Another article about "The Search for Common Ground" report for the GLA. Interestingly, a lot of the report was cut before publication much of which - in my opinion - was highly dubious anyway and didn't deserve to make the final cut. Even some of that which has made the final report is also questionable.
There has been too much 'politic-ing' going on in the background and it's a shame - as this article suggests - that the credibility of the sound research that underpins some of the chapters (mine included) is being overshadowed by the associations being made to certain certain groups and/or individuals.
Sadly, I have no option but to agree with some of the comments made in this article...
Watching Ken Livingstone at the mayoral press conference yesterday was like watching an old bare-knuckle fighter. Horrible, but you had to admire his nerve.
He spun away from danger so adroitly you could blink and miss the trickiness of the foot movements. He landed low blows and then turned to the referee as if butter wouldn't melt in his mouth.
Ostensibly he was releasing a report by "leading academics and experts on Islam" on Islamophobia. He had a poll which showed that Muslim Londoners weren't very different from other Londoners, which was fair enough, and descriptions of the prejudices Muslim journalists face. These revelations were merely the build-up to the shocking news that "leading academics and experts" had found that 91 per cent of articles on Islam "were negative in their associations".
Ninety-one per cent! Imagine. I knew there was bigotry, but not the "torrent of Islamophobic demonisation" Livingstone described. Where could we get further particulars?
We couldn't, initially. Although Livingstone had sat on the report for weeks, no copies were available before the conference - "problems with couriers", apparently. It arrived while Livingstone was speaking and as we skim-read we learned that it was giving Islam "negative associations" to report that the Iranian regime was holding a conference of Holocaust deniers. Muslim democrats in Iran opposed it. Livingstone and his " leading academics" could not. Meanwhile, journalists - including me - conveyed "negative associations" when we wrote that Jack Straw was standing up for the rights of women when he criticised the full veil. Muslim feminists oppose the veil. Mr Livingstone and his "leading academics and experts" cannot.
The worst of it was that a large chunk of the report was a devious attack on a Panorama expose; of the Muslim Council of Britain by John Ware of the BBC. As luck would have it, Ware was at the press conference and able to point out that all the criticisms of the MCB that he broadcast came from liberal-minded British Muslims. Were they, like Iranian democrats and Arab feminists, Islamophobes as well?
Then he looked at the press release and noticed that one of Livingstone's nine "leading academics and experts" wasn't an academic or expert at all but Inayat Bungawala of the MCB. Later I discovered that two others were also from the MCB. At a cost of £30,000 to the taxpayer, Livingstone was allowing the MCB and its friends to rubbish a well-sourced and balanced documentary and dressing up the results as an impartial study.
I've written a book on why the Left is going along with the Islamist Right and won't go over it all again here. The point is that while the Labour government has cut links with the MCB, and announced that no organisation will receive public money until it explicitly opposes extremism, Livingstone can't admit a mistake. He never explains, never apologises and always attacks.
Thursday, 15 November 2007
Wednesday, 14 November 2007
Guardian Media: Study shows 'demonisation' of Muslims
Here is a piece that appeared in the Guardian Media today about the GLA report. If you want to view the article in its original form, click here.
A "torrent" of negative stories has been revealed by a study of the portrayal of Muslims and Islam in the media, according to a report published yesterday.
Research into one week's news coverage showed that 91% of articles in national newspapers about Muslims were negative. The London mayor, Ken Livingstone, who commissioned the study, said the findings were a "damning indictment" of the media and urged editors and programme makers to review the way they portray Muslims.
"The overall picture presented by the media is that Islam is profoundly different from and a threat to the west," he said. "There is a scale of imbalance which no fair-minded person would think is right." Only 4% of the 352 articles studied were positive, he said.
Livingstone said the findings showed a "hostile and scaremongering attitude" towards Islam and likened the coverage to the way the left was attacked by national newspapers in the early 1980s. "The charge is that there are virtually no positive or balanced images of Islam being portrayed," he said. "I think there is a demonisation of Islam going on which damages community relations and creates alarm among Muslims."
