 2pm on Tuesday 1st June
This sort of philosophical thinking is often bypassed as we all dive into our research. But still worth pondering, I think. We will all find some particular approaches to our work are more suitable than others, and more suited to us as people and researchers. This talk sketches out a critical realist approach where we find out what the media does, how it does it, but most important of all – WHY they do it that way. Suitable for researchers, teachers and students.
Join Zoom Meeting
Meeting ID: 899 5640 3486
Passcode: 6#tSV+*y


FMC Research Process Seminars. Upcoming sessions – all staff and research students welcome

Hi colleagues,

For the last three and a half years, we have been running regular research seminars in the Faculty of Media and Communication. These are 60 min research seminars focussed on the process of doing research – particularly research methods but also including publishing, writing, time management etc. The idea here is that the speaker takes us through the anatomy of the project focussing particularly on the data collection and method – the challenges, the successes, and the failures. For the audience, we walk away with a practical application of a method we may not be familiar with or may not have applied in this way before.

The schedule until the start of June is below, with links to each seminar. Each will be led by an external speaker, who are leading experts in these methods.

If you would like to give a talk on an aspect of method or research process, then drop us a line

Dan Jackson and Sae Oshima, FMC


11 May at 2pm

Re-designing focus groups for inclusion – by Filippo Trevisan at American University, Washington, DC

Focus groups provide important opportunities for putting participants’ voices at the center of social research. However, ensuring that every participant has a fair chance of being heard can be difficult. This seminar will discuss strategies to ensure that focus groups are as inclusive as possible, focusing in particular on the challenges faced by participants with communication disabilities and disorders, which account for over 10% of the world’s adult population. Inspired by the principles of universal design, a range of solutions will be discussed that constitutes a flexible framework to empower new voices in research.

Join Zoom Meeting

Meeting ID: 871 3969 9000

Passcode: F+3iwB@Y

18th May at 2pm

Capturing incivility in online political spaces – by Rosalynd Southern and Emily Harmer at The University of Liverpool

Abstract TBA

Join Zoom Meeting

Meeting ID: 893 6583 7916

Passcode: Za@D3Csq

25th May at 2pm

Examining the Dirt Under Our Fingernails: Exploring the Role of Ethnographic Mixed-Methods Research in Digital Political Communication – by James Dennis (University of Portsmouth), Amy Smith (BU) and Nikki Soo (Cardiff University)

As political actors diversify into multimedia communication strategies and citizens embrace semi-public and private digital spaces for everyday political talk, research into this realm has become increasingly complex. Effective and accurate investigation into political communication processes, events, and outcomes that occur in hybrid media systems means scholars must employ methodological reflexivity. In this paper, we argue that in particular, ethnography, the close observation of the phenomenon of study, is critical for scholars seeking to connect observations of digital communication with an understanding of the motivations that drive them. Combining insights from three projects analysing MPs, parties, news media organisations, and acRPStivist organisations, we provide advice for scholars looking to draw upon this methodological toolset.

Join Zoom Meeting

Meeting ID: 837 9804 8442

Passcode: p6x+Lb6A

1st June at 2pm

Thinking about epistemology – by Richard Thomas at Swansea University

This sort of philosophical thinking is often bypassed as we all dive into our research. But still worth pondering, I think. We will all find some particular approaches to our work are more suitable than others, and more suited to us as people and researchers. This talk sketches out a critical realist approach as particularly suitable to journalism/media research where we find out what the media does, how it does it, but most important of all – WHY they do it that way. Suitable perhaps for researchers, teachers and students.

Join Zoom Meeting

Meeting ID: 899 5640 3486

Passcode: 6#tSV+*y


BU researchers publish U.S. election analysis report within 11 days of vote

We are delighted to announce the publication of U.S. Election Analysis 2020: Media, Voters and the Campaign
Featuring 91 contributions from over 115 leading US and international academics, this publication captures the immediate thoughts, reflections and early research insights on the 2020 U.S. presidential election from the cutting edge of media and politics research. It is a collaboration between BU academics, American University, and Kent State University, in partnership with the Political Studies Association, American Political Science Association and the International Political Science Association.

Published within eleven days of the election, these contributions are short and accessible. Authors provide authoritative analysis – including research findings and new theoretical insights – to bring readers original ways of understanding the campaign. Contributions also bring a rich range of disciplinary influences, from political science to cultural studies, journalism studies to geography.
In 24 hours, the report website has already had over 5000 hits and has been featured by Nieman Lab.
As always, these reports are free to access.
The report can be found on alongside our previous reports on UK and U.S. elections.
Direct pdf download is available at:  (please note, large file size!)
The table of contents is below.
1. Introduction 
Daniel Jackson, Danielle Sarver Coombs, Filippo Trevisan, Darren Lilleker and Einar Thorsen

