The visualization shows how immigration and immigrant integration were reported, discussed and debated in national newspapers in seven Western European countries between 1995 and 2018. It includes four types of actors: the state, political parties, civil society organizations, and the media.
The position of actors in the media was analyzed on the basis of claims and counter-claims, that is to say specific instances when an actor said something about immigration or integration. A claim is understood as a purposive public articulation of political demands, calls to action, criticism, proposal, or physical action that actually or potentially affect the interests of immigrants. The data cover different aspects of a (counter-)claim:
– Location of the claim (when and where was the claim made?)
– Actor: person or organization making a claim (who made the claim?)
– Form of the claim (how was the claim made in the public sphere?)
– Addressee of the claim (who was the claim directed to?)
– Substantive topic of the claim (what aspect of immigration and integration was the claim about?)
– Object actor of the claim (who was affected by the claim: for/against whom was the claim made?)
– Justification of the claim (why should the action be undertaken?)
Media coverage on immigration and integration in Western Europe included different kinds of actors. National governments and political parties were major actors in the public debate. By contrast, explicit anti-immigrant actors that are not anti-immigrant parties played a marginal role in European newspapers: very few of their claims were reported in newspapers.
Overall, the debate on immigration and integration in the Western European newspapers was dominated by claims that would have a slightly positive impact on immigrants and their descendants (shown in blue shades in the visualization). This overall depiction of immigration and integration hides important differences in the portrayal of immigrants by different actors and in different contexts.
While governmental actors and the judiciary often made positive claims about the integration of immigrants already in the country, they often made negative claims about immigration, particularly on individuals trying to reach the country. The most negative claims in this context concerned worries over security and crime. Political parties and members of the legislative also voiced concerns over safety and crime regarding immigrants already in the country.
How is migration being politicized in the media?
–
Sources: The core data 1995 to 2009 are from the FP7 project Support and Opposition to Migration (SOM). They are available from the Harvard Dataverse. The extensions 2010 to 2018 (preview) are hosted on Zenodo.
Data collection and coding for the 2010 to 2018 extension: Leslie Ader, Marco Bitschnau, Marilyn Ducommun, Cheryl Kwok, Julie Mancini, Oriana Polero Cardoso, Margaux Quadroni, Manon Reith, Didier Ruedin, Lora Zanasco.
Note on the methodology: Refer to Koopmans & Statham (1999), Koopmans et al. (2005), and Van der Brug et al. (2015) for a description of claims-making methodology.
Terms of use: The Migration-Mobility Indicators are made available free of charge for non-commercial use. We ask the users to acknowledge the source.
Suggested citation: nccr – on the move, Migration-Mobility Indicators. Neuchâtel: nccr – on the move, 2023.
Data visualization: Andreas Perret
Last update: 14 February 2023