|Appears in Collections:||Communications, Media and Culture Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||"Scrounger-bashing" as national pastime: the prevalence and ferocity of anti-welfare ideology on niche-interest online forums|
|Citation:||Morrison J (2021) "Scrounger-bashing" as national pastime: the prevalence and ferocity of anti-welfare ideology on niche-interest online forums. <i>Social Semiotics</i>, 31 (3), pp. 383-401. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2021.1930859|
|Abstract:||Recent research has noted the persistence of a long continuum of “anti-welfare” discourses that are increasingly embedded in the UK news media, political communication, and popular culture (e.g. Golding and Middleton Citation1982. Images of Welfare: Press and Public Attitudes to Poverty. Oxford: Mark Robertson; Jensen Citation2014. “Welfare Commonsense, Poverty Porn and Doxosophy.” Sociological Research Online 19 (3): 277–283; Morrison 2019. Scroungers: Moral Panics and Media Myths. London: Zed Books). Historical distinctions between the “deserving” and “undeserving poor” have been sharpened by successive governments in the service of varying shades of neoliberal governance. While Margaret Thatcher castigated “shirkers” in fostering an ideology of economic self-reliance, both New Labour and the Coalition obsessed over “welfare reform”: promoting an ideology of “work” in symbolic opposition to supposed cultures of “worklessness”. But, while “scroungerphobia” (Deacon Citation1978. “The Scrounging Controversy: Public Attitudes Towards the Unemployed in Contemporary Britain.” Social Policy and Administration 12 (2): 120–135) is now a widely recognised sociological phenomenon, scholarly attention to the concept has largely been reserved for its manifestation in tabloid newspapers, political rhetoric and, latterly, “poverty porn” television. Even recent work considering the public’s contribution to scrounger discourse(s) on social media focuses on mainstream platforms, such as Twitter and newspaper comment threads (e.g. Van Der Bom et al. Citation2018. “‘It’s not the Fact They Claim Benefits but Their Useless, Lazy, Drug Taking Lifestyles we Despise’: Analysing Audience Responses to Benefits Street Using Live Tweets.” Discourse, Context & Media 21: 36–45; Morrison 2019. Scroungers: Moral Panics and Media Myths. London: Zed Books; Paterson Citation2020). This paper begins to address this oversight, by examining how normative anti-welfare discourses infiltrate everyday communication in more disparate online communities – including niche consumer forums. It draws on previously unpublished findings from an analysis of welfare-related conversations in these and other spaces at the height of a recent moral panic over “scroungers”: the period from 2013-2016, when Conservative-led governments strove to legitimise sweeping benefit cuts and punitive “welfare reform”.|
|Rights:||© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.|
|Scrounger-bashing as national pastime - Social Semiotics.pdf||Fulltext - Published Version||1.74 MB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
This item is protected by original copyright
A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.