Responding to prejudiced agendas were a daily occurring for Amardeep when he entered regional/mainstream journalism. He told the audience how editors firstly wanted to know the ethnicity of those involved when he joined the press agency in Birmingham to provide copy/features for national newspapers. “They were very blatant and would ask, are they of the truer faith? I.e. were they white and if they weren't, I could hear the interest wane on the other end. In that respect things have changed. What might have made two or three paragraphs because it was an Asian family, now will make the headlines.”

He then spoke about choosing to write about issues that were affecting Asians but as a journalist rather than an ethnic minority to introduce better quality stories. “Only after I had a strong foundation on reporting on all issues that I thought I’m deliberately now going to go out of my way to report on ethnic and Asian issues. Mainly because in Birmingham, the papers there weren't covering them very well and obviously because I’m brown there's more of a chance of me getting a story.”

Amardeep ended by hooking the debate on the importance of seeing yourself as part of a professional community first and foremost. “I’m a journalist; I don't have many ethical dilemmas. If it’s a good story it’s a good story. I don't care who it pisses off. That’s the way it should be.”

Rajeev Syal

Addressing whether mainstream media does engage ethnic minorities in a meaningful way, Rajeev talked about an inherent conservatism that he has come across in his career in the broadsheets. “If you’re a Hindu or Sikh you are more likely to be given a fair crack of the whip than if you're Muslim or if it’s a story on black on black crime. The attitude that is still present amongst national newspapers is well they do that don't they?”

But he believed there has been a sea change in national newspapers and TV. “Since I started off in 1993, a conscious attitude, sometime a little patronizing…is to include a certain type of minority.” This includes “the millionaires, the educational, aspiring parts of our communities.” Rajeev added that this was something that wasn’t “going to change overnight” but said he was hopeful that “we will get there.”

Questions from the audience

Question 1

One of the questions raised was about the religious press and its significance in Britain. Humera responded to this and acknowledged a “historical allergic reaction to religion in the mainstream media and even black anti racist movements” and that she kept cuttings “which show Islamaphobic tendencies.” She offered the perspective that though there has been an emergence of faith voices in the press, “the Jewish Chronicle, Catholic Times, Tablet etc. …they don’t always deal with diversity, that’s why people move away from those things, because they may be Christian, but as a black Christian, they can't connect with Tablet.”

She proposed being conscious of the different challenges that communities have amongst themselves, with their own confusions and conflicts and how they can relate to the media In particular she spoke about Muslims who seem to end up in a defensive and apologetic corner. She said: “We’re all are presented as crazy nutters, rampant terrorists, so therefore are always going against the tide. It’s always ‘Hey people, we have eggs for breakfast, go play football on Sunday, we're really lovely and we support football you know. We don't even get to reporting anything, before have to have all the stuff that goes before.”

Question 2

The second key question related to the Commissioner Ian Blair’s comments about the bias in the press when reporting crimes by or on people of colour and made references to the Soham murders [The Metropolitan Police chief accused the media of being institutionally racist and gave an example by citing the disproportionate attention to the murder of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman] as one example of what he was saying. It was put to the panel: “What can you do to get rid of that bias?”

One of the responses was from Sadaf, who mentioned working on a documentary on death in police custody and at how the issue of bias came up repeatedly at The Voice. She recommended speaking to families of those involved in these cases rather than the media solely relying on police accounts. “I spoke to the sister of a man who had died in police custody who was actually furious because she said that the police have a history of releasing information, of misrepresenting victims, and actually it was unfair of the police to target the media on its own.”

Conclusions

All of the panelists, who have spent a number of years working within mainstream media institutions, pointed out how it was still blighted by ‘monolithic representations’ of ethnic minority communities. Whether it is ‘Muslim nutters’ or ‘Asian rich lists’, there is still a propensity to stick with simplistic stereotypes and selective voices.

The challenges ahead, identified initially by Sunny and a running theme throughout, was of becoming producers of meaning and setting the agenda rather than simply reacting. Humera recommended re-defining what makes news, with the setting up of new independent magazines like Q-News.

The ambitions were to embrace British centric perspectives which have to uncomfortably respond to different interpretations of culture, race and religion. Ethnic media was criticized for moving away from these ideals, and at times reflecting similarly prejudiced agendas around inter-ethnic issues. However, Sadaf gave examples of how black media like The Voice was challenging particular media biases e.g. around the reporting of deaths in police custody.