How is politics influencing the public debate on these topics?

Politicians know that voters are sensitive to these topics and chose to raise the fear. Debates usually shift the topic by saying “but the irregular migrants […]”, of which we have no concrete estimate, but still divert the attention for electoral purposes.

What’s the role played by false stereotypes in the media representation of migrants and refugees?

Stereotypes divert attention from some phenomena to other phenomena, by criminalizing some migrations and clearing some others. Media is weak in the current communication market, it is under attack by social media, by self-built information or information spread through alternative channels. That bends themselves to overdramatize migration, as it fears losing readers or viewers, thus trying to fight back with the techniques that are used against them in the first place.

Among the traits of racism, you highlighted, the ‘reassuring victimism’ (“vittimismo consolatorio”) is particularly interesting. What is it and how does it affect the media?

Identifying a common enemy, a root cause for our impoverishment, of our existential uncertainty, has a dual purpose. Firstly, it gives a simple and external explanation to our hardships. We see our social condition getting more fragile because more refugees come from Africa, and they are seen as the ones draining our resources and making our living conditions worse. Secondly, it builds a twisted sense of community, as facing a common enemy drives us closer.

What is the least addressed theme in the Italian media coverage of migration?

The migrant families. Migration has been mostly about family reunification and birth of sons in the country, in the recent years. Only white people with citizenship were discussed at the conference in Verona (note: this refers to the World Congress of Families XIII, held in March 2019 in Verona, and attended by representatives with conservative and radical visions on issues such as family, adoption, abortion and related topics). Counter-demonstrators defended all the forms of unions but not migrant families. The main argument is that women in migrant families are oppressed: a paternalistic argument. We are more sensitive to pathological problems than issues closer to normality which would only need a smaller support.

How is integration depicted in the media?

The majority of the press pushes on pathology and sensationalism: on one hand we have landings, on the other crime reporting that has a sensationalistic peak when Italian women are raped and killed by African people. There is a niche of press more sensitive to positive narratives, with respect to migrants’ associations. Their presence is scattered and, due to this, they lack critical mass. Continuously talking about migrants suffering is unfair.

What are the communication alternatives?

The first step would be to give more importance to real data. The Global Compact for Migrations highlights the need to spread reliable information. Analysing data without presenting it partially. The second step would be to have an international outlook, as we often talk about migration with respect to Italy and Europe, but never framing that in the context of the whole world. A third step would be to have a positive narrative, telling “normal” stories, being objective.

Please note: This text is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.