Essay
The Cultural Societies Communication Theory in Practice
Radio, television, newspapers, and tabloids as well other products of media culture present materials from which the audience shapes their view of the certain happenings, regions of the world, as well as perceptions about individual countries and persons (Hammer & Kellner, 2009). Media spectacles serve to show who wields power and who is without power to act in a given manner. During the 2012 Dubai Tennis, there was much media coverage on the Dubai government’s decision to refuse travel visa to an Israel female tennis player, Shahar Peer. The Dubai Tennis tournament is among the most prestigious tournament in the world, which attracts top flight tennis players as well huge amounts of investments. The communication theory that best describes the foreign mass media coverage of the story is the Cultural Studies Theory.
According to the Cultural Studies theory, media outlets are controlled by corporations and dominant members of the society (Hammer & Kellner, 2009). As such, corporately-controlled media houses represent the dominant discourse of their owners and funders, which significantly influences the interpretation of events by the public they reach. On the other hand, the Cultural Studies theory argues that the information relayed by the mass media is typically framed and influence with profit in mind (Hammer & Kellner, 2009).
Following Dubai’s announcement of its decision to deny entry visa to the Israel female tennis player, the Western Media, Israel Media and other allies of the West and Israel, begun one-sided criticism of the decision. The Journal Europe, a newspaper published by News Corp, immediately came up with plans to pull special tennis-themed advertising segment beside withdrawing its sponsorship of the men’s tennis tournament. Other influential sponsors of the annual Dubai Tennis such as Barclays PLC, Washington Post Co.’s Newsweek, Rolex, and Sony Ericsson announced their backing of the position Women Tennis Association. The WTA had expressed disappointment in Dubai’s decision and warned it would not continue holding the tennis tournament in Dubai if the visa ban decision was not reversed. However, the WTA decided not to cancel the tournament on financial considerations although it said it would not hesitate to do so the following year if the Dubai government forbade another player on such grounds. The most impacting reaction came from the Tennis Channel, which has the U.S. broadcast rights to the Dubai Tennis Tournament, when it resolved not to televise the Dubai tournament in protest of the decision. The Tennis Channel’s reaction was further popularized by a number of local cable networks and Channel 217 hosted on Direct TV.
The Time Magazine’s coverage of the Dubai-Shahar Peer duel was almost a commentary. The Times called it ‘petty-tit-for-tat retributions” which have c haracterized the almost 60-year Israel-Arab conflict.
With Israeli politics shifting to the right since the Gaza incursion, the Jewish state may find itself even more isolated within the region. One sign of how badly the peace process has gone off track is the rise of Avigdor Lieberman, the leader of the far-right party Yisrael Beiteinu (“Israel is Our Home”) who has called for Israeli Arabs to take loyalty oaths or have their citizenship revoked. (Times Magazine, 2011).
The western/Israel Mass media played to the tenets of the Cultural Studies communication theory by not balancing the story and featuring as much the official reasons for the move from the Dubai side. The United Arab Emirates Lt. Gen. Dahi Khalfan had expressly explained that the ban had been inspired by the assassination of a Hamas operative in Dubai by the Israel’s Mossad spy agency. The Lt. Gen said,
“Mossad shouldn’t come to us. We haven’t done anything to Israel. This is an insult to us, to Britain, to Australia, to Germany and to New Zealand and it’s shameful.”
However, this was downplayed by the media instead there was much vilification of the UAE government’s decision against the Israel tennis star. Furthermore, the media overlooked the fact that Israel had not denied or confirmed whether it played a role in the killing of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh (said to have aided smuggling of weapons from Iran into the Hamas-controlled Gaza strip) while in his hotel room in Dubai. The media chose not to afford the same much coverage to the Wall Street Journal’s report that not less than 26 suspected persons of the hit squad said to have tracked and assassinated Mabhouh in Dubai had fled to the U.S. almost immediately using Irish passport. While these chains of events could have the audience to understand the reasons behind Dubai’s Israel visa ban, the mainframe media concentrated on demonizing the United Arab Emirates. It is common knowledge that Israel has a golden place in soul of Americans and Europeans, who are the main sponsors of the Dubai event as well most of the international media. It is almost certain that no such anger, outrage and partisan international media coverage would have happened were the Israeli government denying participation permission to a UAE player. The action of the media in this instance was duly in line with the Cultural Studies theory.
Reference:
Hammer, R., & Kellner, D. (2009). Media/Cultural Studies: Critical Approaches. Bern: Peter Lang.
