“手上沾满鲜血”vs“愚蠢的恶作剧”:英国媒体对王室致命骗局的回应

Q4 Social Sciences Journalism history Pub Date : 2023-09-11 DOI:10.1080/00947679.2023.2251357
Teri Finneman, Ryan J. Thomas
{"title":"“手上沾满鲜血”vs“愚蠢的恶作剧”:英国媒体对王室致命骗局的回应","authors":"Teri Finneman, Ryan J. Thomas","doi":"10.1080/00947679.2023.2251357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study builds upon historical scholarship of the royal family and the British press to examine a critical incident in 2012 involving future queen Kate Middleton. After radio deejays hoaxed a hospital where Middleton was a patient, a nurse inadvertently involved with the prank died by suicide, creating a global sensation. This study examines how the British press and public reacted to this breach of media ethics. Although some in the press condemned the incident, victim-blaming illustrated an evasion of responsibility when it comes to media and the royal family. The public, via letters to the editor, tended to take a firmer stance and were more apt to contextualize the hoax against a history of invasive media coverage. Overall, this study suggests the British press remains wedded to historical strategies of distancing and victim-blaming, providing little optimism about how the relationship between the press and the royal family might change.","PeriodicalId":38759,"journal":{"name":"Journalism history","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Blood on their Hands” vs. “A Foolish Prank”: The British Press’s Response to a Deadly Hoax on the Royal Family\",\"authors\":\"Teri Finneman, Ryan J. Thomas\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00947679.2023.2251357\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This study builds upon historical scholarship of the royal family and the British press to examine a critical incident in 2012 involving future queen Kate Middleton. After radio deejays hoaxed a hospital where Middleton was a patient, a nurse inadvertently involved with the prank died by suicide, creating a global sensation. This study examines how the British press and public reacted to this breach of media ethics. Although some in the press condemned the incident, victim-blaming illustrated an evasion of responsibility when it comes to media and the royal family. The public, via letters to the editor, tended to take a firmer stance and were more apt to contextualize the hoax against a history of invasive media coverage. Overall, this study suggests the British press remains wedded to historical strategies of distancing and victim-blaming, providing little optimism about how the relationship between the press and the royal family might change.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38759,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journalism history\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journalism history\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947679.2023.2251357\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journalism history","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947679.2023.2251357","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“Blood on their Hands” vs. “A Foolish Prank”: The British Press’s Response to a Deadly Hoax on the Royal Family
ABSTRACT This study builds upon historical scholarship of the royal family and the British press to examine a critical incident in 2012 involving future queen Kate Middleton. After radio deejays hoaxed a hospital where Middleton was a patient, a nurse inadvertently involved with the prank died by suicide, creating a global sensation. This study examines how the British press and public reacted to this breach of media ethics. Although some in the press condemned the incident, victim-blaming illustrated an evasion of responsibility when it comes to media and the royal family. The public, via letters to the editor, tended to take a firmer stance and were more apt to contextualize the hoax against a history of invasive media coverage. Overall, this study suggests the British press remains wedded to historical strategies of distancing and victim-blaming, providing little optimism about how the relationship between the press and the royal family might change.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journalism history
Journalism history Social Sciences-Communication
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
期刊最新文献
Thelma Berlack Boozer: A “Forgotten First” at the School of Journalism at Lincoln University The Reagan Doctrine or “Sandinista Chic”? Political Balance in the Committee to Protect Journalists’ 1982 Mission to Central America What We Talk about When We Talk about Women: Benevolent Sexism in Historical Studies of Women Journalists, 1974–2023 The Black Arts Movement and the House of Ideas The Ad Agency and Ad Content in the 1840s
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1