several others” (Richardson, 2007, p. 238). This reiterates discourse as being language in use or action. Through language use, people co-construct shared meanings to make sense of the world that they live in, and in turn discourse is created – some of these discourses are accepted norms in society and others not so much. These are referred to as dominant and subjugated discourses. For example, there are discourses on Brexit, immigration, austerity, mental health and British Muslims. Foucault (1980) proposes that a dominant discourse is created by those in power, and it becomes the accepted way of looking at a subject, since it is repeated so much; for example, through newspapers, social media and entertainment, thus creating dialogue within society. He asserted that modern society is a disciplinary society – power in our time is largely exercised through disciplinary means in a variety of institutions such as, prisons, schools, hospitals, and the military. Therefore, dominant discourse is related to political, economic and social positions which are accepted by society as truths which are given by those who are in powerful roles such as economists, politicians, religious heads, and medical professionals (Burr, 1995). These roles are rooted in institutions such as governments, churches, corporations, banks and the media. Institutional power exists in situations where authority has been socially approved and accepted as legitimate. In other words, institutions get their power from the fact that society as a whole agrees that they have a right to their authority over others. How these institutions use their power is dependent on the type of society it is. However, Foucault did not take human nature to be naïve and argued that if people really understood that they were being controlled then they would not stand for it and would revolt. This he saw as a crucial aspect of the task of power, as “power is tolerable only on condition that it mask a substantial part of itself ” (Foucault, 1975, p. 86).


Capitalism, politics and newspapers


The majority of the Western world


can be defined as capitalist where the highest context marker is to make money. As a socio-economic system,


Context 170, August 2020


capitalism has led to economic inequality and the division of society into classes. In principle, a class-based society is designed in such a way as to facilitate one set of people to live off the labour of others, which highlights the role and subject of power. Newspaper publishers and other media outlets fit in well with capitalism as they are institutions of business. The primary aim is to sell stories, produce readers/audiences who advertisers want to appeal to, which determines the strength of the business by the number of subscribers it gets/ sells (Richardson, 2007). So, what is written in newspapers will partially be determined by the need to make a profit, which is inf luenced by its external relationships and alliances with other industries, financial institutions and political parties. This partnership works well for political parties in particular as they are free to campaign in the press to canvas readers for potential votes. This also benefits newspapers as they have connections to people who have power. For instance, Conservative Member of Parliament, George Osborne, in 2017 was appointed as the editor of the Evening Standard,but stood down as an MP due to public outrage regarding conf lict of interest. Nick Clegg, who was the leader of the Liberal democrats in 2015, wrote for the Financial Times. 2010 Prime Minister Gordon Brown was a television journalist; and our current Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, was a journalist for The Times, The Daily Telegraph and editor of The Spectator. These examples lead me to question


the relationship between inf luential people in power, the media and politics, and how this contributes to the construction of societal discourses. My aim isn’t to locate blame in the media alone, but to consider the possible motives, agendas and narratives that newspapers have surrounding certain topics and how this impacts on our views. A comparative study by Gunther and Mughan (2000) looking at the effects of the media on the distribution of political power, highlighted the crucial role that the media play in a democracy. However, they also highlighted how the media can be used to control society with propaganda, such as in China and Russia. Again, this punctuates the power that the media have in relation to what becomes


socially constructed and accepted as societal discourse and/or norms. As we can see, newspapers do not simply report the news, they make news and in turn can mould and shape our views, privileging certain stories over others regardless of what the public want to know.


Islamophobia Islamophobia has become a much used


but lit le understood term in the UK today. T e Oxford English Dictionary defi nes it as a hatred or fear towards Islam or Muslims. However, it is argued that it fi rst


appeared in an essay in 1922 by French author Etienne Dinet, while Fourest and Venner (2003) claim the term was invented during the Iranian revolution (1978-1979) by mullahs (learned theologians) to describe women who refused to wear the headscarf. In our present context, Allen (2010)


suggests that Islamophobia has its origins in Britain. He asserts that it is not until the 1990s that we see the formation of Islamophobia as a phenomenon. He further at ributes this to the Runnymede Trust (1997) report, “Islamophobia: A Challenge For Us All”, which provided a stronger defi nition that was more widely recognised. T us, Islamophobia is defi ned as an “… unfounded hostility towards Islam, unfair discrimination against Muslims individually or as part of a group” (p. 5). To contextualise this further, whilst growing up during the 1990s, it was a challenge being a British Asian Muslim, especially when being Pakistani and Muslim were presumed by most to be the same thing. My white English peers did not see my faith and culture as being cool, which was highlighted through programmes on television and media. My black friends, however, were portrayed and positioned to a degree as being cool (which of course is loaded with its own prejudice and racism). Stereotypes, such as eating curries, owning a corner convenience shop and/or being a greasy Paki were common themes and my lived experience. T erefore, I suggest that Islamophobia as an ideology is comparable to racism as it is the way Muslims and Islam are referred to, spoken, thought and writ en about that positions us, as the other, as a negative, by some sections of British society. For example, when the word terrorist is mentioned, what instinctively comes to


19


Islamophobia – a systemic perspective: Unpacking prejudices and assumptions


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68