Coverage of student demonstration 10.11.10

Student protests across the country have finally made government officials think twice about the rise in tuition fees. Worry has broken out for not just for students, but for A-Level lectures.

50,000 Students in Central London

There may be many decisions the government make that we don’t agree with, but, the rise in tuition fees is something that hasn’t gone down very well with students all over country. Last month up to 50,000 students from all over the UK united to make a stand against the rise in tuition fees. The demolition on the 10.11.10 through the centre of London was set up by the National Union of Students (NUS) and the University and college union (UCU).
The government’s plan to raise tuition fees means allowing some universities to charge up to £9,000 – currently students pay £3,290 pounds a year, the major worry is that socially everyone will not be entitled to a chance of free education and making it more about the individual.



ULCAN make an appearance

Michael Palmer the University of Central Lancashire’s student president said “180 students from UCLAN have marched down the streets of London; they have done themselves proud, I’m proud to have led them. It has been a massive achievement”. He explained “The whole country had paid attention to students, their future and what we need to achieve – to fight this rise in tuition fees; to demand that every single MP that signed the pledge to stick to it.”
Hundreds of students waved banners in the heart of the capital against the 300% increase in tuition fees set to be in place by 2012. Fury has originated from Deputy Prime Minister Nick Cleg, who originally campaigned against the rise in tuition fees in the general election. Nafisah Aticha, a student attending the protest said “Nick Clegg went back on his word, he shouldn’t have done that, that’s not what we voted for” she went on to say “most of the votes he got were from students, he’s lost that now.”

Students start march’s across Britain

London is not the only place that students have protested against the rise in tuition fees. Protests have been going on in recent weeks all over the country with thousands of students making a stand in hope that the government will listen. There have been mass walk outs, sit ins, some students closed access to the Old School office which is home to the vice-chancellor's office and finance office in Cambridge last month.

Suzanne Cunning a student from the University of central Birmingham said “By students protesting across the country it is making people and more importantly the government realise just how badly we feel about it, the people really have spoken and this is something we just won’t stand for. We have been promised something completely different to what is happening”.
With this being the biggest student protest in over a decade many students are hopeful that this will make a difference Suzanne went on to say “we won’t give up, that’s for sure!”.


View Universitys that have took part in a student protest in a larger map


Putting people off University

A recent survey on popular networking site Facebook, asked people of all demographics ‘how this will affect future generations – if at all’ there was a very controversial mixed response. Louise Rebecca Crowther said: “As a student myself I think its silly paying that much for university. It's already too expensive as it is let alone putting it up to a possible 9 grand. Of course it will put people off going to university and I don't think it will necessarily mean more determined students get places, just the ones who can afford it!.”
Some people think it’s a good idea – suggesting that places becoming more competitive may be an incentive for people. Colleen Butler another student says “as for university places I think they may get more competitive. No it’s not fair but it is an incentive to maybe work harder, after all tuition fees are a loan so yes it is adding on a few years in terms of debt but it’s a vicious cycle!”

Fears for A-Level students

As the potential increase is not due to take place until 2012, it’s more a worry for A level students and also lecture’s preparing future university students. A lot of people that are currently in University won’t actually be affected but there are lots of fears for college students. With debts up to £30,000 plus, if the increase does go up to £9,000 this will hold back thousands of students that have the qualifications but primarily funding is the initial problem. The spending review announced that there could be cuts of up to 40% by the end of 2010 but it’s said that teaching funds will face bigger cuts then 40%. There are some university’s that will be able to increase there’s fees allowing them to increase their funding regardless to the budget cuts.




The problem college lectures now fear some people not going on to study at college due to the fact some students know they won’t be able to pursue any further. This is instigated fear into teachers of further education. Questions have been raised as to whether people now will not want to receive further education from A-Levels and leave school just to go straight into work.

College tutors in fear over plans

Nicola Sandano, head of media studies at Preston College is worried she won’t have any students if the government do go along with the rise. She says “A lot of the students we get are from a working class background so they will right off the idea of going to university; it scares the hell of them being in that much debt.”
She went on to say “Now students will be looking for apprenticeships or just go straight into work. It’s definitely having an impact on numbers in getting students in to do A-Levels in the first place, because what’s the point if I’m not going to university”.

