IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socres/v28y2023i2p558-576.html

The Cutaway to the Toilet: Towards a Visual Grammar of Spatial Stigma in Factual Welfare Television

Author

Listed:
  • Jayne Raisborough

    (Leeds Beckett University, UK)

  • Lisa Taylor

    (Leeds Beckett University, UK)

  • Katherine Harrison

    (Leeds Beckett University, UK)

  • Shelly Dulson

    (Independent Research Associate)

Abstract

Editing techniques used in Factual Welfare Television (FWT) in the UK undermine narratives of hardship and structural inequality in representations of the living places of welfare claimants. This research identifies the affects of a televisual syntax – or ‘visual grammar’ – of spatial stigma in FWT. Using original data generated in a study of Channel 5’s documentary series On Benefits (2015–2019), we conduct a visual grammar analysis to argue that cutaway editing, which inserts camera shots of toilets, canine excrement, and fly-tipping into programmes, undermines potentially sympathetic representations of poverty communicated via narrator voiceovers, and/or verbal testimonies of participants. Our findings show that cutaway editing is a significant feature in the production of On Benefits and is oppositional to the articulated narrative. The research concludes that cutaway editing in FWT generates disgust towards the living places of benefits claimants, which is productive of a powerful visual grammar of spatial stigma.

Suggested Citation

  • Jayne Raisborough & Lisa Taylor & Katherine Harrison & Shelly Dulson, 2023. "The Cutaway to the Toilet: Towards a Visual Grammar of Spatial Stigma in Factual Welfare Television," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 28(2), pages 558-576, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:28:y:2023:i:2:p:558-576
    DOI: 10.1177/13607804211066118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/13607804211066118
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/13607804211066118?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Katherine Harrison & Jayne Raisborough & Lisa Taylor, 2021. "From Streetscapes to Sofas: Representations of Place and Space in Britain’s Benefit Blackspots," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 26(2), pages 377-393, June.
    2. Jayne Raisborough & Matt Adams, 2008. "Mockery and Morality in Popular Cultural Representations of the White, Working Class," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 13(6), pages 1-13, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kathy Arthurson & Michael Darcy & Dallas Rogers, 2014. "Televised Territorial Stigma: How Social Housing Tenants Experience the Fictional Media Representation of Estates in Australia," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(6), pages 1334-1350, June.
    2. Elias Le Grand, 2015. "Linking Moralisation and Class Identity: The Role of Ressentiment and Respectability in the Social Reaction to ‘Chavs’," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 20(4), pages 18-32, November.
    3. Karen Soldatic & Helen Meekosha, 2012. "The Place of Disgust: Disability, Class and Gender in Spaces of Workfare," Societies, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-18, September.
    4. Ruben Flores, 2013. "When Charity Does Not Begin at Home: Exploring the British Socioemotional Economy of Compassion," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 18(1), pages 50-60, February.
    5. Michelle Addison & Victoria & G. Mountford, 2015. "Talking the Talk and Fitting In: Troubling the Practices of Speaking? ‘What you are Worth’ in Higher Education in the UK," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 20(2), pages 27-39, May.
    6. Imogen Tyler, 2013. "The Riots of the Underclass?: Stigmatisation, Mediation and the Government of Poverty and Disadvantage in Neoliberal Britain," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 18(4), pages 25-35, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:28:y:2023:i:2:p:558-576. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.