31 results
Foreword
-
- By Sam Friedman
- Nicola Ingram, Manchester Metropolitan University, Ann-Marie Bathmaker, University of Birmingham, Jessie Abrahams, University of Bristol, Laura Bentley, University of Birmingham, Harriet Bradley, University of Bristol and University of the West of England, Bristol, Tony Hoare, University of Bristol, Vanda Papafilippou, University of the West of England, Bristol, Richard Waller, University of the West of England, Bristol
-
- Book:
- The Degree Generation
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 20 January 2024
- Print publication:
- 22 June 2023, pp vi-x
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
The Paired Peers project, from which this excellent book emerges, will surely go down as a landmark study in British sociology. Spanning nearly 12 years, this unique and groundbreaking qualitative research has followed the lives of 90 working-class and middle-class students as they first traversed entry into, and progression through, university and now as they negotiate the precarious and uncertain graduate labour market. Reading The Degree Generation, I am struck by the ways in which the latest instalment of this project has once again moved our understanding on. These distinct contributions are made possible not only by the quality and the sensitivity of the analysis undertaken by the team (who themselves come from a variety of different class backgrounds), but also by the unique longitudinal research design undertaken. It is clear, for example, that the research team has built very important and deep relationships with their participants over the years, and this has clearly yielded insights that simply would not have been possible using other methodological tools.
The first of these is the simple observation that labour market futures are not the sole focus of graduates. Sociological and policy work in this area, particularly studies that focus on inequalities of outcome (like my own), tend to overlook the fact that young people emerging from university are not just concerned with constructing a career; rather, they are also building a life. Spending extended periods of time with participants, this simple reality becomes abundantly clear: they are not always making decisions with an instrumental emphasis on career success, occupational status or high earnings; instead, they are thinking about how to forge relationships with friends and family, how to enjoy their leisure time, or how to look after their mental health. This is important because it asks us to reconsider conventional understandings of ‘graduate success’ and instead think about young people's broader quest to find meaningful work and to live a life of, what the authors call, ‘personal value’.
Second, however, while this book certainly spotlights a uniquely broad understanding of the graduate experience, it also pulls no punches in simultaneously underlining the corrosive inequalities that stratify the UK graduate labour market. Here, in particular, they highlight how notions of ‘graduate value’ tend to be tied not only to particular universities and particular degree courses, but also, more broadly, to a certain performance or image of merit.
Spillover benefit of pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV prevention: evaluating the importance of effect modification using an agent-based model
- Ashley L. Buchanan, Carolyn J. Park, Sam Bessey, William C. Goedel, Eleanor J. Murray, Samuel R. Friedman, M. Elizabeth Halloran, Natallia V. Katenka, Brandon D. L. Marshall
-
- Journal:
- Epidemiology & Infection / Volume 150 / 2022
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 28 October 2022, e192
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
We developed an agent-based model using a trial emulation approach to quantify effect measure modification of spillover effects of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV among men who have sex with men (MSM) in the Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell metropolitan area, Georgia. PrEP may impact not only the individual prescribed, but also their partners and beyond, known as spillover. We simulated a two-stage randomised trial with eligible components (≥3 agents with ≥1 HIV+ agent) first randomised to intervention or control (no PrEP). Within intervention components, agents were randomised to PrEP with coverage of 70%, providing insight into a high PrEP coverage strategy. We evaluated effect modification by component-level characteristics and estimated spillover effects on HIV incidence using an extension of randomisation-based estimators. We observed an attenuation of the spillover effect when agents were in components with a higher prevalence of either drug use or bridging potential (if an agent acts as a mediator between ≥2 connected groups of agents). The estimated spillover effects were larger in magnitude among components with either higher HIV prevalence or greater density (number of existing partnerships compared to all possible partnerships). Consideration of effect modification is important when evaluating the spillover of PrEP among MSM.
