Lecture 02 | Media, social Movements & Politics

Being a media student, we are fully aware that every one needs a forum for getting heard and reaching to the desired audience. Mass media invariably provide a platform for discursive opportunity structure to social movement actors. It also constitutes essential opportunities and constraints for social movements. It may always be kept in mind that social movement actors always act in what Ferree et al. (2002) have aptly described “media master forum” which highly receives greater influence from political actors. Politicians always have a greater sway on mass media. For instance, trivial activities or misspellings of political actors succeed in making news on media channels. If citizens of an area launch a movement in any areas of Sindh for provision of safe drinking water, proper medical facilities etc, they will be considered to be a competitor by local political actors.

Political organizations succeed in organizing their voters and party workers in any event. On the other hand movement actors propose their discourses and put forth their demands to gain attention, support and sympathy from a wide range of publics on “media master forum”. Social movement actors need as greater support as possible because they movements are not based on any organizational level. In this way, political spectrum and public opinion is the target of attention of movement actors.

When movement actors in gaining attention of media, public and politicians, they come in direct competition with more institutionalized political actors. When movement actors propose their discourses on local environmental, economic, cultural issues of community and movement finally come to a logical conclusion, they become competitors of mainstream political actors. Political actors feel threatened by the movement actors. This competition is not violent but based on discourses.

At this stage it becomes utmost important for movement actors to frame their beliefs, demands and objectives which is in resonance with greatly and widely held societal beliefs. This framing helps movements to get greater support from a wide range of public. Moreover, such framing of discourses in such a way will also be essential for gaining symbolic power which eventually becomes fundamental for political mobilization. If the discourse is framed otherwise, it will directly affect the movement itself. 

In this context we may take example of recent Women Movement in Pakistan which started in 2018. Indeed those movement actors were strongly criticized for forming slogans like “Khana mein garam kar lun gi, bistar khud garam kar lena”, “Agar dupatta itna pasand hai to aankhon per baandh lo” and few other slogans on sanitary pads etc. Such slogans did not expand scope of the movement and turned it subject to criticism. On the other hand, in 2019 the slogans were much better like “Mere jahez ki naheen meri taleem ki fikr karo”. No portion of society will go against this demand because in a traditional society like ours such slogans are more acceptable.

In these circumstances of discursive competition between movement actors and political actors, focus of both the actors remain at gaining ability to affect mass media for obtaining symbolic power for two purposes: (1) mobilising masses politically and; (2) becoming and establish themselves autonomous sources of conflict.