Policy and Political Context

2. The far-too-normal election 
Dave Karpf
3. One pandemic, two Americas and a week-long election day 
Ioana Coman
4. Political emotion and the global pandemic: factors at odds with a Trump presidency 
Erik P. Bucy
5. The pandemic did not produce the predominant headwinds that changed the course of the country 
Amanda Weinstein
6. Confessions of a vampire 
Kirk Combe
7. COVID-19 and the 2020 election 
Timothy Coombs
8. President Trump promised a vaccine by Election Day: that politicized vaccination intentions 
Matthew Motta
9. The enduring impact of the Black Lives Matter movement on the 2020 elections 
Gabriel B. Tait
10. Where do we go from here? The 2020 U.S. presidential election, immigration, and crisis 
Jamie Winders
11. A nation divided on abortion? 
Zoe Brigley Thompson
12. Ending the policy of erasure: transgender issues in 2020 
Anne C. Osborne
13. U.S. presidential politics and planetary crisis in 2020 
Reed Kurtz
14. Joe Biden and America’s role in the world 
Jason Edwards
15. President Biden’s foreign policy: engagement, multilateralism, and cautious globalization 
Klaus W. Larres
16. Presidential primary outcomes as evidence of levels of party unity 
Judd Thornton
17. A movable force: the armed forces voting bloc 
Amanda Weinstein
18. Guns and the 2020 elections 
Robert Spitzer
19. Can Biden’s win stop the decline of the West and restore the role of the United States in the world? 
Roman Gerodimos


20. A divided America guarantees the longevity of Trumpism 
Panos Koliastasis and Darren Lilleker
21. Cartographic perspectives of the 2020 U.S. election 
Ben Hennig
22. Vote Switching From 2016 to 2020 
Diana Mutz and Sam Wolken
23. It’s the democracy, stupid 
Petros Ioannidis and Elias Tsaousakis
24. Election in a time of distrust 
John Rennie Short
25. Polarization before and after the 2020 election 
Barry Richards
26. The political psychology of Trumpism 
Richard Perloff
27. White evangelicals and white born again Christians in 2020 
Ryan Claassen
28. Angry voters are (often) misinformed voters 
Brian Weeks
29. A Black, Latinx, and Independent alliance: 2020 
Omar Ali
30. Believing Black women 
Lindsey Meeks
31. The sleeping giant awakens: Latinos in the 2020 election 
Lisa Sanchez
32. Trump won the senior vote because they thought he was best on the economy – not immigration 
Peter McLeod
33. Did German Americans again support Donald Trump? 
Per Urlaub & David Huenlich

Candidates and the Campaign

34. The emotional politics of 2020: fear and loathing in the United States 
Karin Wahl-Jorgensen
35. Character and image in the U.S. presidential election: a psychological perspective 
Geoffrey Beattie
36. Branding and its limits 
Ken Cosgrove
37. Celtic connections: reading the roots of Biden and Trump 
Michael Higgins and Russ Eshleman
38. Kamala Harris, Bobby Jindal, and the construction of Indian American identity 
Madhavi Reddi
39. Stratagems of hate: decoding Donald Trump’s denigrating rhetoric in the 2020 campaign 
Rita Kirk and Stephanie Martin
40. Campaign finance and the 2020 U.S. election 
Cayce Myers
41. The Emperor had no clothes, after all 
Marc Hooghe
42. Trump’s tribal appeal: us vs. them 
Stephen D. Reese

News and Journalism

43. When journalism’s relevance is also on the ballot 
Seth C. Lewis, Matt Carlson and Sue Robinson
44. Beyond the horse race: voting process coverage in 2020 
Kathleen Searles
45. YouTube as a space for news 
Stephanie Edgerly
46. 2020 shows the need for institutional news media to make racial justice a core value of journalism 
Nikki Usher
47. Newspaper endorsements, presidential fitness and democracy 
Kenneth Campbell
48. Alternative to what?A faltering alternative-as-independent media 
Scott A. Eldridge II
49. Collaboration, connections, and continuity in media innovation 
Valerie Belair-Gagnon
50. Learning from the news in a time of highly polarized media 
Marion Just and Ann Crigler
51. Partisan media ecosystems and polarization in the 2020 U.S. election 
Michael Beam
52. What do news audiences think about ‘cutting away’ from news that could contain misinformation? 
Richard Fletcher
53. The day the music died: turning off the cameras on President Trump 
Sarah Oates
54. When worlds collide: contentious politics in a fragmented media regime 
Michael X. Delli Carpini
55. Forecasting the future of election forecasting 
Benjamin Toff
56. A new horse race begins: the scramble for a post-election narrative 
Victor Pickard

Social media

57. Media and social media platforms finally begin to embrace their roles as democratic gatekeepers 
Daniel Kreiss
58. Did social media make us more or less politically unequal in 2020? 
Dan Lane and Nancy Molina-Rogers
59. Platform transparency in the fight against disinformation 
Valerie Belair-Gagnon, Bente Kalsnas, Lucas Graves and Oscar Westlund
60. Why Trump’s determination to sow doubt about data undermines democracy 
Alfred Hermida
61. A banner year for advertising and a look at differences across platforms 
Markus Neumann, Jielu Yao, Spencer Dean and Erika Franklin Fowler
62. How Joe Biden conveyed empathy 
Dorian Davis
63. The debates and the election conversation on Twitter 
G.R. Boynton and Glenn W. Richardson
64. Did the economy, COVID-19, or Black Lives Matter to the Senate candidates in 2020? 
Heather K. Evans and Rian F. Moore
65. Leadership through showmanship: Trump’s ability to coin nicknames for opponents on Twitter 
Marco Morini
66. Election countdown: Instagram’s role in visualizing the 2020 campaign 
Terri L. Towner and Caroline L. Munoz
67. Candidates did lackluster youth targeting on Instagram 
John Parmelee
68. College students, political engagement and Snapchat in the 2020 general election 
Laurie L. Rice and Kenneth W. Moffett
69. Advertising on Facebook: transparency, but not transparent enough 
Jennifer Stromer-Galley, Patricia Rossini, Brian McKernan and Jeff Hemsley
70. Detecting emotions in Facebook political ads with computer vision 
Michael Bossetta and Rasmus Schmøkel