Introduction
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp 1-28
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Mark has one of the most coveted jobs in television. As Head of Current Affairs at 6TV, he has commissioned some of the UK’s most high-profile and critically acclaimed programmes. He controls a budget extending to the tens of millions. And every day a steady stream of independent television producers arrive at his desk desperate to land a pitch. He is, for many, the ultimate gatekeeper.
At just 39 Mark is young to wield such power. Certainly he’s enjoyed a swift ascension. After making his name as a programme maker, Mark initially became a commissioner at a rival broadcaster before being headhunted by 6TV some five years ago. A string of hits later and Mark is now one of the biggest players at the channel.
Of course we know all of this before we interview him; it is detailed in multiple, glowing journalistic profiles hailing his creative talents. Yet when we meet Mark, on the top floor of 6TV’s futuristic aluminium and glass-clad headquarters, and invite him to narrate his career in his own words, a very different account emerges. It’s not that Mark disavows his success; he is clearly very proud of what he has achieved. But what is striking is his candid honesty; his career trajectory, he tells us, particularly its rapid speed and relative smoothness, has been contingent on “starting the race” with a series of profound advantages.
He starts from the beginning. Mark is from a privileged background. His father was a successful scientist and he was educated at one of London’s top private schools, before going on to Oxford. This privilege, he tells us, was pivotal in facilitating his entry into television. Specifically, he explains, while at university he went to New York – subsidised by his parents – to research his undergraduate dissertation. While there he landed free accommodation with a contact his father had made at his school. “So, because my dad had met someone at the side of the rugby pitch, I ended up in this empty flat in New York”, he recalls, shaking his head and smiling. The contact then promptly introduced him to a friend in television:
And so I went out with Ross the cameraman and met this director who was making a BBC series. She said “What are you doing?” I was like, “I’m at Oxford.” And she was like, “Ooh, Oxford.
five - The Bank of Mum and Dad
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp 87-108
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
We interviewed Nathan at one of London’s most prestigious West End theatres. He was the lead in the venue’s big budget autumn play, and was enjoying very good reviews. It was only the latest accolade in an illustrious acting career. Now in his mid-40s, Nathan’s CV is littered with acclaimed roles on stage and screen. He has played title roles for the Royal Shakespeare Company, appeared in Hollywood blockbusters and fronted BAFTA award-winning television. Recently profiled in the culture pages of a national newspaper, Nathan is celebrated as a rare and prodigious talent. He himself is more modest. Any success, he tells us, is down to “just working incredibly hard” and “making good decisions”. Particularly crucial, he notes, has been turning down acting projects that he hasn’t believed in: “No job is worth sacrificing yourself for,” he tells us.
Contrast Nathan with Jim, also an actor and also in his 40s. We interviewed Jim a few weeks later at another top London theatre. Jim, however, was not starring inside. In fact, he wasn’t working at all, and hadn’t for some six months. Yet Jim also had an impressive CV. Through his 20s and 30s he had worked consistently in television and theatre and a few years ago had accepted a prominent part in a television soap. But after four years his character was axed and, in the intervening years, he had struggled to re-adjust.
“I’ve just been going up for smaller and smaller parts, for less and less money,” he says, explaining that he has recently decided to leave the profession: “The writing is on the wall. But it still hurts because … because it sort of means I’ve failed.”
Jim’s story is not particularly unusual. Acting is widely considered one of the most precarious and competitive professions in the world. Comparing these two men’s careers at face value, then, many people might come to the conclusion that Nathan is simply a more talented actor. Or has worked harder. Or has made better decisions.
