EU MIGRATION AND THE
PROPAGATION OF A MORAL
PANIC:
AN EXAMINATION OF THE ‘OTHER’
IN THE DAILY MAIL AND THE SUN
200288938
HANNAH ROBINS
UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS
MA DISSERTATION
2007
CONTENTS
Chapters
1.
Introduction
3
2.
The tabloid press and its relationship with truth
7
3.
The discourse of the tabloid press and the creation of an ‘other’
13
4.
The creation of a moral panic
28
5.
Conclusion
39
Bibliography
42
HANNAH ROBINS
2
INTRODUCTION
On April 16 2003 Britain signed the Treaty of Athens; this detailed the accession of
ten new member states into the European Union. These new members were
predominantly from the East of Europe and included: Cyprus, the Czech Republic,
Slovenia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Malta, and Slovakia. During
the signature ceremony the governments of the 25 EU states made a solemn
declaration, which proclaimed that the union represented their ‘will to embark on a
new future based on cooperation, respect for diversity and mutual understanding.
[Their] Union is a joint project, aimed at sharing [their] future as a community of
values.’1 The Treaty essentially dissipated Europe’s national boundaries and
permitted free movement of individuals for travel and labour – this notion caused
widespread fear amongst the old EU nations, as they foresaw their national values
being threatened. Walter Lippmann expounded such social concerns:
In the individual person the limited messages from outside, formed into a
pattern of stereotypes, are identified with his own interests as he feels and
conceives them (1997:19).
Lippmann, above, demonstrates how a society might feel that ‘others’, who are
different from them, pose a threat to their social order, and could throw their world
into discord. Within this conjecture, migrants from the new EU states serve as a
convenient scapegoat for social ills, and allow the media, through discourse and
figures to create a necessary underclass.
For the purpose of this study I will be utilising a working definition of the ‘other’, which
establishes the EU migrant as a socially excluded group. A migrant, according to
Amnesty International is:
http://www.delcan.cec.eu.int/en/press_and_information/newsletter/2003/NL-2003-2EN.pdf
1
3
Simply a person who moves from one place to another. They may
be forced to leave because they are afraid, starving, or desperate
for the safety and security of their family. They may move
voluntarily. They may leave for a whole mixture of reasons
(http://web.amnesty.org/pages/refugees-background-eng).
This study will be focussing predominantly on migrants from the European Union who
have entered Britain in great fervency since the May 2004 accession of ten new
members. The freedom of labour, detailed in the Treaty of Athens, permitted EU
citizens to take on paid employment in any other member state, this issue has been
the victim of pungent criticism. In November 2004 the Daily Mail expressed concern
that the ‘Liberal policies on immigration and crime are rapidly making this country
more disorderly and less safe’ (Blair’s blunders are putting our liberty at risk Daily
Mail 14.11.04). This study will therefore explore whether the tabloid furore outweighs
the realistic threat of migration, and if so whether it has been inflated through the
media discourse of The Sun and the Daily Mail.
The conjectures of Walter Lippmann, Tony Blair and Stanley Cohen, amongst others,
have noted that the media influences public opinion, and demonstrated the possibility
of subjugating and enhancing events within news to create a specific result. Tony
Blair within his ‘Feral Beast’ speech stated that ‘Impact is what matters. It is all that
can distinguish, can rise above the clamour, can get noticed’ (Full text of Blair’s
speech on politics and media The Daily Telegraph 12.06.07). Stories would therefore
be selected upon their capacity to cause impact. Arguably migration has been utilised
for its ability to impact and capture its audience, as it offers great dramatic potential.
Capella and Jamieson state that we exist ‘in a mediated reality’ and therefore the
public receive much of their knowledge from newspapers, television and radio
(1997:31). This theory would provide the media great sway over public opinion. This
study deems it necessary to freely discuss migration and the influence and possible
bias of the media – considering whether media representation may have negatively
affected public opinion. To satisfactorily achieve this, I will be analysing the content of
4
The Sun and the Daily Mail. These papers have specifically been selected as they
are the two most popular newspapers in Britain, together totalling ‘22 per cent of
newspaper readership’ [www.statistic.gov.uk]. I will explore the affect that these two
papers have had on migration – considering their employment of derogatory
discourse, which I argue aims to exclude members of society.
The following chapter will explore the nature of tabloid news and its relationship with
truth and reality. Tony Blair’s ‘Feral Beast’ speech ardently criticised the news for
revealing the ‘opposite of truth’ and stated that its need to cause impact overrode its
responsibility to reliably inform (Full text of Blair’s speech on politics and media The
Daily Telegraph 12.06.07). Blair’s critique will be explored in conjunction with Walter
Lippmann and Hayden White, considering whether the subjugation and enhancement
of selective events is a concern. Ultimately chapter one will consider what affects the
telling of news, and what pressures are placed upon a journalist to capture an
audience; these themes will form the basis for subsequent analysis into tabloid
discourse and moral panic.
Chapter two will be concerned with the style of discourse employed within The Sun
and the Daily Mail. The chapter will focus on the tone and style of the language used
to describe the issue of EU migration, considering furthermore the employment of
derogatory terminology alongside the use of hypothetical figures. In conjunction to
this, chapter two will explore the role of the tabloid press in ‘othering’ and excluding
members of society, for this I will draw upon Helene Cixous’ study of binary pairings
and Benedict Anderson’s thesis on nationalism.
Finally, chapter three will examine the main concerns expressed by the tabloid press
of mass migration, in relation to the propagation of moral panics. To achieve this I will
consider Stanley Cohen’s principle research into moral panic alongside Goode and
5
Ben-Yehuda’s contemporary research. The conjectures of both will be considered in
regard to how The Sun and the Daily Mail have fuelled concern over the issue of EU
migration, analysing to what degree newspaper discourse correlates with reality.
Ultimately I will be evaluating whether a moral panic exists and whether the tabloid
press has aided its creation.
In summary, this study will examine the concerns of mass migration from the new EU
member states. The primary aim will be to establish whether concern over migration
is justified, or whether it has been misconstrued and exaggerated within the column
inches of The Sun and the Daily Mail. I will be considering: society’s need to create
an ‘other’; the discourse of the tabloid press; and critical theory of media and
migration. To begin, however, I must look at the relationship the tabloid press holds
with truth; and it is to this I now turn.
6
THE TABLOID PRESS AND ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH TRUTH
By its literal definition news is: ‘The reporting or accounting of recent events or
occurrences’ (Sykes 1927: 734). The Oxford English Dictionary’s interpretation,
suggests news to be an exact account of events, an objective retelling. News
reporting is however, not this straightforward, and instead there are many factors
which determine what stories are to become news. These events will often be
determined in respect of their potential to interest and capture a public audience. The
filters of the Chomsky and Herman 1988 Propaganda model, state that a journalist is
impinged by a number of external forces, including: ownership, advertising, available
sources, or a need to establish an enemy (1994). This chapter will explore the biased
and ambiguous nature of news writing, considering how the style affects the public
and the enemy that it has created. To do this I will be focussing principally on the
works of Hayden White, Walter Lippmann and Paul Weaver, exploring throughout
whether the performance of news affects public opinion. It is to the issue of truth that
my discussion will first focus.
Writing within News and the Culture of Lying Paul Weaver articulates that news does
not follow the lines of a factual report or summary but instead, news forms strong
parallels with storytelling and fiction. Weaver writes that news is ‘a story, with
characters, action, plot, point of view, dramatic closure (1994:2). I suggest that the
tabloid press is far more susceptible to writing news stories of a misleading nature
than the broadsheet press, as the tabloid medium has a greater responsibility to
entertain and impact its reader.
I would like to equate Weaver’s concepts concerning the storytelling nature of news
the ideas of American theorist Hayden White, who wrote of historical emplotment.
Hayden White was principle in likening the discipline of history with literature; he
suggested that the writer possessed fundamental influence over a readers
7
understanding of what they read. White establishes that the function of a writer is to
establish a ‘plausible story’ which surround an array of facts (White cited in Roberts
2001:376). Furthermore White states the writer to possess the power to subjugate
and enhance specific events dependant upon his or her own bias. While White’s
theory refers specifically to the study of history, I suggest that it holds relevance to
my study of tabloid journalism, for like an historian a journalist is in control of the
words that they write, and their personal opinions and obligations cannot be
extinguished from the process. As such each article reveals a little about its author.
This is supported by theorist Dominick LaCapra who wrote that ‘to understand a
document one must understand the context in which it was produced’, augmenting
that an author, whether, literary writer or tabloid journalist, will inevitably demonstrate
the ideas and concerns of his or her contemporary environment (cited in LaCapra
and Kaplan 1980:376). With this in mind I suggest that contemporary pressures, such
as finance, ownership, and need to cause impact, assist in altering the original
reality.
Jostein Gripsrud, who, suggests that the popular press is dictated by its ability
to entertain, might argue that the tabloid press purposely select news material that
errs upon the melodramatic. Writing in Journalism and popular culture,
Gripsrud states that:
Astonishing stage-effects, like erupting volcanoes, fires,
dreadful rainstorms, avalanches, etc. would not only testify to the
cosmic dimensions of the drama presented. They would also
have the effect of shaking the audience, and thus
increase the pedagogical effect of the play in question.
