The Teeming Mass: Representation Matters: Jeremy Corbyn, The Establishment, and Bias in the Media

Current MP for Islington North and former leader of the Opposition, Jeremy Corbyn remains a contentious figure. Many accuse him of creating divisions in the Labour Party and for the historic defeat in the 2019 General Election, however, the extent to which he is solely culpable is questionable. Politicians are no strangers to negative press, but as Party Leader, Corbyn suffered more than his counterparts and predecessors. The criticism he received was easily accessible and seemingly inexhaustible, going as far as to present him as a threat to democracy. By negatively representing Corbyn almost constantly, there is a possibility the press influenced the public’s opinion of him.

“Court Jezter”, “Corbyn’s anti-Semite army”, “Comrade Corbyn”, from The Sun to the Sunday Times, the criticism faced by Jeremy Corbyn seems relentless. During his 5 years as the leader of the Labour Party, he weathered many headlines seeking to belittle and represent him negatively, with some arguing that the slating he faced was far more extreme than that of any other politician. The Independent suggested that in the ‘honeymoon period’ of his time as leader of the Opposition, the brief period where a new leader is typically given greater leeway with respect to changes they wish to make, 75% of the media coverage he received misrepresented him. Additionally, when Corbyn was represented by the press, his voice was not included in the coverage, and as a result he is not given the chance to represent himself. Despite being the first leader in British history to appoint a front-bench team with more women than men and his promise of renationalising the railways, Corbyn seems to inspire negative feelings within the population. However, there were some undeniable faults with the Labour Party under Corbyn’s leadership, including being too slow in taking action to stamp out anti-Semitism within the party, something which alienated the Jewish community and many Labour supporters. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and people’s attitudes towards Corbyn are no exception. To be able to agree or disagree with politicians is an important aspect of democracy, no politician is infallible, but the constant criticism from the media has certainly helped make Corbyn an unpopular figure. However, despite his perceived unpopularity nationwide, he seems to be a firm favourite in his constituency, where he has held his seat since 1983, something Chris Renwick suggests is “one of the greatest testimonies. No one comes close to removing him from his constituency, election after election”.

The excessive negative representation of Corbyn potentially reflects the bias typical of governing media bodies and outlets. While Corbyn faced criticism from newspapers across the political spectrum, those frequently representing him negatively were linked by political affiliation. The Daily Express, The Sun, The Daily Mail and The Sunday Times, a mixture of tabloid and broadsheet publications, all of which are right leaning. Despite The Sun supporting Tony Blair in the wake of the Thatcher and Major era, Corbyn’s ideals juxtapose the political alignments of these newspapers. Additionally, there are clear links between the publications negatively representing Corbyn and the Establishment, the group in society exercising power over matters of policy and opinion. This group is typically seen as the opposer of change, a complete contrast to Corbyn’s radical left-wing ideas. As a result, it’s logical that the media aligned with the Establishment would be more critical of Corbyn than left-wing newspapers. However, the obvious bias in the media raises several issues, including exploitability of the open nature of it. If a media outlet only wishes to portray one aspect of a situation, the acceptability of openly biased media makes this far easier. There is also the potential for openly biased media to lead to a rise in fake news due to the need to push a certain, often completely fabricated, narrative. Returning to Corbyn, the media, especially right-leaning publications, are quick to pass judgement and criticise him, but there are far fewer pieces seeking to represent the positive achievements of his time as Labour Party Leader. Those negatively representing Corbyn often suggest he is a one-dimensional caricature, an apparent reflection of a media biased against him.

Most media outlets target a specific demographic, and as a result the purpose of the outlet is somewhat influenced by the need to appeal to this audience. People tend to buy newspapers that agree with their views, basing their decisions on the stances the paper takes rather than the price or the writing style. A completely unbiased media is an almost utopian ideal, at least while anyone with opinions is reporting the news. However, there are ways of combating the biased view of the news we receive. One way of getting an unbiased scope of the news is reading views from both sides of the spectrum. While the right-wing and left-wing views of the situation may not show the whole story, the truth often lies somewhere in between. The potential link between the media’s bias and their treatment of Jeremy Corbyn poses an interesting paradox. If I suggest the two are highly linked, surely my own bias should be considered and questioned. From what I’ve discovered writing this piece, I would suggest it’s up to the reader to choose whether they believe there’s a link or not, don’t you agree?