Popular culture and public critique

71. On campaigns and political trash talk 
Michael Butterworth
72. It’s all about my “team”: what we can learn about politics from sport 
Natalie Brown-Devlin and Michael Devlin
73. Kelly Loeffler uses battle with the WNBA as springboard into Georgia Senate runoff 
Guy Harrison
74. Made for the fight, WNBA players used their platform for anti-racism activism in 2020 
Molly Yanity
75. Do National Basketball Association (NBA) teams really support Black Lives Matter? 
Kwame Agyemang
76. The presidential debates: the media frames it all wrong 
Mehnaaz Momen
77. Live… from California, it’s Kamala Harris 
Mark Turner
78. Who needs anger management? Dismissing young engagement 
Joanna Doona
79. Meme war is merely the continuation of politics by other means 
Rodney Taveira
80. Satire failed to pack a punch in the 2020 election 
Allaina Kilby
81. Election memes 2020, or, how to be funny when nothing is fun 
Ryan M. Milner and Whitney Phillips

Democracy in crisis

82. Social media moderation of political talk
Shannon McGregor
83. The speed of technology vs. the speed of democracy 
Ben Epstein
84. The future of election administration: how will states respond?
Jennifer L. Selin
85. How the movement to change voting procedures was derailed by the 2020 election results 
Martin P. Wattenberg
86. From “clown” to “community”: the democratic potential of civility and incivility 
Emily Sydnor
87. Searching for misinformation 
David Silva
88. Relational listening as political listening in a polarized country 
Kathryn Coduto
89. QAnon, the election and an evolving American conservativism 
Harrison Lejeune
90. President Trump, disinformation, and the threat of extremist violence 
Kurt Braddock
91. The disinformed election 
Saif Shahin
92. Election 2020 and the further degradation of local journalism 
Philip Napoli

We hope you enjoy reading it.
Dan, Danielle, Filippo, Darren and Einar

FMC Research process seminars – all via MS Teams – all staff welcome to participate

Hi colleagues,

For the last two and a half years, we have been running regular research seminars in the Faculty of Media and Communication. These are 60 min research seminars focussed on the process of doing research – particularly research methods but also including publishing, writing, time management etc. The idea here is that the speaker takes us through the anatomy of the project focussing particularly on the data collection and method – the challenges, the successes, and the failures. For the audience, we walk away with a practical application of a method we may not be familiar with or may not have applied in this way before.

Due to the pandemic, we have moved all of the upcoming seminars online. The benefit of this is that we are now not restricted by the size of the room, and so we can invite colleagues from across the university to attend. The schedule until the end of June is below, with links to each seminar that takes you to MS Teams – note you do not need to be in a particular Team for this link to work.

All you need to do is click on the corresponding link when the seminar is scheduled (and mute yourself while the speaker is presenting!).

If you would like to give a talk on an aspect of method or research process, then drop us a line

Dan Jackson and Sae Oshima, FMC


Thurs 30th April


Link to recording:

Dr Roman Gerodimos (FMC)

Visual Content Analysis – A flexible framework for the systematic analysis of images

In this workshop Roman will share a working method for the content analysis of images based on his recent projects. While content analysis of text is well-established in media, social and political studies, many researchers are reluctant to engage in visual analysis and there is no systematic framework for the coding of images.

The presentation will include a demonstration of specific examples of coding sheets/manuals and ways of analysing and interpreting visual data.

Are you interested in the analysis of images? Have you thought of including images in your primary research? Are you already in the midst of collecting, coding or analysing images? Do you have previous experience and lessons to share with others? If so, this session might be of value to you.

There will be some time for individual work, so by all means do bring your laptop and any project(s) that you’re currently working on.


Tues 5th May


MS TEAMS meeting invite here

Dr Xin Zhao (FMC)

Doing a justice-related survey in China

I will introduce the survey I used in my ongoing research on the indirect impact of digital media use on online collective political action via the social identity model of collective action. It is conducted in the context of China’s air pollution. The research aims to clarify the mediating role of the element of justice in the model between media use and collective action. I will share with you how I: 1) design what survey questions to be included, 2) phrase the survey questions due to the limitations of Chinese-language survey platforms and China’s socio-cultural environment, 3) collect, analyse, and report the data. Moreover, the designing of some variables is exploratory due to the facts that 1) the patterns of digital media use in China are quite unique and 2) patterns of online collective political action are far from established. I would love to hear your opinions as well.


