Introduction
In both AQA and OCR A level Sociology, students study how different social groups are represented in the media. One of the most debated topics is the portrayal of the working class and the so-called “underclass.”
Since the early 2000s, sociologists have highlighted how television, film and news coverage often depict working-class people as lazy, immoral or dependent rather than as individuals shaped by wider structural inequalities. These portrayals have real social effects because they can influence public attitudes, shape social policy and reinforce class divisions.
Below is a summary of key sociological research that is often used in A level Sociology when studying media representations of the underclass.
Jones (2011) – Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class
Owen Jones argues that working-class people have become one of the few social groups that it is still socially acceptable to ridicule. Through tabloid newspapers, political speeches and reality TV shows, the working class are often represented as feckless “chavs” responsible for their own poverty.
According to Jones, this “chav” stereotype distracts attention from the real causes of inequality such as low wages, insecure work and cuts to welfare. It blames individuals for their position and helps to maintain ruling-class ideology by justifying inequality.
Skeggs and Wood (2004, 2009, 2012): Reality TV and Class Disgust
Beverley Skeggs, often with Helen Wood, explored how reality TV constructs class identities through programmes such as Big Brother and The Jeremy Kyle Show. Their research shows that working-class participants are frequently portrayed as loud, emotional and morally lacking while middle-class people are framed as respectable and in control.
This contributes to what Skeggs calls a “culture of class disgust” where working-class behaviour and lifestyles become a source of entertainment and moral judgment for middle-class audiences. These shows not only reinforce stereotypes but also mark out who is seen as respectable and who is deviant.
Tyler (2013) – Revolting Subjects: Social Abjection and Resistance in Neoliberal Britain
Tyler’s influential book explores how the “underclass” is constructed in both media and politics. She argues that television programmes such as Benefits Street and tabloid stories about “benefit scroungers” turn poverty into spectacle and disgust.
Tyler introduces the idea of “social abjection,” the process through which certain groups such as welfare claimants or single mothers are represented as revolting or undeserving. These portrayals justify punitive welfare reforms and deepen class stigma.
Her work connects closely with moral panic theory (Cohen) and Marxist ideas about ideology and control.
Middleton (2017) – Working-Class Masculinities and the Media
Middleton’s work explores how working-class men are portrayed across film, advertising and sports media. He argues that the media often represents working-class masculinity as aggressive, unemotional and outdated, especially since the decline of traditional industries.
This feeds into a broader narrative of “failed” masculinity, suggesting that working-class men are unable to adapt to a post-industrial, service-based economy. Middleton’s analysis links the representation of class to changes in gender identity and economic structure.
Nairn (2008; 2011) – News Media and the Politics of Blame
Nairn focuses on how news coverage constructs the idea of an “underclass” through selective reporting. His studies of UK and Scottish press coverage found that the media tends to:
- Focus on individual moral failings such as laziness or addiction
- Ignore structural causes of poverty like unemployment or austerity
- Use language that creates moral panic around “benefit scroungers”
Nairn describes this as the “politics of blame,” a discourse that shifts responsibility for inequality onto individuals and aligns with New Right ideologies about welfare and dependency.
Bringing It All Together
| Researcher | Focus | Main Argument | Theoretical Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jones (2011) | Tabloid and TV stereotypes | Working class mocked and blamed for poverty | Marxism, Ideology |
| Skeggs & Wood (2004–12) | Reality TV | Class disgust as entertaining | Bourdieu, Cultural Capital |
| Tyler (2013) | Welfare and abjection | Media defines poor as “revolting” | Moral Panic, Hegemony |
| Middleton (2017) | Working-class masculinity | Portrayed as aggressive or failed | Masculinity, Class Identity |
| Nairn (2008; 2011) | News coverage | Poverty framed through individual blame | New Right, Ideology |
Across these studies, sociologists show that media representations of the underclass are not neutral. They reflect broader power relations and cultural hierarchies that shape how society understands class, poverty and morality.
Exam Tip
In A level essays, you can use these studies to support points about:
- Stereotypes and ideology in media representations (AQA Paper 2 or OCR Paper 3)
- Moral panics and the social construction of deviance
- The relationship between media, power and inequality
Always link the research back to theory such as Marxism, Hegemony, Cultural Effects or Postmodernism and use specific examples like Benefits Street or I, Daniel Blake.
📚 Full Reference List
- Jones, O. (2011) Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class. London: Verso.
- Middleton, S. (2017) ‘Working-Class Masculinities and Representations of Class in the Media’, Sociological Research Online, 22(3), pp. 1–15.
- Nairn, A. (2008) ‘Reporting Poverty: Media, Stereotypes and Responsibility’, Journal of Poverty and Social Justice, 16(3), pp. 245–259.
- Nairn, A. (2011) ‘Constructing the “Underclass” in British News Media’, Media, Culture & Society, 33(6), pp. 943–960.
- Skeggs, B. (2004) Class, Self, Culture. London: Routledge.
- Skeggs, B. and Wood, H. (2009) ‘The Labour of Transformation and Circuits of Value “around” Reality Television’, Continuum, 23(5), pp. 559–572.
- Skeggs, B. and Wood, H. (2012) Reacting to Reality Television: Performance, Audience and Value. London: Routledge.
- Tyler, I. (2013) Revolting Subjects: Social Abjection and Resistance in Neoliberal Britain. London: Zed Books.
You can download a PPT for use in classrooms here:
Leave a Reply