Some time ago, dozens of Moroccans were reported swimming towards\nCeuta, crossing the Mediterranean Sea towards Spain. Images capturing\nthose moments were repeatedly published and displayed on the front pages\nof newspapers, on European television screens, and filled social media\nacross the globe. However, what is interesting about this coverage lies\nnot merely in the reporting of the event itself, but in how the event\nwas narrated.<\/p>\n
In much of the coverage, Moroccans were first introduced as illegal\nmigrants, a \u201cwave of illegal migrants\u201d, \u201cinfiltrators\u201d, or a \u201cthreat to\nborders\u201d before the public learned who they were, why they came, or what\nthey had left behind. Their identities seemed to have been fully\nconstructed by language and the media.<\/p>\n
Language is often regarded as a tool for describing reality. Yet,\nmore than that, language also shapes reality itself. The words chosen by\nthe media can determine which aspects are considered important and which\naspects disappear from public attention. In this process, language is\nfrequently used not only to report on the world, but also to help\nconstruct it. It is here that words often turn into walls.<\/p>\n
In the case of these Moroccans, much international coverage often\ndirected attention first towards the threat to European borders rather\nthan highlighting the stories of human beings risking their lives. A\nheadline stating \u201ca wave of migrants storms the border\u201d certainly\nconjures a different image compared to a headline reading \u201chundreds of\npeople risk their lives crossing the sea\u201d. In this context, the facts\nreported may be equally true, but the social meaning produced can\ndiffer.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, linguistic choices do not stand alone. In critical\ndiscourse analysis, Teun A. van Dijk shows that discourse often\nreproduces power relations within texts. When a particular group is\ncontinually associated with criminality, chaos, or disorder, society may\ncome to accept such associations as natural. In reality, what appears as\n\u201creality\u201d is often the result of repeated narratives.<\/p>\n
Robert M. Entman explains in his framing theory that the media works\nby selecting certain elements of an event to make more salient.\nSeemingly simple choices such as headlines, diction, photographs, or\nquoted sources have an enormous impact in constructing meaning. When\nnews speaks more often about \u201cborder security\u201d than \u201csaving human\nlives\u201d, the reader\u2019s focus shifts from humanitarian concerns to security\nconcerns.<\/p>\n
Framing, in this sense, does not alter facts, but it changes how\nfacts are understood. Moreover, photographs of overcrowded boats,\nbarbed-wire fences, armed patrols, and crowds of running migrants do not\nmerely serve as visual documentation. When combined with narratives of\n\u201ccrisis\u201d, \u201cinvasion\u201d, or \u201cthreat\u201d, such images can build the myth that\nmigration is synonymous with danger, so that gradually readers no longer\nsee distinct individuals, but rather a category regarded as uniform.<\/p>\n
Indeed, every country has the right to regulate its borders,\ndetermine entry procedures, and enforce immigration rules. However,\nbeyond legal matters, there is another equally important issue: how\nmedia language shapes public perception of who is deemed worthy of\nacceptance and who is positioned as a threat.<\/p>\n
The media does not simply convey facts. The media selects which facts\nto highlight, which facts to set aside, and what language to use in\nexplaining an event. It is these choices that form what is called\nframing.<\/p>\n
In the case of Moroccan migration to Spain, framing often places the\nissue on the aspect of border security. Headlines such as \u201cWave of\nIllegal Migrants Storms Ceuta\u201d or \u201cHundreds of Migrants Breach the\nBorder\u201d immediately direct readers\u2019 attention to words like wave,\nbreach, or storm. Such diction creates the impression that those\narriving are not individuals with diverse backgrounds, but rather a mass\nthreatening state stability.<\/p>\n
Linguistically, the context of these words is commonly used for\nnatural disasters or military operations, so when applied to human\nbeings, such language builds the impression that migrants are no longer\nindividuals with diverse backgrounds, but an anonymous mass that must be\nconfronted. Yet linguistic choices always carry consequences, just as\nthe same photograph can produce different meanings when framed\ndifferently.<\/p>\n
A man carrying his child amid the waves can be understood as an\n\u201cinfiltrator\u201d or as \u201ca father risking his life for his family\u2019s future\u201d.\nThe visual facts presented may be the same, but the social meaning can\nchange depending on how the media constructs the narrative.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, the public certainly has the right to support orderly\nand secure border management. However, at the same time, the public also\nneeds to be critical of language that can be used to describe human\nbeings. For when a label erases a person\u2019s life story, family, struggle\nagainst death, and reasons for migrating, we are no longer reading\nreality in its entirety. We are reading a reality that has been selected\nfor us.<\/p>\n
The issue of migration is not merely a legal matter, but also a\nmatter of humanity and representation. The way we speak about migrants\nwill determine the way we treat them. Before we readily accept the label\n\u201cillegal migrant\u201d, perhaps it is worth asking first: is what we are\nseeing a violation of law, or a narrative that slowly makes some human\nbeings appear unworthy of acceptance?<\/p>\n
Migration is indeed not a simple issue. The state has the right to\nguard its borders, regulate migration flows, and enforce immigration\nlaw. At the same time, every person who migrates also carries a story,\nreasons, and conditions that cannot always be reduced to a single\ncategory. The challenge for the media is to explain that complexity\nwithout erasing one side of it.<\/p>\n
Ultimately, migration will continue to be part of human history.\nPeople will continue to move because of war, poverty, climate change,\neducation, or the hope of a better life. What will determine the quality\nof our civilisation is not only how states manage their borders, but\nalso how the media and society choose to see them \u2014 whether as threats\nto be feared, or as human beings whose stories deserve to be understood\nbefore being judged.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/reading-media-framing-of-moroccan-migrants-1787129571", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }