Income Inequality: a developing issue, and one difficult to present

Income inequality “does not resemble a single policy issue”, and is a “meta-issue with a galaxy of cases, consequences, forms, values and policy solutions affiliated with it”

(McCall 2013, p.57). Therefore, “income inequality” does more than describe the gap between rich and poor (Schramm 2005; Wong et al. 2009); it is evaluative and pejorative, reflecting the negativity of injustice and the “positive ethical value” of

“equality” (Charles-Coll 2011, p.17). Table 3.4 summarises the identified themes that provide the framework for this section.

Table 3.4 Summary of themes within literature about poverty and its media coverage.

While poverty and wealth can be represented pictorially and verbally, despite being relatively simple to measure, income inequality is more difficult to describe.

Metaphor is ubiquitous in everyday discourse (Lakoff and Johnson 2003; Morgan 1997), and has been used to conceptualise income inequality. Pen (1973) for example, describes the phenomenon in terms of an imaginary procession where each citizen’s height is proportionate to their income. The result is “a parade of dwarfs and a few giants” which “really tells us something” about income inequality (Pen 1973, p.48). The imbalance of a significant short population and a few very tall people clearly indicates a disproportionate distribution of incomes. While average income

64 | P a g e recipients are of average height, professional classes are measured in yards, with

some CEOs standing 120 yards high. Billionaire John Paul Getty’s height for example, is estimated at “ten miles, maybe twice as much” (Pen 1973, p.53), the uncertainly in the statement implicitly alluding to the difficulties in quantifying the assets of the mega rich. Intentionally or not, Pen’s parade might have been inspired by an episode of The Frost Report in 1966, when John Cleese, Ronnie Barker and Ronnie Corbett performed “the classic comedy sketch on social mobility” (Telegraph 2005)⁴. Like Pen, the comedians used height, this time to demonstrate the prosperity of the various layers within the British social class system (See Figure 3.2).

Figure 3.2 “I look up to him but down on him…” Social Mobility on The Frost Report.

In another metaphor, Toynbee (2003) describes a caravan crossing the desert with sheiks and their entourage leading the procession, and the working poor trailing behind; she rhetorically asks whether they can still be described as travelling together.

Despite such accessible discourses, academics cared little about the way that income is distributed until relatively recently (Atkinson 1997). Figure 3.3 is basic chart showing the worldwide use of the phrase “income inequality” within a large corpus

4 This sketch is available on http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00hhrwl (Accessed on 8th March 2016).

65 | P a g e of books, articles and other texts⁵. It indicates that the phrase only gained significant

traction after the late 1970s, and has fluctuated thereafter.

Figure 3.3 Chart showing historical rate mentions of phrase “income inequality”.

Academically, income inequality became more mainstream during the 1990s (Atkinson 1997), the new interest perhaps indicating a shift away from official data sources (Jenkins 2007) to more empirical and independent analysis. Pryce et al.

(2011) list the major quantitative measures of income inequality; these include the Robin Hood index (Wilkinson and Pickett 2010; Schiff 2010); the Decile ratio (De Maio 2007; Haughton and Khandker 2009) and the Theil index (Oyelere 2010).

Despite such an array of measures (Dorling 2014), the most popular is the Gini Coefficient (see, inter alia, Haughton and Khandker 2009; Badolo and Traore 2012;

Yang et al. 2012). A Gini Coefficient of 0 (zero) means that individuals in a defined population have identical incomes, and a coefficient of 1 (one) reflects a population where one person receives all available income (Saunders 2010; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2011).

Notwithstanding concerns that the Gini Coefficient does not comprehensively describe inequality (Jenkins 2009), it has been widely adopted. As part of this examination of income inequality coverage, the use, or absence, of this official metric enables some conclusions as to how deeply the issue is covered; mentions of the Gini Coefficient for example, might indicate that income inequality is considered a standalone issue worthy of discussion. Income inequality has increased in most countries during the last few decades (Goesling 2001; Subramanian and Kawachi

5 This chart was generated using Google Ngram, which can establish the frequency of a word or phrase within around 5 million books, articles and other written texts.

66 | P a g e 2004; Jäntti and Jenkins 2010); Figure 3.4 confirms that the trend is global and that

over the last 30 years, income disparity has generally increased across the U.S and Western Europe (Bok 2010).

Figure 3.4 Selected Gini Coefficients of income inequality, 1985-late 2000s.

Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2011, p.24).

The length of the arrow indicates the magnitude of change; longer upward arrows indicate a greater increase.

There is further compelling evidence showing that the increase in U.K income inequality has been more dramatic than that experienced in other developed economies (see, inter alia, Fritzell 1993; Atkinson 1997; Alderson et al. 2005;

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2008). It has been “well above the OECD average in the last three decades” (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2015, p.1), and Atkinson (1997, p.300) asserts that within the global context of income inequality, “if you want to see a big increase then it is to the United Kingdom that one has to look”.