Tues 12th May


MS TEAMS meeting invite here

Prof Julian McDougall (FMC)

Visual Methods: Doing Text 

In this workshop I will share my experiences using visual methods with research participants to ‘curate’ the role of media texts in reflections on identity, politics and personal narrative. The specific project I’ll talk about, ‘Comrades and Curators’, was funded by the Bill Douglas Museum in Exeter. The visual literacy fieldwork intervention I will describe involved three museum curators and a film academics’ network  ‘mapping’ their mediated identities and curational practices with a particular focus on personal and professional transformations.  The method is transferable to any research which explores the interplay of personal experience and public identity (for example, education) and, in other projects, I have done this remotely, by asking participants to send me photos of their maps, so I think it could be ‘pandemic friendly’, if that’s a thing.


Thurs 21st May


MS TEAMS meeting invite here

Dr Andrea Jarman (FMC)

The Invention of ‘Legal Archaeology’

In this Workshop, I will  examine the political and scholarly context of the historical method of ‘Legal Archaeology’ and its development into a ‘methodology’ of legal research.   The paper will  discuss the scholarly and ideological background to the method, which was influenced by scholars such as  EP Thompson and JAG Griffith, and its importance for growth of law-in-context scholarship.  It will argue that the emergence of ‘legal archaeology’ as a methodology is founded upon two coinciding developments — the digitisation of legal archives and the new requirement both in the US and UK for legal scholars to have PhDs.


The paper will explore, and seek discussion with the participants about, the potential pitfalls for scholarship of legal archival material being readily, yet still selectively, available.


Tues 26th May 


MS TEAMS meeting invite here

Dr Birte Asmuß (Associate Professor, Department of Management, Aarhus University, Denmark)

Analysing emotional displays in interaction

This presentation builds upon work that I conducted together with my colleague Johanna Ruusuvuori (a professor in social psychology at the University of Tampere, Finland), on the importance of emotional displays at work. In this seminar, I will show how we used the method of conversation analysis to investigate vocal and non-vocal affective displays as a prerequisite for accomplishing work-related actions – in the context of employee complaints during performance appraisal interviews. I will then discuss the role of affective displays as managing social relational aspects of institutional interaction, as well as some methodological problems related to the analysis of emotions in interaction.


Tues 2nd June


MS TEAMS meeting invite here

Dr Alina Dolea (FMC)

Critical Discourse Analysis

During this seminar I will apply CDA to a corpus of focus groups data to investigate how Romanian migrants in the UK construct their identity, social status and country images. I will focus on the strategies to construct representation of us (ingroups) versus them (outgroups).

This is part of a paper that I am working on “Diaspora Diplomacy in a transnational social field: constructing identities, social status and country images” (working title). This paper aims to explore how migrants construct their identity and social status in the country of settlement in relation to their image of the country of origin. It draws on seven focus groups with Romanian migrants in the UK between 2018 and 2019.


Tues 9th June


MS TEAMS meeting invite here

Dr Sae Oshima (FMC)

Transcribing: the conversation analytic approach

The practice of transcription is a key process of conversation analytic research. Here, we capture not only “what” is said but also details of “how” something is said, e.g. the precise beginning/ending of turns, speaker overlap, pause duration, as well as other vocal features such as breath and laughter. In this session I’ll go over key conventions for transcribing vocal conduct, and then briefly share how I transcribe visible behaviour such as gaze, gesture, facial expression and body posture. The fidelity and level of detail of conversational transcripts may vary, depending on your research needs, but I hope the session will provide a space for you to enhance your observational skills and reflect on your own use of transcriptions.


Tues 16th June


MS TEAMS meeting invite here

Dr Kenneth Kang (FMC)

Switching around the Constants and Variables in Analysis

This research seminar proposes an innovative switch to the way we position constants and variables when analysing our object of study. Normally, analysis indicates the problem as a given (constant), and then searches for a variety of possible solutions for the same problem. Though this schema is useful for documenting actualized solutions to a given problem, it nevertheless tells us very little about the dynamic property of a particular solution, i.e. how a solution actually works – which is of analytical use in its own right. As an innovative way forward, this seminar suggests that when things fall short, perhaps it is more rewarding not to look for variable solutions to problems, but to temporarily ask instead, which variable problems do constant solutions function to solve? From this perspective, an entirely new dimension of complexity comes into play because analysis no longer situates itself with some kind of equilibrium model or normative orientation. Rather, we enter a problem-oriented mode of analysis which aligns itself with a much more empirical or heuristic quality, and with that, to an opening of cutting-edge multidisciplinary research.

To illustrate the analytical value of this conceptual exercise, this research seminar will employ case studies ranging from romantic love, to international environmental law, and to the risk management of Covid-19.


Tues 30th June


MS TEAMS meeting here

Alexandra Alberda & Dr Anna Feigenbaum (FMC)

Research illustration & design-led Knowledge Exchange 


Abstract TBC

Latest publication from interdisciplinary BU project on the broadcasting of the Rio Paralympics, with a bit of SRA help

The BU-led, AHRC-funded project on the cultural legacy of the Paralympics is entering its final few months; a busy period involving impact visits to multiple stakeholders, the completion of the project documentary and exhibition, and the development of academic papers.

