Abstract
This article examines the media framing of the 2018 ‘paid to lie’ campaign of Lush, a high-street ethical cosmetics firm. The viral nature of Lush’s intervention into the undercover policing of activism in the United Kingdom highlights the significance of media reporting in the construction of narratives surrounding policing and activism. A qualitative content analysis was undertaken of articles published online in the immediate aftermath of the campaign launch. Based on this analysis, this article argues that the intensely polarised debate following Lush’s ‘paid to lie’ campaign is representative of a wider discursive framing battle that continues to persist today. Within this battle, the state and police establishment promote ‘rotten apple’ explanations of the undercover policing scandal that seek to individualise blame and shirk institutional accountability (Punch 2003). This is significant, as identifying systemic dimensions of the ‘spycops’ scandal is a key focus for activists involved in the ongoing Undercover Policing Inquiry (Schlembach 2016).
Highlights
In June 2018, many consumers in the United Kingdom (UK) were surprised to see what appeared to be police tape adorning the storefronts of the ethical cosmetics chain Lush
This paper empirically shows how ‘rotten apple’ explanations have come to dominate media reporting of cases of police misconduct
- focus on the Lush Spycops campaign of 2018; and - have been published between 1 June 2018 and 30 June 2018
Summary
In June 2018, many consumers in the United Kingdom (UK) were surprised to see what appeared to be police tape adorning the storefronts of the ethical cosmetics chain Lush. A closer inspection revealed a carefully planned awareness raising campaign, highlighting harmful cases of police spying on activists. This article argues that the heavily polarised debate, which immediately followed the launch of Lush’s ‘paid to lie’ campaign, can be understood as part of a wider discursive framing battle that continues to persist between activists and the state. A central contention raised by spied-on activists related to the systemic nature of the harms perpetrated by the state. The state responded to the allegations about the ‘spycops’ by attempting to individualise blame and amplify ‘rotten apple’ explanations for the scandal. The state placed responsibility on individual officers rather than systemic police practices and sought to shirk institutional accountability
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
