Semi-structured interviews

35 When meanings are constructed, they become – for the people within a given cultural space – the

“reality”. It becomes their world; moulding their worldview and shaping their actions. Therefore, from the perspective of the constructionist approach, representation enters into the very fabric of culture; hence it does not just interpret reality but also shapes reality (Hall, 1997a).

Hall (1997a) argues that representation is rooted in two processes or what he terms “two systems of representation”. The first system is what he calls the “conceptual map”, a set of schemata of meaning or frames of understanding which each person carries in their head that enables them to assign meaning to reality. However, this “system” alone would not be enough for achieving transmission and sharing of meaning in society; hence comes the second system which is language, a shared set of signs that enables mutual expression of the meaning generated via the first system of representation. Consequently, representation utilizes language as its indispensable vehicle.

The implication of the foregoing is that what is termed “ethnicity” – being a phenomenon subject to social perception – is inevitably implicated in representation. When we say that we belong to a particular ethnic group or that someone belongs to an ethnic group, we are invariably representing ourselves or someone in a particular way by invoking preconceived schemata (or frames) of meaning.

36 instance, when one says “I am a Moslem”. On the other hand, it is negative when it denies belongingness, for instance, when one says “I am not a Christian”.

Identity is an inevitable component of society and culture because it is through identity that social bonding is generated – be it at the familial, communal, national and transnational levels.

Akerlof and Kranton (as cited in Epstein & Heizler, 2015) define identity“as a person’s sense of self or self image”, and his or her identity is bound to social categories; individuals identify with people in some categories and differentiate themselves from those in others” (p.1). The writers thus note that ethnic identity is a measurement of one’s feeling of belongingness in regard to a particular ethnic group. Such identity can be measured in various ways including by simply asking an individual about his or her feeling of belongingness or otherwise vis-a-vis a given ethnic group.

Identity has an important relationship with representation because identities (ethnic, religious, national etc) are invariably a form of representation. We cannot communicate identity (whether in reference to ourselves or others) without engaging in representation. In driving this point home, Hall (1997b) points out that when, for instance, fans turn up at football matches with banners and slogans, with bodies painted in certain colours and with certain symbols inscribed, all these objects and symbols could be considered as language; a vehicle through which the nationality of the fans are communicated. They are language of representation. Hall explains further that representation in this case is closely related to both identity and knowledge.

Therefore, it is difficult to determine what it means to be “English”, “French”, “German”, “South African” or “Japanese” without reference to “all the ways in which our ideas and images of national identity or national cultures have been represented.” Outside these “signifying” systems, we could find it impossible to assume or reject such identities “and consequently could not build up or sustain that common ‘life-world’ which we call a culture” (Hall, 1997b, p.5).

37 Like gender, race and ethnicity are viewed as social construction (Mayorga, 2007; Brooks &

Hébert, 2006; Chávez & Guido-DiBrito, 1999). While ethnicity could be founded on natural characteristics like complexion and other bodily features, the way we understand it and relate with it is ultimately socially constructed. Stated differently, though ethnicity may have some apparent natural basis, its whole manifestation in society is ultimately a product of belief, perception and prejudice (Quintana, 2007).

It is widely accepted in scholarship that the media play a key role in how and to the extent we construct social identity including as related to ethnicity (Brooks & Hébert, 2006). Discussing this power of the media to build identity, Brooks and Hébert (2006) observe that in our present society with its characteristic consumption culture and mediated reality, much of what comes to assume importance is usually a reflection of what the media have told us. Much of what people know and feel concerned about is based on messages that got to them through media institutions – radio, television, film, music, and others. How individuals come about their social identities i.e.

how they appreciate what it means to be male, female, negro, white, Asian, Latino, rural or urban is influenced by texts produced by the media for audiences that are becoming more and more

“segmented by the social constructions of race and gender. Media, in short, are central to what ultimately come to represent our social realities” (p.297).

Thus, by highlighting perceived ethnic differences, the media create and/or reinforce ethnic consciousness and prejudices. Stated differently, the way the media represent ethnicity could be key to how individual and collective ethnic consciousness is shaped, i.e. individual and collective beliefs and prejudices regarding ethnicity. This role of the media in representing ethnicity and shaping ethnic consciousness informs the next section – the media and ethnicity.

38 However, it is important to note that the identity building role of the media is mediated by a number of factors including importantly the role of opinion elite or opinion leaders (Bachofer, 2014). Hence, in the context of Nigeria, the ethnic identity construction role of the media cannot be viewed in isolation of the opinion of members of the elite including leaders of ethnic interest groups.