Dominant cultural representations of ‘the typical benefits recipient’ – notably in reality television and the tabloids – have been marked by an increasing focus on the character and alleged moral defects of individuals. Drawing on interviews from a large-scale German qualitative longitudinal study, this article explores how benefits recipients respond to such negative media images. Our analysis of interviewees’ ‘identity work’ finds that they have internalised and replicate negative public discourses to a surprising extent. The figure of the ‘typical’ benefits recipient constructed in the media emerges as both a threat to recipients’ self-identities, and as a central reference point in the strategies through which they attempt to defend their respectability. The article concludes with some thoughts on the relationship between such negative representations and the political legitimacy of welfare reform.
BlairT. and SchröderG. (1999). Europe: The Third Way/Die Neue Mitte. Joint statement (11/6/1999). Reproduced in The Spokesman66: p. 27–37.
2.
BourdieuP. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste.London: Routledge.
3.
BourdieuP. (2001). Masculine Domination.Stanford: Stanford University Press.
4.
BrettschneiderA. (2008). On the Way to Social Investment? The Normative Recalibration of the German Welfare State, German Policy Studies, 4(2): p.19–66.
5.
BUNDESMINISTERIUM FÜR WIRTSCHAFT UND ARBEIT [BMWA] (2005). Vorrang den Anständigen - Gegen Missbrauch, ‘Abzocke’ und Selbstbedienung im Sozialstaat. Ein Report vom Arbeitsmarkt im Sommer 2005.Berlin: BMWA.
ChasséK.A. (2010). Unterschicht in Deutschland: Materialien zu einer kritischen Debatte.Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
8.
ClarkeJ. (2005). New Labour's Citizens: Activated, Empowered, Responsibilized, Abandoned?Critical Social Policy25(4): p. 447–63. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0261018305057024]
9.
CordenA. and MillarJ. (2007). Time and Change: A Review of the Qualitative Longitudinal Research Literature for Social Policy, Social Policy & Society, 6(4): p. 583–592.
10.
DaviesB. and HarréR. (1990). Positioning: the discursive construction of selves, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour20(1): p. 43–63.
11.
DingeldeyI. (2007). Between Workfare and Enablement? The Different Paths to Transformation of the Welfare State: A Comparative Analysis of Activating Labour Market Policies, European Journal of Political Research46(6): p. 823–51. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2007.00712.x]
12.
DouglasM. (2003). Purity and danger: An analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo.London: Routledge.
13.
FaircloughN. (1999): Global Capitalism and Critical Awareness of Language, Language Awareness8, 2: p. 71–83. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09658419908667119]
14.
FleckensteinT. (2008). Restructuring welfare for the unemployed: The Hartz legislation in Germany. Journal of European Social Policy, 18 (2): p. 177–188. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0958928707087593]
15.
FleckensteinT. (2012). The Politics of Labour Market Reforms and Social Citizenship in Germany, West European Politics, 35 (4): p. 847–868. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2012.682348]
16.
FohrbeckA. (2014). Currencies of Reciprocity: Negotiations of Identity and Value in the German Welfare State: A Secondary Qualitative Analysis.London: Unpublished MSc Dissertation.
17.
GiddensA. (1998). The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy, Cambridge: Polity Press.
18.
GilensM. (1999). Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media and the Politics of Anti-Poverty Policy.Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226293660.001.0001]
19.
GoffmanE. (1963). Stigma: notes on the management of spoiled identity.Harmondsworth: Penguin.
20.
HallS., CritcherC., JeffersonT., ClarkeJ. and RobertsB. (2013). Policing the crisis: Mugging, the state and law and order (2nd ed.). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
21.
HaylettC. (2001). Modernization, welfare and ‘third way’ politics: limits to theorizing in ‘thirds’?Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 26(1): p. 43–56. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1475-5661.00005]
22.
