JANUARY MOCK REVISION
LFTVD:
- Q3 will have a representation focus, although is still a synoptic question (30 marks)
- Q4 will be on representation theorists (choice of 2)
Question 4
How to structure answer:
TERMINOLOGY
GENRE HYBRIDISATION (COMBINATION)
- Genres are combining together. Stranger Things is the best example of this: rom-com, horror, coming-of-age, high school movie, romance, mystery, police procedural, 80's
NARRATIVE (STORY) ENIGMAS (MYSTERY/GAP)
- Stranger Things: Where is Will? What is the upside down?
- Lupin: Fewer than Stranger Things. How has Assane become this successful whilst also failing so badly at his parenting and marriage? What has actually happened to his dad babakar?
OLIGOPOLIES:
- When a few companies exert significant control over a given market
___________________________________________________________________________________
KEY HISTORICAL CONTEXTS (UPDATED FOR GUARDIAN + DAILY MAIL)
These are the exact historical factors OCR want students to reference — and they directly explain why the Guardian supports the Budget and why the Mail attacks it.
⭐ A. Longstanding Political Partisanship in British Newspapers
The UK press has been politically aligned since the 19th century.
Daily Mail → Conservative-supporting; anti-tax, anti-Labour economics since the Northcliffe era.
The Guardian → progressive, centre-left since the Manchester Guardian days; traditionally supports social investment.
How this shapes Budget coverage:
Mail historically opposes Labour taxation → frames Reeves’ Budget as harmful.
Guardian historically supports redistributive policy → frames Budget more positively.
Where to use this: PRODUCTION + CONSUMPTION
Production: editorial stance shapes headlines and selection of economic arguments.
Consumption: audiences choose papers reinforcing their political identity.
⭐ B. Historical Development of Newspaper Formats (Broadsheet vs Mid-Market Tabloid)
Broadsheets historically target educated, middle-class audiences → emphasis on analysis and policy detail.
Mid-market tabloids use simplified, emotive framing for mass audiences.
Budget links:
Guardian explains policy impacts, quoting analysts, referencing fiscal frameworks.
Mail uses emotional or fear-based framing around “tax hikes,” “squeezed families,” etc.
Use this to explain: Production (tone, content) + Consumption (audience habits).
⭐ C. Rise of Mass Literacy & Popular Press (19th–20th Century)
Enabled the growth of national newspapers with distinct ideological identities.
Mail’s huge early 20th-century success → populist, sensational economics coverage.
Guardian’s growth linked to educated, reformist readership.
Impact today:
These historical audience bases STILL shape the way Budget stories are coded and received.
⭐ D. Digital Transformation (21st Century)
All OCR Q3 answers must use this — it's compulsory.
Influence on production:
Creation of Budget explainers, live economic coverage, interactive graphics (Guardian).
Mail Online producing rapid, sensational push-notification headlines.
Influence on distribution:
Guardian = open-access digital model, global reach.
Daily Mail Online = one of the world’s biggest news websites.
Influence on consumption:
Younger, mobile-first audiences consume Guardian content via apps/social media.
Older, conservative-leaning audiences consume Mail via print and online.
Historical link:
The digital shift evolved from earlier technological changes (rotary press, colour printing, online-first models).
⭐ E. Ownership History & Historical Editorial Influence
Daily Mail → long tradition of strong editorial stance, now under DMGT.
Guardian → owned by the Scott Trust for over 80 years, historically committed to public-interest journalism.
Budget coverage link:
Guardian’s Trust model → independence → supportive, critical-but-balanced tone.
Mail’s commercial model → populist framing → dramatic economic narratives.
✅ 4. STUDENT STRUCTURE FOR Q3 (10 marks, AO1+AO2)
This is the structure that reliably hits Level 3.
⭐ INTRO
Name Guardian & Daily Mail
Mention historical contexts influence production, distribution, consumption
Identify Budget coverage difference as an example
⭐ PARA 1 — PRODUCTION (Historical influences)
Possible points:
Political alignment (left vs right)
Historical readership identities
Broadsheet vs tabloid conventions
Ownership influence
Tabloidisation history (Mail)
Guardian’s tradition of detailed policy analysis
Tie to the Budget:
Guardian → frames Reeves as credible
Mail → frames Reeves as dangerous / raising taxes
⭐ PARA 2 — DISTRIBUTION (Historical media development)
National distribution networks → modern print sales
Shift to online → websites, apps, push notifications
Guardian’s open-access digital strategy
Mail’s global online expansion
Budget link:
Guardian’s online explainers attract digital audiences
Mail’s push notifications use emotionally-loaded economic framings
⭐ PARA 3 — CONSUMPTION (Historical audience patterns)
Guardian: historically educated, liberal, younger → consumes detailed Budget breakdowns
Mail: historically older, Conservative → consumes Budget news through ideological lenses
Historical audience loyalty shapes present-day interpretations
⭐ CONCLUSION
Summarise how historical factors continue to shape how the Budget is represented and consumed today.