Among examples in the study was a report which claimed that Christmas was being banned in one area because it offended Muslims, which researchers said was "inaccurate and alarmist". The report said that Muslims in Britain were sometimes depicted as a threat to traditional British values, and the coverage weakened government attempts to reduce extremism. The report is an amalgam of research projects individually prepared by members of a panel. Some research, examining published newspaper articles and reporting the experiences of Muslim journalists, involved Hugh Muir, of the Guardian.
A "torrent" of negative stories has been revealed by a study of the portrayal of Muslims and Islam in the media, according to a report published yesterday.
Research into one week's news coverage showed that 91% of articles in national newspapers about Muslims were negative. The London mayor, Ken Livingstone, who commissioned the study, said the findings were a "damning indictment" of the media and urged editors and programme makers to review the way they portray Muslims.
"The overall picture presented by the media is that Islam is profoundly different from and a threat to the west," he said. "There is a scale of imbalance which no fair-minded person would think is right." Only 4% of the 352 articles studied were positive, he said.
Livingstone said the findings showed a "hostile and scaremongering attitude" towards Islam and likened the coverage to the way the left was attacked by national newspapers in the early 1980s. "The charge is that there are virtually no positive or balanced images of Islam being portrayed," he said. "I think there is a demonisation of Islam going on which damages community relations and creates alarm among Muslims."
Among examples in the study was a report which claimed that Christmas was being banned in one area because it offended Muslims, which researchers said was "inaccurate and alarmist". The report said that Muslims in Britain were sometimes depicted as a threat to traditional British values, and the coverage weakened government attempts to reduce extremism. The report is an amalgam of research projects individually prepared by members of a panel. Some research, examining published newspaper articles and reporting the experiences of Muslim journalists, involved Hugh Muir, of the Guardian.
The Search for Common Ground
You can download the Greater London Authority (GLA) report, 'The Search for Common Ground" can now be downloaded by clicking here.
My research and writing can be found in chapter 2 of the report. I want to make sure that everyone is aware of my contribution as there have been 'political' problems with some parts of the report. The key findings of my chapter are shown below (reproduced from the Executive Summary):
Chapter 2: A normal week?
To explore the context and implications of representations of Islam and Muslims in the media, a study was made of the British press over the course of a week. The week beginning Monday 8 May 2006 was chosen at random about a month in advance. A count was made of every article mentioning ‘Islam’, ‘Muslims’, derivatives such as ‘Islamic’ and ‘Islamist’, and words and phrases with an obvious association with Islam, for example ‘Sunni’ and ‘Shi’a’.
On the basis of these criteria, 352 articles were identified. They were categorised according to type of paper, whether they were about domestic or international affairs, whether the context was negative, positive or neutral, and whether the articles expressed a sense of threat or crisis. The principal findings included:
• There were substantial differences between daily newspapers with regard to how many articles mentioning Islam or Muslims they contained during the week in question. There were just over 50 articles in the Guardian, over 40 in The Times, Financial Times, Daily Telegraph and Independent, but less than 20 in the Sun, Mirror, Express and Star.
• Tabloids and broadsheets differed not only in the amount of coverage they provided but also in whether they focused on domestic or international affairs. Close to 60 per cent of articles in tabloids pertained to Britain and 40 per cent to the wider world. In the case of the broadsheets, however, the proportions were the other way round: 60 per cent were about the wider world, and 40 per cent about Britain.
• Of the 352 articles that referred to Islam and Muslims during the week in question, 91 per cent were judged to be negative in their associations. Only four per cent were judged to be positive, and five per cent were judged neutral.
• In 12 of the 19 papers studied during the week there were no positive associations.
• In the tabloids, 96 per cent of all articles were judged to be negative, compared with 89 per cent in the broadsheets. It is relevant to bear in mind in this connection that the combined circulation of the The search for common ground Muslims, non-Muslims and the UK media xvii tabloids is about three times greater than that of the broadsheets (May 2007 figures).