Melodrama was didactic drama, designed to teach the
audience a lesson ... Today's popular press also teaches the
audience a lesson, every day [Gripsrud The aesthetics and politics
of melodrama cited in Dahlgren and Sparks 1999: 87].
Gripsrud here suggests that melodrama is utilised within the popular press to
educate its audience on a given topic; this is established using overt and
8
explicit techniques. Melodrama relies, essentially upon exciting and extreme
scenarios. Predominantly these situations, stand outside normal life. The news
media, especially within the popular press, stands at a distance from reality;
Aitchison and Lewis note it to represent a 'rhetorical version of the nation or its
simulacrum' (2003:54). This interpretation suggests therefore, that because there
is no 'original', the popular press is able to create its own dramatic
interpretation. Hence Gripsrud's analysis that the popular press has a didactic
role is interesting, as it suggests that their news does not necessarily need to
base itself fully on any reality. I want to at this stage be clear that it is not the opinion
of this study that news editorial within the Daily Mail and The Sun is fabricated;
merely that its news, and the material contained within is selected to serve a biased
purpose.
Dahlgren and Spark suggest that it is detrimental to society to accept that news
conveys truth. This is expressed below:
While melodrama in film, television, theatre and literature is
presented as fiction and thus normally understood as ‘not
empirically true, as hypothetical examples, by audiences, the
melodramatic representation of the popular press claims to be
truth (1999:91).
Dahlgren and Spark thus note that the problem with the format of news media is that
it is presented to reveal truth. However, within the tabloid press the pressures to
cause impact often override the responsibility to reveal empirical fact – to achieve
this; a journalist may subjugate mundane issues and enhance those of more interest.
Thus like an author, the journalist creates ‘melodrama’. In other words, instead of
relaying facts, the journalist (not dissimilar from what White terms emplotment)
selects article issues in accordance to their ability to evoke emotion from the reader.
Dahlgren and Spark progress to state that ‘if the material, the news item per se, is
not shocking or personal, the popular press will tend to present it as such, for
9
instance by focussing on any traces of shocking or personal aspect of the material in
question’ (1999:85).
Importantly the storytelling function of the contemporary journalist is not made
apparent to the reader, and this is of concern. News editorial written by the tabloid
press is expected to represent the world’s reality; instead I suggest that the tabloid
press create within their pages a new reality, drawing upon unusual and dramatic
situations to captivate its audience. Weaver augments this notion of news, stating it
to be a: ‘story about crisis and emergency response – about the waxing and waning
of urgent danger to the community’ (1994:2). As chapter two will explore, tabloid
journalists often exploit social situations for their own ends, and use language to
generate a fear within the public sphere. Migration is the ideal example of this –
chapter two will investigate the effect of tabloid language in exclusive regard to this
issue.
Former Prime Minister Tony Blair in a speech entitled the ‘Feral Beast’ ardently
condemned British media, arguing it to present the ‘opposite of the truth’. The Prime
Minister stated that:
Impact is what matters. It is all that can distinguish, can rise above
the clamour, can get noticed. Impact gives competitive edge. Of
course the accuracy of a story counts. But it is secondary to
impact. It is this necessary devotion to impact that is unravelling
standards, driving them down, making the diversity of the media
not the strength it should be but an impulsion towards sensation
above all else (Full text of Blair’s speech on politics and media The
Daily Telegraph 12.06.07).
The Prime Minister here suggests that the function of journalism as a moneymaking
business, has overridden its responsibility to reliably inform. Sensationalism and
impacting stories, sell papers, and this, Blair argues has become the fundamental
priority for newspaper owners. This notion is supported by Lang and Lang who write
that ‘the mass media force attention to certain issues’ implying therefore that the
10
media are in the position of selecting stories to suit their requirements (cited in
McCombs and Shaw 1972:154).
Although Blair’s critique singled out the Independent Newspaper – deeming it to form
the ‘metaphor for this genre of modern journalism’, I argue that it is the tabloid press
which vehemently select stories based on their capacity to entertain, is more likely to
need to impact its audience (Full text of Blair’s speech on politics’ and media The
Daily Telegraph 12.06.07). As Blair notes, opinion and comment now dominate
‘news’ content, bias has arguably become an integral feature of factual news story.
Blair states that:
Opinion and fact should be clearly divisible. The truth is a large
part of the media today not merely elides the two but does so now
as a matter of course. In other words, this is not exceptional. It is
routine (Full text of Blair’s speech on politics and media The Daily
Telegraph 12.06.07).
Thus, the division between fact and opinion has been distorted, while this may not
immediately appear to be an issue of concern, unease arises, when one considers
the role news has in society. The function of news is to inform the public of important
world events; people acquire knowledge about the world from the media, and as
McCombs and Shaw note, ‘most of what people know comes to them ‘second’ or
‘third’ hand from the mass media or from other people’ (1972:153). The problem
entailed therefore with an overly sensationalist style of journalism, is that news is at
large the only thing that the public has to inform them of current issues. If they are
not directly affected they rely on information from the media. As a result, when
opinion is presented over fact, the public is immediately misled; this is because within
our ‘mediated reality’ few points of reference exist outside of journalistic reporting and
the words of our political leaders (Capella and Jamieson 1997:31). In accordance it
becomes inevitable that opinion expressed by the media will affect the understanding
of the audience it reaches. Whether this is in a negative or positive way, it is
11
undeniable that a journalist has massive sway over public opinion. McCombs asserts
the news media are ‘not very good at telling people what to think but are very good at
telling people what to think about it’, this will clearly be demonstrated when we
consider the discourse of The Sun and the Daily Mail in chapter two (1972:92).
A way in which a journalist might affect public opinion is to enhance or to subjugate
chosen events. To explore this point I turn to Walter Lippmann, who in 1921 argued
that the ‘Bolshevik revolution from 1917 to 1920’ was insufficiently covered by the
American media (cited in Weaver 1994:62). He stated that the New York Times had
only dealt with the anti-Bolshevik line, and did not report anything removed from this
perspective. Lippmann determined the paper to by guilty of ‘seeing not what was, but
what men wished to see’ (1994:62). This was achieved Weaver continues, through
the suppression of disagreeable evidence, overusing and analysing uncritically the
‘manipulative lies of interested parties’ (1994:62). Lippmann, Weaver notes, was
concerned with the way newspapers ‘stereotyped’ groups, therefore how the press
generalised a situation, and oversimplified it (1994:62). For example the language in
the media often stereotypes migrants; they are grouped together and provided with
an overarching identity (Weaver 1994:63).
However, in his later years Lippmann’s opinion significantly shifted. Despite early
criticism of journalistic reporting, specifically over the Russian revolution, Lippmann
later argued that ‘news and truth are not the same thing’ (Lippmann cited in Weaver
1994:63). If they are not the same thing, a journalist is permitted to provide bias to an
article. Lippmann’s comments reveal how he considered a journalist to be restricted
by their subjective opinion, which ultimately hinder the potential to reveal truth.
Furthermore, Lippmann has asserted that the relationship between news and truth
has become confused, fundamentally because the reliability of news, stands
12
somewhere between fact and fiction, however, its exact location is not made clear to
the reader:
It is argued that the problems of the press is confused because the
critics and the apologists expect the press to realise this fiction, expect
it to make up for all that was not foreseen in the theory and
democracy, and that the readers expect this miracle to be preformed
at no cost or trouble to themselves (1997:19).
Lippmann suggests therefore that ‘news’ should not be called ‘news’ – unless this is
truly what it is – objective reporting. However, like Noam Chomsky and Edward
Herman, who utilised Lippmann when naming their book Manufacturing Consent,
Lippmann theorises that a journalist has a limited capacity to convey truth (1994).
Significant about this lineage is the recognition by Herman, Chomsky and Lippmann,
that external forces influence journalists; this influence is believed to affect the ability
to convey truth. While Lippmann asserts that news and truth are not the same thing,
he recognises that the public are not made aware of its potential bias. While
subjectivity is an inevitable feature in all written work, as White displayed, news is
viewed not as fiction, but as a reliable and predominantly factual genre. For these
reasons therefore, it is Lippmann’s early assertions over the Russian revolution that
hold pertinence to this study – for it is through stereotyping and selection that the
tabloid media has been able to establish an ‘other’ within British community. This is
established not solely through news selection and the subjugation of certain reports
but also the utilisation of derogatory language – as chapter two will augment.
Having now explored the disharmony between news and truth, it is required to
consider the implicit effect of language over the understanding of EU migration. It is
to the issue of news discourse, and its precise facility to influence the course of
mass opinion to which the attention of this study now turns: specific focus will be
placed on the case study of migration.
