Here Dr Philippa Carr, Dr Simon Goodman, Dr Adam Jowett and Dr Jackie Abell explore how the media portrays inequality and wealth and the impact this has on economic growth and how we set about achieving it.
Rethinking Economic Growth: The impact of media narratives on inequality, wealth and growth
High levels of inequality are harmful to economic growth yet claims about growth often focus on increases at the ‘top’, which can lead to increased inequality. By exploring how we talk about poverty, wealth and inequality within everyday interactions and media communication, we can raise awareness of the conditions needed to support the development of good growth that benefits everyone.
Claims that economic growth reduces poverty have been discredited. However, reducing wealth inequality can also lower poverty levels. Representations of poverty in the media in the UK present negative stereotypes of poorer people and ignore the role of precarious employment and the working poor. However, televised debates about unemployment often criticise welfare benefits as encouraging a poor work ethic. Low paid Health and Social Care Workers interviewed during the COVID-19 pandemic described their circumstances as unjust highlighting the challenging nature of their work in return for poor pay and working conditions. To move towards good growth, the media needs to highlight the role of precarious employment in maintaining poverty instead of focusing on negative representations of unemployment.
For growth to be truly “good” it must be broadly shared and this requires policy intervention, not just economic expansion. Redistributive policies are needed to manage growth and reduce wealth inequality. A fairer tax system is key to ensuring that economic growth benefits all groups. In radio discussions about tax, people use collectivist arguments to state that tax provides public goods to support the community. Conversely, individualist arguments view tax as a form of theft that harms people’s work ethic. The perception of tax as unfair allows wealthier people to justify less proportional contributions and for people to present tax avoidance as fair. Increasing positive media coverage of taxation as a redistributive mechanism could help reduce wealth inequality and foster sustainable economic growth.
Public accounts of inequality are similar to those presented in the media. Research with members of the public about inequality found that people can view inequality as inevitable and unavoidable, with it presented as both unfair and justified. Many of their participants found inequality to be a serious problem and cause of injustice; they were particularly critical of tax avoidance amongst the rich. Others perceived inequality as beneficial as a motivating force, people would not strive hard without the potential of financial rewards. Connected to this was the idea that inequality was the (fair) result of individual differences in characteristics such as intelligence, qualifications and work ethic. This aligns with the meritocratic idea that inequality is the result of differences between the ability and the effort that people put in. These insights shed light on the public’s understanding of income inequality and highlight the challenges that interventions must address to effectively tackle this issue.
Wealthy individuals have been found to benefit more from economic growth than less affluent groups. Despite the detrimental impact of wealth inequality, extreme wealth is presented as aspirational in entertainment documentaries. The proliferation of programmes about the super-rich normalises wealth inequality under the guise of entertainment. Extremely wealthy people are represented as both ordinary and extraordinary. Depicting super-rich individuals as ordinary suggests that extreme wealth is presented as attainable to everyone who is driven and resilient.
Inheritance is known to maintain inequality and inhibit the conditions needed for economic growth. Television programmes justify extreme wealth by using meritocratic arguments although this ignores the role of inheritance in maintaining inequality. Entertainment documentaries that flaunt the luxury consumption of ‘rich kids’ challenge perceptions of the UK as a meritocracy where social mobility is the result of effort and ability. Heirs featured within the programmes often present themselves as both hardworking and their privilege as unintentional stemming through birth rights. The children of the super-rich reference their wealth as ‘family money’ and emphasise the importance of sharing with loved ones. These narratives are used by heirs to maintain the illusion of a meritocracy where wealth is deserved. Acknowledging the role of inheritance in the acquisition of wealth for the super-rich within media broadcasts would challenge the perception of wealth inequality and its negative impact on growth.
A progressive tax system would help narrow the gap between the ultra-wealthy and everyone else, fostering a stronger consumer base and more sustainable economic growth. However, media narratives shape public attitudes toward these policies, influencing their political viability. When tax is framed as an unfair burden or government overreach, policies that could drive good growth such as higher corporate tax rates or wealth taxes become much harder for politicians to sell to the electorate. Good growth is not just about increasing GDP, it’s about ensuring that prosperity is widely shared. To achieve this, politicians must carefully frame progressive tax policies when engaging with the media. Instead of allowing tax to be portrayed as a punitive measure, they must emphasise its role in economic stability, public investment, and long-term prosperity. Incorporating the principle of fairness within media communications could be beneficial as this is an important social value. A narrative that frames taxation not as an individual burden but as a collective investment in shared prosperity will also increase the chances of public acceptance and political success. How policymakers communicate these policies directly influences public support and, ultimately, the feasibility of implementing reforms that foster ‘good’ growth.
About the authors
Dr Philippa Carr is a Senior Lecturer in Qualitative Research Methods at UWE Bristol. She teaches Social Psychology and Qualitative Research Methods at postgraduate and undergraduate level. Philippa supervises undergraduate and postgraduate research projects on social and economic inequality. She is a co-theme lead for the Identities, Subjectivities and Inequalities theme within the Social Science Research Group.
Dr Simon Goodman is an associate professor at De Montfort University. Simon uses discursive psychology to address a number of issues relating to prejudice, hate, inequality and conflict. Simon’s research interests include online hate speech and the British public’s understanding of income inequality and high earners.
Dr Adam Jowett is Director of Psychology at the University of Law. He is a social psychologist and he is Chair of the British Psychological Society’s (BPS) Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Board and former Chair of the BPS Psychology of Sexualities Section.
Dr Jackie Abell is an Associate Professor at Coventry University. She is the lead author of the David Myers ‘Social Psychology’ textbook (European edition) which is now in its 3rd edition and an Associate Editor for the British Journal of Social Psychology, and a Chartered Psychologist with the British Psychological Society.
Image credit: Auke Bakker on Unsplash