• It was judged that almost half of the articles represented Islam as a threat. Of these, about a third pertained to Britain and two-thirds to the wider world.
• The overall picture presented in the media during the week in question was that on the world stage Islam is profoundly different from, and a serious threat to, the West; and that, within Britain, Muslims are different from – and a threat to – ‘us’.
My research and writing can be found in chapter 2 of the report. I want to make sure that everyone is aware of my contribution as there have been 'political' problems with some parts of the report. The key findings of my chapter are shown below (reproduced from the Executive Summary):
Chapter 2: A normal week?
To explore the context and implications of representations of Islam and Muslims in the media, a study was made of the British press over the course of a week. The week beginning Monday 8 May 2006 was chosen at random about a month in advance. A count was made of every article mentioning ‘Islam’, ‘Muslims’, derivatives such as ‘Islamic’ and ‘Islamist’, and words and phrases with an obvious association with Islam, for example ‘Sunni’ and ‘Shi’a’.
On the basis of these criteria, 352 articles were identified. They were categorised according to type of paper, whether they were about domestic or international affairs, whether the context was negative, positive or neutral, and whether the articles expressed a sense of threat or crisis. The principal findings included:
• There were substantial differences between daily newspapers with regard to how many articles mentioning Islam or Muslims they contained during the week in question. There were just over 50 articles in the Guardian, over 40 in The Times, Financial Times, Daily Telegraph and Independent, but less than 20 in the Sun, Mirror, Express and Star.
• Tabloids and broadsheets differed not only in the amount of coverage they provided but also in whether they focused on domestic or international affairs. Close to 60 per cent of articles in tabloids pertained to Britain and 40 per cent to the wider world. In the case of the broadsheets, however, the proportions were the other way round: 60 per cent were about the wider world, and 40 per cent about Britain.
• Of the 352 articles that referred to Islam and Muslims during the week in question, 91 per cent were judged to be negative in their associations. Only four per cent were judged to be positive, and five per cent were judged neutral.
• In 12 of the 19 papers studied during the week there were no positive associations.
• In the tabloids, 96 per cent of all articles were judged to be negative, compared with 89 per cent in the broadsheets. It is relevant to bear in mind in this connection that the combined circulation of the The search for common ground Muslims, non-Muslims and the UK media xvii tabloids is about three times greater than that of the broadsheets (May 2007 figures).
• It was judged that almost half of the articles represented Islam as a threat. Of these, about a third pertained to Britain and two-thirds to the wider world.
• The overall picture presented in the media during the week in question was that on the world stage Islam is profoundly different from, and a serious threat to, the West; and that, within Britain, Muslims are different from – and a threat to – ‘us’.
Birmingham Post: Being old is the new being young
This article forms my column in the Birmingham Post to be published tomorrow, 15th November. you might see that it's very similar - without the more gruesome parts - to the post I made yesterday entitled "In the words of the Mitchell Brothers...". This is because the Mitchell Brothers piece was the original - and something that I wanted to get 'out-there' whilst this piece is what the Post published. Both are entirely my writing but the Post were worried about libel etc and you can't blame them for that. So no conspiracies, no falling out...both myself and the Post very happy with the outcome...
Having recently become a single parent if widespread opinion is to be believed, then my three kids are on a slippery slope towards wanton crime, educational underachievement, ASBOs and at least one teenage pregnancy. Personally, I hate these knee-jerk reactions that lump all single parents, young people or indeed whoever together as they are extremely dangerous. Unfortunately, it seems to be something that as a society we increasingly do.
Nonetheless, making the transition from ‘happy family’ (tongue placed firmly in cheek) to ‘single parent family’ does require some support. I have to say though, there’s not too many places so far that I’ve found where this is readily available.
