This is a funny insight into #medialogic but, unfortunately, the consequence are not so funny. #Thread https://twitter.com/damongreenITV/status/1194965615599144961

1. Mainstream media are not representing "vox pop" -- which are obviously plural and internally confused -- but are creating it by these kind of "man in the street" sketches.

2. They do this by following loudest voices on (social) media, mostly highly elitist pundits who claim to know the vox populi. This is what got us simplistic and essentially populist "Somewheres" vs "Anywheres".

3. Rather than testing whether simplistic frame is correct, media go into town to find examples of "Somewheres", then thinking this proves the general thesis.

4. Not only are "North" and "South", or "cities" and "towns" essentiallized, they are also moralized. "Somewheres" are authentic and good (salt of the earth), Anywheres are egocentric, elitist and not really representative of "our people" (cosmopolitans).

5. Even if "man in street" approach is undertaken with open mind, what town is selected is crucial, as is what street, and what time. Who walks around main street during day? And who wants to openly express opinion to national media? Mostly old white people who are (semi-)retired

6. In essence, "man in street" is media prop, which is meant to provide "authenticity" and "representiveness" to media stereotypes. It is a cheap and dishonest ploy, which at times also exploits and manipulates people they interview.

7. "Man in street" is not only used in populist way, it is itself consequence of "populist zeitgeist", in which "elites" (including academic and polling experts) are replaced by (real) "people".

8. Time to dump the populist and simplistic "man in street" frame and either reform it --and really listen to broad variety of (wo)men in broad variety of streets or to select certain (wo)man as illustration of specific voice (based on surveys) or just stop using it. #TheEnd