1. Introduction
2. Representation
3. Telling the Truth
4. Frontline
5. Additional Texts
6. Assessment Task

Introduction

The discussion that follows explaining how Module C fits into the course structure is adapted from "Play it Again Sam" ( A review of the NSW Stage 6 English  Syallabus) by Eva Gold and Wendy Michaels, Metaphor Issue 1 and 2, 2006

In Module A students explore the composers' context. They come to understand the ways the issues and values of the context are reflected in or have shaped the form, structure, language features and meaning of the text. The emphasis is very much on what the composers' context brings to the text and our exploration of these aspects of the text enrich our understanding of meanings as much as the process of how meaning is made.

In Module B the focus shifts to the context of the composer. This acknowledges the role of the responder's experiences and knowledge in making meaning from the text. Students must consider how conditions in their own context shape their own reading of the text. They must also consider how conditions in other people's context must also shape their readings of the text.

In Module C our attention turns to how specific uses of language shape meaning in texts. We undertake a close analysis of how particular aspects of language shape meaning within the text. In Module C we are working from within the text and thinking about how these aspects of the text contribute to making meaning. Every text is constructed to achieve a particular purpose and it is this idea of 'constuctedness' that is at the heart of the module.

The aspects we explore are quite specific in the syllabus rubric: medium of production, textual form, perspective and choice of language. None of these are discrete. They work in concert with or arise out of each other to make meaning.

In our course, the set text is 6 episodes of Frontline (Sitch et al). Frontline is an imaginary current affairs programme and the series combines elements of sit-com and 'behind the scenes' documentary to create an entertaining and fictional account of the 'reality' of current affairs journalism in Australia. Frontline is considered within the context of the elective 'Telling the truth'. The challenge for us is to consider the issues that arise when a particular group of texts, current affairs and investigative journalism, are expected to 'tell the truth' within a commercial framework. Like all media texts they are subject to commercial pressures - ratings, competition, sponsorship, politics.

The position of these texts in the public arena invests both the texts and their 'truths' credibility. Sitch et al's Frontline series challenges this credibility and presents a very different perspective of current affairs television and the professional and ethical goals ascribed to by Australian journalists. Through satire, the series argues that current affairs television programmes are subjected and respond to the same constraints as other media products - they are made for money. We have to site Frontline within its context. Frontline itself is a media construction. It too must 'rate' and Sitch et al had serious issues to raise. In this sense the text is a post modern construct - it is entertaining and it does provoke us to stop, think about and reconsider our expectations of media products.

Representation

There are two key points to understanding the broader term Representation as distinct from the term 'representing'. In our syllabus 'representing' is clearly defined as the obverse of viewing. It is concerned with the process of visual composition.

The first of these two key points is that form, structure and language features are central to the notion of Representation. Form, Structure and language features are familiar terms to HSC English students. They are referred to frequently in the syllabus and in the marking guidelines that no doubt your teachers have shared with you over your course.

The second key point in understanding Representation is that it contains the notion that words, sound and images - the elements of language- are not the thing itself.

Representations do not simply present reality rather they construct a particular version of reality and this, of course, has implications for our thinking about 'telling the truth'. We are frequently invited, by a variety of media texts, to unquestioningly accept the 'spin on reality', while some media texts are predicated on challenging the 'spin'. Satiric texts in contemporary media perform this role. I'm thinking here of programmes such as The Glasshouse, The Chasers War on Everything, Little Britain, Southpark and let's not forget The Simpson's. Another group of texts that performs this function in contemporary media is current affairs.

Telling the Truth

The notion of 'telling the truth' comes with assumptions about objective information and 'facts'. Any generation of a list of texts that we could expect to be 'telling the truth', such as documentary, historical evidence, research, statistics, biography, journalism, immediately raise questions about whose 'truth'. Consider the implications of the use of the word 'non fiction'. What does non fiction imply? Put simply not fiction but I also think it is used in the sense of 'about the real world' as if texts that are not fiction are more 'real' than fiction texts. In this lexicon current affairs programmes are 'non-fiction'. One of the joys and strengths of Frontline is the way it blurs the line between fiction and non-fiction and demonstrates the ways that the medium of television frequently blurs that line.