13
THE DISCOURSE OF THE TABLOID PRESS AND THE CREATION OF AN
‘OTHER’
Language is the essence of news media; it is the means where by a journalist or
news institution is able to convey information to a mass audience. The selection of
language is therefore an intrinsic element in the public’s interpretation of mediated
issues. Capella and Johnson state that it is ‘axiomatic that the media are most
influential in shaping out a sense of the world in those areas in which we have little
direct experience’, by this, one can presume that the public are, by in large subjected
to a mediated reality (1997:30). The news appears to strategically employ words that
evoke a specific emotion from their audience. EU migration has become central to
public and government concern, arguably, as a direct result of the media; it is this
choice of language that may have accentuated the issue. Language furthermore, is
active in defining ones social identity, as you can determine those of a similar
background. Ross Poole writes that ‘part of the secret of national identity lies in the
emergence of vernacular print languages … As these languages formed the
identities of those who lived in a particular region, they provided the foundation for a
shared sense of belonging’ (1999:68). Language therefore is integral to the concepts
held in chapter one, and these issues will now be considered in regards to the
discourse of The Sun and the Daily Mail between April 2003 and December 2004.
This time frame will allow me to consider the affect of the Athens Treaty, from its
signing, to eight months after accession. Attention will be focussed on how the
discourse during this period helped to establish the migrant as ‘other’.
Throughout this chapter I will examine the discourse of the Daily Mail and The Sun,
exploring the meaning and motivation for the language used. Language, and the
written word is the only means by which the tabloid press are able to communicate
information, as such each word, and the syntax which surround it, acquires a greater
14
significance than it would in normal circumstances. For example within speech there
are gestures, tone, and expression which can also affect meaning, none of these
factors matter however, when the word is written. Other factors nevertheless do
affect the meaning of the words; it is arguable that the position of the article, or the
page number it appears, hold influence on the impression the reader receives.
However, for the purpose of this study I will not be considering these stylistic
features. Instead I will focus solely upon the discourse and the context in which
words are cited. Theorist Teun A Van Dijk defines discourse analysis to ‘involve an
integration of text and context, in the sense that the use of a discourse in a social
situation is at the same time a social act’ (1988:29). With this in mind, and in the
interests of this study, tabloid discourse will be analysed, in the context of, and in
reference to, EU migration, considering its potential influence upon public opinion within chapter 3 I will explore the effect on public opinion in relation to moral panic.
Before examining the precise features of this media discourse, it is significant to
consider first the societal need for an ‘other’: determined in this instance as a group
recognisably different.
Michael Billig writes of a ‘nationalised syntax of hegemony’, by this he refers to
language which evokes nationalistic sentiment, creating with it, an imagined
homogenised community (cited in Aitchison and Lewis 2003:46). Extending the ideas
of postmodernist thinker Richard Rorty, Billig continues to debate the effect of the
terms ‘us’ and ‘we’ (1995:166), specifically considering their consequence when
addressing an audience. As both terms state the speaker with, and equal to, the
audience, Billig suggests that an alliance is automatically formed, as the speaker
appears to speak for the audience: ‘an imagined universal we’ (1995:166). Thus
likeminded people are automatically grouped together. It is stated within Banal
nationalism that ‘to protect a nation is to protect a national identity, which as Rorty
recognises, distinguishes that community from other communities’ (1995:168). Thus
15
to ensure the safety of our community, society requires the classification of an
outside, and characteristically different group of people. News language therefore,
particularly in The Sun and the Daily Mail, is written in a predominantly colloquial
manner, suggesting to their audience that they are alike and are therefore likely to
share similar ideologies.
To exhibit this point I turn to a news story in The Sun, which employs colloquial
discourse to exert its perspective. The story’s headline reads; ‘Too many migrants’,
and the news editorial, which is based upon the findings of a Sun newspaper poll,
states that ‘nearly all reckon asylum seekers and illegal migrants leech off taxpayers’
(Too many migrants Daily Mail 10.12.04). I would here like to draw attention to the
word ‘leech’, which is defined by the Concise Oxford English Dictionary as ‘a person
who clings to or preys on another person’, the editorial thereby suggests that people
feel encumbered and are negatively affected by migrants (Sykes 1976: 617). Further
to this, the utilisation of the words ‘reckon’, and later on ‘sponge’, are conversational
words, and speak directly to the reader in an idiomatic style which automatically
invokes a harmful image of the migrant as a detriment to society (Too many migrants
Daily Mail 10.12.04).
Additionally the visualisation of the migrant sponging or
leeching upon society implies them to reap benefit from Britain and provide nothing in
return – such vivid depictions are hard to deny, and I suggest that once combined
with casual discourse the reader naturally feels allied with the ideology as the style is
more like a conversation than an informative piece of news journalism. Aitchison and
Lewis ratify this notion; stating that ‘the vernacular rhetoric of the popular press can
be employed to construct a popular view of community defined from the perspective
of the threat of the outsider’ (2003:50). To this regard it is evident that The Sun,
employs the image of the ‘migrant’ in this instance to represent the ‘other’.
16
This notion is explored within the concept of binary oppositions, or pairings. Helene
Cixous suggests that opposite entities assist in each other’s definition:
Activity/passivity
Sun/moon
Culture/nature
Day/night (Cixous 1994:37).
Thus to have ‘light’ requires an antonym of ‘dark’. Without it ‘light’ cannot
satisfactorily exist, because one can know of no other. The popular media utilises the
issue of migration in a comparable manner. The Sun for example uses the words
‘us’, ‘we’ and ‘Brits’ frequently within news story, in doing this the paper is able to
establish a repartee with its readers, defining them all to be likeminded. To have
people who are the ‘same’ however, you necessarily have to have people who are
‘different’. I argue therefore, that, migration provides a necessary ‘other’ within the
popular media framework. Thus the societal need for the ‘other’, exists prior to media
intervention, Klapper notes that ‘the effects of mass communication are likely to differ
depending upon whether the communication is or is not in accord with the norms of
groups to which the audience members belong’ (cited in Boyd-Barrett and Newbold
1995:137).
Cixous theory, and societies need for an ‘other’, can be paralleled with the modern
day football phenomena. I asked Manchester United fan Jonathon Hornsby how he
felt about the other teams in the premiership? Hornsby responded saying: ‘Man
United are the best team in England, so I’m not too bothered about the other teams, I
hate Chelsea though – they’re such cheats’ (Hornsby was interviewed on 21.04.07).
As a Manchester United fan Hornsby inevitably dislikes his rivals, however, if there
were not other teams for Manchester United to play – the game would cease to exist.
The relevance of this therefore, is that while Manchester United fans are brought
together in rivalry of other teams, those other teams are necessary fundaments of the
game. Equally the British tabloids press need to create an ‘other’ to unite their own
17
readership – in other words to have people who are the ‘same’, you necessarily have
to establish those who are ‘different’.
Within this theme, therefore I propose that the newspaper choice of an individual
assists in determining a subject’s identity; as well as providing a likeminded alliance
throughout society. Arguably as a consumer society, individuals throughout the
western world are characterised not by what they are born as, but by the objects and
symbols they choose to possess. Thus, self-identity has become a socially created
construct. In selecting a particular newspaper we are making a statement as much
about who we are, as who we are not. Parfitt and Egrova discuss how media is
instrumental in including and excluding members of society:
The apparatuses of discourse play a critical role not only in
fostering our sense of collective identity, but also in establishing
who are to be included and who are to be excluded from the very
definition of the collectivity by elucidating the content of the
collective, or at least by verifying its socio-cultural identity
(2006:35).
Thus we see newspaper consumption to form a part of individual identity – and
moreover the feeling part of a collective. Believing that you are a part of something,
and are the same as other people is very important to finding a place in the world.
Both the Daily Mail and The Sun recognise the requirement people have to feel
integrated within a society, within the process of integration it however, becomes
necessary to exclude others, as Parfitt and Egrova earlier state.
This notion is demonstrated through the lyrics of the The Tom Robinson Band’s
1978 record Power in the Darkness, augmenting how specific groups of society are
frequently selected as moral targets. According to the lyrics of the record these
include;
the
niggers,
the
gays,
the
left
wing
scum,
the
juvenile
delinquents…(http://www.tomrobinson.com/trb/songs.htm). Notably all these groups
stand external from ‘normal’ society – and can as a result be considered ‘other’. The
18
lyrics themselves are ironic, as the lyricist was gay; however, the words represent
how society feels that groups of people, altered from them, negatively affect social
harmony. This is clearly expressed, when a ‘BBC spokesman’ interrupts the record:
Today, institutions fundamental to the British system of
Government are under attack: the public schools, the house of
Lords, the Church of England, the holy institution of Marriage,
even our magnificent police force are no longer safe from those
who would undermine our society, and it's about time we said
'enough is enough' and saw a return to the traditional British
values of discipline, obedience, morality and freedom
(http://www.tomrobinson.com/trb/songs.htm).
The song lyrics above demonstrate how Britain considers itself to be a collective
group threatened by the insurgence of social others. I suggest that lineage can be
sighted between these lyrics and the attitude The Sun and the Daily Mail who exploit
the public’s concerns over social discord to present the migrant as a moral threat to
our welfare state.
