AND KEYWORDSAbstract: By and large, contemporary news stories are stories about a particular nation, told to an audience that is seen and addressed in national terms. However, the understanding of the exact ways in which national imagination becomes engrained in the narrative conventions of news reporting is still rather limited, in particular when it comes to audiovisual genres. This article aims to fill a part of this blank by examining the links between national imagination and the narrative conventions of television news. Building on existing debates about different modes of news reporting, the article distinguishes two distinct sets of narrative conventions at work in television news: one typically found in routine reporting, the other characteristic of crisis and celebratory reporting. It is argued that each of these two sets of conventions is tied to a different form of nationalism, and normally arises in a different political climate.Links between national imagination and narrative conventions vary accordingly. To demonstrate this, the article provides a comparative analysis of narrative structures in selected samples of television news bulletins broadcast in the early 1990s in the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The concluding section reflects on the external validity of the chosen case study and surveys supportive evidence from four other relevant cases, drawn from Britain and Israel.
War discourse is typically characterized by a confluence of nationalist and sexist discourses, and tends to reduce the multiple identities and affiliations of human beings to a black-and-white contrast of ‘us’ and ‘them’. Yet, as argued in this article, we should be wary of over-emphasizing the homogeneity and monovocality of war discourse. While the onset of conflict certainly narrows the range of collective identities and narratives on offer in the public domain, it does not impose a total closure on the negotiation and contestation of meanings. Rather, mediated war discourse retains a measure of ambiguity and multivocality, which can be of vital importance to its appeal. We demonstrate this by examining a sample of war-time news bulletins broadcast in Yugoslavia in 1991, focusing on representations of women.
Whereas current policies on migration and integration are beginning to recognise family reunion as one of the most legitimate reasons for acceptance by a host society, they in most cases still do not account for the growing trend of feminisation of migration, and even rarely do they address specific migrants' needs. As currently constituted, the integration bills envision a one-way process that places migrants into a position where they cannot question, but only accept and fulfil the predetermined requirements of integration plans. But who are the women that migrate, what influence do their transnational experiences have on their families, and how do migration policies envision the reality of increasing transnationalism? This paper focuses on biographical interviews with migrant women in Slovenia as a valuable method to question current integration measurements, applied here to explore female migrants' experiences in transnational family life and social networks. A gender sensitive approach is applied that critically evaluates the specificities of family reunification policies, which define women migrants as dependent family members. We discuss life trajectories of women migrants, focusing the debate on their own experiences in and with family life. This new empirical material is used to theorise gaps in contemporary migration research. Women migrants' own reflections of transnational family ties show a great variety of experiences and their narratives are a unique window into motivational, political, as well as legal dimensions of migration.
A gap exists between the EU’s professed guarantees of the rights of migrant children and Member States’ individual practices concerning integration. The EU promotes policies claiming to be based on the rights of the child, children’s best interests, and a child‐friendly integration system. Both theory and the EU framework also insist that integration should be understood as a two‐way process. Yet national practices and policies shift responsibility for integration from the reception community to newcomers. Pressures on immigrants, hate speech, and the closure of borders have become the main features of migration policy. The article points out inconsistencies between the EU and its Member States’ own policy frameworks regarding the integration of migrant children in education. Drawing on interviews with stakeholders, we look at the primary triggers for these inconsistencies to learn what they reveal about the EU and its Member States’ integration policies for migrant children. We argue that nationalism and the denial of rights prevent policy processes from becoming a two‐way process and we demonstrate the consequences this has for child‐centred approaches to integration.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.