National Identity and Television in the UK - Essay Example

187233 Television has a major impact on the minds and lives of people in recent decades. A good and effective channel can mould and un-mould popular opinions at home and abroad. Expressions of national identity and popular culture are part of television culture and the existence and importance of television cannot be ruled out any more as 'It is a potent form of popular culture that has replaced the hearth as a focal point of the household living space (Scriven, 2003). The impact of audiovisual advance with the technological perennial improvements is also the source of reflection of political, economic and social evolutions taking place internally and externally. Today, 'in this period of global balkanisation' (Freidman, 1996, iv), reasserting territorial identities that gladdened the brave hearts of past, is slightly difficult. Identities have taken new forms, signs, symbols and to some extent, they are blurred in the maze of a stronger world identity. They do not represent 'state-endorsed geographical identity' any more and they have moved on with the present mindboggling social and political mobility and environmental issues. All nations are adjusting to diversity now and identities have become all-inclusive. So, keeping with the time, British identity too has become an opaque concept, despite BBC declaring that Prime Minister Gordon Brown's recent speech promotes Britishness. National identity can be one of the most important component of a sense of self, which is necessary to feel belonged. National identity should be a positive factory and should never be a fanatical, regressive factor that would not allow people to move forward. Surveys say that national identity is not very important to British people any more. "That does not mean that fewer of us think of ourselves as British than before - although, as in the past, a striking one in three of us still do not. It means that Britishness is becoming less important to the majority. It is a rum kind of national identity that means so little to so many" saya Guardian. http://www.guardian.co.uk/britain/article/0,,1997381,00.html . National identity, a delicate issue that has to be guarded by the broadcasters, has thinned down in recent years, due to globalised dimensions of the broadcasters. The identities could be localised, regionalised or nationalised, or in the case of Britain and other European countries, to some extent, the identities are europeanised in recent years. In addition, smaller minorities have become louder with their new found identities that have to be reflected on television. "Satellite television may shrink the world, but it also allows smaller communities to speak to and for themselves, to bypass or challenge larger and more powerful nation-states and their omnipotent ideologies" Creeber (2004). It is important to assess the depth of national identity portrayed in the television channels of United Kingdom. There is always a continuation of historic enduring, going back for several centuries of culture, art, music, politics, ways of living, cuisine, evolution of language, and literature to back up this identity. National identity needs not a blatant, belligerent show on every frame; instead it could be a subtle sense of belonging that needs a special understanding to catch. "The role of the media has..had a massive effect on identity. The great unifiers built up in the beginning of the century to ensure a common and shared culture for the British people have been rapidly undermined. The growth of satellite and digital will be the death knell of a society that watches the same programmes and absorbs the same information everyday" Leopald (1997, p.30). Television broadcasting has changed beyond recognition and this could be truly identified only if both the ends could be compared. "To Grasp its transformation, we need a more flexible conceptualization of the relationship between time, media and national identity, than the one which uses as its paradigm the role of the BBC in its early years through its broadcasting of national events," Brooks (1998, p.379). Scotland has created an identity crisis within United Kingdom by separating her media and both the sides, to some extent, have become slightly racial. "National identity affects the way people view and use the media in different ways. For Scottish nationals, who mainly read the Scottish press, there is a taken-for-granted, noncontentious aspect to the media. What they read, watch and listen to is the result of habit in the main, often focusing on local matters." http://www.institute-of-governance.org/forum/Leverhulme/briefing_pdfs/IoG_Briefing_18.pdf In addition, Welsh politics is considered to be in a state of continual flux and although the identity crisis created by Welsh is not as severe as the Scottish one, television reflects the 'otherness' quite often. "Mere usage of the Welsh language already emphasises cultural distinctiveness. It is amongst the remaining four-fifths of Welshmen that national consciousness, beyond that of the fervour of Cardiff Arms Park, can be fostered through television and possibly exploited politically" http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/28/1974jun/436.pdf It is important to note that the identity of United Kingdom has changed beyond recognition in the last few decades after the Second World War and has intensely changed in the last fifteen years. The almost all-white country with the proud heritage of Monarchy and democracy does not exist any more. The imperial clout of ruling more than one third of the world with the belligerent white man's image is a thing of yore. Britain