ECREA16-Abstract

Thursday, November 10

0 9 : 0 0 – 1 0 : 3 0

CDE01

Representation, Minorities and Identity Politics 1

PP 051

Protest and Visibility in Times of Democratisation: A Visual Framing Analysis of the 2010 Belgrade Pride Parade’s Television Coverage

G. Aiello

, K. Parry

, A. Krstić

University of Leeds, School of Media and Communication, Leeds, United Kingdom

University of Belgrade, Faculty of Political Sciences, Belgrade, Serbia

This paper considers the 2010 Pride Parade in Belgrade as a key mediated moment through which to explore struggles for visibility between distinct

actors during a period of democratisation in Serbia. At the heart of this study are concerns around the contested spaces of the city and how such conflicts

for public spaces are represented in the media. Through a visual framing analysis of the television coverage of the Pride parade and the protests which

sought to disrupt the event, we explore how expressions of identity and nationhood are visually constructed and how the news framing choices effectively

marginalised the Pride parade and re-enacted physical and spatial barriers/divisions in the city space. Whilst we draw upon previous research focused on

Pride parades and on the mediation of protest (Johnson 2012; Johnston and Waitt, 2015), this study contributes new insights due to both the distinctly

non-celebratory coverage of the parade, and the illiberal motives of the protesters who violently oppose the event and its organisers. In these ways, the case

study does not conform to the expectations of much of the existing research in this area – where Pride offers a spectacular carnival of colour for tourists to

gaze upon; or where protesters resorting to violence is understood as a desperate tactic to ‘counter the symbolic violence of elites’(Cammaerts 2013, 545).

Four distinct ‘camps’ are portrayed in the coverage: the LGBT community, the counter-protesters, the police, and politicians. However, the four national

news programmes we analyse (RTS, Prva TV, TVB92 and Pink TV) are also political actors in the mediation of the resulting clashes. In particular, we examine

the representational, interactive and compositional meaning potentials of televisual images (Kress and Van Leeuwen 2006; Iedema 2001), to understand

the relationship between news media framing and the ways in which the different actors involved in the Pride Parade are both‘seen’and‘pictured’in public.

In particular we find Rodriguez and Dimitrova’s (2011) four-tiered model of visual framing productive for identifying dominant stylistic and symbolic fea‑

tures in the coverage, especially the degree to which protagonists are successful in claiming their right to be seen on the streets of Belgrade. We approach

the television news coverage of Belgrade Pride and the protests as offering a distinctive window into a ‘public discourse of images’ (Deluca and Peeples

2002: p133), where groups of protagonists utilise visual images to express a sense of identity, grievance or resistance. In shifting attention to the potentials

for political agency and citizenship in this mediated ‘discourse of images’, including the possibility of mis-communications and manifold interpretations,

the paper offers an alternative perspective to the traditional emphasis on dialogue and voice in democratic theory.

PP 052

Free Expression, Tolerance, Offense and Diversity: Comparing France and Denmark with the Cases of Dieudonné and Yahya Hassan

C. Elliott

University of Leeds, School of Media and Communication, Leeds, United Kingdom

When we discuss free expression, we often have to take into consideration the roles of tolerance and offence. This is especially the case when we discuss

situations where contentions regarding politics and diversity are also involved. This paper draws on two cases that offer an opportunity to consider how

these issues intersect: the cases of French comedian Dieudonné and Danish poet Yahya Hassan; both of whom are ethnic minorities who are performance

artists. In 2013, they both engaged in expression acts that have aggravated the place of religious and ethnic groups in their respective countries and ignited

debates on the parameters of free expression. If we consider free expression and secularity to be the cornerstones of (Western) democracy, then how such

controversies are discussed and mediated can influence the political climate of a given country. This then raises some questions to consider. What do media

debates on these expressive genres expose about the limits of tolerance in each country? Does this affect how free expression is contextualized in each

country? How do“critical moments”(Stanyer, 2013) shape these discussions? The dominant government position in France is secularism and in Denmark it

is egalitarianism. France has a long history of mixed people and cultures, both domestically and as a colonial power, Denmark is relatively new to become

demographically diversified. Both countries have suffered attacks in the last two years that contribute to a highly charged atmosphere when it concerns

political discussions about the place and identity of“non-ethnic”nationals and religious minorities. These themes turn to the theoretical framework of this

paper, which is based on literatures on the foundations of freedom of speech (Barendt, 2005), multiculturalism and nationalism (Modood and Meer, 2013;

Kramer, 2011) as well as media and political cultures (Richardson et al., 2013). The research design uses a comparative model in order to discuss the topic

of freedom of speech and diversity by bringing the study down to a case level, but also keeping it aligned with extended structures of comparative research

between countries (Canel and Voltmer, 2014; Hallin and Mancini, 2004). In this paper, I will present findings of a thematic analysis of 19 hours of interviews

from Paris and Copenhagen. The interviews were in-person interviews with 21 activists, politicians, lawyers and journalists. I argue in the paper that what

the cases reveal, is that they are not only relevant to a conversation on freedom of speech, but also point to sensitive issues related to citizenship, social

diversification and political tensions using a comparative angle. Both country contexts discuss political orientations and involve philosophical deliberations

on how society should be. As borders are more fluid, social structures and cultural norms as well as politics are challenged with the prevalence of far-right

political parties and contestations involving the normalization of speech practices.

Communication and Democracy

(CDE01–CDE17)