The latest academic output (written by Emma Pullen, Dan Jackson and Michael Silk) is published in Communication & Sport this week, titled (Re-)presenting the Paralympics: Affective Nationalism and the “Able-Disabled”. The paper is based on an analysis of three integrated data sets from Channel 4’s broadcasting of the Rio 2016 Paralympics: interviews with Channel 4 production and editorial staff, quantitative content analysis, and qualitative moving image analysis. It is an in-depth analysis of the tensions that emerge between nationalism – as a commercial logic of sports mega-event broadcasting – and progressive disability representation.

We are indebted to the two BU student research assistants that worked with us through the SRA scheme on the quantitative content analysis: Jack Beaunier and Bethany Crawford. As well as contributing to this scholarly publication, their work will also form an important part of the report we will present to Channel 4, Paralympics GB, and UK Sport later this Spring.

For more news and information on the project, head over to the Pasccal website.

“When you’re stuck, just narrate” 10 + 1 tips on how to boost your research productivity

A Journalism Research Group research seminar. 3pm – 4.30pm, Wednesday 21 March in WG04.

After years of trial and error, Roman will share some thoughts and tips on how to do research, focusing on the main challenges of staying focused and becoming more productive. He will demonstrate some of the tools and routines he uses to organise his tasks, readings, notes and writing, as well as a few mental strategies on overcoming sticking points. This session is open to all within and outside JEC (including PhD students) but we envisage it as an interactive workshop-type session, in which colleagues will share their own thoughts, anxieties and practical tips.

The session is led by Dr Roman Gerodimos, Faculty of Media and Communication.

What are these sessions about?
They focus on the process of doing research rather than presenting the outcomes. They are less masterclass talks and more quality circles, where we all bring our research questions, dilemmas and dead-ends to the sessions. Whilst there will be someone leading the seminar, they are designed to be participatory.

Spaces are limited, so please email if you intend to come.

For more information about the Journalism Research Group (JRG) visit the CSJCC website:

All welcome. Hope to see you there.