There may be some truth to this. But such routine judgements also reflect the fact that the explanatory tool that most reach for when making sense of who gets ahead is ‘meritocracy’. As we explained in the Introduction to this book, there is much ambiguity over the meaning and definition of ‘merit’.
four - Inside elite firms
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp 71-86
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
“Hear that?” asks Dave, a senior manager at 6TV, as he leads us through the offices of the television broadcaster, on the way to our interview room. The layout of each department, we observe as we walk, is exactly the same. There is no spatial demarcation of grade or seniority, and the desks are arranged open-plan around a line of brightly coloured ‘break-out’ rooms in the centre of each floor. This gives both the impression of inclusivity and also, as we’ve just put it to Dave, means that it must be quite hard to remember which department you are in. He smiles knowingly. “Hear that?” he repeats, this time cupping his hand over his ear to listen on the third floor: “You just have to listen to know which floor you’re in. You can tell by the accents. Posh, right? Yep, this is Commissioning.”
So far in this book we have shown that those from privileged backgrounds not only enter organisations like 6TV at disproportionately high rates, but they also tend to earn significantly more once they get there. More worryingly, and as we explored in the previous chapter, this class pay gap persists even when we take into account an extensive battery of ‘meritocratic’ factors.
Yet a pay gap like this can imply two quite different issues. It might mean, for example, that those from working-class backgrounds are getting paid less for doing the same work (that is, for doing jobs at the same level, same company and same department). Equally, however, it may also reflect the kind of workplace segregation implied by Dave’s comment – that is, those from working-class backgrounds may be paid less on average because they are less likely to enter the most prestigious (and high-paying) departments, like Commissioning at 6TV. Moreover, and perhaps even more significantly, this segregation may also be vertical; it may be that even when those from a working-class background enter the most prestigious areas within the most prestigious firms, they still struggle to reach the top.
Adjudicating between these accounts means going beyond national survey data. Much as a large data set such as the Labour Force Survey (LFS) represents a powerful analytical tool, it also has important limitations. In particular, it lacks the granularity necessary to see such patterns of segregation within firms.
six - A helping hand
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp 109-122
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
In 1960, the pioneering American sociologist Ralph H. Turner wrote a prescient article in the American Sociological Review. In it, he introduced the concepts of ‘sponsored’ and ‘contest’ mobility. In contest mobility, success is the prize in an open tournament, and the contest is only judged to be fair if all players compete on an equal footing. Here victory must be won by one’s own efforts, and the most satisfactory outcome is not necessarily the victory of the most intelligent, or most educated, but the most deserving. The tortoise that defeats the hare, he wrote, was thus both possible and appreciated in these contexts. In contrast, in sponsored mobility, individuals reach the top largely because they are selected by those already in senior positions and carefully inducted into elite worlds. Thus, upward progression is granted or denied based on whether established elites judge a candidate to possess the qualities they wish to see, or the ‘merits’ they value. As Turner notes, this type of ‘upward mobility is like entry into a private club, where each candidate must be sponsored by one or more members.’
Turner saw the UK as the exemplar of sponsored mobility. His article conjured images of an antiquated old boy network, where elite appointments are contingent on a set of ‘old school tie’ connections who ‘pull strings’ for one another, and whose relationships are rooted in the shared experience of ‘public’ schooling, Oxbridge and private members clubs. Yet the power of this old boy network is thought by many to have waned considerably in the last 60 years. Indeed, many have argued that a number of countervailing forces, such as the expansion of secondary and higher education, the decline of the landed aristocracy, rising absolute rates of social mobility, and the achievements of second-wave feminism, have fundamentally eroded this kind of elite closure.
This is not to say that who you know is not considered important today; research showing the power of networks in elite professions is voluminous. Yet in recent decades this has tended to focus on the power of what sociologist Mark Granovetter famously called ‘weak ties’. Here the emphasis is on the importance of forging a multitude of informal professional contacts, on being a good ‘networker’, especially with those in positions of power.
one - Getting in
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp 29-44
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Social mobility has become one of the central political issues of our times; certainly across the Western world, it has emerged as the rhetorical weapon of choice for a generation of political leaders. Impassioned speeches abound. “The American Dream is dead,” Donald Trump declared throughout his 2016 presidential campaign, “But I will bring it back.” In France, Emmanuel Macron has made similar promises. It is in the UK, however, that mobility is most explicitly centre-stage. As Theresa May proclaimed in her maiden speech as Prime Minister: “We won’t entrench the advantages of the fortunate few; we will do everything we can to help anybody, whatever your background, to go as far as your talents will take you.”