It’s funny because when you’re thrown into this type of situation, you begin to think about what ‘family’ means and about what you think being a part of family is. For many of us, we look over our rose-tinted and nostalgic shoulders to the ‘Good Old Days’ when you could leave your doors unlocked and when policemen would clip kids round the ears (I’m welling up with emotion already…!!!). Not now though, not with the youth of today…
As a population in the UK today, we’re ageing. That’s not to merely state the obvious, but to note that a larger percentage us will in the very near future be much more ‘distinguished’ (for distinguished read ‘old’). Given that we’re also living longer, there is the distinct possibility that the older population will become much wider, where two or three generations could all be ‘OAP’ at the same time – all of whom were once young I hasten to add.
These changes will mean that it will be very difficult to generalise about who or what ‘old people’ are in the same way we do about young people for example. Even more so when we have an OAP population that lived through the swinging sixties, the summer of love and in about a decade’s time, the punk revolution. God help us all then when John (Johnny Rotten) Lydon enters his twilight years. To use the old adage, you would think that he knew better at his age (Mick Jagger also please take note).
Knowing better for their age is not something that you can charge kids with. Yet seeing the way that they have responded to recent family events has reassured me that they not only have good sense but that they are reasonably balanced. No addictions, arrests, attacks or ASBOs have yet to arrive at my door.
Despite what society might think about young people - especially those from non-idealistic ‘2.1 kid’ backgrounds – we shouldn’t always presume that they are inherently bad, troublesome or a scourge on society. Things are always far more complex and the mere number of years alive cannot be used as a marker against which your value – or lack of it – in society can be measured.
Given the increasingly ageing population in the UK, maybe we need to re-think the phrase ‘help the aged’ (Lydon and Jagger again take note) as maybe it will be they rather than our youth that will be teetering on the edge of that slippery slope – or at least looking back into it.
If this is the case, then maybe in just a few years time ‘being old’ will become the new ‘being young’.
Having recently become a single parent if widespread opinion is to be believed, then my three kids are on a slippery slope towards wanton crime, educational underachievement, ASBOs and at least one teenage pregnancy. Personally, I hate these knee-jerk reactions that lump all single parents, young people or indeed whoever together as they are extremely dangerous. Unfortunately, it seems to be something that as a society we increasingly do.
Nonetheless, making the transition from ‘happy family’ (tongue placed firmly in cheek) to ‘single parent family’ does require some support. I have to say though, there’s not too many places so far that I’ve found where this is readily available.
It’s funny because when you’re thrown into this type of situation, you begin to think about what ‘family’ means and about what you think being a part of family is. For many of us, we look over our rose-tinted and nostalgic shoulders to the ‘Good Old Days’ when you could leave your doors unlocked and when policemen would clip kids round the ears (I’m welling up with emotion already…!!!). Not now though, not with the youth of today…
As a population in the UK today, we’re ageing. That’s not to merely state the obvious, but to note that a larger percentage us will in the very near future be much more ‘distinguished’ (for distinguished read ‘old’). Given that we’re also living longer, there is the distinct possibility that the older population will become much wider, where two or three generations could all be ‘OAP’ at the same time – all of whom were once young I hasten to add.
These changes will mean that it will be very difficult to generalise about who or what ‘old people’ are in the same way we do about young people for example. Even more so when we have an OAP population that lived through the swinging sixties, the summer of love and in about a decade’s time, the punk revolution. God help us all then when John (Johnny Rotten) Lydon enters his twilight years. To use the old adage, you would think that he knew better at his age (Mick Jagger also please take note).
Knowing better for their age is not something that you can charge kids with. Yet seeing the way that they have responded to recent family events has reassured me that they not only have good sense but that they are reasonably balanced. No addictions, arrests, attacks or ASBOs have yet to arrive at my door.
Despite what society might think about young people - especially those from non-idealistic ‘2.1 kid’ backgrounds – we shouldn’t always presume that they are inherently bad, troublesome or a scourge on society. Things are always far more complex and the mere number of years alive cannot be used as a marker against which your value – or lack of it – in society can be measured.
Given the increasingly ageing population in the UK, maybe we need to re-think the phrase ‘help the aged’ (Lydon and Jagger again take note) as maybe it will be they rather than our youth that will be teetering on the edge of that slippery slope – or at least looking back into it.