✅ 5. SENTENCE STARTERS (FOR GUARDIAN/MAIL + BUDGET)
⭐ Political / Production
“Historically, British newspapers have been politically partisan, which explains why the Daily Mail continues to frame Labour Budgets negatively…”
“The Guardian’s long-standing centre-left editorial stance shapes its more supportive representation of Reeves’ economic policy…”
“Broadsheet conventions developed historically to prioritise analysis, which is reflected in the Guardian’s detailed Budget coverage…”
⭐ Distribution
“The shift from print to digital distribution has transformed how both newspapers present Budget stories…”
“Historically, national print distribution allowed newspapers to shape public understanding of major events like the Budget…”
⭐ Consumption
“The Mail’s traditional Conservative audience historically expects criticism of Labour tax policy, shaping how they consume Budget coverage…”
“The Guardian’s digital-native readership consumes Budget news through data visualisations, explainers, and live blogs…”
✔ balanced
✔ comparative
✔ analytical
✔ evaluative
✔ exactly what OCR expects in a “how far” question
- Media industries are dominated by a small number of conglomerates.
- This leads to narrow viewpoints, lack of diversity, and profit-driven production.
- Independent ownership = more creativity and alternative voices.
- Owned by DMGT, a long-running media corporation → supports concentration of ownership.
- Strong right-wing stance repeated for decades → supports limited ideological diversity.
- Tabloid conventions used to maximise commercial appeal → supports profit-driven logic.
- Mail Online uses click-driven, sensational content → fits Curran & Seaton’s argument.
- Owned by The Scott Trust, NOT a conglomerate → contradicts the theory.
- Editorial independence protected → diverse viewpoints maintained.
- Not primarily profit-driven; aims for public value journalism.
- A digital-first model based on subscriptions/donations → does not fit the idea of commercial limitation.
- Oversimplifies the industry: doesn’t account for ideological motivation (Mail isn’t only profit-driven).
- Cannot fully explain the Guardian’s unique Trust model.
- Underestimates audience influence in digital media.
- Ignores the political polarisation shaping coverage of events (e.g., confidence vote pages).
“Therefore, Curran & Seaton’s theory is useful in explaining the Mail’s concentrated ownership and ideological consistency, but is less effective in explaining the Guardian’s independent structure and alternative voice.”
- Media industries minimise risk and maximise profit.
- They use familiar genres, repetition, and vertical/horizontal integration.
- Conglomerates dominate; creativity is restricted.
- Repetitive political narratives (“Boris strong”, “Labour dangerous”) → low-risk content.
- Sensationalism = commercial strategy for profit maximisation.
- Mail Online uses highly clickable, emotionally driven content.
- The Mail fits Hesmondhalgh’s model of predictable, profitable media.
- Investigative journalism and detailed analysis are high-risk, low-profit.
- The Guardian maintains editorial independence → not commercialised content.
- Its Trust ownership contradicts the assumption that all media aims for profit.
- A digital subscription model shows creativity, not formulaic production.
- Overemphasises profit: ignores ideological purpose (Mail’s agenda is political as well as commercial).
- Fails to explain non-profit, public-value journalism like the Guardian.
- Doesn’t account for digital crowdfunding, membership, and global audiences.
- Ignores political identity’s influence on content creation.
“Hesmondhalgh is very effective in explaining the Mail’s commercial strategy, but his theory is far less useful when analysing the Guardian’s non-profit model and public-interest journalism.”
- Regulation must balance protecting citizens and supporting choice/competition.
- Digital media makes regulation harder.
- Traditional frameworks struggle in a convergent media world.
- Light regulation of print (IPSO) allows strong ideological messaging.
- Online comments & social sharing → difficult to regulate harmful or extreme content.
- Headlines can be sensational without broadcast-style restrictions.
- Guardian maintains high editorial standards beyond IPSO → self-regulation stronger than external regulation.
- Its online presence still faces the regulatory challenges Livingstone & Lunt describe.
- Produces more balanced political content → may reduce need for stricter regulation.
- Regulation alone does not explain ideological differences.
- The theory doesn’t consider ownership or political alignment.
- Not all newspapers operate at the risky edge of regulation (Guardian rarely does).
- Theory focuses on harm & choice, not ideology.
“Livingstone & Lunt help explain why online newspapers are difficult to regulate, but the theory is limited in explaining the ideological differences between the Guardian and the Mail.”
- “Therefore, the theory is useful to an extent but does not fully explain ideological or ownership differences.”
- “The theory explains the Mail more effectively than the Guardian.”
- “Although the theory helps illuminate industry pressures, it is limited as a complete explanation.”
- “Overall, the theory offers a partial but not comprehensive understanding of the newspaper industry.”
Theorist | Apply to Daily Mail | Apply to Guardian | Limitations |
|---|---|---|---|
Curran & Seaton | Conglomerate, narrow ideology | Independent Trust, diversity | Oversimplifies; ignores ideology |
Hesmondhalgh | Profit-driven, low-risk formats | Public-interest, low-profit | Doesn’t fit non-profit models |
Livingstone & Lunt | Light regulation = strong ideology | Self-regulation strong | Doesn’t explain political differences |
When comparing this theory to online news, it could link to the Daily Mail Online. The Daily Mail is a right-wing newspaper owned by DMGT. The Daily Mail online could link to this theory as it is proft-driven. This is seen through the 'side bar of shame' on their website. On the day of the budget, the sidebar of shame had stories on Sydney Sweeney in a bikini. This shows that the Daily Mail relies a lot on celebrity gossip in order to make profit.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Comments
Post a Comment