Nicola has said she has many students that know what they want, have the qualification and know what course they would like to do they just have the support financially.

New government plans

New government plans mean that up to 18,000 students may be able to get their first two years of study paid for according to universities minister David Willets. Following the past few weeks it has seemed that the government would have to do something to insure there are equal opportunities to all. This is what the government have come up with. Ministers believe that this could benefit poorer children and able all classes the right to education.

Have you‘re say

With a very mixed and controversial reaction to the government’s plans and with thousands of students across the country against the plans – many education officials will have to re-think their plans, we as a nation can understand that in a recession we will understandably have to go through cuts backs, but is it right that some people will miss out on opportunities that in the long run could actually benefit our climate? Or it will ensure that the most determined and academically able students will get places meaning there will be a higher level of more qualified professionals?


Have your say at: ALDillon@uclan.ac.uk

International Reporting

Western media organisations are very much active on a global scale, with western countries being the most powerful countries in the world in many different aspects, media just being one example. As America and the UK do have the most power and influence in worldwide media they will often cater to western media values and ideologies.

Richer cliental such as Japan for instance, would be included in many media mediums and even make headlines in some newspapers – whereas a story out that same day, even of more importance but from a seconds or third world country would be ignored as they have less marginal concern.
The age-old saying goes – “Who pays the piper calls the tune!”
Power and money have the biggest influences here.

Global news agencies

Three types:
• The British – Reuters (Primarily a private company, now deriving most of its considerable wealth, income and profits from its financial services)
• The American agency – AP ( also running a strong financial service – primarily remains a media cooperative)
• The French AFP – thrived for a long time on generous government subscriptions but increasingly it is trying to shift its emphasis to media clients

This in turn means that there is not equal representation of world news. With the west of the world being more privileged in many aspects journalists will often stay in London, New York e.t.c.
Poorer countries would struggle to have foreign correspondents as this is very expensive – so in a way poorer areas of the world will rely on western countries to provide their news and also giving the more western countries the power to represent them. This does have its negative factors as western countries such as the UK or USA can be quite stereotypical with what they report, some of their reporting becomes quite predictable. Major news companies will have correspondents all across the world in about 100 different foreign countries, but for the major quality newspapers they will only have about 20-50 maximum. Correspondent’s in main cities.

Bigger scale events in less developed countries will almost always be underreported when up against anything of readership gold dust in more developed countries - simply because of money and power and again what audiences in places like the UK and USA are expecting to get out of their daily newspaper.

Not even a hundred words on a bomb that killed to Afghanis including three children.
However as we would expect to see from tabloid newspaper, X factor makes the front page followed by lots of follow up articles about the people that are in x factor in the following pages.
Here is an example showing that even though the people killed in Afghanistan maybe be of more importance it is very much underreported by western countries for two main reasons – we expect this kind of thing to happen in these countries and also when buying our tabloid newspaper we expect and want to see x factor or I’m a celebrity splashed across the front page.

Quite often (tabloid newspapers mainly), will leave out background information about the country and just include a few basic facts about one particular story – again just leaving people with a very stereotypical view of the outside world.


This results in less/few journalists being around the rest of the world to report what’s going on, therefore a lot of news goes unreported.

Rule of thumb

• Less than a third of USA correspondents are stationed in North America
• More than a third in western Europe
• Roughly a third covering the entire rest of the world (Eastern Europe, Africa Latin America e.t.c)


A more recent example of predictability would be the newly married couple in South Africa. The women was murdered – again this is a predictable story for South Africa as it’s known for having some of the largest crime rates in the world. This will also reinforce the stereotypical views from western parts of the world, as this is what western audiences would “expect to see”.

26 people die of aids in New Zealand – this would be a massive story worldwide maybe even making some front page news – however the exact same story happening in Africa – would probably, well most likely not even get reported at all because as bad as it may sound people expect to hear this coming from this country.

Many places get mentioned frequently in the media just because of its historical values, we could also say its predictability value as well. Japan is a good example here; Japan is often in the news because of their developed technology.