If this is the case, then maybe in just a few years time ‘being old’ will become the new ‘being young’.
24 Hour Dash.com: Media report reveals 'torrent' of negative Muslim
Another article about the GLA research. Click link in widget to view 'au naturel'...
A "torrent" of negative stories has been revealed by a study of the portrayal of Muslims and Islam in the British media, according to a report today.
Research into one week's news coverage showed that 91% of articles in national newspapers about Muslims were negative.
London mayor Ken Livingstone, who commissioned the study, said the findings were a "damning indictment" on the media and he urged editors and programme makers to review the way they portray Muslims.
"The overall picture presented by the media is that Islam is profoundly different from and a threat to the West," he said.
"There is a scale of imbalance which no fair-minded person would think is right."
Only 4% of the 352 articles studied last year were positive, he said.
Mr Livingstone told his weekly news conference that the findings showed a "hostile and scaremongering attitude" among the national media towards Islam and likened the coverage to the way the Left was attacked by national newspapers in the early 1980s.
"The charge is that there are virtually no positive or balanced images of Islam being portrayed," he said.
"I think there is a demonisation of Islam going on which damages community relations and creates alarm among Muslims."
Among the examples highlighted in the study was a report which claimed that Christmas was being banned in one area because it offended Muslims, which researchers said was "inaccurate and alarmist".
The report said that Muslims in Britain were depicted as a threat to traditional British values.
Alternative world views or opinions were not mentioned and facts were frequently distorted, exaggerated or over-simplified, said the report.
The researchers said that the coverage weakened government attempts to reduce and prevent extremism.
A separate opinion poll published by Mr Livingstone today showed that Muslims in London were more likely to feel "British" in their attitudes than other members of the community.
More Muslims were proud of their local area compared with other members of the public.
A "torrent" of negative stories has been revealed by a study of the portrayal of Muslims and Islam in the British media, according to a report today.
Research into one week's news coverage showed that 91% of articles in national newspapers about Muslims were negative.
London mayor Ken Livingstone, who commissioned the study, said the findings were a "damning indictment" on the media and he urged editors and programme makers to review the way they portray Muslims.
"The overall picture presented by the media is that Islam is profoundly different from and a threat to the West," he said.
"There is a scale of imbalance which no fair-minded person would think is right."
Only 4% of the 352 articles studied last year were positive, he said.
Mr Livingstone told his weekly news conference that the findings showed a "hostile and scaremongering attitude" among the national media towards Islam and likened the coverage to the way the Left was attacked by national newspapers in the early 1980s.
"The charge is that there are virtually no positive or balanced images of Islam being portrayed," he said.
"I think there is a demonisation of Islam going on which damages community relations and creates alarm among Muslims."
Among the examples highlighted in the study was a report which claimed that Christmas was being banned in one area because it offended Muslims, which researchers said was "inaccurate and alarmist".
The report said that Muslims in Britain were depicted as a threat to traditional British values.
Alternative world views or opinions were not mentioned and facts were frequently distorted, exaggerated or over-simplified, said the report.
The researchers said that the coverage weakened government attempts to reduce and prevent extremism.
A separate opinion poll published by Mr Livingstone today showed that Muslims in London were more likely to feel "British" in their attitudes than other members of the community.
More Muslims were proud of their local area compared with other members of the public.
Labels:
Islamophobia,
media,
Muslims,
Search for Common Ground
Associated Press of Pakistan: "Publication of a major study into portrayal of Muslims"
As before, this is another article about the work I was commissioned to undertake for the Greater London Authority. You cannot use the widget to the right to open the article in a new window so you will have to click on the following link:
LONDON, Nov 13 (APP): The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, on Tuesday welcomed the publication of a major study into the portrayal of Muslims and Islam in the UK print and broadcast media.
The report, ‘The Search for Common Ground,’ was researched by 9 leading academics, professionals from the media industry and experts on Islam, and shows that during the period of investigation the national media overwhelming portrayed Muslims and Islam in a negative way.
