Getting down to starting the PhD

I think I've found the theme for my PhD research – and it has been a long search. Ironically, not surprisingly, I feel I've been drawn back to my undergraduate work to look at the media within the political economy context and the critical/cultural paradigms. I've just been reading a book that appealed to me because it addressed the issues I am interested in, and I thought: hmmm...I've seen that train of thought – ok, theoretical framework – somewhere. Blimey! I think I meant to use this framework way back in 1995 without realising it! So, someone (Professor Simon Cottle to be specific) has just inpired me to revisit the framework and I think this is it:)

What he talks about is mediatized culture – which basically refers to how the media do not simply report or represent diverse situations of conflict, but actively enact and perform them. It seems his work came out in the early 90s but somehow not to my library, I don't remember quoting him in my research. I'd like to think we kinda thought about the same thing around the same time:)

But I'm also looking forward to revisiting some of the good old folks - Peter Golding and gang - for the thesis.

Ok, what is this mediatized conflict all about? From wars to protests and racial killings, moral panic to environmental threats, the media not only present the information but they actually create them.

For my undergraduate thesis, I wrote on the Social Control in the Newsroom: An analysis of the 1995 general elections by the News Straits Times. In that research, I tried to show how political and ownership control filtered to the newsroom and why journalists did what they did in terms of the reporting. I tried to show the link by showing the ownership trend, reading the content and attempting to understanding behaviour of the journalists.

Why this topic?

Because unfortunately, racism will not go out of fashion, judging from the present developments. Take the most recent case of the 1Melayu 1Bumi being sold by the newspaper Utusan – by its editor Zaini Hassan. That the Chinese in Malaysia are ganging up to take over the country from the Malays. So the Malays need to stick together. Not just stick together but to fight for the rights of the “race”. What does that entail? Going to war? Taking the parangs and attacking all the Chinese? Denying them economic activities? Apartheid? And now the Chinese, formerly Communists, want to create a Christian state. Absurdity at its peak. But why do such ridiculous postulations get the kind of coverage it gets in the Malay media? At the same time, we know that the other vernacular media are also not doing justice to the situation. Ethnic interests and reporting tend to not only define the content but to set the agenda. That it is also widespread gives it a kind of timelessness, which is not something to be happy about.

Missing are questions about class relations, why journalists and editors do what they do – what are the latent meaning or values that the media represent?

I hope I can make a contribution to the discourse on media and identities.

Now down to working out the details in an academic format:)