The bellwether for how nations are doing on social mobility, as we explained in the Introduction, is very often access to the top – who gets into elite occupations and how this relates to their class background. This is perhaps partly due to the limited slice of society that politicians tend to see in their everyday lives. But it also reflects the way in which elite careers are routinely held up by politicians as what we should all be striving towards – occupational destinations that offer high incomes, high status and considerable decision-making power. Such political narratives are fairly obviously undermined, however, if such highly prized arenas are seen as inaccessible, or rigged in favour of the privileged.
But there has long been a perception that many high-status occupations in the UK, such as law, medicine and journalism, are exactly that: professions that have traditionally been, and remain today, stubbornly elitist. As Alan Milburn wrote before resigning in protest as Chair of the UK Social Mobility Commission (SMC), ‘the most pressing policy priority facing the country is opening up the top of British society.’ Britain, he argued, ‘remains – at heart – elitist.’
Yet despite the impassioned political rhetoric surrounding ‘fair access’, the truth is that our actual understanding of this issue has long lagged behind. This is because the surveys traditionally used to look at social mobility have at most a few thousand respondents. That is more than enough for capturing the overall relationship between origins and destinations in terms of ‘big social classes’.
References
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp 321-358
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Methodological appendix
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp 239-284
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Academics often tell suspiciously neat stories of the research process. Most often we package our methodology into a few formulaic paragraphs within an article or book and narrate fieldwork and decision-making as linear, rational and seamless. But research rarely plays out like this. In practice it is usually profoundly messy and disjointed. This project certainly was. The book you have in your hands is the result of a sprawling, often unwieldy, research collaboration that has spanned over four years. It was always an expansive, ambitious project, but also one that has suffered multiple false starts and wrong turns, and which is flawed in important ways. In this Appendix we aim to tell this story. And we try to do so as honestly and transparently as possible, giving readers a chronological picture of exactly how our fieldwork unfolded. At the end we also explore a number of more technical and conceptual issues, including how our own class backgrounds (and other demographic coordinates) affected our research, how we conducted interviews, how we define ‘elite’ occupations, how we measure social mobility, how and why we selected our case studies, how we constructed our statistical analysis, how we fed our research back to our case study firms, and the key limitations of the study.
Stumbling across a class ceiling
This project began entirely serendipitously. It was September 2014 and we had both recently started jobs at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). Our offices were directly opposite one another. Initially working together on the BBC’s Great British Class Survey (GBCS), we were asked to contribute to a special issue of Sociological Review. While Daniel’s paper sailed through peer review, Sam’s did not. The paper, an attempt to use the GBCS to examine the experience of social mobility, received three reviews – two lukewarm, one savage. ‘In my view this is just bad science,’ concluded Reviewer 3, ‘and will ultimately damage the reputation of the author.’ Ouch.
The journal Editor, reacting, was tactful but direct – completely rewrite the paper, or withdraw. On the verge of accepting defeat, Sam shared the article with Daniel. Could something be salvaged? Daniel wasn’t sure. But he did agree that the paper contained one intriguing finding. Among those who had entered the GBCS ‘elite’, those from working-class backgrounds had incomes far lower than colleagues from more privileged backgrounds.
Acknowledgements
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp ix-xii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Frontmatter
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp i-ii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
List of figures and tables
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp vii-viii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Index
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp 359-367
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Note on language usage
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp xiii-xiv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
eleven - Conclusion
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp 209-228
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
In contemporary Britain it quite literally pays to be privileged. Even when individuals from working-class backgrounds are successful in entering the country’s elite occupations they go on to earn, on average, 16% less than colleagues from more privileged backgrounds. And more significantly, this class pay gap is not explained away by conventional indicators of ‘merit’. A substantial gap remains even when we take into account a person’s educational credentials, the hours they work and their level of training and experience.