BU academics publish UK election report within 10 days of vote

We are very pleased to announce the publication of UK Election Analysis 2017: Media, Voters and the Campaign, edited by Einar Thorsen, Daniel Jackson and Darren Lilleker.
Featuring 92 contributions from over 100 leading academics and emerging scholars across the world, this free publication captures the immediate thoughts, reflections and early research insights on the 2017 UK General Election on from the cutting edge of media and politics research.
Published just 10 days after the election, these contributions are short and accessible. Authors provide authoritative analysis of the campaign, including research findings or new theoretical insights; to bring readers original ways of understanding the election and its consequences. Contributions also bring a rich range of disciplinary influences, from political science to cultural studies, journalism studies to geography.
The publication is available as a free downloadable PDF, as a website and as a paperback report.
Thanks to all of our contributors and production staff who helped make the quick turnaround possible. We hope it makes for a vibrant and engaging read!
Introduction (Einar Thorsen, Dan Jackson, Darren Lilleker)
1. Looking on the bright side for a change (Jay Blumler)
2. The performance of the electoral system (Alan Renwick)
3. Fixed-term parliaments and the electoral cycle (Richard Parry)
4. Institutions and nation building: there is such a thing as society (Matthew Johnson)
5. Global questions, parochial answers (Roman Gerodimos)
6. The future of illusions (Barry Richards)
Voters, Polls and Results
7. A glorious defeat: anti-politics and the funnelling of frustration (Matthew Flinders)
8. Younger voters politically energised, but the generational divide deepens (James Sloam)
9. Why the younger generation of Corbynistas? (Pippa Norris)
10. Young people and propaganda in the wake of the 2017 election (Shakuntala Banaji)
11. The generation election: youth electoral mobilisation at the 2017 General Election (Matt Henn and James Hart)
12. The 2017 General Election: How Votes were split between “open and closed” (Jonathan Wheatley)
13. Cartographic perspectives of the general election (Benjamin D. Hennig)
14. UKIP’s former supporters were crucial to the outcome – but not as generally expected (Ron Johnston and Charles Pattie)
15. Why did the Lib Dems fail to benefit from the anti-Brexit vote? (Panos Koliastasis)
16. Meeting the public: the perils and pitfalls of ‘walkabout’ questions to Theresa May in GE2017 (Sylvia Shaw)
17. Political participation in the UK: why might voters have voted? (Bruce Bimber, Shelley Boulianne, Karolina Koc-Michalska and Darren Lilleker)
18. Moments of accidental connection with the ‘Great British Public’: because Brenda et al know best! (Richard Scullion)
19. When democracy kicked back (Natalie Fenton)
News and Journalism
20. Conventional wisdom distorted TV news coverage of campaign (Stephen Cushion)
21. A tale of two leaders: news media coverage of the 2017 General Election (David Deacon, John Downey, David Smith, James Stanyer and Dominic Wring)
22. Did broadcast stage-management create a vacuum for social media? (Charlie Beckett)
23. Ducking the debate (Stephen Coleman)
24. Caught in the middle: the BBC’s impossible impartiality dilemma (Martin Moore and Gordon Ramsay)
25. Media policy: the curious incident of the dog in the night-time (Jonathan Hardy)
26. The use and abuse of the vox pop in the 2017 UK General Election television news coverage (Mark Wheeler)
27. Media bias hits a wall (Des Freedman)
28. Declining newspaper sales and the role of broadcast journalism in the 2017 general election (Guy Starkey)
29. Newspapers’ editorial opinions: stuck between a rock and a hard place (Julie Firmstone)
30. It’s the Sun wot lost it (Mick Temple)
31. From Brexit to Corbyn: agenda setting, framing and the UK media – a research agenda (Steve Schifferes)
32. Is our national press a fading dinosaur? Don’t bank on it (Steven Barnett)
33. A mixed mailbag: letters to the editor during the electoral campaign (Iñaki Garcia-Blanco)
34. Long live the wisdom of the phone-in crowd (Ivor Gaber)
35. Fact-checking the election (Jennifer Birks)
36. Should we worry about fake news? (Susan Banducci, Dan Stevens and Travis Coan)
37. Tweets, campaign speeches and dogs at polling stations: the election on live blogs (Marina Dekavalla)
38. Process, personalities and polls: online news coverage of the UK General Election 2017 (Emily Harmer and Rosalynd Southern)
39. Online election news can be bloody difficult (for a) woman (Emily Harmer)
40. Not just swearing and loathing on the internet: analysing BuzzFeed and VICE during #GE2017 (James Dennis and Susana Sampaio-Dias)
Parties and the Campaign
41. The battle for authenticity (Karin Wahl-Jorgensen)
42. Was it the Labour doorstep or the Labour smartphone that swung it for Jeremy? (Tim Bale)
43. The election at constituency level (Ralph Negrine)
44. Over-managing the media: how it all went wrong (Suzanne Franks)
45. Aristotle and persuasive copywriting in the 2017 General Election (Nigel Jackson)
46. Rhetoric of the 2017 General Election campaign (Andrew Crines)
47. When is an electoral ‘bribe’ not a bribe? (Chris Roberts)
48. PEBs in 2017: not gone, but largely forgotten? (Vincent Campbell)
49. ‘Strong and stable’ to ‘weak and wobbly’: Tory campaign, media reaction and GE2017 (Anthony Ridge-Newman)
50. The Greens and the “progressive alliance” (Jenny Alexander)
51. It’s the way I tell ‘em: car crash politics and the gendered turn (Karen Ross)
52. Dogwhistle sexism (Heather Savigny)
53. The Women’s Equality Party and the 2017 General Election (Elizabeth Evans and Meryl Kenny)
54. The resurrection of ethical foreign policy (Victoria Honeyman)
55. Why immigration faded from view in election 2017 (Thomas Brooks)
56. Invisible enemies, wars without winners: when ‘khaki elections’ fail (James Morrison)
57. The sobering reality of backdoors: cybersecurity and surveillance circumvention during GE2017 (Einar Thorsen)
The Digital Campaign
58. Corbyn, Labour, digital media, and the 2017 UK election (Andrew Chadwick)
59. Was it ‘AI wot won it’? Hyper-targeting and profiling emotions online (Vian Bakir and Andrew McStay)
60. Sharing is caring: Labour supporters use of social media #GE2017 (Anamaria Dutceac and Michael Bossetta)
61. Labour’s social media campaign: more posts, more video, and more interaction (Richard Fletcher)
62. Like me, share me: the people’s social media campaign (Darren Lilleker)
63. The alternate and influential world of the political parties’ Facebook feeds (Matt Walsh)
64. Social media and the Corbyn breakthrough (Mark Shephard)
65. The UK digisphere and the 2017 election (Aljosha Karim Schapals)
66. From voices to votes: how young people used social media to influence the General Election (Vyacheslav Polonski)
67. All LOLs and trolls (Alec Charles)
The Nations
68. Nasty, British and Short: an emotional election (Russell Foster)
69. Scotland in the 2017 UK General Election (Michael Higgins)
70. The General Election did little to solve Wales’ ‘democratic deficit’ (Morgan Jones)
71. GE2017 in Northern Ireland: total eclipse of the moderates (Neil Matthews)
72. Twitter, dual screening and the BBC Northern Ireland Leaders’ debate (Paul Reilly)
Brexit and European Perspectives
73. Brexit without Brexitland (Chris Gifford)
74. Why the General Election will make little difference to the Article 50 negotiations (Simon Usherwood)
75. Totem, taboo and trigger word: the dominance and obscurity of Brexit in the campaigns (Charlotte O’Brien)
76. The Conservatives and Brexit: the election and after (Philip Lynch)
77. The 2017 UK election: reflections from Norway (John Erik Fossum)
78. Partisan and plentiful: the 2017 UK election in the German press (Isabelle Hertner)
79. Expect the unexpected: French media perceptions of the 2017 UK General Election campaign (Emmanuelle Avril)
80. Poles apart: Polish perspectives of the 2017 UK ‘Brexit election’ (Paweł Surowiec)
81. Theresa and Jeremy: who is closer to Matteo? An Italian view of #GE2017 (Emiliana De Blasio and Michele Sorice)
Personality politics and popular culture
82. A tale of two leadership campaigns (Pete Dorey)
83. Seeing Jeremy Corbyn and not seeing Theresa May: the promise of civic spectatorship (Katy Parry)
84. Corbyn and his fans: post-truth, myth and Labour’s hollow defeat (Cornell Sandvoss)
85. It’s the stans wot (nearly) won it (Matt Hills)
86. Celebrities4Corbyn: continuity and change in Labour’s use of celebrities (Ellen Watts)
87. The othering and objectification of Diane Abbott MP (Deborah Gabriel)
88. “Theresa May for Britain”: a personal brand in search of personality (Margaret Scammell)
89. Maybot, Mummy or Iron Lady? Loving and loathing Theresa May (Shelley Thompson and Candida Yates)
90. Politics, charisma, and the celebrity spectre of Nigel Farage (Neil Ewen)
91. Mainstream broadcast comedy and satire (Kay Richardson)
92. Sound bites: the music of Election 2017 (John Street and Adam Behr)