Oliver Boyd- Barretts’s study of the international news agencies (1980: 152-3) identified a number of interrelated factors which help explain differences in the strength of agency representation in different countries:
• Historical referencing (Influence of old agency cartel practices)
• Logistical (referring to the differences between countries in their importance as possible strategic or communication centres for coverage of wider geographic regions)
• Political factors (arising from controls or restrictions imposed by given countries on visiting correspondents)
• Commercial or cost revenue – seen as one of the more important factors – (differences in market pull within different areas of the world & differences in responsiveness of the agencies to the news requirements of different markets)


Historical places often follow a certain agenda. This means that some news will be over reported leaving others under reported. For example a new touch screen device gets brought out in Japan would make big headlines in the more western, more developed countries (mainly because we would probably be next to get the devices), compared to 1000 African students get new I phones.

News will always cater primarily to the home nation of one audience. News values are often a big issue here. For example the UK and the USA are very culturally similar – both English speaking countries, therefore this will mean that there will be more reporters in countries like these to allow maximum news coverage. This also applies to countries such as New Zealand and Australia. Proximity is a major news value here – having a high geographical connection.
The balance will vary from country to country but all media will have a range of potential sources of income. This may be in forms of government contribution, sales to audiences and obviously advertising. With government contributions this can cause some problems, as they expect there ideologies put in the medium this is however slowly changing as many mediums are starting to focus on getting their income strictly just through says as to contributions.
Certain adverting can say a lot about the media it is representing and more importantly the audience that it attracts. For example an advert for ASDA in The Mirror would represent a working class audience – for cheap meals, toys for Christmas e.t.c whereas The Guardian will have adverts for a classical CD, were most middle-upper class people would be interested in this product.

To conclude I have found whilst researching for this presentation that poorer countries do seem to miss out and in a lot of ways go unnoticed/unreported. It also seems that if you are not in a good financial place within world media not only will you countries be underreported but the countries will also find themselves with very stereotypical stories in western media as when they are reported – as said about Mexico in the news – it will often be about the same issues therefore consumers in first world countries will developed a certain option about that particular countries. It is very unfair – however journalists will tend to stick to a certain agenda Oliver Boyd examines. With journalist’s sticking to particular agendas – this may vary depending on what news corporation they work for – this often leads to very predictable news. Consumers will get use to and in some cases expect to see certain stories coming from any particular country. As said before Mexico for example we would relate through no fault of our – to drugs and crime, Asian countries for their conflict over religion. As this is what is constantly injected into our media.

Gangster's

The importance of ‘identity’ as a primary concept of gang culture. Using theory to support arguments.

I think that the increase in the media’s interpretation of ‘gangsters’ and ‘gangs’ and what they should look like highly influences the identity in which gang members feel/think they should act, dress and even criminal activities that they participate in. For example movies like 50 cents’ ‘Get rich or die tryin’ had a massive effect on how young black boys (especially in America) act and ‘think’ they should be acting. They learn illegitimate ways to receive goods and services. They are exposed to what a “hit” is for example or a drive by shooting. I think that it could be argued that these films even educate these young people on how to get away with it. Economic deprivation plays a big part in the forms of gangs – witnessing because of the media all the money, nice clothes, women and big houses e.t.c and thinking ‘This is what gangster are – this is what I want to be’.








Before the age of eighteen, the average American teen will have witnessed eighteen thousand simulated murders on TV this it without films and all other types of media i.e music, newspapers and radio. Willis & Presdee observes that:

“Crime should be viewed as everyday responses to lives out within deprived, brutalised and often lonely social locations. In a society based on consumption to ‘have’ is to exist: to have nothing is to be nothing. Presdee asks rhetorically how – in the latter case- can we emotionally live life that is laden with such a shame and observes that is it through crime we can ‘have’, and therefore ‘be.’
It is the nothingness and loss of social status that is often the wellspring of social or personal harm, the trigger for violence as self expression, weather it is directed inwardly (self mutilation) or outward (the mutilation of others).”

There is, in many areas of the world, ‘dominance for identity’. For example in a lot of gangs even if its small gangs or large organized gangs its seems the more deviant you are, the more anti-social the more you are respected and looked upon – the more other members of the gang want to be like you. Gangs will often commit crimes to become this like this ‘respected ’gang member. Injecting this criminal identity were they are deviant, ruthless, scared of nothing – no one. Some areas such as Rio De Janerio (Brazil) the gang member will often have to kill to become part of the gang.