In many ways this one relatively simple finding constitutes the central contribution of this book. We tend to assume that people get ahead in their careers on the basis of their own individual skill, experience and effort. These principles, both morally and pragmatically, underpin Britain’s ‘meritocratic ideal’, and have long dominated discussions about economic growth and social mobility. Yet the existence of a ‘class pay gap’ provides a sobering corrective to this lofty aim. When even institutions like Oxford and Cambridge, widely championed as the ultimate meritocratic sorting houses, do not wash away the advantages of class background, as we show emphatically in Chapter Three, this surely constitutes a stark rejoinder to even the most strident believers in Britain’s meritocracy. The class pay gap, in other words, reveals a powerful and previously unobserved axis of inequality that clearly demands urgent attention.
Still, we always wanted to do more than just diagnose a problem. In this way, most of this book has been devoted to unravelling the drivers of the class pay gap, the mechanisms that explain precisely why the upwardly socially mobile, even when they are as ‘meritorious’ as their privileged colleagues (in every way we can measure), still fail to progress equally. One theme, in particular, runs throughout our analysis. This relates to the idea of ‘merit’ itself. We would not dispute that conventional measures of ‘merit’ – skills, qualifications, expertise, effort, experience – are important to career progression in Britain’s elite occupations. But what our analysis indicates is that people do not necessarily have an equal capacity to ‘cash in’ their ‘merit’ or ‘realise’ their talent. This is because for ‘merit’ to land it has to be given the opportunity to be demonstrated, it has to be performed in a way that aligns with dominant ideas about the ‘right’ way to work, and it has to be recognised as valuable by those holding the keys to progression.
nine - Self-elimination
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp 171-184
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
We are talking to Giles in the gigantic boardroom at Turner Clarke’s (TC) London headquarters. Giles is one of the firm’s most senior Partners. He was privately educated and his parents are both doctors. We are coming to the end of our interview and have reached the section where we ask Giles for his reflections on our findings so far. We explain that a profound class pay gap persists in UK accountancy, we outline the class ceiling at TC, and we then run through the drivers explored so far in this book – informal sponsorship, behavioural norms and exclusive executive cultures. Giles looks distinctly unconvinced. As we finish, he takes a deep breath and pauses, as if debating whether to say what he’s thinking. Eventually he does:
I understand what you’re saying but … but I do think you’re missing something important. People might be afraid to say it but there is definitely an element of self-censorship. So how do you disentangle what you’ve been telling me from the “I didn’t feel I had the same chops so I took a sideways move.”
For Giles, the problem with our analysis so far is that it tilts too far towards issues of ‘demand’ rather than ‘supply’. We have thus interrogated various barriers that hold the upwardly mobile back but have neglected how the mobile themselves may be implicated in the class ceiling. What about their actions, decisions, aspirations? In Giles’s experience it is this ‘supply’ issue that is more important. To reach the partnership, he goes on to tell us, people need to “really want it”, need to be “comfortable asserting themselves”, need to handle “robust discussion”. But the upwardly mobile, he argues, “sometimes, not always, but sometimes shy away from that.”
This is not an isolated view. Over the course of this project we spoke to many, particularly those in senior positions (often white men from privileged backgrounds), who shared Giles’s take on the class ceiling. This kind of sentiment is also echoed strongly in the political and policy domain. Here the go-to strategy in tackling social mobility is often to focus on ‘fixing’ the individual, to focus interventions on ‘raising aspirations’ among those from disadvantaged backgrounds, to build their confidence and self-esteem.
two - Getting on
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp 45-56
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
The publication of the BBC annual report is normally a fairly sedate affair. A 200-page document covering all areas of the Corporation’s governance and accounts, it’s fair to say that it doesn’t exactly make waves. But in 2017 things were very different. Dedicated to publishing the names of all staff earning over £150,000, the report uncovered for the first time a striking glass ceiling at ‘The Beeb’. Specifically it showed that over two-thirds of high-earners were men, as well as all seven of the highest paid BBC executives. It also detailed stark gender pay gaps between stars of similar experience, fame and stature. Sports presenters Gary Lineker and Claire Balding provide an arresting example. Both are longstanding and much-loved BBC personalities, yet in 2017 Balding earned only one-tenth of Lineker’s £1.75m salary.