There are of course additional benefits to establishing members of society to
exclude, this view is evidenced within George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four;
here the author employs a ‘two minute hate’ (1949:14). Within these two minutes
members of the party are forced to vent all their frustration towards the party’s
enemy, which is represented by an image on the telescreen of Goldstein. Goldstein
was ‘the primal traitor, the earliest defiler of the party’s purity’ (1949:14). Big Brother
knew that in providing a visual outlet for their parties anger avoided society attacking,
or recognising the faults of the inner party. Orwell extends this metaphor further, as
Big Brother employs the slogan ‘War is Peace’ (1949:14). These two contradictions
reveal the perceived benefits of locating a common enemy; in achieving this people
become united. I suggest that the tabloid press utilise this concept in regard to the
EU migrant and that in establishing them as ‘other’, permits blame to lie at their feet,
and unite the readership of the paper.
19
The consistent employment of uniting terms including: ‘us’ and ‘we’, in news
concerning migration, draws furthermore on a sense of nostalgia, and nationalistic
pride. Benedict Anderson wrote of an ‘imagined community’, this means that
nationalism is essentially a false design; this is fundamentally because a person is
unable to truly know everyone within their ‘nation’ (1991). Therefore, while people will
still feel a sense of community and of national pride, primarily Anderson argues, this
emotion derives from sharing the same mass of land. Anderson notably observes the
shifting phases of nations stating that: ‘almost every year the United Nations admits
new members. And many ‘old’ nations’, once thought fully consolidated, find
themselves challenged by sub nationalism within their borders’ (1991:3). We can
from this establish that national borders are frequently altering; it can therefore be
interpreted up to the individuals themselves to create a sense of community within
their given environment. The employment of ‘us’ and ‘we’ therefore, aim to create a
community, which excludes everyone altered from their audience.
Expounding this thesis, is a news editorial from The Sun which writes at the time of
initial entrance of EU migrants. The editorial asserts that: ‘they seemed to think they
didn’t need a passport, saying their embassy in London had told them they only
needed their own country’s ID card’ (No Passport? No problem? The Sun 03.05.04). I
would like to draw attention to the number of times pluralizing words, such as they
and them, are utilised within this short 25-word syntax. These terms, underlined
above, isolate the migrant and distinguish them as different; ultimately the words
exclude migrants from the collective British ‘us’. Moreover, the terminology depicts
the migrants as a mass group and provides them no individuality, which suggests an
overarching problem created by the migrant population as a whole.
20
A further illustration of the ways which The Sun and the Daily Mail have established
severance between British citizens and migrants can be identified within a
photograph from the news columns of The Sun; headlined ‘In EU come, immigrants’:
(In EU come, immigrants The Sun 29.04.04)
The image above shows former Prime Minister Tony Blair standing in front of the
Union Jack – the definitive emblem of a cohesive Britain. In employing the Union
Jack the stance of the article can immediately be recognised, I suggest that this
visual therefore discredits the intentions of the new EU, which called for ‘respect for
diversity and mutual understanding’.2 Instead the vision of Blair in front of the flag
provides a vision of British jingoism, and thus does not welcome potential new
arrivals.
The employment of discourse is vital to the way both papers establish the migrant as
an ‘other’. This can be seen in this news editorial which states that: ‘thousands of
migrants will be waved into Britain by officials completely unprepared for an invasion
by new EU citizens, The Sun can reveal’ (In EU come, immigrants The Sun
29.04.07). I would like to draw particular attention to the word ‘invasion’ which
explicitly refers to the migrants intruding on British land. Incidentally this news
editorial features the day before accession, and over a year since the signing of the
http://www.delcan.cec.eu.int/en/press_and_information/newsletter/2003/NL-2003-2EN.pdf
2
21
Athens Treaty. I therefore suggest that although not criticising the ten new members
in 2003, by 2004 a negative approach had already been taken to the possibility of
migrants entering Britain. It is therefore within an already inhospitable climate that the
new EU members officially joined on May 1st.
A further illustration of how the Daily Mail and The Sun utilise derogatory language to
refer to EU migrants is an article from The Sun which damns migrants capacity to
receive UK benefits (Gipsies get benefit nod The Sun 05.05.04). The headline of the
news article draws immediate attention to the low social class of the migrant, terming
them ‘gipsies’(Gipsies get benefit nod The Sun 05.05.04). The connotation of this is
that the British government has permitted migrants aid, while the migrant serves no
financial benefit to the country itself. The article itself ardently criticises the decision
to revoke the plans which would have prevented new EU nations claiming benefits –
‘they were urged to find work or another means of support – or return home’ (Gipsies
get benefit nod The Sun 05.05.04). This strategy The Sun suggests would have
clamped down ‘on so-called benefits tourists expected in the UK after May 1 to milk
the system’. Critically the concern of the article is that EU migrants will enter Britain
solely to reap the economic benefits of the social support system, this is a notion
repeatedly asserted within the column inches of both The Sun and the Daily Mail. As
demonstrated in an article in the Daily Mail, which suggests that ‘health tourists’
cannot be stopped’ (crackdown on health tourists is unworkable Daily Mail 30.07.03).
Essentially this news article is concerned that health professionals are both unable,
and unwilling to screen patients before treatments, and as a result migrants will
continue to hinder the NHS. The article states that ‘Doctors are powerless to refuse
them free care, even though it may involve complex and costly treatments’
(crackdown on health tourists is unworkable Daily Mail 30.07.03). Within both news
articles the migrant is portrayed to be a financial burden to British society, and to be
significantly altered from the tax paying British citizen.
22
Interestingly a Daily Mail news story suggests that expatriates would be negatively
impacted if EU health care were restricted (UK expats fall victim to health tourism
Daily Mail 31.12.03). Therefore, the article demonstrates the problems that would be
experienced by Britain’s with the luxury of two homes; the article states that
‘pensioners from the UK who live abroad for more than half the year will be denied
free treatment’ (UK expats fall victim to health tourism Daily Mail 31.12.03). Notably
the same paper ardently criticises migrants who utilise British health care facilities, as
demonstrated in the Daily Mail in 2003. The news article states that pregnant
migrants are coming into Britain solely to have their baby free on the NHS (Rise of
the ‘maternity tourist’ Daily Mail 17.06.03). These two articles show the contradictions
held within the paper, and the determination to discredit the intentions of the migrant
and the negative effect that they have upon British citizens.
By November 2004 the new members from Eastern Europe had been free to move
across EU borders for six months. During this period the Daily Mail wrote that
migration was ‘incompetent and out of control’ (Incompetent and out of control Daily
Mail 11.11.04). The news editorial criticised the manner in which Britain had thrown
‘the doors wide open’ to the new members, the utilisation of these words dually
condemn the government and the migrants, the latter depicted as unwelcome guests.
The editorial states ’91,000 migrants from Eastern Europe registered in the first five
months of expansion’ – this immediately shocking figure is contrasted with the sum of
13,000 that the government initially anticipated entering Britain (Incompetent and out
of control Daily Mail 11.11.04). Looked at in isolation, as the statistics are in this
article it is apparent that unprecedented numbers have entered, however, at the
same time ‘380,000 people - over half of them British citizens - left the country to live
abroad, with Australia the most popular destination followed by Spain and France’
(http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=260). This would therefore imply a
23
balance between immigration and emigration, which would consequently negate the
impact of the figures quoted in The Daily Mail.
Incidentally despite repeated criticism over EU migrants entering Britain, The Sun in
2004 freely boasted of the benefits that the new EU countries would bring to them,
writing how it would ‘open up great opportunities for British holiday makers’ (The Sun
03.04.04). It is evident within this context that The Sun newspaper is interested in
Britain, and the benefits and dangers that affect its well-being. Therefore EU
migration is represented through the discourse of The Sun in a negative manner
because it is viewed to threaten Britain’s social harmony, however, there are benefits
for Britain, as new holiday destinations will be opened up to them. It is apparent
therefore that The Sun represents the case from a self-interested perspective, which
aims at all times to provide an instantly impacting editorial.
Impact, as established within chapter one, can be achieved through the utilisation of
subjective information. I suggest that this cannot provide satisfactory material for
debate, and instead is significant in determining the opinions of their readers. This
concept extends further the ideas brought about in chapter one, which state that a
journalist is unable to convey a wholly objective interpretation. Walter Lippmann
attributes this to human fallibility:
Even the eyewitness does not bring back a naïve picture of the
scene. For experience seems to show that he himself brings
something to the scene which later he takes away from it, that
oftener than not what he imagines to be the account is really a
transfiguration (1997:54).
Notably a news editorial within The Sun entitled ‘On their way to a new life’ does not
even allege to possess factual evidence and instead presents an entirely speculative
argument (On their way to a new life The Sun 29.04.04). This is evident from the
news lead, which states that,
24
In Rimavska Sobota, in the south of [Slovakia], 300 of the 30,000
inhabitants wanted to travel to Britain in search of work. That is
one per cent and in a country of five million — more than a quarter
of them Roma gipsies - the same ratio nationwide could see
50,000 wanting to come to Britain (On their way to a new life
The Sun 29.04.04).