Studies from Chicago university have showed that people living in these socially disorganised areas with adopt different moral standards to people living in for example at the top end of Rio De Janerio as it is a town split into two worlds. For people that live in the ‘slummy’ areas this will contribute to their willingness to become more involved in criminal behaviour. As this is all they have know – this is who they are – their identity. Some of these patterns of behaviour however have been adopted and passed on from one generation to the next. (Parents were heavily involved in crime).

However, Thrasher (1947) argues that:

“The adolescent gang emerged out of spontaneous street play groups of young children in relatively permissive and socially disorganised slum areas were neither ‘disturbed’ or ‘psychopathic’ nor ‘driven’ by socio-economic forces beyond their control, they were simply looking for excitement, adventure and fun. This can be found on the streets but not at home”.

So the gang members or ‘deviant’ individuals may not have been brought up around criminal activities and may be completely unaware of crime and what in entails however some of what they see outside of what they know (school, home life e.t.c ) interreges them, these new identities that they are being exposed to excites them.

For many young gang member’s or young males and now even females thinking about becoming gang members much of this is due to their home life and financial situation. They join to find out their identity. Who they are, what they are or more what they should be, what they should look like.



For many young males joining gangs or getting involved in criminal activities a lot of it starts from their roots - their family situation. Talcott Parsons (1937) studies argue that women are more at home looking after children the house chores e.t.c while the male goes out to provide for the family therefore being absent a lot of the time – resulting in them being unable to function as a role model for his children. Males do have strong cultural expectations of how they should be, what makes a good father, a good friend, a good home provider and good ‘identity’ to aspire to. Whether the father is absent due to work commitments or the mother is a single mum this proves problematic as the young males have to adopt this masculine role with ‘no real concept of what it involves’. Talcott says that:

“He has, during his childhood, discovered that stealing, violence and destruction provoke the disapproval of his mother and hence identifies these as non-feminine and therefore masculine characteristics. Offending behaviour satisfies these criteria of masculinity”.

We could argue from this, also in relation to the media, that being in a surveillance society forces some ‘gang members’ to adopt identities that they are shaped and told to look like. In some circumstances for example the area in which they live in or the colour of their skin often contributes to this factor. For example young black men living in a council estate in London, may well want to better themselves and work they way up the social ladder but they are already stereotyped by society as ‘young black thugs – that wont/cant amount to anything’. I think this is very unfair though it could be suggested why these males keep the identities they all ready have and live up to what society and the media label them as. Studies of Gerland suggest that:

“contemporary life is characterised by a ‘culture of control’ where we are policed at home, at work, at pleasure and in a surveillance society were we cannot escape the dominate gaze (gaze of the dominate) , as we are watched and tracked, trailed, filmed, photographed as our ‘life trial’ is picked up by electronic panoptical society”.

Personal social decline plays a big part on deviant behaviour and identity. This is when we learn that we are ugly; we are different, apart and even excluded. In effect this can result in a silence and often being left isolated and lonely. However in some instances it can go the other way and in a culture were distraction is a part of everyday life – in Presdee’s theory the central question becomes: ‘Social survival or social destruction?’.

In conclusion, identity is hugely important factor in the gang lifestyle. Not looking a certain way, wearing a certain colour of clothing or even your hairstyle in different gangs across the globe could even get you killed in extreme cases. I think one of the most influential aspects that contribute to this at the moment is the media. In all its mediums, it is very stereotypical – young gang member’s pick up on this and begin to adopt this ideology that this is the norm to be included, accepted and part of a new criminal family. There are two areas in which gang members don’t understand the vital difference – ‘fantasy’ and ‘reality’. Suggesting that ‘identity’ in gangs is very much glamorised as said previously, they are not aware of the many negative realities that their activities will outcome. These people can often end up in prison (their sentence also increased if they are part of a gang), addicted to drugs or alcohol or even worse – dead.

However on this point, I would argue that every person has their own mind – and should have a good sense of right or wrong no matter where you live, how you were brought up or how much money you have. Identity and finding about your individual identity and who you are is part of growing up – I think that people in these gangs have so many different cultural influences that they may struggle to lose the identity or be stopped from gaining it when it’s what’s been programmed into them or the area in which they live produces this identity as the norm.