has evolved after the wars and women, who had become slowly visible, are absolutely in control of their lives. This means that many issues have changed in the British society of today. "Internally, minority groups defined according to their political beliefs, ethnicity, sexual predilections, geographical locality, or socially marginalised status, have become increasingly more vocal in their demands for greater representation," Scriven (2003, p.2). In the same way, other cultures, minorities, who had infiltrated into Britain either for a better life, or for education, have become British now and in some cases, especially the Muslims from Sind and Punjab area of India/Pakistan and Caribbean have reached their third generation here. Britain has lost her all-enveloping original Britishness of Vikings and Anglo-Saxons now and has welcomed the minority cultures. As the country has altered its identity, so has the media. It does not represent only the white British any more. Instead, it tries to represent all the cultures, and to some extent, it also welcomes the European union and this means, trying to know more about the European neighbours, learn their language and ways of living, even though these programmes are yet to come to the forefront. "As long as the people who run Europe do not seem to actually like the place as a concept, it is very difficult to make attractive programming out of 'our continent' says Scriven (p.174). . This is definitely not a time of isolation for any country. But it is important to note that more than any other country, Britain has taken a laudable initiative to have an inclusive policy. There are also other issues of standardising the regional languages. It is important to give equal prominence even to the dying languages of the region. Scottish TV boosts Gaelic to an impressive extent, even though it is difficult to say that Gaelic has any relevance now, other than to scholars of language. Still the regional dialects are important for the national television. "Dialectal diversity does not immediately lead to mutual incomprehensibility, but some features of certain dialects may not be known to the whole audience of a national broadcast . If dialects are not represented in their full diversity, then another question is whether this is acceptable to the viewing audience" http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/dsayers/academic/Sayers_narrowcasting.pdf Even though comparatively a very small country, Britain has always had very vocal communities like Irish, Welsh and Scottish and not to forget the Celtic Fringe. It also has a national identity of an extremely decorative, but with reduced power, Monarchy combined with glorified democratic institutions that gave inspiration to many democracies of the world. Arguably, Britain had the most enduring monolithic national identity in the entire world with very specific national characters through which the explorations were conducted, wars were waged, colonies were subdued and after the imperial rule, Britain even managed to distance the colonies without much bitterness from both the sides. Today television has given voice to that colourful history of Britons. It must be emphasised that television has done great justice to the historical identity of Britain. In accordance with the changing identities of the nation, media too has attempted to project Britain as the democratic, but traditional country that has a place for all the religions, cultures, colours and creeds. It has projected a new Britain on the television screen, a Britain that has no discrimination towards any one, and where people could be treated equally despite racial differences. Television has given preference to guard the human rights of all and has waged war against its encroachment. BBC has become perhaps the most reliable television channel in the entire world today and even though it cannot project acute British identity while being a cross-national television, it has tried hard to retain its originality to the maximum extent possible. Group identities and national identities are not a thing of past in spite of United Nations and European Unions or NATO. People still need an identity to be proud of. But the British television has been sometimes blamed for the fragmentation of the nation. Usually television reflects the reality of the society and to a cursory glance, British society looks slightly fragmentised today. It is still in the process of coming into terms with the new, self-imposed identities and it has never been easy to lose an identity of centuries to adopt another one, of which it is yet to be sure. There were also criticisms that there was "a growing belief that television had grown over-dominant, that it was beginning to 'trivialise' politics and to be careless of its effects on public morals, on the level of violence and on respect for authority" (Smith, 1974, p.17 in Franklin, 2001, p.9). British television has a better advantage and farther access into all parts of the world because of the language. "British television in producing for wealthy and populous English language speakers, thus has immediate access to a critical mass of fellow speakers often without recourse to subtitling or dubbing," Buscombe (2000, pp. 310-11). Television, while telecasting crime and terrorism related stories, to a very large extent, relates to the present social condition of the country. Sex related crimes; culture related points of view, ethnic backgrounds, racial belligerence, and most of all religious bigotry have been reflected very often. This definitely is not the majority reflection; but definitely a minority reflection that has a trouble-maker value. Television