Speaking on the occasion ,The Mayor said:
‘While there were some examples of good practice, one of the most startling findings of this report is that in one typical week in 2006, over 90% of the articles that referred to Islam and Muslims were negative. The overall picture presented by the media is that Islam is profoundly different from and a threat to the west.
‘I hope that those who make the day - to - day decisions in the newsrooms of our national papers and TV will read this report and take on board the researchers recommendations.
Among the key findings of the report are that in one week, 8th to the 14th May 2006 there were 352 articles that mentioned Islam, Muslim, Islamic or Islamist, in the national daily press and of those 91% were deemed by the professional researcher team to have been negative.
In 12 out of 19 papers covered, the researchers concluded that every article carried was negative. 96% of Tabloid coverage was assessed to be negative while 89% of broadsheet reporting was deemed to be negative.
They also found that Muslims in the national press were portrayed as being a threat to traditional British customs, that there was little or no common ground between the West and Islam and that the tone of language in many articles was emotive, immoderate, alarmist or abusive.
Robin Richardson was the leader of the team that produced the report and is Co-Director of the Insted Consultancy, the company that undertook the research project said:
‘This is one of the first major pieces of research to be conducted into the manner and style of the way the UK media portrays one of the UK’s most significant religious and cultural groups. Our clear conclusion after twelve months of research and taking evidence is that the coverage we saw over this period was likely to provoke and increase feelings of insecurity, suspicion and anxiety amongst many non Muslims while at the same time causing many Muslims to feel vulnerable and alienated.
Out of London’s eight million population, there are over 600,000 Muslims living in the British capital. The report was researched between the 1st May 20006 and 30th April 2007.
LONDON, Nov 13 (APP): The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, on Tuesday welcomed the publication of a major study into the portrayal of Muslims and Islam in the UK print and broadcast media.
The report, ‘The Search for Common Ground,’ was researched by 9 leading academics, professionals from the media industry and experts on Islam, and shows that during the period of investigation the national media overwhelming portrayed Muslims and Islam in a negative way.
Speaking on the occasion ,The Mayor said:
‘While there were some examples of good practice, one of the most startling findings of this report is that in one typical week in 2006, over 90% of the articles that referred to Islam and Muslims were negative. The overall picture presented by the media is that Islam is profoundly different from and a threat to the west.
‘I hope that those who make the day - to - day decisions in the newsrooms of our national papers and TV will read this report and take on board the researchers recommendations.
Among the key findings of the report are that in one week, 8th to the 14th May 2006 there were 352 articles that mentioned Islam, Muslim, Islamic or Islamist, in the national daily press and of those 91% were deemed by the professional researcher team to have been negative.
In 12 out of 19 papers covered, the researchers concluded that every article carried was negative. 96% of Tabloid coverage was assessed to be negative while 89% of broadsheet reporting was deemed to be negative.
They also found that Muslims in the national press were portrayed as being a threat to traditional British customs, that there was little or no common ground between the West and Islam and that the tone of language in many articles was emotive, immoderate, alarmist or abusive.
Robin Richardson was the leader of the team that produced the report and is Co-Director of the Insted Consultancy, the company that undertook the research project said:
‘This is one of the first major pieces of research to be conducted into the manner and style of the way the UK media portrays one of the UK’s most significant religious and cultural groups. Our clear conclusion after twelve months of research and taking evidence is that the coverage we saw over this period was likely to provoke and increase feelings of insecurity, suspicion and anxiety amongst many non Muslims while at the same time causing many Muslims to feel vulnerable and alienated.
Out of London’s eight million population, there are over 600,000 Muslims living in the British capital. The report was researched between the 1st May 20006 and 30th April 2007.
Labels:
Islamophobia,
media,
Muslims,
Search for Common Ground
Tuesday, 13 November 2007
BBC London: "Muslims 'demonised' by UK media"
This is an article about a piece of work that I was commissioned to undertake for the Greater London Authority back in the spring of 2006. It has finally been published today. USe the widget to the right to open the article in a new window...
