• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

e-ISSN: 2637-0875 Journal of Language and Communication, 7(2), 751-770, September (2020) ©Universiti Putra Malaysia Press THE GOOD AND BAD DICHOTOMY OF THE MEDIA REPRESENTATION OF HEROES AND VILLAINS IN FOOTBALL NEWS Nadhratunnaim Abas1* and Surinderpal Kaur2 1Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA Pahang, 26400 Bandar Jengka, Malaysia 2 Faculty of Languages and Linguistics, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] ABSTRACT Studies on the discourse of representation often involve good or bad values to indicate polarisation. Nevertheless, in the context of sports, literature on sportsmen’s associations with both values reveal that those who tend to be praised despite their flaws are socially included and deemed as the heroes. Meanwhile, those who tend to be blamed despite their good traits, can be regarded as the villains who are socially excluded. Thus, the paper aims to examine how the heroes and villains in the corpus of football news of an English local daily newspaper are represented to further investigate whether or not they are associated with both values. Based on the constructionist approach in the theory of representation, the study centralises on the analysis of social actors that is founded on the dimensions of good and bad which define their social inclusion or exclusion as stated according to van Dijk’s polarisation strategies. Based on the concordance analysis, the findings indicate that the actors became the heroes if their actions bring desirable outcomes and turned into the villains as they caused undesirable circumstances for their team. Hence, this may contribute to a new dimension of polarisation in which both good and bad values can define the socially included and excluded actors. Keywords: heroes, bad, football, good, media representation, villains. ARTICLE INFO Article history Received: February 9, 2020 Accepted: September 25, 2020 Published: September 30. 2020 Volume 7 Issue 2 © Penerbit Universiti Putra Malaysia Abas, N. & Kaur, S INTRODUCTION Vast literature on the representations of ‘Us’ and ‘Others’ has often been invested in the positive self and negative Others’ evaluation (see for instance, Dhoest, 2020; Cheng, 2020; Masroor et al, 2019; Degaf et al, 2019). Although this may be fairly common in most of the contexts, it may not suit those in sport. Hoffman (1992) perceived sport as unpredictable that, at times, the game may end with celebrated victories or miserable failures. Hence, it can influence how sportsmen are represented according to the positive or negative outcomes of the game. They may be praised as they succeed and blamed whenever they lose. Nevertheless, for faithful fans, they may blame their preferred sportsmen but eventually maintain their affiliation with the latter. This seems to be the case in May’s (2009) report that young men tended to disregard the negative media representation of Black male basketball players and continued to idolise them. Maneiro and Marchi (2015) viewed this as resulting from the mythical representation of sports heroes who prevail even in the face of adversity. Therefore, this seems to flout the common correlations between the dimensions of good or bad and social inclusion or exclusion. As this happens, it also unveils the overgeneralised assumption that defines polarisation according to its associations with the default values. This symbolises “automatic fitting” of the perception to the world and contributes to the naturalisation of the definition as a common-sensical notion (Fairclough, 2001). Consequently, it tends to overlook other ways in which inclusion or exclusion can occur despite relying on their associations with these values. Regardless, the definitions of good and bad in sport may also depend on how one is depicted. Mueller and Sutherland (2010) perceived sporting contests as the “metaphors of good versus evil, heroes versus villains” (p. 21). Hence, Barnes (2010) viewed sport as the narrative that compares good guys against bad guys. It may adhere to certain storylines that identify and regard one side better or worse than the other. They describe the game as the battle between good and evil that promises each side with what seems to be its rightful ending – victories as the reward for being good and defeats as the punishment for being bad. By default, while heroes represent good guys, villains represent the evil ones. The creation of such storylines exposes the role of the discourse producers who are responsible for tailoring the notions of heroes and villains according to the ideology of the institutions that they are affiliated with. According to Boyle (2006), “the sports industry has always had its pantheon of heroes and villains who have often been to a large extent created by media coverage, and sports journalism in particular” (p. 111). Therefore, the common perception about the heroes, for instance, can be constructed by “(the) information that is filtered, often sanitized, by media sources” (Wann, et al, 2001, p. 70). Coakley (2007) agreed that “media content is edited and ‘re-presented’” or “constructed” by those who “make decisions about content” based on “what attracts readers, listeners, and viewers” to “boost media profits” (pp. 404 – 405). This notion of ‘construction’ refers to “the media’s role in forming ‘frames for understanding’” (Macdonald, 2003, p. 14). Referred to as the most popular sports globally, football has been one of the most dominant sports in Malaysia (Sawe, 2018; “Fan Favorite: The Global”, 2018). The media has strived to bring the latest updates on football both locally and internationally. One of such media agencies in which football news has largely occupied its sports section is The Star, an English daily newspaper. In 2019, the survey by a market research company reported that The Star was the most read English newspaper (Chu, 2019, Sept 13). Besides reporting, the authors also tended to sensationalise the news by comparing the ‘good guys’ (as the heroes) against the ‘bad guys’ (as the villains) among the competing teams. Mueller and Sutherland (2010) 752 Journal of Language and Communication, 7(2), 751-770, September (2020) The Good and Bad Dichotomy of the Media Representation of Heroes and Villains in Football News mentioned that sports rivalries encourage fan involvement that can further boost the sales of products associated with their favourite players or teams. LaFauci (2015) pointed out that the tribal mentality of ‘us’ versus ‘them’ is specifically tailored to fit into certain narratives that are profit-based. It heightens sports enthusiasts’ excitement over the good guys’ victory or the bad guys’ loss as it is unscripted unlike those in the movies (Dalakas, 2016). In this regard, the paper aims to investigate how heroes and villains are represented in football news and whether or not the dimensions of good and bad are associated with their representation. SPORT HEROES AND VILLAINS Shuart (2007) defined “hero” as “a distinguished person, admired for their ability, bravery or noble qualities and worthy of emulation” (p. 128). According to Gammon (2014), in order to be admired, a hero must have proven himself whether or not by winning impressively or losing with honour. Delaney and Madigan (2009) categorised sport heroes into “the winner”, “skilled performers”, “social acceptability”, “group servant”, “risk takers”, “reluctant heroes”, “charismatic heroes” and “anti-heroes” (pp. 76 – 77). The winner is most often admired as the “extraordinarily skilled” who is capable of intimidating their opponents by their “presence” on the field and implying their “invincibility” (Delaney & Madigan, 2009, p. 76). In addition, Wann, et al (2001) believed that a hero has to meet certain “standards” perceived as “ideal” by the society such as “moral excellence” (pp. 70 – 71). The on- and off- the field excellence attributed to the “hero” label has been widely discussed in the studies of sport heroes (for instance, Dixon & Flynn, 2008; Parry, 2009; Gammon, 2014; Summers & Morgan, 2018; Bifulco & Tirino, 2018). The villains, on the other hand, possess traits contradicting to the heroes. Wann, et al. (2001) added that the villain label stems from their “social excesses, criminal conduct, or behaviours that violate traditional norms” which can lead to his or her public derogation (pp. 86 – 87). They are often described as “scandalous” and displaying behaviours that damage their reputation (Wann, et al. 2001, p. 86). Besides, they can also happen to be the rivals of the more popular sides (Delaney and Madigan, 2009). Through media representation, the audiences are introduced to the heroes and villains among sports casts. Louganis and Johnson, two athletes diagnosed with AIDS, were framed as heroes differently. While Louganis was seen as a “hero to gay men”, Johnson is “labelled as a courageous hero to everyone” (Wann, et al., 2001, p. 339). This demonstrates how the decision makers can “select” and “decide” on the content of the news such as in terms of who should be perceived as the “good guys”, “bad guys”, and “redemption” or “comeback stories” in order to “reproduce ideologies” that match the audiences’ preferences (Coakley, 2007, pp. 405 – 406). Bar-On (2014) related this to Mariona who was celebrated as “a ‘giant’ and one of the greatest players in the history of El Salvadoran soccer” (p. 75) and “David James, goalkeeper of the England national team in 2004” who was demonised as “a donkey” due to his mistake that “cost England victory in its match with Austria” (p. 112). ‘US’ AND ‘OTHERS’ POLARISATION The tribal mentality of ‘Us’ and ‘Others’ driven by sports rivalry can be influenced by the opinions that are constructed by an ideological pattern of polarisation. van Dijk (1998) referred to the ideological square that assigns particular value of good or bad to indicate ‘Us’ and ‘Them’ which are based on four strategies: “emphasize our good properties or actions, emphasize their bad properties or actions, Journal of Language and Communication, 7(2), 751-770, September (2020) 753 Abas, N.

Load more

  20

Copy Link