The trend is confirmed by Dorling (2016) who, shortly before the nation voted to leave the E.U, showed that “the U.K is the most economically unequal state within Europe”. Between 2007/08 and 2013/14 however, U.K income inequality generally fell, but rose again in 2013/4, from 0.337 to 0.343 (Belfield et al. 2015, p.33).

Projected growth, welfare cuts and changing taxation thresholds are likely to fuel further increases (Cribb et al. 2013). It could be reasonably expected therefore, since data shows income inequality to be increasing, that such a narrative would feature strongly in TV news reports about the issue.

67 | P a g e 3.7 Income inequality: why it matters from the socio-health perspective.

Regarding the effects and social outcomes associated with income inequality, intra-national research has largely replaced inter-nation study (Goesling 2001;

Subramanian and Kawachi 2003). However, within “flagship” sociological journals at the end of the 20^th century, academics were “strangely and remarkably silent” on the issue of income inequality (Morris and Western 1999, p.624). This appears to have notably changed in recent years and accordingly, it is reasonable to expect that the issue would justify coverage on mainstream TV news, especially when, through public service regulations, broadcasting systems must serve the public by discussing issues of social importance.

Inequality results in less compassion and more shame, almost to the extent that poor are dehumanised (Dorling 2014). Income inequality “constrains pupil achievement at the lower tail of the distribution”, and so for pupils from poorer households, learning can be problematic (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 1995, pp. 81-2). Inequality also generates protest and instability, as elites seem to benefit disproportionately (see, inter alia, Miller 1982; Lloyd 2010; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2011; Kelley 2012; Stiglitz 2013).

Further, within the European Union, income inequality may retard cohesion and integration (Van Stolk et al. 2011). Moreover, there is strong evidence suggesting income inequality drives poverty (see, inter alia, Allegrezza et al. 2004; Bakare 2012;

Khan et al. 2013), which is then a “powerful social divider” stratifying society and separating rich and poor geographically and socially (Wilkinson and Pickett 2010, p.162). Indeed, one representative of the global banking sector described growing inequality as a “social time bomb” (in Dorling 2014, p.116). Egalitarian societies seem more desirable, and simplistically, drawing people closer together seems more attractive than dividing them (Thomas 2014). Such discontent however, might increase the appeal of more extreme political parties (Duca and Saving 2012;

Goodwin 2014), or encourage people towards a more individualist outlook where they “bowl alone” (Putnam 2000). These are all potential themes within TV news reports regarding income inequality.

Inequality has economic, social and political implications (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2011), in addition to other outcomes such as divided

68 | P a g e communities, environmental degradation and democratic efficiency (Shaheen 2011).

The new emphasis on linking income inequality with numerous pejorative outcomes (see Kaplan et al. 1996; Jenkins 2007; Van Stolk et al. 2011) is a strong determinant for policymaker action. Wilkinson and Pickett (2010) bring new thrust and focus to the study of inequality, and provide evidence that inequality leads to anxiety about status, incorporating emotions such as envy, greed, anxiety and shame. Wilkinson and Pickett’s (2010) basic thesis concludes that among other issues, teenage pregnancy, life expectancy, trust, crime (see also Deaton 2003; Dorling 2014), violence and mental illness (see also Dorling 2014) are more prevalent in unequal societies.

Importantly, their intra-national research concludes that the effects of income inequality are not confined to those with the lowest incomes. Of these undesirable outcomes, the most compelling research strand concerns connections with health outcomes. Such are the wide-reaching impacts and implications of income inequality, in order to fulfil their social obligations, news broadcasters can be expected to feature this issue regularly and appropriately.

It seems reasonable to conclude that higher incomes positively affect health, since they enable consumption and environments conducive to healthier lives (see Thorbecke and Charumilind 2002). Besides well-documented links between poverty and children’s health and well-being (Seccombe 2000; Lewit et al. 1997), a considerable corpus of evidence shows that income levels and/or socio-economic positioning strongly determine health outcomes (see, inter alia, Subramanian and Kawachi 2006; Rowlingson 2011).

At national level, “inequality is highly predictive of health” (Wilkinson and Pickett 2009, p.502), and tangible links have long since been found between income inequality and mortality across a range of ages (see, inter alia, Preston 1975; Lynch et al. 1998; Babones 2008; Idrovo et al. 2010; Torre and Myrskylä 2013). Table 3.5 summarises key meta-analyses assisting the evaluation of the inequality-health hypothesis. It shows that the correlation between income inequality and pejorative health outcomes is supported, in full or in part, by around 75% of the research studies referred to.

69 | P a g e Table 3.5. Summary of Meta-Analyses regarding inequality-health hypothesis.