Page 263 - Communication and Citizenship Journalism and the Public Sphere

252 COMMUNICATION AND CITIZENSHIP

to have been discussed with reference to those depicted as either falsely
charged by one or other of the tabloid papers, or as without the
resources adequately to defend themselves against their unwanted
inquiries. What have not been discussed are those instances where a
public figure adopts and promotes as universally applicable a certain
moral or legal position ‘in public’, which that figure then violates or
contradicts ‘in private’. As was said earlier, such situations have an
almost magnetic pull on the tabloid press.
What do the tabloid papers’ revelations amount to? At one level, they
can be seen to impose a form of discipline. The papers can, as we have
seen, turn nasty. Their publicity of ‘private’ wrongdoing is an ever-
present threat to those contemplating actions which might be taken as
deviant. The morality by which they target their ‘victims’ is, however,
rarely spelled out. Much more work needs to be done to be able to say
more definitely what this morality consists of. At this stage, we can say
that, whatever the precise characteristics of the morality, it is held to be
universally applicable. This is never stated explicitly, but it is
presumed. On this score, the papers are open to criticism since the
morality is not applied evenly across all their forms of coverage.
Some final remarks have to be made with regard to privilege. On this
matter, the papers are deeply ambiguous. It seems too far-fetched to
suggest that the papers express an aversion to the privileges of the stars.
Nowhere was there evidence that these papers were suggesting on a
regular basis that the stars, and the other types of public figure who
were the subjects of their revelations, should be stripped of their
privileges, still less that the privileges they possessed were a symptom
of systemic inequality. Nevertheless, the characterization of some
subjects as loathsome was often related to earnings and/or to lifestyles
which depended upon considerable earnings. Perhaps behind such
characterization there lurked a feeling that could not find adequate
expression, namely that very few stars deserve the privileges that come
their way. Whatever is to be concluded on this point, one thing is
certain. The stories presented the privileges as questionable. They were
not presented as attributes of stardom (or other public office) which
could be taken for granted.
Speaking personally, I found reading these stories fun. Of course
since I have to be analytically interested in them, I have to ask why, and
moreover, why others might find reading them similarly or equally
pleasurable. In my view, the pleasure comes from the acts of revelation
as such. They engender a reaction of the sort —‘well, you’ll never
believe what I’ve just read about so-and-so’. But there was also a