The report does not contain any definitive material. The utilisation of the word could
indicate that the figure of 50,000 Slovakian’s is merely an approximation as there is
no way to prove with any certainty this projection. Additionally the editorial refers to
large numbers of Asians waiting in Slovakia to cross the border to get to Britain the
‘promised land’ (On their way to a new life The Sun 29.04.04). A further example of
this can be cited in the Daily Mail, where a news article claims Labour to have lost
control of figures (Proof: Blunkett loses control of figures Daily Mail 10.11.04). I
suggest that the news editorial intends to cause impact rather than reliably inform,
moreover the depiction of migrants flooding in vast numbers across our borders aims
to cause fear and concern within the readership -this notion aligns with Tony Blair’s
‘Feral Beast’ speech, referred to in chapter one.
To express the ways which speculative information and the requirement to cause
impact has aided the creation of an ‘other’ I turn to Michael Toolan who critically
analyses the media discourse of two Australian newspapers: The Sydney Morning
Herald and The Daily Telegraph – within, Toolan aims to find evidence, of
'systematic othering' (2002:360). Although Toolan is concerned predominantly with
racism, his discussion in regard to the characteristics of media discourse proves
interesting. The author states that: 'They [the media] would speak or act in such
a way that would distance themselves from the ethnic minority, engaging in
discursive strategies that blame the victims for their circumstances on their own
social, economic and even cultural disadvantage' (2002:361). Certain parallels can
be sighted between Toolan's analysis of the Australian coverage of a 'Vietnamese
gang' and the British media's representation of migration (2002:360). To assimilate
this analysis to the British media I turn to a news editorial in the The Sun which
25
states that:
Nearly 700,000 eastern Europeans arrived in Britain last year,
figures revealed last night. And that was before the EU
floodgates open to new entrants tomorrow. Early indications are
that the total could double to almost 1.4 million this year
(700,000 Eastern Europeans arrived last year The Sun
30.04.04).
This specifically denigrates the eastern Europeans and casts them as unwelcome
visitors in Britain. The utilisation of the term ‘floodgates’ furthermore insinuates the
migrants as a lower class of citizens who cannot be prevented from entering Britain;
it also casts aspersions on the Blair government for permitting their entry. I suggest
that such terminology distinguishes the EU migrant as altered from British citizens
and thus limits the possibility of their integration. Consequently, like Toolan's
description of the Australian media's relationship to the 'Vietnamese' The Sun
establishes the migrant to be different and as such an 'other'.
A further approach to establish the migrant as ‘other’ is to unnerve the reader and to
pose the migrant as a social threat, statistical figures are recurrently utilised, arguably
to achieve this exclusion. This can be viewed within the Daily Mail news story: 'How
ministers managed to lose 100,000 migrants’ (How ministers managed to lose
100,000 migrants Daily Mail 27.09.04). This is established early as the tenth word
alerts to the 'chaos' over the number of migrants entering Great Britain, concern is
established when it is made clear that the government cannot record the precise
figures of those who enter. Moreover, it is asserted that ‘Thousands of the migrant
workers are going straight on to benefits rather than finding a job. Of the 270,000
who came into the country last year, 21,500 - nearly one in 12 - managed to sign on
for out of-work or disability benefits as soon as they arrived’ (How ministers managed
to lose 100,000 migrants Daily Mail 27.09.04). I suggest that this editorial does not
indicate the unsatisfactory and often-dangerous standards migrants may be
subjected to by employers and gang masters, and instead reveals the negative affect
26
the migrant has on Britain – again revealing bias. Working standards will be
examined in greater detail in chapter three, within this context however, it is the
usage of statistics to cause concern that I would like to draw upon which often
represent the migrant in a negative and derogatory format accompanied frequently
with the word 'migrant'. This assists in excluding and defining the migrant as an
‘other’, and intimates the migrant to pile pressure on an over-stretched public
services.
Statistics are frequently utilised within the tabloid media, to substantiate and validate
claims. Rachel Pallai states that ‘numbers help create certainty in analysis. Spruce
up a report with some hard quantitative facts and figures and people will almost
always consider it more objective and therefore better’ (Catalyst Magazine 08.05.06).
This however, is not to say that figures are infallible; the problem with their utilisation
in the media is that journalists are infrequently equipped academically to fully
understand them. Moreover, like words, numbers can purvey bias, articulating the
cause of their organisation that released them. Darrell Huff writes upon the
misleading nature of statistics stating them to be: ‘so appealing in a fact-minded
culture is employed to sensationalize, inflate, confuse, and oversimplify’ (1991:10).
Moreover, the figures are arguably used to support their own biased perspective;
Huff writes that ‘what the reader of the reports must remember is that the battle is
never won. No conclusion that ‘sixty seven per cent of the British people are against’
something or other should be read without the lingering question. Sixty seven per
cent of which British people?’ (1991:24). Therefore when a news article within the
Daily Mail newspaper writes that: ‘A staggering 92% of Mail online believe that Britain
needs migration quotas’ (92% of Mail voters back Tory immigration plans
www.dailymail.co.uk 01.11.04). We should be alert that these figures are gained from
within the papers own readership. It is unlikely of course that the writers and readers
of the Daily Mail differ greatly in their ideology. Instead I suggest that the figures
27
mirror the views already established by the paper, thus the statistics in this case are
likely to contain bias and go no way to prove anything outside of the papers own
understanding of migration.
Writing in the News as Discourse, Van Dijk suggests that the press ‘promotes the
dominant beliefs and opinions of elite groups of society’ (1988:83). With this in
mind I suggest that the tabloid press places emphasis on the importance and
social significance of their readership, above all other social groups (tabloid
readership, predominantly includes people of white British origin). To achieve this,
the tabloid press will act in a manner similar to: a group of friends, football
supporters or politicians, where it is necessary they will characterise a group or
individual that is different – to mock, ridicule or compete against; this will make the
original group stronger.
It is the opinion of this study that the Daily Mail and The Sun consistently targets
and aims to exclude visually altered social groups – making these scapegoats.
Whether these groups are: youth, chavs, Jewish people, Muslims, migrants… it
does not matter, the significance is that the groups are recognisably different from
the papers aimed readership. To the tabloid press the migrant stands as an
obvious scapegoat – often migrants will appear visually different to the white British
person; additionally they may not competently speak English. While these factors
certainly do not make these people any different – after all, people are, at the core
the same, all sharing the same desires for happiness and a comfortable existence.
The tabloid press nevertheless uses the visual, and language differences to
differentiate the migrant as the ‘other’. Walter Lippmann astutely notes that: ‘all
strangers of another race proverbially look alike to the visiting stranger. Only gross
differences of size or colour are perceived by an outsider in a flock of sheep, each
of which is perfectly individulised to the shepherd’ (1997:54). I suggest therefore
28
that the tabloids attack on the migrant population is achieved largely out of an
ignorance, which further augments the desire and potential to create an excluded
social group. The Daily Mail and The Sun will consequently utilise, as
demonstrated throughout the chapter, a range of derogatory and frightening
language. The discourse therefore becomes intrinsic in conveying the image of the
migrant as ‘other’.
Having explored the discourse of the tabloid press we can now consider the
influence The Sun and the Daily Mail, both upon public understanding of the
migration issue, and its correlation to reality - asking whether the tabloid press has
created a moral panic within Britain. It is to this issue and the reality of migration,
that my discussion now turns.
29
THE CREATION OF A MORAL PANIC
Having in chapter two explored the utilisation of language within the context of
migration; an issue summarised finally by Bell who states that ‘language is an
essential part of the content of what the media purvey to us’, it is now essential to
examine the effect that the Daily Mail and The Sun has had upon the publics
understanding of the issue of migration (1991:3). I will therefore be considering
whether, or not, society appears negatively affected by the media’s establishment of
the migrant as ‘other’, considering of course the impact of truth and language on this
issue.
Within this context it will be necessary to question whether the media has helped to
foster the opinion that migration threatens the harmony of Britain; exploring
additionally whether the stir of the tabloid press has helped cause a moral panic. To
achieve these ends, I will principally be considering, the early theories of Stanley
Cohen of the tabloid press, the moral panic models of Goode and Ben-Yehuda,
alongside migration case studies; this will be undertaken in view of acquiring a more
adequate understanding of the affect of the tabloid press on public opinion. In this
study, I suggest that foreign migrants, have been labelled by the tabloid media as
‘Folk Devils’ and that the reaction is characteristic of a Moral Panic (1973). It is
therefore important to develop the ideas of the ‘other’ which were established within
chapter two; these concepts must now be related to the conjectures of a moral panic;
and it is to this my discussion turns.
According to Goode and Ben-Yehuda:
A moral panic is characterised by a feeling held by a substantial
number of a members of a given society, that evil-doers pose a
threat to society and to the moral order as a consequence of their
behaviour and, therefore, "something should be done about them
and their behaviour” (1994:11).
30
Accordingly the term 'moral panic' suggests a dramatic and rapid overreaction to, a
group of people or act of deviance, believed to directly threaten social harmony. A
‘moral panic’ by definition threatens the values and interests fueled by media
coverage. As the name suggests the public are specifically concerned over a threat
to national morality. Stanley Cohen was one of the first sociolagists to recognise and
define the characteristics of a moral panic and wrote of them in reference to the
1970s concern over ‘mods and rockers’. Cohen defined the condition as an: ‘episode,
person or group of persons [who] become defined as a threat to societal values and
interests’ (1987:9).