HirselandA. (2013). Qualitatives Panel ‘Armutsdynamik und Arbeitsmarkt - Entstehung, Verfestigung und Überwindung von Hilfebedürftigkeit bei Erwerbsfähigen’ (Anhang B5). In: DietzM., KupkaP., and Ramos LobatoP. (Eds.) Acht Jahre Grundsicherung für Arbeitsuchende. Strukturen - Prozesse - Wirkungen (IAB-Bibliothek No. 347). Bielefeld: Bertelsmann.
23.
HirselandA. and Ramos LobatoP. (2014). Die wollen ja ein bestimmtes Bild vermitteln'. Zur Neupositionierung von Hilfeempfängern im aktivierenden Sozialstaat. SWS-Rundschau54(2): p. 181–200.
24.
HohmeyerK. and WolffJ. (2012). A fistful of Euros: Is the German one-euro job workfare scheme effective for participants?International Journal of Social Welfare21(2): p. 174–185. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2397.2011.00830.x]
25.
JonesO. (2011). Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class.London: Verso Books.
26.
LamontM. and MolnárV. (2002). The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences, Annual review of sociology, 28 (2002): p. 167–95.
27.
LawlerS. (2005). Introduction: class, culture and identity, Sociology, 39(5): p. 797–806. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0038038505058365]
28.
LessenichS. (2008). Die Neuerfindung des Sozialen. Der Sozialstaat im flexiblen Kapitalismus.Bielefeld: transcript
29.
MauS. (2003). The Moral Economy of Welfare States: Britain and Germany Compared.London: Routledge.
30.
MauS. (2004). Welfare Regimes and the Norms of Social Exchange, Current Sociology, 52(1): p. 53–74. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011392104039314]
31.
MeadL.M. (1986). Beyond Entitlement: The Social Obligations of Citizenship.New York: Free Press.
32.
MurrayC. (1990). The Emerging Underclass.London: Institute for Economic Affairs.
33.
NealeB. (2011). Qualitative Longitudinal Research. In: BeckerS., BrymanA. and FergusonS. (Eds.) Understanding Research for Social Policy and Social Work.Bristol: Policy Press.
34.
NolteP. (2004). Generation Reform: jenseits der blockierten Republik.Berlin: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung.
35.
ProbynE. (2000). Shaming Theory: Thinking Disconnection: Feminism and Reconciliation. In: AhmedS., KilbyJ., LuryC., McNeilM. and SkeggsB. (Eds.) Transformations: Thinking Through Feminism.London: Routledge.
Seeleib-KaiserM. and FleckensteinT. (2007). Discourse, Learning and Welfare State Change: The Case of German Labour Market Reforms, Social Policy & Administration, 41(5): p. 427–448. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2007.00566.x]
38.
ShildrickT. and MacDonaldR. (2013). Poverty Talk: How People Experiencing Poverty Deny Their Poverty and Why They Blame ‘The Poor’. The Sociological Review61: p. 285–303. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.12018]
39.
SkeggsB. (1997). Formations of Class and Gender: Becoming Respectable.London: Sage.
40.
SkeggsB. (2004). Exchange, Value and Affect: Bourdieu and ‘the Self’, Sociological Review, 52: p.75–95. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2005.00525.x]
41.
SkeggsB. (2009). The Moral Economy of Person Production: The Class Relations of Self-Performance on ‘Reality’ Television, The Sociological Review, 54(4): p. 626–644. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2009.01865.x]
42.
SomersM.R. and BlockF. (2005). From Poverty to Perversity; Ideas, Markets, and Institutions over 200 Years of Welfare Debate, American Sociological Review, 70(2): p. 260–87. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000312240507000204]
43.
WilliamsS. (1995). Theorising Class, Health, and Lifestyles: Can Bourdieu Help Us?Sociology of Health and Illness, 17(5): p. 577–604. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.ep10932093]
44.
WoolfordA. and NelundA. (2013). The Responsibilities of the Poor: Performing Neoliberal Citizenship within the Bureaucratic Field, Social Service Review87(2): p. 292–318. [doi://dx.doi.org/10.1086/671072]