Muslims are being "demonised" by the British media, with 91% of reports being negative, research commissioned by London's mayor has found.
Ken Livingstone said the survey, by consultancy firm Insted, studied a week's news reports and found Islam was portrayed as a "threat to the West".
Another poll published on Tuesday found that at least 35% of Londoners held Islam responsible for the 7/7 attacks.
The YouGov poll, commissioned by the Evening Standard, spoke to 701 people.
Mr Livingstone said the research by Insted - a consultancy firm which deals with issues of diversity and equality - found the national media had a "hostile and scaremongering attitude" towards the community.
Mr Livingstone said: "The overall picture presented by the media is that Islam is profoundly different from and a threat to the West.
"I think there is a demonisation of Islam going on which damages community relations and creates alarm among Muslims," he said.
Mr Livingstone urged editors to be balanced in their coverage saying out of 352 articles studied by researchers last year just 4% were positive.
The Evening Standard poll asked 701 people about issues and attitudes towards Islam, wearing the veil and faith schools.
The poll found about a third of those questioned wanted political groups "promoting fundamentalist Islamic agendas" banned.
While more than half of those interviewed said Muslims in London were "isolated" from others, about 50% thought Islam was a "generally intolerant faith".
Regarding veils, at least eight out of 10 people said neither students nor teachers should be allowed to wear the veil in school.
On faith schools, some 20% of the respondents wanted faith schools to be "encouraged", 10% wanted their numbers to be reduced and one in three wanted them banned.
Another poll, carried out by Ipsos-Mori on behalf of the Greater London Authority (GLA) and published on Monday, found 86% of Muslims in the city and 91% of other Londoners strongly felt that the police needed to work closely with the community.
Muslims are being "demonised" by the British media, with 91% of reports being negative, research commissioned by London's mayor has found.
Ken Livingstone said the survey, by consultancy firm Insted, studied a week's news reports and found Islam was portrayed as a "threat to the West".
Another poll published on Tuesday found that at least 35% of Londoners held Islam responsible for the 7/7 attacks.
The YouGov poll, commissioned by the Evening Standard, spoke to 701 people.
Mr Livingstone said the research by Insted - a consultancy firm which deals with issues of diversity and equality - found the national media had a "hostile and scaremongering attitude" towards the community.
Mr Livingstone said: "The overall picture presented by the media is that Islam is profoundly different from and a threat to the West.
"I think there is a demonisation of Islam going on which damages community relations and creates alarm among Muslims," he said.
Mr Livingstone urged editors to be balanced in their coverage saying out of 352 articles studied by researchers last year just 4% were positive.
The Evening Standard poll asked 701 people about issues and attitudes towards Islam, wearing the veil and faith schools.
The poll found about a third of those questioned wanted political groups "promoting fundamentalist Islamic agendas" banned.
While more than half of those interviewed said Muslims in London were "isolated" from others, about 50% thought Islam was a "generally intolerant faith".
Regarding veils, at least eight out of 10 people said neither students nor teachers should be allowed to wear the veil in school.
On faith schools, some 20% of the respondents wanted faith schools to be "encouraged", 10% wanted their numbers to be reduced and one in three wanted them banned.
Another poll, carried out by Ipsos-Mori on behalf of the Greater London Authority (GLA) and published on Monday, found 86% of Muslims in the city and 91% of other Londoners strongly felt that the police needed to work closely with the community.
Labels:
Islamophobia,
media,
muslim organisations,
Muslims
In the words of the Mitchell Brothers, "It's because we're family..."
Having recently become a single parent if widespread opinion is to be believed, then my three kids are on a slippery slope towards wanton crime, educational underachievement, ASBOs and at least one teenage pregnancy. Personally, I hate these knee-jerk reactions that lump all single parents, young people or indeed whoever together as they are extremely dangerous. Unfortunately, it seems to be something that as a society we increasingly do.
Nonetheless, making the transition from ‘happy family’ (tongue placed firmly in cheek) to ‘single parent family’ does require support and so how misguided was I when I thought that I might get this from within my own family.