The media is stated to amplify issues of social concern, by
stigmatizing and stereotyping a group or individual, often portraying there to be a
consensus of opinion.
Law and public opinion stipulate that there are many ideas and
behaviours which are to be condemned as outside the pale of
consensus: people who practise such behaviours are branded as
'subversives', 'perverts', 'dissidents', 'trouble-makers', etc. Such
people are subjected to marginalization or repression; and the
contradiction returns, because consensus decrees that there are
some people outside the consensus. The 'we' of consensus
narrows and hardens into a population which sees its interests as
culturally and economically valid, but as threatened by a 'them'...
(Fowler 1991:53).
In regards, therefore to the case study of migration and the process of ‘othering’,
Roger Fowler follows the analysis that the media, has through discourse which
includes a ‘we’, naturally excluded and thus, generated an ‘other’. It is the excluding
language of the tabloid media, coupled with saturation coverage which has arguably
assisted in the creation of a moral panic concerned with migration to Britain. In order
to ascertain the role of the tabloid press in the generation of panic this study will now
focus upon the models which detail the growth of a moral panic.
Goode and Ben-Yehuda place forward a conjecture for what they term the ‘Interest
group theory of moral panics’ (1994:138). This details that the ‘creation and
31
maintenance of moral panics is more likely to emanate from the middle rungs of the
power and status hierarchy e.g. ‘police, press, education’ (1994:139). Of particular
notability here, is the acknowledgment that the press are fundamental in creating a
moral panic – therefore that it is the press, and not the public which orchestrate its
generation. However, the press cannot cause a moral panic on their own ‘some
latent fear or stress must pre-exist in the general public for widespread panic to
occur’ (1994:141). We hence, see a dual reliance of both press and public, both
feeding upon each other’s needs – critically one cannot exist which out the other.
While, the public certainly buy into the theme of a moral panic – expressing concern
over the effect of migrants upon social harmony, you ‘cannot but pay particular
attention to the role of the mass media in defining and shaping social problems’
(Critcher 2003:11). In other words, suggesting that the media take advantage of the
situation, and exploit it to their advantage. I suggest this gain to be financial, for in
creating a moral panic the press generates a frequent issue for news story and an
impacting story for the public to purchase.
To further highlight this point I turn to Jack Macleod, Becker and Byrnes whose
agenda-setting hypothesis states that ‘the media can change the views of social
reality of its individual audience members by indicating which issues are being
discussed…’ (1974:47). While this hypothesis speaks in terms of politics, the
emphasis it places on the media is notable. Suggesting that by placing an issue at
the forefront of the media, the press is able to determine the issues the public think
about, even, if they cannot ‘tell people what to think about it’ (Mccombs). Supporting
this hypothesis is the work of Kim Smith – specifically, concerning ‘newspaper
coverage and public concern about community issues’ (cited in Protess and
McCombs 1991). Smith’s study results conclude that ‘[at a community level] media
coverage of an issue causes an increase in the number of people concerned about
an issue. At the same time, the amount of coverage media devote to an issue is
32
influenced by the public’ (cited in Protess and McCombs 1991:75). In exclusive
consideration of migration, I suggest that the consistent and derogatory coverage of
the tabloid press has played upon the publics existing fears, specifically the concerns
of migrants abusing both the NHS and taxes.
To demonstrate this reasoning I would first like to draw back to the concepts of
stereotyping referred to in chapter one, before analysing specific public fears. Stanley
Cohen states that the ‘creation of folk devils rests on their stereotypical portrayal as
atypical actors against a background that is over typical’ (Cohen 1973:61). From this
one can gather that society needs to find itself something that is can recognise as
typical, or normal, notably, this image will be as much constructed as the stereotype
of the ‘other’. Thus the establishment of the ‘we’ – is generated through language to
be an English, white individual – the ‘atypical actor’ therefore visually conflicts this. In
embellishing this difference and creating apocalyptic possibilities for the ‘others’
arrival, a moral panic is generated. Importantly the media plays upon pre-existing
public concerns, not just of morality but also of a negative effect on social life.
McRobbie and Thornton note that ‘moral panics in society act as a form of ideological
cohesion which draws on a complex language of nostalgia’ (Dec 1995:562). This
notion of nostalgia is vital; it portrays the media to draw upon a conjecture of the
migrant spoiling a by gone world. Importantly ‘nostalgia’ does not depend upon
reality, but a construction of the past in an idealistic format. Significantly however this
in itself does not classify as a moral panic, according to Goode and Ben-Yehuda
‘only when the media attention surpasses the objective, real threat posed to society’
(cited in Pijpers 2006:92).
In 2006 the Daily Mail ran a news story, which warned its reader that migrants were
entering Britain in order to exploit its public services, and in particular attain free
healthcare on the NHS. The article stated that the ‘400,000 illegal migrants living in
33
Britain are putting a strain on public services’; this strain is mentioned in specific
reference to the NHS (NHS open to abuse by illegal immigrants, claims former
minister Daily mail 24.11.06). This issue has received plentiful coverage; in 2004 the
same tabloid warned that migrants utilisation of the NHS was costing in excess of £1
billion every year – a cost paid by the British taxpayer (Sickly immigrants add £1bn to
NHS bill Daily Mail 23.06.03).
There is certainly concern which surrounds the cost of migrants using the NHS; I
suggest however, that the media has played an instrumental role in manifesting this
issue. The National Health Service is a publicly funded body, which provides free
health care for those in need. The tabloid media has embellished the notion that
migrants are not paying sufficient [or any] national taxes, yet are freely using the
NHS. In this way the migrant is said to cost British taxpayers a significant sum. In
2004 The Sun newspaper claimed that ‘health tourists’ were travelling from Eastern
Europe to seek free medical care on the NHS (We expos NHS farce The Sun
25.02.04). Significantly the way the NHS works is unique throughout the world Professor Simon Baron-Cohen from the University of Cambridge comments:
The creation of the NHS in 1948 was the second major victory for
Britain, after the defeat of Nazism. This war-torn nation resurfaced
with a humanitarian vision of free health care for all, and as an
institution the NHS remains a stunning testimony to human
altruism and the principles of a caring, civilized society
(http://www.thefutureofthenhs.com/testimonials.html).
The NHS certainly has its benefits; however, the system appears to be in a current
state of flux, with or without utilisation by migrants. Jeremy Vine humorously stated
that ‘The NHS would not have been invented if the calculator had come first’
(http://www.thefutureofthenhs.com/testimonials.html). Vine thereby implies that the NHS
was, from the beginning, an altruistic and humanitarian success story but was
financially bungled. To further confound the ideas of the tabloid press is the level of
care British citizens are entitled to throughout the EU. While therefore, non-national
34
residence are permitted to utilise the NHS service they are required to present an
EHIC card before they are treated. Notably as an EU member state British citizens
are equally entitled to an insured level of healthcare within the EU. Furthermore the
NHS states that: ‘Migrant labour is crucial to the functioning of the NHS, particularly
in major UK cities. Over one-quarter (26.8%) of health professionals working in the
NHS are foreign born’.3 To this regard, the tabloid press can be viewed as generating
a moral panic, for the words that they hailed, do not satisfactorily correlate with
reality. Instead I suggest that creating an impact was of greater importance than
relaying the facts – material in the case of the NHS has been slanted and subjugated
to portray a biased perspective.
Further criticism has been laid that migrants pay inadequate national taxes. However,
I argue that this media has exploited the situation of a few and negated the success
of many. On this topic Philo states that one ‘has only to consider the migration of
Irish, Italian, Jewish, Indian, Chinese and Caribbean labour to witness the
contribution that these communities have made to the culture and economy of this
country’ (1999:172). Moreover, ‘foreign nationals employed in Britain are an average
more highly qualified than the native workforce’ (1999:176). However, the Daily Mail
and The Sun still lay heavy condemnation upon this workforce, or alternately calling a
brain drain in the less developed world. In other words Britain is accused of seeking
the best and brightest to come and work for them, in turn taking the potential for
growth away from their homelands. This notion was expressed in the pages of the
Daily Mail; the news story stated that Poland ‘wants its workers back’ (1.10.06).
However, British sterling is a far stronger currency than the Polish Zloty – today one
could
receive
5.59
Polish
Zloty,
in
exchange
for
one
pound
(http://www.currencyconverter.uk.com/go/). Therefore, if a Polish migrant is working
in Britain and sending the money home, the family will financially reap the rewards.