FMC Research Seminar: Adapting to dominant news narratives: tax ‘fairness’ as a Trojan horse for anti-austerity politics: Wednesday, 9 December, 3-4pm, Room W240

FMC Cross-Departmental Seminar Series 2015-16

Time: Wednesday, 9th December, 3-4 pm

Venue: The Screening Room W240, Weymouth House, Talbot Campus. 

Adapting to dominant news narratives: tax ‘fairness’ as a Trojan horse for anti-austerity politics

Over the past five years the issue of tax avoidance has broken through into mainstream news media and public debate, after many years in which the campaigning efforts of NGOs, trade unions and a few investigative journalists were met largely with indifference.  Protest group UK Uncut have been widely credited with increasing public engagement in the issue.  News routines are less reliant on official and elite sources than in the past, and protesters less universally delegitimised in dominant news discourse, but the political claims of social movements still tend to be neglected or reduced to vague or naive opposition.  UK Uncut were conscious of the common pitfalls and attempted to fit their own framing of the issue into existing news frames.  In presenting a practical alternative to cuts, they hoped to substantiate an argument against the broadly accepted ‘necessity’ of public spending cuts, smuggling an oppositional claim inside a familiar narrative.

Their framing of the issue in terms of compromised political interests and ‘fairness to taxpayers’ fitted with dominant news narratives and was widely adopted by other sources, including the Public Accounts Committee, and by journalists, but generally in terms of individual and organisational wrongdoing and self-interest rather as a systemic critique.  This did little to challenge or disrupt the overarching dominant narrative of fiscal crisis, necessary cuts, and even of fair tax as low tax.  However, the playful performativity of the protests themselves – although part of an activist repertoire, risking distancing themselves from the mainstream – were successful in achieving some limited press coverage of the cuts that they claimed could be prevented by corporations paying their ‘fair share’, but those arguments were not picked up by other voices.

This paper analyses the extent to which this ‘adaptation’ approach to news framing (Rucht 2013) or intervention in dominant narratives (Hirschkop 1998) was successful in advancing political claims and objectives, and whether this case supports the contention that strategically performative and rhetorical interventions in the public sphere can compensate for marginality and lack of discursive power.

Jen Birks is an Assistant Professor in the department of Culture, Film and Media at the University of Nottingham, where she teaches political communication and public cultures.  She is the author of News and Civil Society (Ashgate 2014).

All are welcome!!

About the series

This new seminar series showcases current research across different disciplines and approaches within the Faculty of Media and Communication at BU. The research seminars include invited speakers in the fields of journalism, politics, narrative studies, media, communication and marketing studies.  The aim is to celebrate the diversity of research across departments in the faculty and also generate dialogue and discussion between those areas of research.


Contributions include speakers on behalf of 

The Centre for Politics and Media Research

The Centre for the Study of Journalism, Culture and Community

Narrative Research Group

Journalism Research Group

Advances in Media Management Research Group

Emerging Consumer Cultures Research Group

Public Relations Research Group

Faculty of Media and Communication Seminar Series – this week – Richard Norrie from Demos

We are delighted to invite you to this week’s Faculty Seminar Series, hosted by the Politics and Media Research Group. It is this weds 4 November, 3-4pm in the screening room (W240), Weymouth house.
It is Dr Richard Norrie from the think tank Demos. See below for his abstract and bio. It promises to be a fascinating talk on the topical issue of immigration and integration.
No need to book – just come along
All welcome!
The ‘is’ and ‘ought’ of integration
In a recent speech David Cameron announced a new review to be led by Louise Casey into how integration and opportunities can be increased in divided communities. The philosopher David Hume famously argued that when it came to questions of morality, it was impossible to say what should be based on what exists – in short, you cannot get an ‘ought’ from an ‘is’But still, whatever Casey’s review will recommend will have to reconcile what we would like to see in our communities with what is possible given the existing conditions. This presentation is all about how evidence on ethnic and religious integration can be used in order to allow us a better understanding of what can be done in order to improve things. In essence, the question is what are the constraints placed by ‘what is’ on what ought to be?
At the think tank Demos, we have recently completed the first stage of major research repository called the Integration Hubas led by David Goodhart. This website aims to bring together much of the available evidence and research on the key questions pertaining to integration. In this presentation I will review what we know about integration in terms of differences in residential patterns, economic outcomes, everyday social life, education, and identity. ThenI will present an empirical model of integration in the towns and cities of England and Wales. Provisional analysis has so far identified two key dimensions of integration – a situational dimension reflecting differences in where and how people live and an identity based dimension reflecting people’s strength of commitment to Britain. 
Throughout, I shall be returning to the questions of what is right and what is wrong in terms of integration and what can be done given the evidence we have and the limitations imposed on us. 
Dr Richard Norrie is an Associate Researcher at Demos and the lead analyst on the Integration Hub website.

