Migration and Integration: Engaging with Media
By Bettina Peters, Director, Global Forum for Media Development
When looking at how media in Europe report migration and integration, we see a pretty mixed picture. There are, unfortunately, still many examples of sensationalized coverage that reduce migration to a threat to indigenous societies but there are also many examples of balanced coverage. What there is not a lot of are initiatives engaging with migrant communities that are run or supported by media organisations themselves.
Many media organisations see ‘promotion’ of diversity and particular attention to fair reporting on migration as ‘imposed agendas’. They feel that ‘regular’ reporting is enough. That view is particularly dominant in the written press.
Public service broadcasters, on the other hand, often have dedicated diversity programmes (both in portrayal and recruitment) and dedicate more resources towards achieving a fair portrayal of migration and integration.
A recent study ‘ Media4Diversity’ supported by the European Commission and carried out by Internews, Media for Diversity and the International Federation of Journalists found that there are more diversity initiatives in North-western Europe than in Southern or Eastern Europe.
Many programmes working on media and migration are initiated and run by civil society organisations, not media.
Most programmes also need outside financial assistance; they are funded by foundations etc, not by media or civil society organisations.
The picture of reporting migration and integration also shows that the role of politicians play in this area is important. Where there is political commitment (legislation as well as government-supported programmes) towards improving integration and openness towards migration, media coverage tends to mirror this (although not throughout the media scene).
Where politicians use migrants as scapegoats and agitate against migration, media coverage tends to reflect this as well (although not throughout the media scene).
But also the commitment by journalists’ groups to balanced coverage and the level of organisation of migrant groups play a role.
Where groups of migrants are organised and have identifiable spokespersons, media coverage tends to reflect this.
Where the journalists’ groups (for instance in the UK and Italy) are engaged in promoting fair portrayal of migrants, this tends to have an effect on coverage.
And where there is a commitment from the media owner/management to improve coverage of migration this effects coverage positively.
But one thing the Media4Diversity study found was that there is so far little commitment from private publishers or broadcasters to put resources towards recruitment of migrants into their news organisations or specific programmes of engagement with migrant communities.
This is also reflected at European level. For instance, the web-site of the European Newspaper Publishers Association has little to say about media coverage or issues of pluralism:
“Despite calls for action from some politicians, there is no competence for the EU to act at European level on media pluralism as this remains the exclusive competence of national authorities. Newspapers around Europe provide a highly diverse content diet adapted to local cultural needs. Publishers need improved flexibility to be able to develop their business models to survive in a fast evolving media landscape.”
So, if anything, European newspaper publishers feel that they are providing diverse content and do not see a role of any kind of intervention that would support more pluralism or programmes for specific communities including migrants.
The journalists’ organisations are more open to the issue. Some national journalists’ unions have special reporting guidelines on migration or councils such as the Black Members Council of the National Union of Journalists of Great Britain and Ireland. Nevertheless, the NUJ is still the exception not the norm in Europe. None of these types of structures exist, for instance, in the journalists’ unions in Eastern Europe, although some of them are involved in specific diversity projects.
The IFJ, which represents journalists at the international and European levels, is more involved. It launched the Ethical Journalism Initiative last year, which promote quality reporting, including on migrants and ethnic minorities (www.ethicaljournalisminitiative.org).
And there are an increasing number of examples of media diversity initiatives across Europe.
For instance, Malta Today, www.maltatoday.com.mt, a bi-weekly newspaper published in Malta, aims to tell the side of the story of the refugees and migrant workers that come to the island. As Malta receives a lot of migrants coming across the Mediterranean and as there have been attacks on migrants in the country, Malta Today fulfills an important role in providing balances coverage and key information in a volatile situation.
Another example is the Roma Mainstream Media Internship Programme run by GFMD member the Centre for Independent Journalism in Hungary. The Roma, of course, are not a migrant community but as one of the most maligned minority groups in Europe, reporting Roma is a particular challenge to media in Eastern Europe. The programme has been running for over ten years and has produced some 150 Roma journalists. Slightly less than half of the journalists trained by the programme continue to work in media, so that the level of representation of Roma inside of Hungarian newsrooms in growing.
As Europe’s largest public service broadcaster, the BBC (www.bbc.co.uk) in the United Kingdom has a diversity department and a range of specific initiatives focusing on portrayal, recruitment and employment practices. It is an example of how a public service broadcaster has made the issue of diversity and integral part of its programming and management policies.
These three examples show that where there is a will there is a way to improve representation and coverage of migrant communities. But civil society organisations aiming to promote a balanced portrayal of migrants sometimes find it hard to engage with media. They need to find the right arguments to get media engaged.
Quality journalism is the best argument when dealing with journalists. One should not talk about ‘positive portrayal’ but should focus on how engaging with migrant communities and telling their stories within context makes for more interesting, more exciting, better quality journalism.
Where appropriate, also the ‘money talks’ argument can be used. Migrants buy newspapers and watch television. They may not be the most interesting segment of the advertising market when they arrive, but if media engage with them they can become loyal customers.
Civil society organisations need to team-up more with journalists’ groups and media development NGOs. Especially the media development groups, such as the GFMD members Panos or the Center for Independent Journalism are often the ones running diversity programmes and are through their mandate dedicated to diversity and media pluralism.
There is a need for a more strategic approach by civil society groups to communication on migration in general. It is not just about media coverage; communication strategies must also target politics as well as other mainstream civil society groups.
While migration and integration are key issues and many civil society groups rightly feel strongly about it, media organisations will not publish or broadcast the work of an NGO ‘just for the cause’, there needs to be a story.
Many journalists are more open to criticism of their coverage, than is widely believed and civil society groups can make a difference when challenging media on unfair coverage. One should also not forget that a lot of prejudice against migrants is pushed by extremist politicians and there are many media organisations that like to expose such politicians. Challenging extremist views should be part of a communication strategy that does not just target unfair media coverage but addresses the issue of prejudice within its larger political context.
1,241 words