3
http://www.southampton.gov.uk/people/yourcommunity/communityservices/communitiesteam/newco
mmunities/keymyths/healthcare.asp
35
Demonstrated in chapter two was the zealous criticism the tabloid press exerted
towards the new EU countries that became free to enter and work on British shores
in May 2004. In the lead up to the 2003 Athens Treaty the tabloid press was fervently
against both an EU constitution and Britain joining a European currency system (the
Euro) – these factors would have directly affected national sovereignty and stood
against the right wing principles of the tabloids. When The Sun stated that ‘an
astonishing 66,188 Sun readers last night demanded a referendum to stop Prime
Minister Tony Blair surrendering 1,000 years of Britain’s independence’, it targeted
the negative effects of the EU constitution, which intimated hostility towards the ten
new member states (16.05.03). Furthermore the unwelcoming headlines which
scathingly screamed ‘see you in May’ and ‘May day for the mob’ aimed to inform of
the devastating possibilities of Eastern European migrants entering Britain on May 1st
(See you in May The Sun 20.01.04). I suggest that premature hysteria utilising
denigrating images and discourse provided an undesirable climate for migrants to
enter under. The dangers of their being in Britain, and the negative effect they would
have upon welfare services had become such a recurrent theme within the Daily Mail
and The Sun that it was inevitable that once migrants entered they would be treated
by the newspapers as unwelcome ‘others’. I suggest therefore that the reaction in the
wake of May 2004 was hyperbolic, because the papers were both intrinsic in
preventing the migrant successfully integrating into British society, casting repeated
assertions of the migrant as a ‘gypsy’ and a ‘sponger’, this in turn they established
acute public anxiety over porous borders (Too many migrants The Sun 10.12.04).
Tony Blair gave his first official speech on migration in April 2004; in this the Prime
Minister asserted that ‘there are half a million vacancies in our job market, and our
strong
and
growing
economy
needs
migration
to
fill
these
vacancies’
(http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/BrowneEconomicsImmigration.pdf). This point is true,
36
and Britain has successfully integrated and developed as a result of migration.
Successful migrants include, comedian Ben Elton, businessman Mohamed Al Fayed,
not to mention the doctors, nurses and dentists, who benefit our country today.
Importantly however, it is not these migrants who are targeted as ‘other’ within the
tabloid press, instead it is the poorer, less educated migrant – who are subjugated
not only by the media, but also oppressed by social and financial pressures.
Amnesty International assert that ‘the reality is that many economies have come to
rely on migrant workers who are prepared to work in dirty, dangerous and demeaning
jobs with little security and low wages’ (http://web.amnesty.org/pages/refugeesbackground-eng). Furthermore an investigation carried out by Lithuanian BBC
journalist Audrius Lelkaitis, revealed an exploitation of the migrant workforce.
Lelkaitis posed as a migrant seeking work in the UK – he signed up to an agency in
Lithuania which promised work on his arrival to Britain, for this promise they charged
£180 – when he arrived the company in Hull had no record of him. When, one week
later Lelkaitis was finally given a job in Hull, it lasted only a day before he was told he
would need to relocate to north Yorkshire, here he was given a job working the
nightshift in a chemical packing plant. Lelkaitis worked 128 hours before he received
any pay, and even then attained pay for only 20 hours totalling £45 for his graft. This
sum equates to, less than £4.85 an hour – the national minimum wage law states
that an individual over the age of 22 should receive £5.35 an hour – showing that
Lelkaitis was 50 pence under this sum. Additionally Lelkaitis was paying for
accommodation, costing an undisclosed £50 a week, the accommodation provided
was sharing with 11 both men and women – the report states that at least one couple
were cohabiting with Lelkaitis. Moreover, the £50 sum is automatically deducted and
is
not
shown
on
his
pay
slip
–
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6593827.stm).
37
this
is
illegal
under
British
law
Further demonstrating the point, that migrant’s work under unsatisfactory, and
sometimes hazardous conditions, is the incident at Morecambe Bay, Lancashire in
2004. Here 21 Chinese cockle pickers drowned in rising tides, they were untrained,
and were provided with no safety gear – the migrant workers were subsequently
vulnerable to the dangers of the sea. Local MP Geraldine Smith told BBC Five Live
that: ‘The estimated value of the cockles on Morecambe beach was £6m, she said,
which had lured people from all over the UK and beyond and led to exploitation’
…‘I'm quite sure those people will have been paid very little for the bags of cockles
they collected and the gangmasters will no doubt have made a great deal of money
out of them’.4 This case study reveals the exploitation of the ‘gangmasters’ who are
willing to take advantage foreign labourers who are prepared to work hard, for a
small cash return – while they themselves reap financial reward. This was revealed in
the instance of Morecambe Bay when the gangmaster Lin Liang Ren was charged
with 21 counts of manslaughter and imprisoned was for 14 years.
Together, the incident at Morecambe Bay and the BBC investigation indicate the
appalling working conditions EU migrants are subjected to. Importantly a migrant
worker appears prepared to work outside of government stipulations, working both
longer hours, and receiving lower pay. Lelkaitis states how no contract of work was
provided to him, the lack of documentation would essentially omit a migrant from the
protections of the UK employment laws and allow employers to take advantage of
their vulnerability, subsequently excluding them from tax.
In exclusive regard to media representation and understanding I suggest that Britain
plays an imperative role in the problem of tax that the tabloid press has so fervently
criticised. The Daily Mail in 2006 stated that ‘half a million illegal workers are costing
the UK up to £3.3billion a year in unpaid taxes, according to a confidential police
4
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lancashire/3464203.stm
38
report’ (Damning police report shows illegal workers cost UK £3bn tax Daily Mail
01.10.06). A further news article stated that that ‘four out of five migrants take more
from the British economy than they contribute’. This ‘analysis demolishes the
Government's key claim that migrants pay more in taxes than they take back in
public services’ (Four out of five migrants ‘take more from economy than they put
back’ Daily Mail 29.11.06). The news article warns that unless a migrant earns in
excess of £27, 000 a year, they will not be making a positive contribution to Britain,
and will in fact ‘cost the taxpayer money’. This damning conclusion that the migrant
costs Britain money, arguably as a result of the preparedness of businesses to pay
migrant workers below the minimum wage. However, much of the tabloid furore has
been lambasted towards workers from the new EU nations who cannot constitute as
illegal migrants, furthermore I suggest that employers in utilising migrants for cheap
labour, not providing them contracts, and paying them cash in hand are exacerbating
the problem with taxation. This notion is summarised by Costa-Lascoux who wrote
that ‘one of the causes of inequalities in the representation of migrant communities in
public opinion is negative images of migrants who cost the taxpayer money as
opposed to those who are prepared to work’ (1990:92).
I suggest therefore that the tabloid media have propagated a moral panic and
created a convenient truth – a truth, which sits easily in the tabloid press, a truth,
which causes fear and excludes members of society, a truth that causes impact and
sells papers. I put forward that the tabloid press has chosen to focus, almost
exclusively, upon the denigrating effects of migrants in Great Britain, disregarding the
role Britain itself has played in choosing migrants over British workers – solely
because they are a cheaper source of labour than a national who would demand to
be paid a minimum wage. This truth could never cause a moral panic, for it does not
threaten social harmony, or moral order; therefore it is neither such an impacting nor
lucrative story as is the notion that migrants are flooding our shores.
39
I therefore put forward that the media has created a moral panic in Britain, which
establishes the migrant as the ‘other’. I suggest furthermore that the tabloid press
has overlooked fundamental features of the migrant issue, including the accession of
ten new EU nations and the employers who willingly exploit migrants. The tabloid
press has used, as shown in chapter two, discourse which denigrates and ‘others’
the migrant. It is therefore the position of this study that the tabloid press has created
a moral panic as the furore ‘far surpasses the objective, real threat posed to society’
by the migrant (Pijpers 2006:92). This said, however, there is a necessary concern
over who enters Britain, and in what numbers they come. The new EU states brought
an unprecedented number into British shores in 2004; however, the government
cannot give exact figures. It is important for both national peace of mind and migrant
safety at work that taxes are paid and contracts are signed – I suggest that the
tabloid press focus on this issue, instead of excluding members of society through
derogatory and superfluous discourse.
ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
g
40
CONCLUSION
The research here has examined the concerns of mass migration, from the Treaty of
Athens to six months after accession, it is the position of this study that The Sun and
the Daily Mail have been instrumental in ‘othering’ EU migrant’s and preventing them
successfully integrating into British Society. The regularity of divisive and derogatory
discourse has ultimately assisted in the propagation of a moral panic, which fits
Goode and Ben-Yehuda’s Interest group theory, as concern over migration appears
to have been unjustly intensified.
Truth, I suggest has been subjugated within both The Sun and the Daily Mail in order
to repeatedly categorise the migrant as a threat to British values. This is achieved
through an overarching stereotype of the Eastern European migrant as a ‘leech’.
Journalist Jeremy Paxman expounds this theory stating that ‘stereotypes are
comforting, [as they] save us the trouble of fresh thought [1998:183]. Thus, it is
easier to repeat the same image of the migrant than to continually alter the
newspapers perspective. According to Daniel Goleman if an idea is repeated as a
constant, the original [the truth] is forgotten, and instead the repeated concept
becomes the new and accepted truth:
The defences – our bastions against painful information – operate
in a shadow world of consciousness, beyond fringes of
awareness. Most often we are oblivious to their operation and
remain the unknowing recipient of the version of reality they admit
into our ken. The craft of teasing out and capturing defences in
vivo is a tricky endeavour (1997:123).
