黑料社

Skip to main navigation Skip to main content
The 黑料社
Public Policy|Southampton

Mr Bates vs the Post Office and the power of storytelling

Joseph Owen

Public Policy|Southampton Specialist Officer and Research Fellow in the Southampton Institute for Arts and Humanities (SIAH)

This article was supported by the 黑料社听ESRC听Impact Acceleration Account

Mr Bates vs the post office

ITV's primetime drama has hastened legislation to compensate sub-postmasters caught up in the Horizon scandal, overturning the judicial process after years of legal wrangling. What implications does accelerated justice have for democracy? In a key election year, we should heed the impact of popular, far-reaching stories on political decision-making.

The power of the moving image to influence public opinion is apparently well established. Connecting these ideas, argue that "persuasion is highest when [people] are unaware that political messages are being communicated", and that "entertainment media can alter public opinion". Film and television are often the dominant channels through which people engage in social dialogue, national crises and cases of political injustice. This point is illustrated by the recent success of , widely reported to have hastened legislation to compensate sub-postmasters caught up in the . impressively claim that it鈥檚 the most-watched programme of this bleary-eyed year.

Contrary to this article in , I think the series works precisely because it isn't great art: it relies on weathered tropes, numbing sentiment and blunt exposition to articulate a pristine, unambiguous message. The binaries of good versus evil, heroes and villains, are bound up in the title. Mr Bates simplifies and sanitises a complex, decades-long struggle for truth, vindication and financial settlement. It鈥檚 very watchable as a result.

Yet revising the show鈥檚 acclaim is probably beside the point. Its popularity lies in its populism, in its direct appeal to feeling. Even Charles Dickens, the great purveyor of art as a diagnosis for social malady, isn鈥檛 to all critical tastes. In fact, the sincerity of his books brought many readers to hysterics. Evaluating the climax of The Old Curiosity Shop , remarked that 鈥渙ne must have a heart of stone to read the death of Little Nell without laughing鈥. It serves as a handy reminder for arts criticism: what鈥檚 good is not always influential, and what presents as pathos is not always powerful.

So, what does policy impact from the arts and humanities look like? The picture is complicated in even the most-cited cases. The work of , whose novels were said to have transformed perceptions of poverty in Victorian Britain, had very little direct impact on contemporary domestic policy. Likewise, the director played down the legislative influence of his landmark teleplay, Cathy Come Home , noting that significant changes in housing policy occurred more than a decade after its TV premiere. Impact, influence and cause are often shiftier than we鈥檇 like to admit.

In a wider context, 鈥渟torytelling鈥 is being hyped across sectors and disciplines as a panacea for all manner of human ills. As literary critics and humanities scholars, many of us feel protective about stories as they are dangled about this brave frontier. Our sense of ownership is based on a practical distrust: we don鈥檛 believe what stories tell us. Worthwhile narratives deceive and discomfort; they are difficult, ambiguous, gnarly, unresolved. They don鈥檛 make us feel any better.

I鈥檝e argued elsewhere (which is to say, unsuccessfully, in a fellowship application) that 鈥渟low cinema鈥濃攁 broad-brush term for films defined by their relaxed pace, resistance to narrative, and long takes鈥攃an transform people鈥檚 perceptions of the world. This type of filmmaking, through its 鈥渟lowness鈥, makes important and often implicit connections between pressing human concerns and our inability to address these concerns. Because the ability to solve policy problems is a matter of who decides, the art of slowness, I argue, supplies a critical form of resistance for decision makers who struggle to confront urgent social, moral and political crises.

Stop laughing. I accept that this line of thinking hasn鈥檛 got me very far. on the school curriculum is parked for now. But what arises, then, if primetime TV is the preeminent medium for influencing government policy? In the example cited earlier, it appears that Mr Bates has helped to overturn a longstanding judicial process and preempted an independent inquiry after years of political and legal impasse. This sort of impact appears to encourage primary legislation that while circumventing usual norms and procedures. Is that always good? Is that ever good?

I forlornly return to this question of who decides. It鈥檚 unfortunate, and perhaps telling, that the Nazi theorist determines much contemporary thought on the subject. Schmitt criticised the rule of law in Weimar Germany, and his scepticism towards democracy led him to believe that suspending checks and balances was unavoidable. Schmitt was an effective storyteller, which is why his views on legal exceptions are now so pervasive. He writes in thrumming incantations, deploying pithy axioms about juridical order and state decision-making that are as slippery as they are suggestive. You can do a lot with them.

In recent years, Schmitt has become fodder for editorials in the , the , the , and the . He is invoked to apprehend crises as disparate as Brexit, identity politics, and the electoral successes of demagogues such as Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. Schmitt is a prevailing figure because elements of our world tend to vagueness and relativity. He provides the appearance of easy answers, flattening the complexities of politics into the clarity of the decision.

His story spawns others. With the spectre of several big elections this year, namely in the UK and US, and any number of corresponding constitutional crises, Schmitt鈥檚 name will be the go-to citation for many pundits and commentators. Meanwhile, local and national governments will seek insights into voters鈥 feelings about the places they live, the people they know, and the people they don鈥檛. Telling the right stories will be crucial. Sounds a bit risky. Maybe we should start with the word 鈥渟tory鈥 and work out what we mean by it.

Evidence to Policy Blogs Voice of Young Science

Find out more

Policy Projects

Policy Projects

Learn about PPS led current collaborative projects between the 黑料社 researchers and UK Government and Parliament.

Policy Podcasts

Policy Podcasts

Click here to listen to our Policy Podcast series. In each episode we speak to UoS researchers and experts, about their experiences confronting critical issues in the domestic and foreign policies.

Ways to engage

Ways to engage

Guidance on the many channels available to researchers to engage with policymakers.

Impact toolkit

Impact toolkit

Guidance on things to consider in the science to policy process and useful tips in planning and costing your impact activities.

Privacy Settings