In the days following the report, countless prominent figures – both inside and outside the organisation – lined up to denounce a normalised culture of gender discrimination at the BBC. The embattled BBC Director-General, Tony Hall, took swift action, authorising an immediate audit of staff pay, promising to end the gender pay gap by 2020 and later agreeing to reduce the salaries of six highly paid male presenters.
This scandal is significant for several reasons. First and foremost, it reveals the sheer scale of gender inequality at the upper echelons of British society. At the same time, however, it also shows the significant progress that has been made in elevating the gender pay gap to the top of the public agenda. After decades of campaigning and countless high-profile studies, pay gaps by gender (and, to a lesser extent, ethnicity) are now finally being meaningfully and pragmatically addressed. The response from Tony Hall, while not going as far as many wished, clearly reflected this shift. While in the past senior leaders may have tried to contest, or at least deflect, a scandal like this, Hall’s response was fairly unequivocal – the BBC had a serious problem, he admitted, and action must be taken.
The BBC annual report was also significant in the context of this book. It detailed, for the first time, data on the class backgrounds of BBC staff. Yet curiously, this was almost entirely ignored by the media. Only one journalist, Sky’s Lewis Goodall, picked up on the omission.
Contents
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp v-vi
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Notes
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp 285-320
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
seven - Fitting in
- Sam Friedman, London School of Economics and Political Science, Daniel Laurison, Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania
-
- Book:
- The Class Ceiling
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 14 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 28 January 2019, pp 123-144
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
“She was just good at selling herself … without … without looking like she was selling, do you know what I mean?” The Future Leaders panel murmur their agreement with Head Judge, Simon. They are discussing the relative merits of two interviewees, Sophie and Martin. Each are vying for a place on television’s most prestigious mid-career scheme, a yearlong programme that takes ‘rising star’ television professionals and provides them with the support, mentoring and network relationships to propel them into senior roles. “Whereas Martin,” Mark continues, “… really impressive, definitely. But it just jarred a little, didn’t it? I’m not sure that works for us …”
On paper, Sophie and Martin have very similar credentials. They have both shone in the early years of their careers. Sophie, white British, privately educated and from an upper-middle-class background, has racked up a series of impressive credits as a documentary producer. Martin, Black British, and from a working-class background, is already a multi-award-winning screenwriter. The panel agree that Sophie and Martin are both comfortably worthy of a place, but there’s only space for one.
We are coming to the end of two intense days observing interviews on the Future Leaders scheme. Hundreds of applicants have been whittled down to 40 or so shortlisted candidates, most of whom have CVs that – while showcasing different specialities and knowledge – are hard to tell apart in terms of experience and achievement. Interviews, then, are key.
After a long discussion Sophie eventually gets the nod over Martin. “All in all, I think she’s a better fit,” Simon says, summarising the panel discussion. Simon doesn’t elaborate on what he means by ‘fit’, but it’s easy to read between the lines. Within seconds of entering Sophie had ingratiated herself, quipping about how the maze-like feel of the building reminded her of a popular ’90s TV game show. Immediately the atmosphere changed. The panel, tense from hours of interview mode, visibly relaxed. The banter continued back and forth, Sophie swapping jokes with the panel about other obscure game shows. Sophie also clearly interviewed well. Her answers to the standardised questions were confident, articulate and knowledgeable. But it is the lasting impact of those first two minutes of interaction that is most striking. Here Sophie’s informal demeanour, her knowing humour, forges an immediate affective energy with the panel, setting the tone for a friendly, sympathetic interview.