adopts the right attitude by telecasting the problems in the society. But there is a serious inherent flat in today's television and other media. One of the greatest British traits over the centuries had been the patience and privacy that had reflected more in silence than in loud talk. This national identity of the British is lost today due to the aggressive, thoughtless and insensitive media and television, which do not care for the personal privacy of the individual. This had been a negative point in present day television as well as in other forms of media. They simply forget that all individuals might not be interested in peeping through the television screen and value their privacy more than publicity. Here, British television has definitely lost the national identity in its quest of going American. Television is also portrayed as 'the end of communication and death of community'. But at the other extreme, television has been instrumental in great entertainment, information, knowledge and creating the make-believe world. The power of television is better known to a lonely pensioner, an immovable lady or to people living the last days in the Home. Instead of feeling alienated from the busy world outside, they are made to feel within the same national identity which they could have lost but for the television. Today's television is called television without frontiers and territorial value. It need not be always so. Another pertinent point is, even though Katz 1996, p.24) said that 'current affairs is being minimised, and ghettoised and overwhelmed by entertainment" his statement could be only partially true. Sometimes the television's disaster marathons, the habitual non-endingly telecasting of the most depressing visuals, almost a celebration of mourning has always been detrimental to the national British traits. The melodrama and the grieving entertainment had never been one of the national characteristics of Britain. Another point that could be made is the difference between the old way of adventurous thinking and the new way of placid thinking because today's NHS dependent Britons are not as adventurous as their ancestors. It becomes necessary to conclude that British television still has national identity as the core topic of importance, but it is not the national identity of the past. The identity has altered in the British society and it is not possible to resurrect the raw British culture once again. Britain has adopted a totally different identity, represented by all her citizens and their cultural identities, it is not surprising that the identity has undergone an unprecedented change and the television represents the altered identity of the day. This envelopes not only the political, environmental, economical, legal and administrative spheres. It also represents the social situation of the country. Gender equality, tolerance of homosexuality and lesbianism, extension of human rights, aggressive democracy, European dimension to some extent, international students and their place in the society, globalisation, burgeoning market trends, loss of fervour in religion, and more than all, a warm glow of world citizenship have become part of the British identity today and there is absolutely no doubt that the media represents the same. Even though group culture is important to a certain extent, it is necessary to realise that the British were the pioneers of geographical discovery and through their colonisation and imperial days, they had developed the world vision, much before the other countries and adapting the new far reaching identity was difficult either for the nation, or for the television. Another worth mentioning factor is the globalization that has decreased the potency of national identities. Television as perhaps the most powerful media sometimes reflects more of globalised world and less of national identity, which is not at all surprising. Television has moved on from the days of mere entertainment and has become a vehicle of tourism, environment, marketing force and on the whole, television is shrinking the world into the much touted Global Village. The fact remains that national identities are fast getting blurred especially in western countries like United Kingdom where the human mobility, temporary and permanent both are heightened. With the increased human mobility and distant possibilities national identity's strength gets lessoned. Migration to America and Australia has increased over the years and in a way, it is the television that brings these possibilities very clearly to the living room of the Britons. At the same time, we must remember that distant shores have always fascinated the Britons even centuries ago, when Great Britain was ruling the waves. BIBLIOGRAPHY: 1. Brooks, Rod, Time, National Identity and Television Schedules in the Postbroadcast age, Time Society 1998; 7; 369. 2. Buscombe, Edward (2000), British Television, Clarendon Press, Oxford. 3. Creeber, Glen (2004), 'Hideously White', Television New Media, 2004; 5; 27. 4. Franklin, Bob (2001), British Television Policy: A Reader, Routledge, London. 5. Leopald, M. (1997), Renewing our Identity, Britain, Television media, Demos, London. 6. Scriven, Michael and Roberts, Emily (2003), Group Identities on French and British Television, Berghahn Books, New York. ONLINE SOURCES: 1. http://www.institute-of-governance.org/forum/Leverhulme/briefing_pdfs/IoG_Briefing_18.pdf 2. http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/28/1974jun/436.pdf 3. http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/dsayers/academic/Sayers_narrowcasting.pdf 4. http://www.guardian.co.uk/britain/article/0,,1997381,00.html 5. Read More