Are Asylum seekers misrepresented in the Media?

Ghislaine Manuel 19/12/03 British Media Essay

In the past few years the immigration issue has gained more and more prominence within the British media, Largely due to the disaster of September 11 and the problems regarding the increasing number of immigrants. It is highly fictitious to say that the press has been highly objective when reporting stories surrounding the immigration issue because of the many reports compiled on the coverage of immigration by the media.

The freedom of press is something that journalist a-like fight for on a daily basis in relation to what they can print. Although freedom of press is very important in order to release key information on issues that most matter to society there are times when freedom of press in misused and misinterpretations occur. These times especially occur in the case of immigration. This may be a sweeping judgement to make but it is far from fetched.

During 2002 immigration dominate the attention of the press. The issues, which surrounded the headlines, consisted of; the Sangatte camp, security concerns at the Eurotunnel, the proposed locations of new accommodation centres and government policies relating to immigration and asylum. In the course of 2002 research was commissioned by the Scottish executive to explore the effects of the immigration and asylum act 1999 on asylum seekers. Part of the research focused on the press coverage of immigration. It revealed that during the period of January 2002 and July 2002, the amount of stories, which included references to ‘asylum seekers’ per month, averaged 700. The key thing to note here is that the term asylum seeker appeared in a variety of apparently non-related news-stories, without having any immediate apparent links to the main story covered. It would appear that during this period linking asylum seekers to diverse news reporting served as a way to keep the issue firmly in the public domain.

This is a preview of the whole essay

The influence of terms and connotations of words used by the media also should not to underestimate. A MORI (marketing and opinion research international) Poll carried out in May this year asked respondents what word the media most uses when referring to asylum seekers and refugees. The top answer Mentioned by 64% was ‘illegal immigrant’. Bogus was cited by 22% of respondents. This is not surprising when you analyse the type of language used to describe immigrants. The study which was carried out by the Scottish Executive also found that the following terms appear to be used interchangeably with asylum seeker blurring the differences between those genuinely fleeing persecution and genuine economic migrants; ‘immigrant’, ‘illegal immigrant’, ‘refugee’, ‘economic migrant’. The negative language used in by the media also called into question the reliability of asylum claimants included; ‘ bogus refugees’, asylum cheats’, ‘migrant scam’, ‘crook refugee’, ‘ illegals’, ‘bogus asylum seeker’. The last term ‘bogus’ highlights the one form of bias at the nature of some news reporting.

The headlines that focused on the immigration issue during 2002 were very focused on the negative aspects of it. They were more inclined to show immigrants as cheats and invaders rather than people simply feeling prosecution. Here are some of the examples of this negativity charged headlines:

The hi-tech Id Card to beat Asylum Cheats, Daily Mail, 1 February 2002

Immigration Hit Squads to target 5000,000 illegal workers, Independent, 21 January 2002

.... Asylum invaders will destroy the channel tunnel, The Express, 31 January 2002

Officials admit: Bogus refugees will stay forever: 200,00 asylum seekers vanish, The Express, 29 July

These examples are only but a few which reported asylum seekers in a negative light. Although some articles from last year portrayed asylum seekers in a positive light such as; I’m proud of refugee children in my school says head, Independent, 2 July 2002, there was a much higher proportion of negative coverage on the issue. Furthermore I found that the Headlines which were showing asylum seekers in a positive light fell into human-interest stories or dealt with the experience of one asylum seeker living in Britain. There seem to be a lack of news articles focusing on factual information about the conditions and treatment of asylum seekers in the countries from which they fled. Also some negative headlines appeared to endorse racist views that asylum seekers were not legitimate asylum seekers and were only here to take advantage of the better social provision of the UK.

From observing the language used by the media, it can be said that it reinforces myths by asserting the need to toughen the asylum policies. As well as this it reinforce negative stereotypes already held or misinformation currently circulating. The fact that all of images portrayed of asylum seekers are likely to effect the way people respond to them in thought and behaviour, the newspapers have a duty to deliver fact based news.

It is alarming to see that although complaints are being made against the coverage of immigration within newspaper everyday, no change has occurred in the way the papers represent asylum seekers. The papers still use such terms such as ‘bogus’ to refer to asylum seekers which in itself is a fictitious and highly bias term to use, which only adds to the social tension on the issue. A lot of the terms that are used in the newspaper are actually regarded as myths rather than facts. The term ‘illegal asylum seeker’ is fictitious because everyone is allowed to claim asylum under the 1951 Convention on Refugees but many tabloid newspapers such as the Sun and the Express. The Tabloid make wild claims which if researched are far from factually based. A the claim which was made by the Sun that Britain is the No.1 refugee magnet But in fact this is false because the it is the developing countries which take in the most amount refugees. A recent MORI poll demonstrates the impact of such misinformation, showing that people vastly overestimate the numbers of asylum seekers and refugees in the UK on average think that 23% of the world’s refugees and asylum seekers are in the UK, the real figure is actually less than 2%.

The PCC (Press Complaints Commission) received a lot of complaints about he way in which the press report such stories but despite this editors still print stories which are misleading and receive no substantial repercussions. The PCC is in fact a non-statutory which means its power to enforce any kind of influence on the newspapers is limited. It is quite a worry that even in light of serious complaints the PCC are unable to successfully influence the newspapers to revise their coverage. However the PCC believes that it is an active force in controlling implementing complaints of individuals by use of adjudication. They say that using fines do not work because it introduces to much regulation and money. Also they would have to take freedom of press into consideration.

Press wise and the RAM project urges anyone who considers that a newspaper story or radio and TV broadcast to be encouraging attacks on innocent refugees, to complaint immediately. It is well and good to complain by all means but my question is how far will this affect the way an editor chooses their next headline on asylum seekers. I think that the PCC need more power in order to be more influential in the way in which asylum seekers and other groups are perceived within newspapers. At this moment in time, with no influence on the tabloid to decrease their use of negative terminology, only the Independent and Guardian will be the for runners amongst dailies to promote the need to help asylum seekers rather to label them all as bogus. Also, it will be a long time before you see the Sun reporting a story on a kind refugee.

I have focused mainly on tabloids as key drivers of this negative perception amongst society because they are the papers with the largest circulation therefore the largest readerships. Therefore if they are printing unreliable or bias news about this specific issue than something really should be done about it. Freedom of press is a great thing but reporters as well as editors need to use this right in a way, which will benefit society rather than drive forward the already mounting animosity towards asylum seekers and immigrants.

Word Count: 1,384