Is exposure or censorship the best way to beat the BNP asks Paul Donovan
The election of two British National Party MEPs has thrown up a number of dilemmas for the media in this country. The recurring question concerns how the BNP ought to be reported. Should it be treated as any other party, made subject to scrutiny and thereby exposed for the racist and fascist organisation it is? Or, in the spirit of Margaret Thatcher’s broadcasting ban on Sinn Fein the 1980s, should the BNP be censored out of the media as much as possible and denied the oxygen of publicity?
The coverage of the BNP in the run up to the European elections gave it plenty of opportunity to put its views across. It had a party political broadcast on prime-time television. This was put together carefully, emphasising the BNP as standing for law and order. There was no mention of the racist policies that demand the repatriation of ethnic minorities.
While many papers and broadcast outlets carried exposés of the BNP and its leader, Nick Griffin, there was also concern that the far right’s vote would increase due to the widespread disgust at the expenses scandal at Westminster. In the event, it seems that UKIP profited more from this. There is, though, a very real danger of the BNP gaining more support as a result of the increased media coverage it has received and the fact that it now has elected representatives in the European Parliament. The concern is that publicity allows the BNP to portray itself as a victim and a voice for truth in the wilderness.
An alternative approach to exposure would be to censor the BNP in the way that Thatcher claimed she was doing with her Government’s broadcasting ban on Sinn Fein. Something similar now might include simply not covering the BNP’s various activities. It could mean actors speaking the words of Griffin and his acolytes. The problem is that this approach would be likely to add to the allure of the organisation and possibly strengthen the resolve of those inclined to support it. Certainly, the broadcasting ban did not do much damage to Sinn Fein. Many commentators argued it actually had the opposite affect and that Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness dubbed sounded rather better than they did in real life. Their message was still communicated and given added value by the ban.
Simply ignoring the BNP totally or keeping it off the airwaves seems unlikely to be effective, if the aim is to reduce the impact of the party. We need to realise that the BNP is quite sophisticated in its dealing with the media. Its representatives do play the race card, but often only when they think it will be beneficial to them.
During an interview on Radio 4’ s Today programme on the day after the European election results and in response to questions about black and Asian people being barred from BNP membership, Griffin accused the BBC of being fixated on race. He said: “It is the BBC that has a black Friar Tuck in Robin Hood for heaven’s sake. That is race-obsessed craziness.”
The BNP’ s extremist nature was revealed, but how many listening also wondered about Griffin’s black Friar Tuck rant set against the background of constant media attacks on the corporation concerning “political correctness gone mad”? To what extent did the interview expose Griffin and his party as racist or shore up the BNP’s profile as a voice of dissent?
The constant anti-immigration coverage of many right wing newspapers helps to create a fertile ground for the BNP to exploit. Nor do persistent references to the dubious opinions of right-wing think tank Migration Watch help to give a balanced approach of the issue.
The decision of many white working-class people to desert the Labour Party was probably the single biggest contributor to the BNP vote at this year’s European elections. Traditional Labour voters felt let down by the party and were looking to give it a bloody nose. The question now is: can Labour do enough to win back those people from the BNP at the next general election? The fear is that the Labour Government will take the approach it has in the past to the threat of the far right, which has been to become even more reactionary itself in areas such as immigration.
While publicity has helped the BNP, there are many discontented voters in this country and, as a consequence of warped reporting of immigration in the right-wing press, significant numbers of them mistakenly believe their very way of life is under threat. The BNP is adept at exploiting these fears. It needs to be exposed via robust reporting and interviewing, but this cannot be done in isolation. The social, economic and political factors fuelling the fascists’ growth must also be tackled. l
