A look into the media and fake news
Since the fatal US Presidential election last year the term “fake news” has found its way into the mainstream lexicon, with it becoming Collins Dictionary’s Word of the Year 2017. In my view a silver lining to this Trump cloud is the way that the legitimacy of news media has reared its head as a subject for public discussion. I have noticed two channels of debate across the political spectrum about this topic. There has been the subject of fake news on social media, particularly the misinformation spread in the run-up to the election and there has been the constant putting down of news media by Trump himself. I’m interested to observe how these discussions evolve, but in my opinion there is another key incarnation of fake news that has been historically overlooked; celebrity.
That wasn’t the Foo Fighters themselves who decided to open that pub in East London the other week, that was the multinational media-conglomerate record label looking to gain buzz around their new product. As much as it might seem like a laugh opening a pub for a few days and filling it with fans who love the same band, this cannot be viewed as being anything other than a more demographic-tailored approach to the current pop-up merch trend akin to the ‘limited edition = increased demand = maximum buzz’ business model of streetwear brand Supreme. A translation of this business model was to be seen in the recent launch of the Double Down sandwich by KFC. Event marketing in the digital age. It’s interesting because the Foo Fighters here are no different than a brand. The music becomes incidental because consumers are unlikely to part with their money for it these days; with a refined, limited edition merch line, however, they can squeeze some profit out of fans while inspiring a few “omg I wish I was in London for that FF pub #FooFightersArms” Tweets.
You could argue in defence of the Foo Fighters that they have an established legacy in the rock music community and natural fan base. The likes of Justin Bieber and the Kardashians have no such organic cultural credentials. With careers moulded with limitless corporate cash, regarded as cultural gatekeepers by those ignorant of their true origin, they are the couriers of a manufactured culture idolised by millions. The media’s treatment of celebrities as individuals serves no purpose other than to play in to the hands of the corporate interests that benefit from them. To ensure that this system keeps on working, it is important to keep the illusion in place that their lives and decisions are not meticulously planned out by scores of personal assistants, managers, stylists and public relations practitioners. Bieber is listed in the writing credits on his album, albeit a footnote amongst a team of producers and writers. Zoella’s name is on the cover of her books, even though it was shortly after her debut novel was released it was established that it was ghostwritten.
The celebrity is nothing other than the public (human?) face of the product, the objective of which is to make it easier for the public to consume and, moreover, to cloak what is merely another cash grab put together by a subsidiary of a faceless multinational corporation. If Bieber were introduced as “Universal Music Group’s Justin Bieber” it would be an accurate representation of the fictional character he is. It would probably also hit home how concentrated industries like this really are because you’d hear the same corporations mentioned over and over again. You might say that this is just the ‘music biz’ or ‘showbiz’, but this is what Sociologist collective The Frankfurt School call The Cultural Industry in 1944. This is the constant churning out and normalising of crap which keeps the public distracted, docile and dependent on the market.
In the age of immersive non-stop media it is more important than ever that we interrogate it to understand the forces behind it. At face value you can likely appreciate the empty calories that come from a news story about Taylor Swift’s latest breakup. Public relations, nevertheless, has a profound impact on the construction of editorial and it is, therefore, not always easy to recognise what the true purpose of a story or a piece of content can be.
In the early 20th Century, the father of public relations, Edward Bernays, began pulling together techniques and ideas based on his Uncle Sigmund Freud’s psychological theories to manipulate culture through media. Whether making bacon and eggs the All-American breakfast by using doctors and newspapers or making it socially acceptable for women to smoke by using celebrities in a publicity stunt, Bernays’ techniques had a significant impact on the way information would go on to be controlled and communicated in the future. He recognised from the beginning that remaining invisible was the most effective way for a message to be conveyed in an authentic seeming way, removed from any corporate bias. Nearly a century on from the foundations being laid of this shadowy practice, you can only imagine it’s sophistication today.
As long as corporate forces continue to shroud themselves we will continue to live in a world where we are blind to the true meaning behind the media we consume. Transcending corporations, the use of the persuasive industries are available for whoever is willing to pay for them, it just happens that at the moment it’s the establishment who helped incubate it in the first place.
Culture has been commodified and sold back to us for so long now it’s hard to tell what is real and what is a corporate construct. It’s incredibly effective, all pervasive in our modern culture and it is something that needs to be taken seriously. When you next hear a story about a celebrity announcement ask yourself what the motive really is behind it, who is really benefitting from it and how this has come to be something you’ve been informed about. You’ll shortly come to realise how manufactured and fake the news media really is.
By Joseph Cahill
Edited by Maryam Elahi
