Page 148 - Culture Media Language Working Papers in Cultural Studies

TELEVISION NEWS AND THE SOCIAL CONTRACT 137

appropriating a topic which has already, in some measure, been prestructured,
articulated in the political discourses. The often extensive use of actuality forms
masks the specific structuring accomplished by the broadcasters. They are not
simply engaged in restating what has already been said; their appropriation of the
topic represents it as a televisual event.
What is particularly interesting here is that the process of authentication relies
upon—and constantly reaffirms—the veracity of journalistic discourse as such.
The process requires both modes of television: direct, live recording/transmission
from the studio (marked principally by direct address to camera) and the
transmission of recordings of events that have already happened (marked
principally by the lack of direct address). Each requires the other; together they
function to validate one another’s order of truth and to pose the former as the
authoritative and predominant mode. The temporal register, marked by the
system of address to camera, not only locates the studio-based discourse in the
here-and-now but simultaneously reduces the actuality discourse to its content.
The ‘elsewhere’ of activity and participation is, in and through the
juxtapositioning, made to appear as the simple substance of the ‘here-and-now’
of witnessing.
The moment of appropriation is one in which television can be said to be
dominant over politics but without obliterating the latter. The articulations
produced in the political discourses continue to exercise determination on
television’s mode of appropriation. Between the prime ministerial speeches and
what the journalists have to say about them, there is a reciprocity of perspectives.
To put it another way, the journalists’ accounts not only provide details of the
speeches, they are also positioned within the terms of reference of the speeches.
The propositions and interpretations contained in the speeches are reproduced by
the journalists’ accounts and, because these assume the form of straight reports,
are made to appear as ‘facts’.
The clue to this lies in the opening remarks of the accounts. In both examples
these remarks function as headlines; that is, they announce, in summary form, a
focus or an orientation to what follows in the main body of the account. The
orientation provided by the headline in each example is contained in the
statement that each speech received a ‘standing ovation from the TUC’. This
observation is taken to convey that what the Prime Minister had to say was ‘well
received’. In the case of example 2 this point was underscored by the current
affairs coverage of the speech later in the day. Opening an interview with Ken
Gill, General Secretary of TASS (Technical, Administrative and Supervisory
Section of the Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers) and Allen Fisher,
General Secretary of NUPE (National Union of Public Employees), Robin Day
said:

First of all gentlemen, your verdict generally on the Prime Minister’s
speech today, which was received quite warmly and, indeed, with standing
applause at the end. Mr Fisher?