Our recognition of the role perspective plays in shaping meaning and the language choices we make to express meaning should lead us to recognise that the notion of 'objective' fact is limiting. When we recognise in ourselves that we respond to situations and events out of a context we acknowledge the subjectivity of statements of truth. We also must acknowledge that 'reality' and truth are not interchangeable.

Our examination of Frontline should be a critical study of the ways in which Sitch et al's text suggests how commercial television current affairs programs go about representing their truths. It should also consider the ways the 'behind-the-scene sit com' frame story constructs its own truth statements about how commercial current affairs programs operate within a specific network ideology. We can and should evaluate the composers' representation of current affairs television.

Frontline, Representation and Telling the Truth

The syllabus rubric is also quite specific about the framework for examining the set text. We need to examine how truth statements are "explored, tested, and endorsed or refuted". A question that arises is why these texts? That is: current affairs television. One response is that they are enormously popular. They are programmed on every network and compete aggressively for a share of the viewing audience. This may be because they successfully market themselves to dramatise the events, people and situations of everyday life. They do comment on the political, social, economic and cultural landscape in which we live and this too may explain their popularity. We all want to know the 'goss'. However I would also suggest that viewers expect current affairs television to assist them in exploring, testing, refuting or endorsing truth statements made in the public arena. As I suggested earlier, Frontline blurs the line between fiction and fact and implies that current affairs television similarly blurs that line, reducing its usefulness to the viewing public.

Frontline uses the tools of satire, parody, exaggeration and humour, to 'test' the authoritative voice and ultimately refute its ability to make truth statements. It uses the 'behind the scenes' frame story to characterise Mike as foolish, ego driven and superficial in direct contrast to his on screen persona. Mike is also juxtaposed against the journalists Marty and Brooke and the researcher Emma, who are all makers of 'truth statements'. Both Brooke and Marty are also seen both on and off screen. Brooke is represented on screen as 'sincere and compassionate', while Marty is the 'serious investigator', both representations in direct and humorous contrast to their off screen character. All are shown to be compromised by the commercial imperatives of a network current affairs programme.

Throughout the episodes set for study there are numerous examples of the ways in which the medium of television disguises the constructed realities it represents. Brooke's use of the edit in 'Add sex and stir', replayed at infinitum by HSC students in Frontline essays, and Marty's famous flak jacket in 'The Siege' are really quite superficial evidence of a more significant concern about the ways in which the processes of television production when coupled with the need to 'rate' present a reality that is largely unquestioned by viewers, not because they don't care but because the medium of television disguises its constuctedness and goes to great lengths to present authenticated reality.

"This Night of Nights' is a scathing satire of pervasive deception and misrepresentation in the Australian media industry. The central story in this episode is the ethics surrounding the decision not to televise the Telecom story but to go ahead with the story about money being stolen from a charity. Brian's story about the poison water, used to justify the decision not to run the charity story, is retold and changed with each retelling. In this episode Sitch et al cleverly explore, test and refute the use of the 'public's right to know' as a defence for televising any story. The story of the poison water is ironically familiar to anyone who has viewed Ellen Fanning's documentary on Australian journalism, FineLine, in which Derryn Hinch describes the seminal moment that launched his successful career as a journalist that always 'tells the public the truth'.

Additional Texts

The requirement to collect and use additional texts can be problematic for students and teachers and it is tempting to rely on just one or two. Of more significance is perhaps the quality of the texts selected and the analysis undertaken. These texts are used to demonstrate a students understanding of the notion of representation and in the case of Frontline to build the argument beyond media texts.

There are also numerous examples in the episodes about the ways in which Frontline's dubious reporting is questioned by other representatives of the media and public figures, such as the radio interviews of Mike and Brooke, the Bourke's Backyard interview and the Police Commissioner's damning objections to Frontline's actions during the farmhouse siege. These features of Frontline would seem to endorse Sitch et al's belief that good reporting is possible and that media consumers expect it. A different perspective on the ways current affairs programmes go about representing their truths is contained in Fanning's documentary. FineLine explores the complexity of the media industry in Australia and the moral and ethical dilemmas faced by journalists. Like Frontline it demonstrates that making truth statements is a serious business and deserving of interrogation. The self reflective stance of the journalists adds credibility to an examination of the ways that truth statements are 'explored, tested refuted or endorsed' by the media.