Thinking that two older, retired members of my family might offer some support and stability, I encouraged my kids to spend time with them following my marriage’s recent breakdown. Increasingly the kids went to their house, had dinner with them, helped them with chores, kept each other company and basically did what families used to do in the ‘Good Old Days’.
Then, quite out of the blue, my youngest daughter came home crying saying that she couldn’t go there anymore. Having asked why, she retold in gruelling detail a conversation that the couple had had with both her and her elder sister.
Outrageously, one of the couple had decided to tell my daughters about how they had recently discussed taking a ‘contract’ out on someone they had fallen out with. Having explained the ‘costs’ involved and how ‘they wouldn’t have been able to trace anything’ might have made avid viewing in the final episode of the ‘Sopranos’ - albeit rather less Mafia than Mitchell Brothers - but not over afternoon tea.
Seriously though, this made me wonder what on earth they were doing having thoughts like this, let alone voicing them to children. I also wondered what value they gave to life when they could even justify contemplating such things as a result of such a minor issue. What does it say about the world that they – and we - also live in? To use the old adage, you would think they were old enough to know better.
Having confronted them since, I was shocked to be told that I was over-reacting adding that I had always thought that I was right ever since I was a child. Much to their annoyance, I told them that there is a fine line between confidence and arrogance and I’m just very confident that I’m always right!!! Unsurprisingly, they haven’t spoken to me since.
Seeing my kids response, reassured me that they had the good sense to tell me straight away and the moral fibre to be genuinely appalled. Despite what society might think about young people - especially those not from idealistic ‘2.1 kid’ backgrounds – we shouldn’t always presume that they are inherently bad, troublesome or a scourge on society. Things are always far more complex where the mere number of years alive cannot be a marker against which your value – or lack of it – in society can be measured.
Given the increasingly ageing population in the UK, maybe then it's about time that we began to re-think the phrase ‘help the aged’.
Nonetheless, making the transition from ‘happy family’ (tongue placed firmly in cheek) to ‘single parent family’ does require support and so how misguided was I when I thought that I might get this from within my own family.
Thinking that two older, retired members of my family might offer some support and stability, I encouraged my kids to spend time with them following my marriage’s recent breakdown. Increasingly the kids went to their house, had dinner with them, helped them with chores, kept each other company and basically did what families used to do in the ‘Good Old Days’.
Then, quite out of the blue, my youngest daughter came home crying saying that she couldn’t go there anymore. Having asked why, she retold in gruelling detail a conversation that the couple had had with both her and her elder sister.
Outrageously, one of the couple had decided to tell my daughters about how they had recently discussed taking a ‘contract’ out on someone they had fallen out with. Having explained the ‘costs’ involved and how ‘they wouldn’t have been able to trace anything’ might have made avid viewing in the final episode of the ‘Sopranos’ - albeit rather less Mafia than Mitchell Brothers - but not over afternoon tea.
Seriously though, this made me wonder what on earth they were doing having thoughts like this, let alone voicing them to children. I also wondered what value they gave to life when they could even justify contemplating such things as a result of such a minor issue. What does it say about the world that they – and we - also live in? To use the old adage, you would think they were old enough to know better.
Having confronted them since, I was shocked to be told that I was over-reacting adding that I had always thought that I was right ever since I was a child. Much to their annoyance, I told them that there is a fine line between confidence and arrogance and I’m just very confident that I’m always right!!! Unsurprisingly, they haven’t spoken to me since.
Seeing my kids response, reassured me that they had the good sense to tell me straight away and the moral fibre to be genuinely appalled. Despite what society might think about young people - especially those not from idealistic ‘2.1 kid’ backgrounds – we shouldn’t always presume that they are inherently bad, troublesome or a scourge on society. Things are always far more complex where the mere number of years alive cannot be a marker against which your value – or lack of it – in society can be measured.
Given the increasingly ageing population in the UK, maybe then it's about time that we began to re-think the phrase ‘help the aged’.
Labels:
Bermondsey,
family
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)