His research interests include ethnic integration, political participation, religiosity, and civil society. He has co-authored reports on populist political parties in Europe, how immigration is discussed on social media, and online misogyny. He specialises in quantitative research methods.

He holds degrees from the Universities of Warwick, Oxford, and Cologne. His doctorate was awarded in 2014 with a thesis written on the subject of country context, religiosity, and participation in public life.
Richard Norrie

BU Researchers Deliver Journalism Training for the Big Issue


The Big Issue Online Journalism training programme finished off last week with a gallery exhibition of the participants’ work, open to the public. The event which took place in Poole Library featured articles and photos produced by the trainees during the 6-week course. The course, organised by the Big Issue, in collaboration with communications agency Poached Creative and Bournemouth University, targeted as participants Big Issue sellers or unemployed people with an interest in writing or photography. Its main aim was to equip the trainees with basic journalistic skills that would help them find their own public voice and offer a pathway to future employment.

BU researchers Dr Ann Luce, Dr Dan Jackson and Dr Einar Thorsen were approached by the Big Issue to deliver part of the training, after their successful collaboration with Access Dorset – a charity for disabled people – on a similar project that aimed at empowering people with disabilities through citizen journalism.

The Big Issue Online Journalism included lessons on news and features writing and photography, with a focus on interviewing and how to connect to the audience, as well as promoting work through social media. Participants also had the opportunity to put their newly adopted skills to practice by creating photo-essays and covering the Wheels Festival in Bournemouth, and individual choices for stories included such on the Dino Exhibition in Christchurch and a feature article about Chaplin’s bar in Boscombe. Works by all of the participants were published on the project’s blog. Guest talks were also given, including one by the editor of Dorset Life magazine.

One trainee said: “Training like this is not available anywhere. This is really good because it’s hands on as well as the written part of it. I’ve learnt a hell of a lot in a short period of time.”

Another participant also praised the course: “I’m stepping back into the right zone of getting back to work. Freelancing is difficult. This is good for networking, getting back with people, seeing how different people work and getting good feelings about yourself.”

Many said the training had given them a clearer idea of what topics they want to implement in their work, and a better understanding of what editors are looking for in order to get their work published in the future.

All of the participants had an artistic background and were engaged with writing, photography, music or painting – a hobby for some, a means for a living for others.

Dr Dan Jackson and Dr Einar Thorsen – assisted by students Daniel Weissman, Naomi Mihara and Stefani Tasheva – also worked on evaluating the project through interviewing the participants prior to their training as well as after to learn about their background, their expectations of the course and their experiences throughout the six weeks, and in what ways it was beneficial to them. The data from these interviews will be disseminated in upcoming publications.



BU staff take ICSR conference to Barcelona


On 9-10 October, BU staff helped organise the 3rd international Conference on Social Responsibility, Ethics and Sustainable Business (aka ICSR), at Blanquerna School of Communication and International Relations in Barcelona. Previous conferences – led by CMC’s Georgiana Grigore with help from CMC colleagues – have been held in Romania in 2012 and Bournemouth in 2013.

CSR and business ethics remains high on the agenda: the conference attracted 76 delegates from 23 countries, delivering 70 papers. We started the conference in style at a wine tasting event, held in central Barcelona. For your benefit, your correspondent made copious mental notes about the various wines on show; their nose, their balance, their body, their finish and so on, but sadly forgot almost everything other than they tasted good and were Spanish. Maybe he tasted too much wine that night…

Anyway, the morning after the conference was opened by a keynote by Professor Josep Rota (University of Iowa), who spoke about communication and development.

Josep Rota


We then broke out for panel sessions for the rest of the day, before convening for a keynote delivered by Ana Palencia, Communications Director for Unilever Spain. Her talk showcased the various CSR initiatives Unilever is pursuing in Spain with the aim of achieving ‘sustainable growth’.

Ana Palencia

The first day was finished at the spectacular San Pau Hospital, where the gala dinner was held. We were pleased to learn that they did not serve hospital food: at least not British style.

They don't call him Tasos "three puddings" Theofilou for no reason...


The second day was kicked off by a keynote by non-other than BU’s Professor Tom Watson. His critique of both the theory and practice of CSR was finished by the proposal of a CSR checklist for practitioners to build into their practice.

Prof Tom Watson

After a day of parallel sessions and a keynote by Professor Luis Franco (University of Barcelona), delegates were taken on a bus tour of Barcelona, stopping for a tour of the Miro Foundation and Olympic Mountain. The day was closed by some much needed ‘networking’ over sangria and tapas.

Conference delegates at the Miro Foundation, Barcelona


BU staff were prominent throughout the 2014 conference as Chair (Georgiana Grigore) and on the organising committee (Tasos Theofilou and Dan Jackson). The ISCR network is growing in numbers, influence and confidence. The conference organisers are currently evaluating offers to host next years’ conference from South America, India and Europe. The best papers from the Barcelona conference will be published in a special issue of Tripodos.

The "Bournemouth mafia"