The above extract thus asserts that lying can become unconscious when the original
‘truth’ is forgotten. I suggest that The Sun and the Daily Mail have reaped significant
reward in writing dramatic editorial which casts the EU migrant as the ‘other’, and the
newspapers have therefore seen benefit in consistently producing editorial which
pertains to this ethos and impacts on the reader. Gurevith exerts this issue further
41
writing that a distinction between fact and fiction is not always immediately apparent
(cited in Bondebjerg 1996:28). Hence, a news editorial in The Sun and the Daily Mail
will contain fact, however, it will, be skewed to detail their bias and cause sensation.
The discourse style and employment of statistics is essential in this process.
Both The Sun and the Daily Mail therefore interpret EU migration in a negative
format. The news editorial is predominantly derogatory, and establishes key
concerns with migrants entering Britain, such as taxation and social services. In
repeatedly asserting the migrant to threaten intrinsic aspects of British society, which
everybody utilises, public response is inevitable. In repeating with startling regularity
the notion of the migrant is ‘other’, and threatening to society the newspapers have
propagated a moral panic. Critcher recognises the entwining relationship between
the media and the establishment of society’s problems, stating that one ‘cannot but
pay particular attention to the role of the mass media in defining and shaping social
problems (2003:11).
McRobbie and Thornton stated that moral panics were ‘once the unintended outcome
of journalistic practice’ however; it has become their goal (1995:560). A moral panic
is stated to exist when the issue is represented in a way which outweighs the realistic
threat. EU migration is one such case, as it works on the assumption that Eastern
Europeans predominantly enter Britain so that they may ‘sponge’ off the social
support system while not paying taxes in return (Too many migrants The Sun
10.12.04). This damning stereotype is utilised frequently within The Sun and the
Daily Mail as I have demonstrated in chapter two and three, and Van Dijk expounds:
Without good evidence, we do not discard fundamental beliefs
constructed from years of understanding, and action (1988:83).
This study has therefore suggested that the Daily Mail and The Sun have through
both discourse, and news selection propagated the segregation of EU migrants from
42
the British community and in turn created the greater risk of long-term social
problems. The British government made a significant decision in 2003 to provide
economic migrants a legal means of entry, rather than leaving them with little option
but to abuse the asylum system. Both The Sun and the Daily Mail however, met the
decision with instant hostility and fear; this I argue set the president for the reaction
that came in 2004. If migration is going to become a success, not least for current EU
citizens, Britain is required to achieve far better integration of those who already live
and work here, while at the same time preparing for future migration. As Europe’s
national borders became more porous in May of 2004, Britain forever changed – it
was no longer the imperial nation it once was. Change is a necessity if Britain wants
to progress and advance, and it is time that the media moved in step with change
instead of relying on overwhelming nostalgia to sell its papers. The spread of a moral
panic and the othering of migrants serve no benefit, neither to the native, nor the
newcomer and instead proliferates division and promotes jingoistic thoughts. Capella
and Jamieson suggest we live in a ‘mediated reality’; therefore The Sun and the Daily
Mail must take responsibility for the words that they write and not propagate
exclusion and social division (1997:31). The remedy for Britain’s current state of
panic is a recovery of open discussion, with better data, more empirical evidence,
less panic and hysteria; then perhaps we can commence a sensible and rational
debate.
43
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anderson, B,. 1991 Imagined communities: Reflections on the origins of nationalism,
London: Verso press
Bell, A,. 1991 The language of news media, Oxford: Blackwell press
Billig, M,. 1995 Banal nationalism London: Sage Publications
Brown, G, and Yule, G,. 1983 Discourse analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University
press
Bondebjerg, I, B,. 1996 Public discourse/private fascination hybridisation in true-lifestory genres Media, Culture and Society, Vol. 18
Cappella, J and Jamieson, K,. 1997 Spiral of cynicism: the press and the public
good, New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Chomsky, N and Herman, E,. 1994 Manufacturing consent, Croyden, Surrey: Vintage
Critcher, C,. 2003 Moral Panics and the Media, Buckingham, Open University press
Cobley, P,. 2006 Communication theories: critical concepts in media and cultural
studies, London: Routledge press
Costa-Lascoux, J,. 1990 Immigration policies and the single European market,
European Immigration Policy: Contemporary European Affairs Vol. 3
Curan, J, and Gurevitch, M,. 2000 Mass media and society, London: Arnold press
Dahlgren, P, and Sparks, C,. 1999 Journalism and popular culture, London: Sage
publications
Fowler, R,. 1991 Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press,
London: Routledge
Garnham, N,. The media and the Public Sphere, in Boyd-Barrett and Newbold, 1995.
Approaches to media a reader, London: E Arnold Press
Gauntlett, D,. 2002 Media, Gender and Identity: An Introduction, London: Routledge
Goleman, D,. 1985 vital lies – simple truths London: Simon and Schuster
Goode, E, and Ben-Yehuda, N,. 1994 Moral Panics: the social construction, Oxford,
Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell press
Gumperz, John Joseph, 1982 Language and Social Identity Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
Hall, S,. The rediscovery of ‘ideology’; return of the repressed in media studies, in
Boyd-Barrett and Newbold, 1995. Approaches to media a reader, London: E Arnold
Press
Huff, D,. 1991 [1954] How to lie with statistics, London: Penguin press
44
http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/family_parent/health/nhs_charges_for_people_fr
om_abroad.htm#NHSchargesandpeoplefromabroad
http://www.amnesty.org/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lancashire/3464203.stm
http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/BrowneEconomicsImmigration.pdf
http://www.currencyconverter.uk.com/go/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/dailymail/home.html?in_page_id=1766
http://www.delcan.cec.eu.int/en/press_and_information/newsletter/2003/NL-2003-2EN.pdf
http://www.dti.gov.uk/employment/migrant-workers/index.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
http://www.southampton.gov.uk/people/yourcommunity/communityservices/communit
iesteam/newcommunities/keymyths/healthcare.asp
http://www.statistics.gov.uk
http://www.thesun.co.uk/
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/
http://www.tomrobinson.com/trb/songs.htm
Kennamer, D,. 1992 Public opinion, the press, and public policy, Westport, Conn,
London: Praeger press
Klapper, J, T,. The effects of mass communication, in Boyd-Barrett and Newbold,
1995. Approaches to media a reader, London: E Arnold Press
La capra, D,. 1980 Rethinking Intellectual History and Reading Texts In LaCapra and
Kaplan 1982, Modern European Intellectual History
Lewis, D, and Aitchison, J,. 2003 New media language, London: Routledge press
Lippman, W,. 1997 Public Opinion, New York: Free Press
McCombs, M, E, and Shaw, D,. 1972 The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media
McRobbie, A, and Thornton,. S Rethinking ‘Moral Panic’ for multi-mediated social
worlds The British Journal of Sociology Vol. 46, No. 4 (Dec., 1995), pp. 559-574
McQuail, D,. 2000 Mass communication theory, London: Sage press
Nietzsche, F,. 1873 On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense
Orwel, G,. 1987 (1949) Nineteen Eighty-Four London: Secker and Warburg
45
Parfitt, T, and Egrova, Y,. 2006 Genetics, Mass media and Identity New York:
Routledge Press
Philo, G,. 1999 Message received: Glasgow Media Group research, Harlow:
Longman press
Pijpers, R,. 2006 Help! The Poles are coming: Narrating a Contemporary Moral Panic
cited in Swedish Society for Society and Geography
Pillai, R,. 2006 Safety in Numbers Catalyst Magazine
Poole, R,. 1999 Nation and identity, London: Routledge press
Protess, D, and McCombs, M,. 1991 Agenda setting: readings on media, public
opinion, and policymaking, Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum Associate press
Reah, D,. 2002 The language of newspapers, London: Routledge press
Riffe, D, Lacy, S, and Fico, F,. 2005 Analyzing media messages: using quantitative
content analysis in research, Mahwah, N.J. London: Lawrence Erlbaum press
Rorty, R,. 1991 Objectivity, Relativism and Truth Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press
Sykes, J, B (editor) 1976 The Concise Oxford English Dictionary, Great Britain,
Oxford University Press
Toolan, M, J,. 2002 Critical Discourse Analysis: Critical Concepts in Linguistics
London: Routledge
Tudor Parfitt, Yulia Egorova Jews, Muslims, and Mass Media: Mediating the 'Other'
Van Dijk, T,. 1988 News as discourse, Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates press
Van Dijk, T,. Opinions and ideologies in the Press, in Bell and Garrett, 1997.
Approaches to media discourse, Oxford, Malden, Mass: Blackwell Press
Venables, J,. 2005 Making Headlines: News values and risk signals in Journalism,
Huntingdon: ELM Publications
Weaver, P,. 1994 News and the Culture of Lying, New York: Macmillan Press
White, H,. Historical Emplotment and the Problem of Truth, in Roberts, 2001. The
History and Narrative Reader, London: Routledge
White, H,. The Historical Text as Literary Artefact, in Roberts, 2001. The History and
Narrative Reader, London: Routledge
Zaller, J, R,. 1992 The nature and origins of mass opinion, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
46
47